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


    Tu-22M3: News

    dino00
    dino00

    Posts : 1487
    Points : 1524
    Join date : 2012-10-12
    Age : 33
    Location : portugal

    Tu-22M3: News - Page 27 Empty Re: Tu-22M3: News

    Post  dino00 Wed May 13, 2020 1:44 pm

    Isos wrote:Kh-59mk2 would be more usefull. Kinzhal is meant to destroy US carriers so it won't be used anyday soon and they already have kh-32 and mig-31 equiped with it.  

    Kh-59 is a smaller and probably cheaper counterpart to the huge kh-101 and a tu-22M can carry a big amount with special pylons. It is a weapon that may be needed for new conflicts that start like fires all over the world.

    The range of the tu22+kh59mk2 is enough. Tu-160+kh-101 or frigate launched 2000km kalibr is overkill most of the time.

    Disagree.
    The future weapons of TU-22M3M will be:

    Kh-50(1500/2000km) subsonic 6 inside the weapons bay
    Kh-MT ( 1500km) supersonic also 6
    GZUR (1500km) hypersonic mach 6/7 also 6 inside

    4 Khynzal obviously with less than the 3000km range the Russian media talks about ( it will fly lower and slower than Mig-31 so less range)
    3 kh-32

    About Gzur

    From Macks 2013

    “I’m not trying to get ahead of ourselves,” says Boris Obnosov, “but we looked at all our developments and came to the conclusion that it is necessary to consolidate all efforts. And not only because it is one of the priority tasks for Russia. Speaking of hypersound, we must bear in mind first of all a long-term flight in the atmosphere with speeds exceeding 4–5 M. We have products that fly today at a significantly higher speed, but this is either ballistic descent or its varieties. And we are talking about a controlled flight in the atmosphere with speeds of 6–7 M, in the future - 10–12 M ”.


    There is no end to work,” Obnosov emphasizes. - It all depends on the speed that is set. If we talk about 4-5 M, then the ramjet engine with subsonic combustion (Ramget) for today is fully developed. The corporation mastered it, we, together with NPO Mashinostroenie, Lytkara enterprise Soyuz, are pioneers here.

    If you go to higher speeds, it is necessary to achieve normal operation of the supersonic combustion engine (Scramjet)
    Isos
    Isos

    Posts : 7150
    Points : 7136
    Join date : 2015-11-06

    Tu-22M3: News - Page 27 Empty Re: Tu-22M3: News

    Post  Isos Wed May 13, 2020 2:37 pm

    There is no point to use hypersonic missiles in low intensity conflicts like in Syria or ukraine. They will be much more expensive than kh-59 which is more than enough against any target in modern conflicts.

    I'm not saying they should stop hypersonic missiles. If they develop them it means they are not sure to win with oniks and older missiles. And they are mostly made to destroy US ships.

    But against land tarets with no air defence or system not desin to deal with cruise missike kh-59 is the best option.
    dino00
    dino00

    Posts : 1487
    Points : 1524
    Join date : 2012-10-12
    Age : 33
    Location : portugal

    Tu-22M3: News - Page 27 Empty Re: Tu-22M3: News

    Post  dino00 Wed May 13, 2020 2:44 pm

    Isos wrote:There is no point to use hypersonic missiles in low intensity conflicts like in Syria or ukraine. They will be much more expensive than kh-59 which is more than enough against any target in modern conflicts.

    I'm not saying they should stop hypersonic missiles. If they develop them it means they are not sure to win with oniks and older missiles. And they are mostly made to destroy US ships.

    But against land tarets with no air defence or system not desin to deal with cruise missike kh-59 is the best option.

    I agree that it's needed a subsonic cruise missile for TU-22M3M, that's why:

    The missile that you want is the kh-50 for the TU-22M3M (6 launched from inside), and the kh_59Mk2 for SU-57 also from inside the weapons bay(4)
    magnumcromagnon
    magnumcromagnon

    Posts : 6891
    Points : 7040
    Join date : 2013-12-05
    Location : Pindos ave., Pindosville, Pindosylvania, Pindostan

    Tu-22M3: News - Page 27 Empty Re: Tu-22M3: News

    Post  magnumcromagnon Wed May 13, 2020 3:47 pm

    dino00 wrote:4 Khynzal obviously with less than the 3000km range the Russian media talks about ( it will fly lower and slower than Mig-31 so less range)
    3 kh-32

    Not necessarily. While the Tu-22M platform has a slower and lower max speed and altitude respectively, it makes up for it in max payload. With a much higher payload than the MiG-31 platform it could launch Khinzals (or other munitions) with heavier and denser propellant, and or longer propellant compartment, or even additional stages to make up the difference.

    There's also this breakthrough:

    Russian specialists were able to significantly increase the efficiency of rocket engines...
    The result of the study showed that copper increases the burning rate of fuel by 500%, zinc - by 130%, and boron - by 10%....

    https://www.russiadefence.net/t3341p425-russian-launch-vehicles-and-their-spacecraft-thoughts-news#275781

    Copper nano-particulate infusion in propellant saw the exhaust speed of rocket propellants increased by a factor of 5 all across the board. In real terms, rocket propellants designed to launch rockets/missiles/munitions at  Mach 1, could theoretically be redesigned with copper nano-particles to allow those same entities to fly at Mach 5. This is real bleeding edge science, and it will take some time to adapt them (probably a decade), but when it becomes ubiquitous don't be surprised if we see Hypersonic equivalents of MANPADs like Verba and ATGMs like Kornet.
    Hole
    Hole

    Posts : 3780
    Points : 3776
    Join date : 2018-03-24
    Age : 44
    Location : Merkelland

    Tu-22M3: News - Page 27 Empty Re: Tu-22M3: News

    Post  Hole Wed May 13, 2020 4:28 pm

    The 3000km range is carrier (aircraft) plus missile.
    Singular_Transform
    Singular_Transform

    Posts : 871
    Points : 857
    Join date : 2016-11-13

    Tu-22M3: News - Page 27 Empty Re: Tu-22M3: News

    Post  Singular_Transform Wed May 13, 2020 7:57 pm

    magnumcromagnon wrote:

    Copper nano-particulate infusion in propellant saw the exhaust speed of rocket propellants increased by a factor of 5 all across the board. In real terms, rocket propellants designed to launch rockets/missiles/munitions at  Mach 1, could theoretically be redesigned with copper nano-particles to allow those same entities to fly at Mach 5. This is real bleeding edge science, and it will take some time to adapt them (probably a decade), but when it becomes ubiquitous don't be surprised if we see Hypersonic equivalents of MANPADs like Verba and ATGMs like Kornet.


    : D

    Or simple groundless random technoblabla, capable to generate advertisement revenue on a bait and click false news site.


    : D

    dino00
    dino00

    Posts : 1487
    Points : 1524
    Join date : 2012-10-12
    Age : 33
    Location : portugal

    Tu-22M3: News - Page 27 Empty Re: Tu-22M3: News

    Post  dino00 Wed May 13, 2020 8:05 pm

    magnumcromagnon wrote:
    dino00 wrote:4 Khynzal obviously with less than the 3000km range the Russian media talks about ( it will fly lower and slower than Mig-31 so less range)
    3 kh-32

    Not necessarily. While the Tu-22M platform has a slower and lower max speed and altitude respectively, it makes up for it in max payload. With a much higher payload than the MiG-31 platform it could launch Khinzals (or other munitions) with heavier and denser propellant, and or longer propellant compartment, or even additional stages to make up the difference.


    If they are another state to Khynzal sure, but Mig-31 appears to have enough space for another state.
    What I said is the exact same missile launched from Mig-31 will always have more range than from TU-22M3M.

    There's also this breakthrough:

    Russian specialists were able to significantly increase the efficiency of rocket engines...
    The result of the study showed that copper increases the burning rate of fuel by 500%, zinc - by 130%, and boron - by 10%....

    https://www.russiadefence.net/t3341p425-russian-launch-vehicles-and-their-spacecraft-thoughts-news#275781

    Copper nano-particulate infusion in propellant saw the exhaust speed of rocket propellants increased by a factor of 5 all across the board. In real terms, rocket propellants designed to launch rockets/missiles/munitions at  Mach 1, could theoretically be redesigned with copper nano-particles to allow those same entities to fly at Mach 5. This is real bleeding edge science, and it will take some time to adapt them (probably a decade), but when it becomes ubiquitous don't be surprised if we see Hypersonic equivalents of MANPADs like Verba and ATGMs like Kornet.

    I remember reading that. We don't know if the breakthrough is already present in missiles like Khynzal or will be in future missiles.

    I don't understand the quote mode that's why my answer is underlined.


    Last edited by dino00 on Wed May 13, 2020 8:08 pm; edited 1 time in total (Reason for editing : Quote mode)
    dino00
    dino00

    Posts : 1487
    Points : 1524
    Join date : 2012-10-12
    Age : 33
    Location : portugal

    Tu-22M3: News - Page 27 Empty Re: Tu-22M3: News

    Post  dino00 Wed May 13, 2020 8:09 pm

    Hole wrote:The 3000km range is carrier (aircraft) plus missile.

    Exactly what I think.
    avatar
    Mindstorm

    Posts : 1060
    Points : 1227
    Join date : 2011-07-20

    Tu-22M3: News - Page 27 Empty Re: Tu-22M3: News

    Post  Mindstorm Wed May 13, 2020 8:44 pm

    Hole wrote:The 3000km range is carrier (aircraft) plus missile.


    Not, this is the range (Hi-Hi-Hi with mixed subsonic cruise/supersonic delivery and egression) moreover underestimated, of the not modernized version of Ту-22М3 when carrying 3 Kh-22M class weapons.

    Usual bad work of the journalists ,that take a data from a source and begin to mix-up the things don't having the minimum clue of what it talk about.
    dino00
    dino00

    Posts : 1487
    Points : 1524
    Join date : 2012-10-12
    Age : 33
    Location : portugal

    Tu-22M3: News - Page 27 Empty Re: Tu-22M3: News

    Post  dino00 Wed May 13, 2020 9:24 pm

    Mindstorm wrote:
    Hole wrote:The 3000km range is carrier (aircraft) plus missile.


    Not, this is the range (Hi-Hi-Hi with mixed subsonic cruise/supersonic delivery and egression) moreover underestimated, of the not modernized version of Ту-22М3 when carrying 3 Kh-22M class weapons.

    Usual bad work of the journalists ,that take a data from a source and begin to mix-up the things don't having the minimum clue of what it talk about.

    Exactly what I think lol1
    avatar
    Mindstorm

    Posts : 1060
    Points : 1227
    Join date : 2011-07-20

    Tu-22M3: News - Page 27 Empty Re: Tu-22M3: News

    Post  Mindstorm Wed May 13, 2020 10:14 pm


    dino00 wrote:Exactly what I think lol1


    Majority of journalsts, instead in those instances, suggest that this range include the range of the weapon when obviously it is not the case.

    Do you know some basic performances data vary from source to source, in particular publicly available : Ту-22М is credited in majority of public sources ,that use data coming from aircraft's development years, with a combat radius of 2500-3400 km with a main payload of 2 X-22 -varying obviously from speed and altitude -, Carlo Kopp instead reveal of a personal (therefore informal and not public) talk with at the time Onored Chief Designer of Туполев bureau Б.Е.Леванович that declared for the production aircraft an Hi-Hi-Hi combat radius of 4000 Km with three X-22.

    Now Кинжал has a mass lower than X-22 and Ту-22М3М has an authonomy greater than its not modernized iteration.

    magnumcromagnon
    magnumcromagnon

    Posts : 6891
    Points : 7040
    Join date : 2013-12-05
    Location : Pindos ave., Pindosville, Pindosylvania, Pindostan

    Tu-22M3: News - Page 27 Empty Re: Tu-22M3: News

    Post  magnumcromagnon Wed May 13, 2020 10:27 pm

    Singular_Transform wrote:
    magnumcromagnon wrote:

    Copper nano-particulate infusion in propellant saw the exhaust speed of rocket propellants increased by a factor of 5 all across the board. In real terms, rocket propellants designed to launch rockets/missiles/munitions at  Mach 1, could theoretically be redesigned with copper nano-particles to allow those same entities to fly at Mach 5. This is real bleeding edge science, and it will take some time to adapt them (probably a decade), but when it becomes ubiquitous don't be surprised if we see Hypersonic equivalents of MANPADs like Verba and ATGMs like Kornet.


    : D

    Or simple groundless random technoblabla, capable to generate advertisement revenue on a bait and click false news site.


    : D


    What's groundless is the bullshit insinuation on your part that this was a click-bait article generated by a random website, when in reality had you actually read the article you would know that they reported on the findings of the National Research Technological University “MISiS”, and as of 2019 MISiS is the leading university in the Russian Federation in the field of material science.

    The research effort was lead by Professor Alexander Gromov, the head of the Kinetica Engineering Center at MISIS. Gromov's specialization is in material science, specifically nano-materials.

    https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Alexander_Gromov5

    Gromov's research was published on the main MISiS website, hardly a vector for click-bate articles. Rolling Eyes

    Materials scientists from NUST MISIS managed to increase rocket fuel burning rate by almost 5 times

    Tu-22M3: News - Page 27 39514525944_7e2588c85d_k%20%281%29_picture

    Due to the unique catalysts based on metal nanopowders scientists of the National University of Science and Technology “MISIS” managed to increase the burning rate of solid rocket fuel by five times. The invention will make spacecraft five times faster.

    Jet thrust in solid rocket engines is created by burning a mixture of high-energy substances capable of fast burning. At the same time, a large amount of heated gaseous body is released and forms a jet stream — that has been shown in the past by Konstantin Tsiolkovsky. As a rule, a polymer matrix with a filler of powerful combustible substances, oxidizing agents, metal powder, such as aluminum and various modifiers, is used as a solid fuel.

    The basis of combustible substances in the modern solid rocket fuels composition is cyclic nitramines. They are chemically resistant to traditional combustion catalysts, such as metal oxides and lead salicylates. This property does not allow scientists to increase the fuel burning rate, on which a rocket’s flight speed directly depends.

    Metal scientists from NUST MISIS have found that metal nanopowders can act as an effective catalyst for the burning of solid fuels reaction, which means it results in increasing the speed of an aircraft. During the laboratory tests conducted by the research team, nanoscale metal powders showed good catalytic activity.

    In the course of the research, materials scientists added metal nanoparticles to the fuel, which accelerated the ignition of aluminum particles in the fuel composition. The use of nanopowders of aluminum, boron, nickel, and molybdenum made it possible to increase the burning rate by 1.5 times, regardless of pressure. Catalysts based on copper nanopowder showed the most impressive results — the fuel burning rate increased by almost 5 times. However, researchers believe that the obtained reagent needs to be improved.

    “The copper nanopowder already reacts with the components of the fuel during its production at low temperatures, which reduces the efficiency of using such a catalyst,” said Alexander Gromov, project manager, chief researcher at the NUST MISIS Rapid Prototyping Center.

    Scientists are currently completing a series of laboratory tests of the obtained catalysts. The results of the materials scientists’ research are published in the Propellants, Explosives, Pyrotechnics journal.

    https://en.misis.ru/university/news/science/2019-02/5991/

    Alexander Gromov is arguably the leading material researcher in Russia (perhaps even in the world), you could of easily just googled his name (I did), but instead you had to make a complete fool out of yourself by insinuating Professor Gromov's research was designed for click-bait articles. You can wipe the bird shit off your face and see your way out the door. Razz lol1
    dino00
    dino00

    Posts : 1487
    Points : 1524
    Join date : 2012-10-12
    Age : 33
    Location : portugal

    Tu-22M3: News - Page 27 Empty Re: Tu-22M3: News

    Post  dino00 Wed May 13, 2020 11:36 pm

    Mindstorm wrote:
    dino00 wrote:Exactly what I think lol1


    Majority of journalsts, instead in those instances, suggest that this range include the range of the weapon when obviously it is not the case.

    Do you know some basic performances data vary from source to source, in particular publicly available : Ту-22М is credited in majority of public sources ,that use data coming from aircraft's development years, with a combat radius of 2500-3400 km with a main payload of 2 X-22 -varying obviously from speed and altitude -, Carlo Kopp instead reveal of a personal (therefore informal and not public) talk with at the time Onored Chief Designer of Туполев bureau Б.Е.Леванович that declared for the production aircraft an Hi-Hi-Hi combat radius of 4000 Km with three X-22.

    Now Кинжал has a mass lower than X-22 and Ту-22М3М has an authonomy greater than its not modernized iteration.


    I think you didn't understand my post... I didn't doubt your opinion, was just a joke because you made me change my mind in little time, so I posted the exact same thing.

    When you say that  "Majority of journalsts, instead in those instances, suggest that this range include the range of the weapon when obviously it is not the case."
    I 100% agree with you as you can see from here https://www.russiadefence.net/t820p650-tu-22m3-news#283173
    When I said
    4 Khynzal obviously with less than the 3000km range the Russian media talks about ( it will fly lower and slower than Mig-31 so less range)


    I now understand from your post that not even the range of the missile is included, if I interpreted correctly.

    I knew that Khynzal couldn't had a 3000km range launched from TU-22M3M because first it didn't make sense, secondly I remember your previous post mentioning a range in 1500/1600km range.

    If I understand correctly the last part of your post we could be talking of a TU-22M3M with 3/4 Khynzal with a combat radius of 5000km plus 1500km range for the missile Shocked  Carl Copp part is astonishing

    P.S. this means TU-22M3M can attach deep inside USA with hypersonic weapons...

    Great post as always thanks for the answer thumbsup


    Last edited by dino00 on Thu May 14, 2020 12:27 am; edited 2 times in total
    Singular_Transform
    Singular_Transform

    Posts : 871
    Points : 857
    Join date : 2016-11-13

    Tu-22M3: News - Page 27 Empty Re: Tu-22M3: News

    Post  Singular_Transform Wed May 13, 2020 11:50 pm

    [quote="magnumcromagnon"]
    Singular_Transform wrote:
    magnumcromagnon wrote:

    Copper nano-particulate infusion in propellant saw the exhaust speed of rocket propellants increased by a factor of 5 all across the board. In real terms, rocket propellants designed to launch rockets/missiles/munitions at  Mach 1, could theoretically be redesigned with copper nano-particles to allow those same entities to fly at Mach 5. This is real bleeding edge science, and it will take some time to adapt them (probably a decade), but when it becomes ubiquitous don't be surprised if we see Hypersonic equivalents of MANPADs like Verba and ATGMs like Kornet.


    So, basic math : combustion is IS NOT EQUAL with exhaust speed.

    The COMBUSTION SPEED means the time required to burn all fuel.

    EXHAUST SPEED means the average speed of molecules in the exhaust of the rocket.

    The nanoblabla particle increase the speed of combustion, it will not increase the speed of the exhaust or the speed of the missile.

    The Challenger space shuttle explosion is a nice example of the suddenly increased combustion speed.
    Instead of few minutes the propellant in the main tank combusted in few seconds.


    That is the same result that you can expect from a rocket engine if the combustion happens five times faster.
    thegopnik
    thegopnik

    Posts : 318
    Points : 324
    Join date : 2017-09-20

    Tu-22M3: News - Page 27 Empty Re: Tu-22M3: News

    Post  thegopnik Thu May 14, 2020 12:55 am

    [/quote]That is the same result that you can expect from a rocket engine if the combustion happens five times faster.[/quote]


    https://newinform.com/210943-opyt-rossiiskikh-specialistov-pozvolil-povysit-kpd-raketnogo-topliva-v-5-raz?utm_source=finobzor.ru

    "Researchers have proposed an alternative component composition of solid fuels. As a fuel, experts used aluminum powder, a catalyst - nano- and microadditives of aluminum, boron, zinc, nickel, copper, molybdenum and their oxides. It turned out that the addition of copper nanoparticles to fuel would increase the speed of rockets by a factor of five."

    Thank me later cheers
    magnumcromagnon
    magnumcromagnon

    Posts : 6891
    Points : 7040
    Join date : 2013-12-05
    Location : Pindos ave., Pindosville, Pindosylvania, Pindostan

    Tu-22M3: News - Page 27 Empty Re: Tu-22M3: News

    Post  magnumcromagnon Thu May 14, 2020 9:06 am

    Singular_Transform wrote:
    magnumcromagnon wrote:
    Singular_Transform wrote:
    magnumcromagnon wrote:

    Copper nano-particulate infusion in propellant saw the exhaust speed of rocket propellants increased by a factor of 5 all across the board. In real terms, rocket propellants designed to launch rockets/missiles/munitions at  Mach 1, could theoretically be redesigned with copper nano-particles to allow those same entities to fly at Mach 5. This is real bleeding edge science, and it will take some time to adapt them (probably a decade), but when it becomes ubiquitous don't be surprised if we see Hypersonic equivalents of MANPADs like Verba and ATGMs like Kornet.


    So, basic math : combustion is IS NOT EQUAL with exhaust speed.

    The COMBUSTION SPEED means the time required to burn all fuel.

    EXHAUST SPEED means the average speed of molecules in the exhaust of the rocket.

    The nanoblabla particle increase the speed of combustion, it will not increase the speed of the exhaust or the speed of the missile.

    The Challenger space shuttle explosion is a nice example of the suddenly increased combustion speed.
    Instead of few minutes the propellant in the main tank combusted in few seconds.


    That is the same result that you can expect from a rocket engine if the combustion happens five times faster.

    Just give it up lmao! lol1 Razz You were dead wrong with your laughable unfounded assertion that his research was click-bait designed by a random website. Wink Keep doubling down on your turd-sandwich, all your going to do is get these posts thrown in to the talking bollocks thread. Wink
    avatar
    Mindstorm

    Posts : 1060
    Points : 1227
    Join date : 2011-07-20

    Tu-22M3: News - Page 27 Empty Re: Tu-22M3: News

    Post  Mindstorm Thu May 14, 2020 12:04 pm

    dino00 wrote:
    Mindstorm wrote:
    dino00 wrote:Exactly what I think lol1


    Majority of journalsts, instead in those instances, suggest that this range include the range of the weapon when obviously it is not the case.

    Do you know some basic performances data vary from source to source, in particular publicly available : Ту-22М is credited in majority of public sources ,that use data coming from aircraft's development years, with a combat radius of 2500-3400 km with a main payload of 2 X-22 -varying obviously from speed and altitude -, Carlo Kopp instead reveal of a personal (therefore informal and not public) talk with at the time Onored Chief Designer of Туполев bureau Б.Е.Леванович that declared for the production aircraft an Hi-Hi-Hi combat radius of 4000 Km with three X-22.

    Now Кинжал has a mass lower than X-22 and Ту-22М3М has an authonomy greater than its not modernized iteration.


    I think you didn't understand my post... I didn't doubt your opinion, was just a joke because you made me change my mind in little time, so I posted the exact same thing.

    When you say that  "Majority of journalsts, instead in those instances, suggest that this range include the range of the weapon when obviously it is not the case."
    I 100% agree with you as you can see from here https://www.russiadefence.net/t820p650-tu-22m3-news#283173
    When I said
    4 Khynzal obviously with less than the 3000km range the Russian media talks about ( it will fly lower and slower than Mig-31 so less range)


    I now understand from your post that not even the range of the missile is included, if I interpreted correctly.

    I knew that Khynzal couldn't had a 3000km range launched from TU-22M3M because first it didn't make sense, secondly I remember your previous post mentioning a range in 1500/1600km range.

    If I understand correctly the last part of your post we could be talking of a TU-22M3M with 3/4 Khynzal with a combat radius of 5000km plus 1500km range for the missile Shocked  Carl Copp part is astonishing

    P.S. this means TU-22M3M can attach deep inside USA with hypersonic weapons...

    Great post as always thanks for the answer thumbsup


    Yes, give and take some hundreds km coming from a portion of the flight's approach to the target being conducted at low altitude before accelerating and gaining altitude, at the maximum rate allowed by the payload, before the missile delivery and egression.

    The profile up described is one of the most "optimized" to engage CVBGs with possible E-2 airborne in the sector of the attack; this reduce, togheter with limited afterburner egression from the delivery point, of several hundreds km the combat range of the involved .

    Anyway is important to do not concentrate the attention exclusively on the hypersonic products, here Isos has surely a point.

    While Federation's MoD have very strongly, and with unrivaled success, invested in hypersonic and other highly innovative and/or even revolutionary technologies that greatly increase offensive and defenisve capabilities against the most highly protected or densely armed OTAN targets, it is very important to integrate a new generation of mass-produceable subsonic missiles with substrategic range.

    There exist a real gap in this engagement range of substrategic air-delivered missiles ( within 2000 km) in domestic air delivered weapons production - that instead can boast the best samples in the tactical and strategic ones -; ВВС has since a long time posed the requirements for those weapons that will be very important to destroy not heavily defended OTAN airbases from friendly airbases posed at stand off range in respect to those hosting enemy aircraft armed with JASSM-ER.

    At today those targets should be hit by X-555 and X-102, with a wide waste of potential range not used against those targets.

    Internal placement in the rotary weapon bay of Ту-22М3 will increase the combat range with this payload, thanks to reduced drag.

    GarryB
    GarryB

    Posts : 27895
    Points : 28423
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    Tu-22M3: News - Page 27 Empty Re: Tu-22M3: News

    Post  GarryB Thu May 14, 2020 12:36 pm

    Ramjet technology is now outdated .

    Ramjet propulsion is perfectly sensible for vehicles that operate at speeds of between mach 1.5 up to about mach 5-6 or so. They are relatively cheap and simple with few moving parts and no expensive exotic materials required.

    The much vaunted european AAM the Meteor uses ramjet propulsion... is that obsolete?

    Why are they developing a Ramjet-based missile with a speed of only 4-6M when they already have a Cirkon missile with a revolutionary scramjet drive with parameters much better than 9M speed. Gzur is a step back.

    Gzur started a decade ago and is intended presumably to replace a missile that was withdrawn from service quite some time ago. Gzur does not have to be better than everything else... it just need to do what is required and as a short range attack missile for strategic cruise missile carrier aircraft the performance figures listed actually sound ideal. 6m means it fits in the internal weapon bays of both the Backfire and Bear, and you could fit two in end to end in each weapon bay on the Blackjack.... so the Bear can carry 6 internally and the Backfire can carry 6 internally and the Blackjack could carry up to 24 internally.

    Its purpose is to accelerate ahead of the aircraft and take down threats... whether they are major airfields or SAM sites or HQs or comm centres on the flight path of the strategic strike aircraft... one use could be to launch them into the centre of a group of American F-22s on their way to intercept the bombers... a nice airburst inside that group would take them out fairly easily...

    They have already developed a new propulsion system so they can be used in hypersonic missiles fired from bombers.

    The presumed purpose of the Gzur I is a penetration missile... something that can destroy any defences that might be left from when the ICBMs and SLBMs hit a few hours ago... it wont need to move at mach 10... mach 6 would be impossible to stop anyway.

    let's wait for the speed of the tests to be announced and if it's more than mach 6 is definitely a scramjet.

    That would be a good indicator. It might be a ramjet with more energetic fuel like the Mach 2.5 Onyx going up to mach 5 with the high energy fuel they are talking about...

    Doh..... I mean to say Kh-47M2 Kinzhal but cut n paste from the wrong folder and was in too much of a hurry to notice...

    Ahh, that makes more sense, but I think Kinzhal is too fat to be carried internally on the rotary launchers for the three large Tupolevs...

    Kh-59 is a smaller and probably cheaper counterpart to the huge kh-101 and a tu-22M can carry a big amount with special pylons. It is a weapon that may be needed for new conflicts that start like fires all over the world.

    The Kh-59 entered service in the 1980s and is ancient and subsonic and in no way related to the Kh-101... the original reporting name was AS-13. An improved datalink led to the AS-18 variant, but this missile is essentially a TV guided missile where the TV view of the target is sent back to the launch aircraft so the weapon operator can move the targeting cursor onto the target and send the attack command to hit specific targets from stand off ranges.

    AFAIK the only aircraft intended to operate it was initially the Su-24 but it has been seen on later Sukhois like the Su-34 and Su-35 and Su-30 families.

    There is no point to use hypersonic missiles in low intensity conflicts like in Syria or ukraine. They will be much more expensive than kh-59 which is more than enough against any target in modern conflicts.

    Very high speed weapons make sense in situations with enemy air defences, so in Syria and the Ukraine a hypersonic weapon does make sense but often slower weapons could also be used. BTW a scramjet is brand new technology but there is no evidence it needs expensive exotic materials to work properly... a scramjet is a ramjet which means no spinning blades or shafts for propellers... the actual design is pretty straight forward and should be quite cheap and simple to make once the design is perfected of course.

    But against land tarets with no air defence or system not desin to deal with cruise missike kh-59 is the best option.

    It would depend on the target of course, but one large factor regarding the conflict in Syria is the fact that it is a testing ground... so I think it is possible they might use some exotic weapons...

    As Dino mentioned there are already subsonic weapons being developed for the strategic cruise missile carrying aircraft already... this is a SRAM...

    This is real bleeding edge science, and it will take some time to adapt them (probably a decade), but when it becomes ubiquitous don't be surprised if we see Hypersonic equivalents of MANPADs like Verba and ATGMs like Kornet.

    The improved fuel performance could be applied to scramjet engines as well as rocket motors...

    Or simple groundless random technoblabla, capable to generate advertisement revenue on a bait and click false news site.

    Well I doubt Scramjets could operate at mach 9 or faster with petrol as a fuel....

    I remember reading that. We don't know if the breakthrough is already present in missiles like Khynzal or will be in future missiles.

    Kinzhal appears to be an air launched Iskander so perhaps not yet...

    I would expect in their efforts to find higher energy fuel for mach 10 plus speeds with scramjets has led them to explore fuel additive options perhaps?


    The COMBUSTION SPEED means the time required to burn all fuel.

    EXHAUST SPEED means the average speed of molecules in the exhaust of the rocket.

    Well it is a bit confusing... if you are talking rocket fuel then combustion speed is obviously supersonic, but in a ramjet or scramjet then combustion speed revolves around the speed at which the air can flow through the hot section of the engine where the fuel is added and burned.

    With a ramjet the airflow needs to be subsonic for the fuel to burn, with a scramjet the airflow can be supersonic.

    Obviously the exhaust speed is strongly effected by whether it is a ramjet or scramjet, because subsonic burning in the combustion chamber limits the exhaust velocity, whereas air coming in the front of the engine at mach 5 and then fuel is added and burned means it will be leaving much faster than if it had to be slowed down to subsonic speeds before fuel was added and burned...

    The nanoblabla particle increase the speed of combustion, it will not increase the speed of the exhaust or the speed of the missile.

    Increasing the speed of combustion for any propellent increases pressure faster and leads to airflow moving faster through an engine... which by definition increases thrust and the speed of the object being propelled.

    The Challenger space shuttle explosion is a nice example of the suddenly increased combustion speed.
    Instead of few minutes the propellant in the main tank combusted in few seconds.

    And if that propulsion could be directed through the proper nozzles it would have received an enormous boost in thrust for a very short period.

    They are not putting copper nanoparticles into the fuel of missiles to make their fuel tanks explode by the way.

    That is the same result that you can expect from a rocket engine if the combustion happens five times faster.

    You can't just apply these numbers willy nilly... you can't just add copper nano particles into grad rockets and suddenly have 1,000km range 122mm rockets, but for missiles already designed to operate at very high speeds then higher octane fuel is going to improve performance... or break their motors... we are assuming the rocket or jet motors are adjusted for the new fuel and that the result will be significantly better performance.

    Just give it up lmao! lol1 Razz You were dead wrong with your laughable unfounded assertion that his research was click-bait designed by a random website. Wink Keep doubling down on your turd-sandwich, all your going to do is get these posts thrown in to the talking bollocks thread.

    No need to be rude... dude... it is important for everyone to think about these things for ourselves and not just accept claims made by researchers. But then we should not also assume all researchers are lying to us either... a bit of scepticism is healthy...
    dino00
    dino00

    Posts : 1487
    Points : 1524
    Join date : 2012-10-12
    Age : 33
    Location : portugal

    Tu-22M3: News - Page 27 Empty Re: Tu-22M3: News

    Post  dino00 Thu May 14, 2020 1:39 pm

    Mindstorm wrote:

    Anyway is important to do not concentrate the attention exclusively on the hypersonic products, here Isos  has surely a point.

    While Federation's MoD have very strongly, and with unrivaled success, invested in hypersonic and other highly innovative and/or even revolutionary technologies that greatly increase offensive and defenisve capabilities against the most highly protected or densely armed OTAN targets, it is very important to integrate a new generation of mass-produceable subsonic missiles with substrategic range.

    There exist a real gap in this engagement range of substrategic air-delivered missiles ( within 2000 km) in domestic air delivered weapons production - that instead can boast the best samples in the tactical and strategic ones -; ВВС has since a long time posed the requirements for those weapons that will be very important to destroy not heavily defended OTAN airbases from friendly airbases posed at stand off range in respect to those hosting enemy aircraft armed with JASSM-ER.

    At today those targets should be hit by X-555 and X-102, with a wide waste of potential range not used against those targets.

    Internal placement in the rotary weapon bay of Ту-22М3 will increase the combat range with this payload, thanks to reduced drag.

    [/quote]

    So your point is that Kh-50 from TU-22M3M will "release" TU-95MS and Tu-160M2 for deeper attacks and will be more cost effective?

    That's the kh-SD, Kh-MT, Gzur program, all to be launched from inside the TU-22M3M and Tu-95MS, what I don't understand is why the kh-50 should be launched from the Tu-160, I don't see what that plane gains from that.

    Could you say if the 4000km combat radius was with the kh-15? If so TU-22M3M could have an ~5000km combat radius with 3 Khynzal and 6 Kh-50  Cool


    And from your post we can guess kh-50 will be nuclear, or have a nuclear version...

    NATO/Hato/Nazto/OTAN lol1
    Isos
    Isos

    Posts : 7150
    Points : 7136
    Join date : 2015-11-06

    Tu-22M3: News - Page 27 Empty Re: Tu-22M3: News

    Post  Isos Thu May 14, 2020 2:05 pm

    The Kh-59 entered service in the 1980s and is ancient and subsonic and in no way related to the Kh-101... the original reporting name was AS-13. An improved datalink led to the AS-18 variant, but this missile is essentially a TV guided missile where the TV view of the target is sent back to the launch aircraft so the weapon operator can move the targeting cursor onto the target and send the attack command to hit specific targets from stand off ranges.

    AFAIK the only aircraft intended to operate it was initially the Su-24 but it has been seen on later Sukhois like the Su-34 and Su-35 and Su-30 families.

    I'm talking about the newest variant for su57. It has a range of 500km and is stealthier than other variants with probably Glosnass guidance without the need to turn on the video link (not sure about that however, maybe it's not the case and that why they develop new missiles which are real fire and forget).

    Very high speed weapons make sense in situations with enemy air defences, so in Syria and the Ukraine a hypersonic weapon does make sense but often slower weapons could also be used. BTW a scramjet is brand new technology but there is no evidence it needs expensive exotic materials to work properly... a scramjet is a ramjet which means no spinning blades or shafts for propellers... the actual design is pretty straight forward and should be quite cheap and simple to make once the design is perfected of course

    And what country beside Russia has AD able to intercept subsonic cruise missiles ? No one. Even Syrian AD modernized by russians can't deal with israeli subsonic missiles with 100% Pk.

    Against a better equiped country hypersonic missiles could be used to deal with big AD like patriot systems the first day but that's what ? Not even 4 systems per country. Then what's the point of using 2000km hypersonic missiles against undefended targets when a simple subsonic cruise missile like kh-59mk2 or kh35 can do the job with enough stand off for the launch aircraft.
    jhelb
    jhelb

    Posts : 934
    Points : 1041
    Join date : 2015-04-04
    Location : Previously: Belarus Currently: A Small Island No One Cares About

    Tu-22M3: News - Page 27 Empty Re: Tu-22M3: News

    Post  jhelb Thu May 14, 2020 2:13 pm

    GarryB wrote:Ramjet propulsion is perfectly sensible for vehicles that operate at speeds of between mach 1.5 up to about mach 5-6 or so.  They are relatively cheap and simple with few moving parts and no expensive exotic materials required.
    China is using pre cooled engine instead of scramjet for hypersonic cruise missile.  They give very high thrusts.
    Isos
    Isos

    Posts : 7150
    Points : 7136
    Join date : 2015-11-06

    Tu-22M3: News - Page 27 Empty Re: Tu-22M3: News

    Post  Isos Thu May 14, 2020 2:18 pm

    I want to add also that russian hypersonic missiles are mostly developed to counter NATO navies rather than attacking land targets because best NATO AD systems are on ships. Their land base AD is done with their air force which is the worst thing to use against cruise missiles.

    And apart kh-59, russian air force has no other tactical cruise missile with enough stand off range This missile has the disadvantage of needing the pilot to control it in last stage. The other missile is kh-101 but it is huge and I considere it as a strategic missile.

    Developing kh-50 for strategic aviation is good but I would rather have a missile that can be used by all of my sukhois and strategic bombers. But again this kh50 seems to be a strategical missile.

    IMO a kh-59 with guidance taken from kalibr is the best option for a widely used tactical missile.
    AlfaT8
    AlfaT8

    Posts : 2037
    Points : 2030
    Join date : 2013-02-02

    Tu-22M3: News - Page 27 Empty Re: Tu-22M3: News

    Post  AlfaT8 Thu May 14, 2020 5:39 pm

    Isos wrote:I want to add also that russian hypersonic missiles are mostly developed to counter NATO navies rather than attacking land targets because best NATO AD systems are on ships. Their land base AD is done with their air force which is the worst thing to use against cruise missiles.

    And apart kh-59, russian air force has no other tactical cruise missile with enough stand off range This missile has the disadvantage of needing the pilot to control it in last stage. The other missile is kh-101 but it is huge and I considere it as a strategic missile.

    Developing kh-50 for strategic aviation is good but I would rather have a missile that can be used by all of my sukhois and strategic bombers. But again this kh50 seems to be a strategical missile.

    IMO a kh-59 with guidance taken from kalibr is the best option for a widely used tactical missile.

    Isn't that the Kh-59MK2?
    Granted 550km isn't a considerable stand-off range, but the guidance is definitely their.

    On a further note, after looking up the Su-34, Russia's main Strike fighter, it becomes clear that it has the ability to carry the Kh-41, aka: the Moskit, and the Moskit is a very large and heavy missile.
    More so than even the Kalibre-T.

    So what your asking is why Russia hasn't deployed an air launched version of the Kalibre, short answer, they have, except its for export, the 3M-14AE.
    Oddly enough there should be a domestic variant called the 3M-14A, but i don't see it listed, so it either exists, but isn't listed, like the domestic 91RE, or it doesn't exist at all.

    Regardless, giving the specifications, it shouldn't even be a challenge for Russia to deploy an air-launched Kalibre of 6,2m Length and around 2000kg Mass, with a 1500-2000km range.
    Heck it already exists in export, all they need to do is change the fuel and software, could be deployed in a matter of months.

    The Su-30 has a capacity to carry 8000kg, you could load 3 of these missile plus more.
    The Mig-29M could handle 2 of them.
    Singular_Transform
    Singular_Transform

    Posts : 871
    Points : 857
    Join date : 2016-11-13

    Tu-22M3: News - Page 27 Empty Re: Tu-22M3: News

    Post  Singular_Transform Thu May 14, 2020 6:07 pm

    magnumcromagnon wrote:
    Just give it up lmao! lol1 Razz You were dead wrong with your laughable unfounded assertion that his research was click-bait designed by a random website. Wink Keep doubling down on your turd-sandwich, all your going to do is get these posts thrown in to the talking bollocks thread. Wink

    Sorry, mate, my first reaction was that , I haven't considered as an option the complete lack of basic physic understanding .

    My bad.
    kvs
    kvs

    Posts : 8708
    Points : 8851
    Join date : 2014-09-11
    Location : Canuckistan

    Tu-22M3: News - Page 27 Empty Re: Tu-22M3: News

    Post  kvs Thu May 14, 2020 7:00 pm

    What the combustion of aluminum nano-powder in pure CO2 shows is that addition of metal nano-powders such as aluminum and
    copper which have O2 affinity opens up new combustion pathways. This directly implies the increase of thermal energy output
    as more chemical potential energy is released.

    So the 500% burn efficiency increase from copper nano-particle addition is validated by the non-intuitive combustion behaviour
    of these particles. Chemistry is subject to Gibbs free energy constraints. Nano-particles have dramatically different surface
    effects compared to bulk materials. These surface energy effects cannot be neglected in the chemical potential and thus
    change the reaction rates and open up new reactions not possible with bulk materials.

    The most commonly known surface effect is called the Kelvin curvature effect. It is typically considered when dealing with
    condensation and evaporation of nano-particles (both liquid and solid). But it also affects the chemical potential via the
    fact that nano-particles are more surface active (the fraction of the surface mass diverges as the particle diameter goes
    to zero). At the same time, O2 molecules can attack nano-particle surface molecules or atoms (metal) more easily than
    is the case for bulk materials. So combustion efficiency increases.

    I see my comment was removed but the original troll post was not. Pfft. Miketheterrible is right about this site.




    Sponsored content

    Tu-22M3: News - Page 27 Empty Re: Tu-22M3: News

    Post  Sponsored content


      Current date/time is Thu Feb 25, 2021 3:49 am