NPOMash 3M22 Tsirkon Hypersonic Missile
- Thread starter bobbymike
- Start date
Marcellogo
ACCESS: Restricted
- Joined
- 27 September 2021
- Messages
- 37
- Reaction score
- 39
It is still possible to house 3 Oniks in a Granit launcher , so I wonder if it would be possible to do the same with Slava class missile launchers.
- Joined
- 11 February 2007
- Messages
- 2,089
- Reaction score
- 3,082
Not a Slava, but they're supposed to be doing it to Petr Veliky in his refit. I would imagine it's possible for the box-launchers on the Slavas but we might not see the three for one swap.
Dilandu
I'm dissatisfied, which means, I exist.
Mainly because while it's large, it's still one of the deadliest anti-ship missiles in the world, far beyond anything anyone else have.
Dilandu
I'm dissatisfied, which means, I exist.
Slava-class cruiser did not have P-700 Granits; they initially carry P-500 Bazalt, and now P-1000 Vulkan. Those missiles, while similar in capabilities to Granit, are not compatible.
(P-500 Bazalt was developed as successor of P-35 Progress cruise missile, for the same launchers. P-700 Granit was developed initially as submarine-launched weapon. Since P-700 Granit was more advanced than P-500 Bazalt, it was also adopted for the large surface combatants)
paralay
ACCESS: Top Secret
tequilashooter
ACCESS: Top Secret
- Joined
- 1 January 2021
- Messages
- 699
- Reaction score
- 889
Russia’s Tsirkon hypersonic missile strikes naval target in White Sea test-launch
According to Russia’s Defense Ministry, the recording equipment data show that the hypersonic missile’s flight complied with the designated parameters and the target was destroyed by a direct hit
Russia’s Tsirkon hypersonic missile strikes naval target in White Sea test-launch
According to Russia’s Defense Ministry, the recording equipment data show that the hypersonic missile’s flight complied with the designated parameters and the target was destroyed by a direct hit
Tsirkon hypersonic missile test-launched
© Russian Ministry of Defense/TASS
MOSCOW, November 18. /TASS/. A Tsirkon hypersonic missile test-launched from the Northern Fleet’s frigate Admiral Gorshkov struck a naval target in the White Sea with a direct hit, Russia’s Defense Ministry reported on Thursday.
"The recording equipment data show that the hypersonic missile’s flight complied with the designated parameters. The target was destroyed by a direct hit," the ministry said.
As Russia’s Defense Ministry specified, the hypersonic missile was test-fired against a sea target position in the White Sea.
"The Northern Fleet involved its surface ships and naval aviation to provide for the test-firings and close off the area," the ministry said.
A source earlier told TASS that the state trials of the Tsirkon hypersonic missile would begin in November and continue in December. Overall, five test-launches against sea and coastal targets are planned. On August 24, 2021, a contract was signed at the Army 2021 international arms show on the delivery of Tsirkon hypersonic missiles to the Russian troops.
Most likely something like this.
Attachments
NPOMash has started serial production of Zircon: https://tass.ru/armiya-i-opk/13041523
QuadroFX
Russia, Chelyabinsk
Is it normal to fire this many test articles for a missile program? Do the Russians ever announce the goals of individual tests? Clearly fired from a sub and ship are very different things that will require their own separate test programs but haven’t there been a dozen tests now? I feel like LRASM had like three end to end tests, though admittedly it flies a much simplified flight regime and only from one platform type.
- Joined
- 11 February 2010
- Messages
- 1,545
- Reaction score
- 2,321
Very normal i think. In fact they might want to do more to fully understand the missile's behavior.
- Joined
- 3 June 2011
- Messages
- 17,885
- Reaction score
- 10,947
It used to be normal in the US. LRASM is basically JASSM with a different guidance system. They've probably got thousands of hours test time with the seeker mounted on an aircraft/drone. All they were testing with the LRASM flights, really, was if the integration was good.
Re. testing here's a sample of Sprint & Spartan tests:
They don't test as much now, because if a thing isn't immediately successful they cancel it. This is why we're still using the half-century old Tomahawk instead of any of the plethora of supersonic/hypersonic programs since then.
QuadroFX
Russia, Chelyabinsk
This is a completely new type of missile weapon that has never been used in any army in the world before. So yeah it's ok
Why do they conduct Cirkons tests only on such a short range of 400 km, if the missile has a range of over 1000 km? which is almost 3 times larger
Marcellogo
ACCESS: Restricted
- Joined
- 27 September 2021
- Messages
- 37
- Reaction score
- 39
Testing a new weapon in Russia is a very long and exhaustive process, essentially for two reasons.
First one is that they doesn't have (because they DON'T want it) something equivalent to an IOC and LRIP production phase so they keep on testing until all the things of a new weapon is settled and declare them to be "in service" only when all the maintenance could be fully serviced by their own logistical structure (i.e. if the F-35 was their, it would still take YEARS before to be declared so, even with 500 actually operative).
Su-35 bombed three years in Syria before being declared "in Service".
Second, they are doctrine centered: state test doesn't just ascertain if a weapon is technically ready to be used but how to use it tactically, how to deploy, refurbish and train people to make the most out of them.
Needless to say: the more a weapon is innovative and "with no equivalent in the world" (to cite their most abused slogan), the more this last phase will take time.
So they have a LOT of new weapons that have passed the STATE TRIALS and reached the most sought letter O (i.e. ready for mass production) but are still mired in the SECOND STATE TEST phase (i.e. the one that have to ascertain how they will fit in the service) but for them this is not such a bad new...
Quite the contrary, it means that they have really innovative and game changing weaponries up into their sleeves (while the previous one are still in full production).
First one is that they doesn't have (because they DON'T want it) something equivalent to an IOC and LRIP production phase so they keep on testing until all the things of a new weapon is settled and declare them to be "in service" only when all the maintenance could be fully serviced by their own logistical structure (i.e. if the F-35 was their, it would still take YEARS before to be declared so, even with 500 actually operative).
Su-35 bombed three years in Syria before being declared "in Service".
Second, they are doctrine centered: state test doesn't just ascertain if a weapon is technically ready to be used but how to use it tactically, how to deploy, refurbish and train people to make the most out of them.
Needless to say: the more a weapon is innovative and "with no equivalent in the world" (to cite their most abused slogan), the more this last phase will take time.
So they have a LOT of new weapons that have passed the STATE TRIALS and reached the most sought letter O (i.e. ready for mass production) but are still mired in the SECOND STATE TEST phase (i.e. the one that have to ascertain how they will fit in the service) but for them this is not such a bad new...
Quite the contrary, it means that they have really innovative and game changing weaponries up into their sleeves (while the previous one are still in full production).
Last edited by a moderator:
FWIW the mouth watering expensive joint Army Long Range Hypersonic Missile/Navy Conventional Prompt Strike missile program, the Pentagon recent budget estimate of $28.5 billion is for 88 development/test missiles and 218 operational missiles, total 306, 29% development/test missiles.
Wow, 88 seems like a vast number of test/development missiles for any US program. That would probably cover every SM-3/THAAD test ever performed with room to spare, and that represents a couple of the longest, most technically challenging missile programs the US has had.
Fair points all on the new weapon pushing the envelop and the Russians having different testing regimes.
Fair points all on the new weapon pushing the envelop and the Russians having different testing regimes.
bring_it_on
I really should change my personal text
- Joined
- 4 July 2013
- Messages
- 3,231
- Reaction score
- 2,587
Moving the reply to the last two posts in the US Hypersonic Weapon Thread:
Last edited:
Probably coz it's pretty hard to make a 1000km restricted zone in international waters. Even if it's an Arctic Ocean. And, after all, this wouldn't make much sense. Usually ASM's are not being tested on their full range.
QuadroFX
Russia, Chelyabinsk
"Сегодня ночью, точнее под утро, проведен залповый пуск гиперзвуковой системы "Циркон". Это новейшая наша ракета, которая работает и по морю, и по морским целям, и по наземным целям. Испытания проведены успешно, безупречно." - В.В. Путин
“Tonight, more precisely in the morning, a salvo launch of the Zircon hypersonic system was maid. This is our newest missile, which works both at sea targets and at ground targets. The tests were completed successfully, flawlessly.” - V.V. Putin
ria.ru
“Tonight, more precisely in the morning, a salvo launch of the Zircon hypersonic system was maid. This is our newest missile, which works both at sea targets and at ground targets. The tests were completed successfully, flawlessly.” - V.V. Putin
В России провели залповый пуск гиперзвуковой системы "Циркон"
Президент России Владимир Путин рассказал о последних испытаниях системы "Циркон". РИА Новости, 26.12.2021
Last edited:
QuadroFX
Russia, Chelyabinsk
"Zircon" launch from "Admiral Gorshkov" as part of strategic exercises:
View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_TS88Vg0ZLU
bring_it_on
I really should change my personal text
- Joined
- 4 July 2013
- Messages
- 3,231
- Reaction score
- 2,587
Weekly Debrief: Russia’s Wonder Weapon May Not Be What It Seems | Aviation Week Network
What is Zircon exactly? The answer may seem obvious.
aviationweek.com
Can you give us a quick summary of the conclusion? I've often wondered what exactly is its propulsion. It clearly has a rocket booster for surface launch, it looks like that is a relatively small affair normal to ground launched cruise missiles. I always assumed Zircon had to be a combined cycle ram/scram jet that started at relatively slow speeds and change combustion changer/inlet geometry as it accelerated. What is their take?Weekly Debrief: Russia’s Wonder Weapon May Not Be What It Seems | Aviation Week Network
What is Zircon exactly? The answer may seem obvious.
- Joined
- 16 April 2008
- Messages
- 9,039
- Reaction score
- 12,786
Can you give us a quick summary of the conclusion? I've often wondered what exactly is its propulsion. It clearly has a rocket booster for surface launch, it looks like that is a relatively small affair normal to ground launched cruise missiles. I always assumed Zircon had to be a combined cycle ram/scram jet that started at relatively slow speeds and change combustion changer/inlet geometry as it accelerated. What is their take?Weekly Debrief: Russia’s Wonder Weapon May Not Be What It Seems | Aviation Week Network
What is Zircon exactly? The answer may seem obvious.
I think it's this line of thinking, that Tsirkon/Zircon may be a rocket, not an air-breather.
View: https://twitter.com/TheDEWLine/status/1495822058147794950
This version was expressed and investigated at the Airbase.ru and Paralay boards more than a year ago.
Last edited by a moderator:
bring_it_on
I really should change my personal text
- Joined
- 4 July 2013
- Messages
- 3,231
- Reaction score
- 2,587
What was the result of this investigation?
Multiple penalties from moderators.
Speaking seriously, i'm the one who was tending to think it's a rocket.
But now i'm not so sure it is.
In the video below you can see the moment(at 0:32) when the solid booster-stage finished its job and disabled.
So, it's a liquid-fuel rocket motor or air-breather.
I'm surprised there was ever any debate about that. It isn't large enough to be a boost glide; look at the relatively tiny US SWERVE glider and how large the booster is. My question is whether anyone has discussed the mode of operation - it seems impossible to me that the weapons is boosted to anything like scramjet speed or altitude. But at the same time it is claimed to have a top speed of M8. I don't see how that isn't a combined cycle ram/scramjet, unless they are really pushing the envelope of ramjet performance or perhaps the M8 speed is the terminal dive speed not the cruise speed.
Dilandu
I'm dissatisfied, which means, I exist.
Literally everything indicates that it's air breather.
bring_it_on
I really should change my personal text
- Joined
- 4 July 2013
- Messages
- 3,231
- Reaction score
- 2,587
I'm leaning towards a ramjet or another air-breathing system but technically it could also be using a pulsed solid rocket motor. We just don't know definitively and they haven't disclosed this or shown a clear enough view to determine this.
Similar threads
-
-
-
-
-
9M730 Burevestnik (SSC-X-9 Skyfall) cruise nuclear-powered missile- Started by Brickmuppet
- Replies: 268