How Russian Zircon strips US of maritime advantage

1 May 2020 18

It seems that the United States, with 12 nuclear-powered carrier strike groups, will no longer be able to boast of the title "master of the oceans." The end of American naval hegemony was laid by the Russian anti-ship missile 3M22 Zircon, which successfully passed its next tests in January of this year.

During testing, a missile launched from the Admiral Gorshkov frigate hit a ground target at a distance of 500 km, while developing a marching speed of up to 8 Machs, which significantly exceeded the calculated parameters. In the future, it is planned to increase its destruction range to 900 km.

The Pentagon already recognizes that the SPY-1 radar installed on the US Navy ships is capable of detecting Zircon at a distance of 350 km, which makes it impossible to repulse the attack. In this case, the rocket will reach the goal in 2 minutes, and for effective counteraction, according to the standards, it takes from 4 to 6 minutes. The only way to combat 3M22, according to the Pentagon, are lasers or an airborne nuclear explosion, but there are no such means on American ships yet.

According to calculations, 1-2 “Zircons” are enough for a destroyer, 3 cruisers, and 6-8 nuclear carriers. At the same time, the Russian frigate Admiral Gorshkov carries up to 16 such missiles.

The results achieved during the tests have already made it possible to begin the conversion of a number of ships and submarines to the Zircons. In 2-3 years, a unique missile will become the main mass anti-ship weapon of the Russian Navy, as they say, zeroing the American advantage.

Information

Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must sign in.

Sergey Latyshev

-1

1 May 2020 11: 32

Already stripped? Well done !!!
And how many Zircons are on combat duty in our fleet?

Somewhat earlier, they were already deprived of "Daggers". It seems that there are as many as 12 of them, and the range is higher ... And before that Volcanoes, Caliber, Onyx ...
And still not all deprived?
1. Syoma_67
  
  -1
  
  1 May 2020 13: 06
  
  An article for Hurray for patriots to be proud of. Look, there is no SU-57, or rather, there are about five unfinished ones, and all the planes in the world have already been finished. I’m not speaking for the Raptors (as Smuglyanka said, “the conditional enemy was conditionally shot down”), there is no Armata, and all the Abrams are already in panic, there are no Poseidons, and the US coast has already been destroyed five times, and such a whole list of conditional victories over an insidious adversary.
  1. Aleksey Glotov
    
    +2
    
    2 May 2020 07: 41
    
    The article is normal ... do not praise the US aircraft carriers for you ... supposedly the AUG is impenetrable from all sides ... there was still a bolt on this nut ... I'm glad of that.
    1. Syoma_67
      
      0
      
      2 May 2020 14: 34
      
      There is only one bolt, but there are many nuts.
bzbo

0

1 May 2020 14: 34

Satan rules the Ball. Fleet of partners for metal)))
Oleg Rambover

-1

1 May 2020 16: 59

Why is the article about the superiority of Russian weapons illustrated with a photograph of an American Boeing rocket?
1. Observer2014
  
  0
  
  1 May 2020 17: 43
  
  Quote: Oleg Rambover
  Why is the article about the superiority of Russian weapons illustrated with a photograph of an American Boeing rocket?
  
  How observant you are, however! It is likely that without a fantasy about this, our media? Or maybe this is such a method of protest ?! Against the mandatory topics of stupid articles that should be voiced by our media ?!
2. Kristallovich
  
  +1
  
  1 May 2020 18: 23
  
  Do you have a picture of "Zircon"? Share, we will be very grateful ...
  1. Oleg Rambover
    
    -2
    
    2 May 2020 15: 20
    
    Do they exist? Photos? Would they use BrahMos or Onyx photos then, they are probably more similar to Zircon than the American Boeing. And in general, somehow it’s wrong to use American photos.
    1. Kristallovich
      
      +1
      
      2 May 2020 15: 55
      
      they are probably more like Zircon than the American Boeing.
      
      Baseless claim. The hypersonic apparatus is characterized by certain external signs. Onyx doesn't have them.
      
      somehow it's wrong to use american photos.
      
      May be. But in the absence of a photo of "Zircon", we use what we have ...
      1. Oleg Rambover
        
        -2
        
        3 May 2020 17: 16
        
        Quote: Kristallovich
        Baseless statement.
        
        Actually, like yours. Although mine has more reason.
        
        https://lenta.ru/news/2017/04/15/cirkon/
        
        The source added that Zircon can be launched from the same launchers that are used for the Caliber and Onyx missiles.
        
        I would venture to suggest that it should look more like a rocket that has already started from this launcher.
        
        Quote: Kristallovich
        The hypersonic apparatus is characterized by certain external signs. Onyx doesn't have them.
        
        Which ones for example? Onyx has ramjet engines, like Zircon.
        
        Quote: Kristallovich
        May be. But in the absence of a photo of "Zircon", we use what we have ...
        
        There are modern graphic programs that allow you to draw any of your imagination. Everything from laziness.
        
        Kristallovich
        
        +2
        
        3 May 2020 17: 29
        
        The source added that Zircon can be launched from the same launchers that are used for the Caliber and Onyx missiles.
        
        I'm not talking about the mass-dimensional characteristics. It is clear that all modern sea-based missiles will be made under UKKS.
        
        Which ones, for example? Onyx has ramjet engines, like Zircon.
        
        Look at the hypersonic vehicles being tested in the United States and also being developed in China and India .... Onyx has too much drag.
        
        There are modern graphic programs that allow you to draw any of your imagination. Everything from laziness.
        
        You, as I understand it, are not lazy? Draw ...
        
        Oleg Rambover
        
        -2
        
        4 May 2020 14: 38
        
        Quote: Kristallovich
        Look at the hypersonic vehicles being tested in the United States and also being developed in China and India .... Onyx has too much drag.
        
        But this does not mean that the nose and air intake will be like that of a Boeing. Of course, I understand little in aerodynamics, but it seems to me that the nose contours do not have such fundamental significance, in contrast to the frontal projection area. But I will not argue.
        
        Quote: Kristallovich
        You, as I understand it, are not lazy? Draw ...
        
        I'm not lazy for any interest. To be honest, I'm tempted to try, but now there is no time. But this is the bread of the author of the article, and he had to take care of it.
        
        Kristallovich
        
        +1
        
        4 May 2020 14: 47
        
        but it seems to me that the nasal contours are not of such fundamental importance
        
        You are mistaken. Movement in dense layers of the atmosphere at a speed of more than 5 Machs of such a projectile as 3M55 is impossible for a long time. The skin will melt. That is why experimental hypersonic devices have a literally pointed nose, which is also lined with heat-resistant ceramics.
Sergey Sfiedu

0

2 May 2020 18: 58

How does Zircon differ today from X-22 and P-35 half a century ago and Granite thirty years ago? In theory, they were just the same almost never knocked down. But somehow the Americans did not consider themselves particularly vulnerable. It is not necessary to shoot down anti-ship missiles, as a rule, anti-ship missiles are taken away from aiming by passive and active interference. Well, as always, the problem of target designation. What's the use of an invulnerable missile if, with the start of hostilities, the enemy neutralizes our satellites and over-the-horizon radars.
Dzafdet

+2

3 May 2020 10: 13

Quote: Sergey Sfyedu
How does Zircon differ today from X-22 and P-35 half a century ago and Granite thirty years ago? In theory, they were just the same almost never knocked down. But somehow the Americans did not consider themselves particularly vulnerable. It is not necessary to shoot down anti-ship missiles, as a rule, anti-ship missiles are taken away from aiming by passive and active interference. Well, as always, the problem of target designation. What's the use of an invulnerable missile if, with the start of hostilities, the enemy neutralizes our satellites and over-the-horizon radars.

Well, the satellites are still back and forth, and how do they neutralize the radar? Or do you think they will be without protection? And we will destroy their companions too. So their floating scrap will not be easy to fight. It will be enough to blow up an atomic bomb over Aug and all their electronics will be covered with a copper basin.
BoBot Robot - Free Thinking Machine

0

3 June 2020 23: 00

Let dreamers of Russian aircraft carriers read this - dumb weapons of the mid-20th century!
Winnie

-3

5 June 2020 14: 54

How Russian Zircon strips US of maritime advantage

Another nonsense of the Russian agitation industry. There is nothing to deprive the US of benefits. Well, no Zircon, that's all! He is not accepted into service! And this, at best, will not happen soon. And so, one idle talk about anything. Empty cheeks.