Why the Russian "Zircon" will have to be equipped with a nuclear warhead

107

Today, when Ukraine and Georgia have come close to joining the NATO bloc, and it will be possible to deploy elements of the American dual-use missile defense system and even direct strike weapons on their territory, the question of the need to curb the expansion of the "hegemon" has become an edge. As a new "wunderwaffe" in Russia, promising hypersonic weapons have been announced, protection against which so far does not exist. But are Zircons and Daggers really capable of fulfilling their task, and if not, then what is required?

Once again, we will not describe the undoubted advantages of Russian hypersonic missiles, such as the phenomenal speed of movement and the inability to intercept them with existing missile defense systems, we will not, this has already been done many times and with great enthusiasm before us. Unfortunately, with the actual use of Zircons and Daggers, some problems may arise that need to be mentioned in order not to create false illusions and adequately represent the scope of their use.



Mobile targets


If you look at the domestic press on this topic, then it is all devoted to the fact that the Zircons, as well as the Daggers that joined them, are an irresistible strike weapon against the US Navy AUG, capable of easily destroying any ship, "from a frigate to an aircraft carrier" . Alas, but several more difficultthan we would like.

Contrary to a dangerous misconception, an aircraft carrier strike force is an extremely difficult target to destroy. An AWACS aircraft is constantly circling above it, which will be the first to see approaching (our) surface ships or aircraft, and carrier-based fighter aircraft will go towards them. In principle, the AUG will not be able to get close, so anti-ship missiles of the Russian Navy will have to be launched from a distance of at least 900 kilometers. It is not for nothing that the Zircon has the ability to cover a distance of up to 1000 kilometers.

And everything would be fine: a serviceman launched a hypersonic missile and went with friends to drink beer, forgetting about the AUG, but there are some problems. American aircraft carriers and an escort order are capable of moving at speeds up to 30 knots. While the rocket, even as fast as the Zircon or Dagger, will fly, the AUG will move at least ten kilometers. In order to avoid an offensive miss, the anti-ship missile must be aimed at the target and constantly adjusted, and this is precisely the “plug”. The Liana satellite constellation of the RF Ministry of Defense has not yet been developed, and the Russian Navy does not have its own carrier-based AWACS aircraft (DRLOiU), which are responsible for performing such tasks in the US Navy. For their sea-based aircraft carriers are needed, but in our country, ships of this class are anathema.

Paradoxically, in order to be able to sink enemy aircraft carrier strike groups with hypersonic missiles, you need to have your own aircraft carriers with carrier-based AWACS aircraft for reconnaissance and target designation of Zircons, Caliber, Daggers and Onyxes, as well as carrier-based fighter aircraft for air cover for our ships, which have a frankly weak air defense system. About what aircraft carriers and carrier-based aviation we need, and whether Russia can afford them, we reasoned earlier.

But in any case, even if a couple of aircraft carriers are laid down right today and the development and production of carrier-based AWACS aircraft Yak-44 is resumed, it will really take 10-15 years to achieve a result that allows their use. This is vital, but quite a long time. Is it possible to somehow use "Zircons" and "Daggers" in the more foreseeable future?

Stationary targets


Note that, unlike mobile ones, hypersonic weapons have no problems with hitting stationary targets.
You can hang 1 "Dagger" on the MiG-31K fighter-interceptor and release it at a command post or ammunition depot somewhere in Ukraine or Eastern Europe, and the Tu-22M3 bomber will be able to take four such missiles at once. Project 22350 frigates "Admiral Gorshkov" can be fired at coastal targets with 16 Zircons without any problems, and in version 22350M - with 48 hypersonic missiles.

In 2019, President Vladimir Putin mentioned that work had begun on the creation of a ground-based Zircon. Probably, the Bastion coastal missile system will be used as a carrier. With the defeat of naval mobile targets at a great distance from the DBK, the problems so far will be the same as we described above. However, the experience of the Syrian campaign has shown that such systems can be quite successfully used against land targets.

In other words, by creating a ground-based Zircon based on the Bastion, the Russian Defense Ministry will receive an almost irresistible hypersonic missile capable of hitting targets at a distance of up to 1000 kilometers. For example, the DBK could be located in the Kaliningrad region or Belarus, from where they would target continental Europe or even Great Britain, as well as somewhere in Kamchatka or Chukotka, from where they would block the US military infrastructure in Alaska. There is only one problem.

The problem lies in the relatively small Zircon warhead. There is no exact data anywhere, but in open sources you can find figures from 300 to 400 kilograms, sometimes up to 500. For a frigate in the event of a hit, this will be enough, but is it enough to restrain the aggressiveness of the United States and the NATO bloc as a whole? How many "Bastions" with ground "Zircons" can we put up? It is likely that hypersonic missiles will not be too massive due to the presumably high cost of their production. What then remains?

It remains to realize the nightmare of US Department of Defense spokesman John Kirby:

Of course, we are aware of President Putin's statements. And while I won't go into details or do any analysis of his claims, it's important to note that Russia's new hypersonic missiles potentially pose significant risks because they are capable of carrying nuclear warheads.

With a nuclear warhead, "Zircon" or "Dagger" will become a truly effective means of deterring the NATO bloc. So, the distance from Kaliningrad, say, to London in a straight line is only 881 kilometers, that is, a hypersonic nuclear missile will definitely fly to Foggy Albion and hit it for sure. With nuclear "Zircons" on board, not only SSBNs, but also, for example, SSGNs of projects 885 "Ash" and 885M "Ash-M" and promising nuclear submarines "Husky" can pose a real danger to the United States itself.
107 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must sign in.
  1. +4
    29 January 2022 12: 21
    yes, there’s nothing to talk about - equip with thermonuclear and IMMEDIATELY!!!
    1. -1
      29 January 2022 23: 49
      py si
      and to hit the A-carrier, it is enough to equip the rocket itself with additional equipment, like on Onyx!
  2. +3
    29 January 2022 12: 40
    We do not know much, maybe it has already been done?
    1. -3
      29 January 2022 13: 08
      He will write his next post on this topic. Read the comments to https://topcor.ru/23638-s-raketoj-cirkon-rossii-net-nuzhdy-sozdavat-bazy-vblizi-ssha.html#comment-id-216086 laughing
      1. -2
        29 January 2022 13: 15
        And what exactly is there to read? It is obvious that the nuclear warhead is needed, but there is 0 information on it?
        1. +1
          29 January 2022 13: 21
          Anything can be imagined.

          That is, fantasies are the lot of the elite, like Marzhetsky?
          Problem topics?
          1. -2
            29 January 2022 13: 21
            Something I did not understand the personal attack. Explain yourself?
            1. -1
              29 January 2022 13: 28
              And this is not the first run-in, about the fantasy world in which I live.
              Find?
              1. -1
                29 January 2022 13: 29
                I will not minus, be calm.
                1. -1
                  29 January 2022 13: 48
                  To be honest, I generally don’t care about these pluses and minuses. I'm just doing my job.
                  1. 0
                    29 January 2022 13: 51
                    ... I generally don’t care about these pluses and minuses.

                    Why are you betting?
                    1. -1
                      29 January 2022 13: 54
                      I don't care when they put me. smile
                      1. -6
                        29 January 2022 13: 55
                        And I do not care about FIG.
              2. -1
                29 January 2022 13: 32
                Again. What is your claim? You wrote your conjectures about YABCH. I replied that so far these were fantasies, and offered to talk later, WHEN the YABCH will be.
                With this article, I wrote my opinion on the need for nuclear warheads for Zircon and tried to justify this. At the same time, there is still no information from the word at all about the nuclear warhead for Zircon. I mean, it's still fantasy.
                By this, I, excuse me, somehow violated your copyright on a completely unique idea that Zircon needs a nuclear warhead?
                What exactly is the claim, please explain? hi

                And this is not the first run-in, about the fantasy world in which I live.
                Find?

                Boris, with all due respect, all these showdowns are not interesting to me at all, just like running into you. I respond harshly to those who allow themselves unmotivated aggressive attacks against me.
                How are you now. But I'm holding my own for now, mind you. hi

                Problem topics?

                I have no problems with topics, for which they keep. smile
                1. -4
                  29 January 2022 13: 52
                  ... all these disassemblies are not interesting to me at all, ...

                  Well then, calm down. I already said everything.
                  1. -3
                    29 January 2022 13: 53
                    Yeah, I didn't even start to worry smile It was you who got nervous about something and started writing all sorts of garbage in my address.
    2. Sah
      0
      15 March 2022 02: 22
      Quote: viktortarianik
      +3
      We don't know much, maybe

      Yes anyway
  3. +2
    29 January 2022 13: 11
    The fact that Zircon needs a special warhead - ladies, is not even a subject for discussion. And it is guaranteed to be. And above all, not so much for strikes against the AUG - but for coastal targets.
    And yes, Liana is needed, and by the way, it cannot be said that she does not exist, exists, functions, but the functionality is still incomplete. It's like GLONASS - at first only the territory of Russia was covered, then more and more accurately ...
    And Zircon does not need AWACS at all. It is the scout who is engaged in maritime reconnaissance, and not AWACS! Difference? - RC works both in liabilities and assets, and AWACS only in assets! Yes, the AWACS functionality is an order of magnitude wider, but for the RC, the range and accuracy of determination are more important than the completeness of the situation control and management (in the air, on the water, and on land, even with selection!) And for this, that the RC, that for AWACS today they use large aircraft, slow, but long on duty and flying far! An aircraft carrier is not needed for this! It is for a strike aircraft carrier that AWACS is needed - to rake up problems off a foreign coast.
    1. -1
      29 January 2022 20: 45
      Quote: sH, arK
      It is the scout who is engaged in maritime reconnaissance, and not AWACS!

      AWACS - the same scout, only with advanced functionality

      Quote: sH, arK
      The RC works both in liabilities and in assets, and AWACS only in assets!

      AWACS have passive radio intelligence stations or the main radar operating mode in passive mode, which allows you to detect enemy aircraft by fixing the operation of radio systems. Although such secrecy to him, as a rule, will not be needed.

      Quote: sH, arK
      Yes, the AWACS functionality is an order of magnitude wider, but for the RC, the range and accuracy of the determination are more important

      AWACS has no problems with this

      Quote: sH, arK
      in the air, on water, and on land, even with selection!

      RTK AWACS can operate in one of several modes or a combination of them:
      - Panoramic without beam scanning in the vertical plane
      - Surveillance with beam scanning in elevation to determine the flight altitude of air targets.
      - over-the-horizon search with cutoff of signals below the horizon line to increase noise immunity
      - review of the water surface with short pulses to suppress reflections from the sea surface.
      - passive direction finding of RI sources

      It is not at all clear why you decided that AWACS cannot act as a target designator. It has all the necessary functionality. This is not only an aircraft for detecting targets, but also for aiming at it (i.e., issuing target designation) and controlling (aircraft)

      When a scout has discovered a target, how does he report it to the regimental command post, for example? Is it just on arrival? Also, radio silence does not work, even if you use exclusively passive means. In addition, intelligence from the base aircraft will go to the headquarters of the regiment, then to the headquarters of the Navy, then this data will be transferred to the headquarters of the formation, and only then to the ship. The chain is not easy. The decker interacts with his ship (and "his" aircraft) directly. this is precious time.
      Target designation, although not a specialization of AWACS, but he will cope with the task.

      In the USSR, for example, there was a project of the Su-28KRTS carrier-based aircraft (based on the Su-27K), designed to conduct aerial reconnaissance in the interests of the strike formations of the fleet and issue target designation to the main missile armament of an aircraft carrier group. So having "your own" deck target designator is not only sound, it has been worked out.
  4. -3
    29 January 2022 13: 36
    Quote: sH, arK
    An aircraft carrier is not needed for this! It is for a strike aircraft carrier that AWACS is needed - to rake up problems off a foreign coast.

    Again 25. smile
    1. +1
      29 January 2022 19: 17
      Elementarily simple! Do not multiply entities unnecessarily! It was the inability to spend money carefully that killed the USSR and is now painfully affecting the United States. We don’t feel sorry for them, of course ... But can we have enough for a rake ?!
      1. -1
        31 January 2022 12: 31
        The USSR was definitely not killed by aircraft carriers. smile
  5. -1
    29 January 2022 13: 48
    A hypersonic missile flies, roughly speaking, at a speed of 3 km / s (well, a little less), 900 km will fly in 300 seconds (5 minutes). AUG on full steam at 30 knots will pass 5 miles in 2,5 minutes, not a dozen.
    1. -4
      29 January 2022 15: 31
      Quote: KSP31
      A hypersonic missile flies, roughly speaking, at a speed of 3 km / s (well, a little less), 900 km will fly in 300 seconds (5 minutes). AUG on full steam at 30 knots will pass 5 miles in 2,5 minutes, not a dozen.

      but homing (or external guidance) for firing at a moving target is still needed. KVO ballistic missile OTRK "Iskander-M" (for example) when using only INS - about 70-100 meters (according to open sources). And if the target moves, makes maneuvers, it is extremely difficult to predict its position with an accuracy of up to a meter. The probability of a direct hit is practically zero.
    2. 0
      29 January 2022 17: 02
      Quote: KSP31
      will pass in 5 minutes 2,5 miles, not a dozen.

      maybe a dozen or more. After all, the time from receiving target designation to hitting a missile is not only the time of a missile's flight.
      How will the combat operation of a missile without a GOS take place?

      The target has been found. satellite constellation. Moreover, it must be borne in mind that the coordinates of the target will be obtained with a certain error. Information from the satellite will go to the headquarters of the affiliation. There they will have to decipher it, make sure that the coordinates of the target are received. That this is the goal, and not some object nearby. During this time, the error in the coordinates of the target (it is not stationary!) Will increase even more.
      Further, the coordinates of the target (suppose that they are still updated) with the order will be transferred to the commander of the ship, who will carry out the firing. The calculation of the predicted point of impact will begin based on the assumption that the target will not change its course and speed, just like its own ship. After that, the flight task will be loaded into the rocket. Errors accumulate again - for the time of calculating and loading the flight task, errors in determining their own coordinates (the ship also moves, and the equipment is not without errors). And only then - start. Those. the launching rocket will already be aimed with some error. With a small one, but still.

      Well, then the flight itself - 6-7 minutes. This is the shortest phase of the use of a hypersonic missile. Preparatory operations will take several times more time. And during this time, the target can go not only 3, but 6 miles, and even more. And when a missile launch is detected from the side of the target, they will probably take an evasive maneuver. They won't go far, but they can get half a mile. Or maybe not, but it's possible.

      Therefore, the probability of being hit by a direct hit by a missile without a seeker is practically zero. Therefore, all anti-ship missiles with GOS of one type or another.
      When shooting at ground targets, most of the above errors are not present, therefore the seeker is not required, but still desirable - accuracy is greatly improved.

      Shooting unguided projectiles at a moving target is not easy, even at close range. So, armor-piercing sub-caliber shells of tank guns are also hypersonic - 1800 m / s is Mach 5,3. When firing at 2,5 kilometers, the projectile will fly for only about 1,5 seconds, during which the target tank will be able to travel from 4 meters or more. And if you aimed at the tower and made a little mistake with the range and speed determination, you can easily miss. Even at 2 kilometers, not to mention a thousand.
      1. 0
        29 January 2022 22: 00
        There is a GOS on Zircon, of course.
        1. -4
          30 January 2022 09: 15
          She is weak
          1. -2
            31 January 2022 11: 18
            She is weak

            Here - https://glav.su/forum/5/2015/6292683#message6292683
            crafts specialists and veterans, scatter your creation into molecules, if I may say so

            1. -2
              31 January 2022 12: 05
              I did not find any reasoned analysis into molecules, except for spelling errors and scoffing, by reference hi
              PS
              Here among the readers of the Reporter there are both officers and veterans.
            2. -2
              31 January 2022 12: 39
              And by the way, the main topic of the "near-journalist" article is Zircon.
              In the "parsing into molecules" there is only a beautiful picture of the Dagger. Think about it. request
  6. -12
    29 January 2022 16: 03
    With invariable joy I read another utopian-militarist opus of Mr. Marzhetsky. What is even worth this statement:

    Project 22350 frigates "Admiral Gorshkov" can be fired at coastal targets with 16 Zircons without any problems, and in version 2350M - with 48 hypersonic missiles.

    Alas, Marzhetsky, the problems are higher than the roof. To begin with, frigates are unlikely to be able to move away from the wall at all. Well, the author’s intentions to destroy London are also unrealizable, but who will allow this to be done? Britain is not Georgia at all ... In general, when gentlemen who have never served in the army try to predict future armed conflicts, this is inevitably ridiculous. laughing
    1. The comment was deleted.
      1. The comment was deleted.
        1. +3
          29 January 2022 19: 03
          are you telling your mrii again?))) if nothing flies from Russia, nothing can move away from the pier, you can bomb and destroy everything - then why is your ukrovermacht still not in Moscow, or at the extreme in Sevastopol?)))
          1. -8
            29 January 2022 21: 11
            Wait, uncle, just give me a deadline - you will have a squirrel, there will be a whistle. (c) I seem to have already written that I have nothing to do with Ukraine, I have dual citizenship (USA-Israel). Therefore, questions about Ukraine are not for me.
            1. 0
              30 January 2022 00: 53
              Quote: Bindyuzhnik
              I think I already wrote that I have nothing to do with Ukraine, I have dual citizenship (USA-Israel). Therefore, questions about Ukraine are not for me.

              what's the difference?
              USA, Ukraine or Israel, if we are talking about Russia?

              From fear, the missiles will not take off and the frigates will not move away?
              1. -6
                30 January 2022 01: 15
                Quote: bulvas
                From fear, the missiles will not take off and the frigates will not move away?

                Missiles will not hit targets and frigates will not withdraw due to opposition from the other side, and not at all because of the fear that you imagine ...
            2. +2
              30 January 2022 09: 00
              that is, you are like a dual citizen in Zhmerinka, without living in Russia, discussing Russia and how things are in it?)))) I think you are shaking the pan and your thoughts about Russia are very important to us))) With the same success I can discuss how things are in New Zealand and how soon everything will die and fall apart)))
    2. +1
      30 January 2022 08: 51
      What is at least this statement worth: "Project 22350 Admiral Gorshkov frigates can be fired at coastal targets with 16 Zircons without any problems, and in version 2350M - with 48 hypersonic missiles." Alas, Marzhetsky, the problems are higher than the roof. To begin with, frigates are generally unlikely to be able to move away from the wall.

      In your clinical Russophobia you write complete nonsense. laughing

      Well, the author’s intentions to destroy London are also unrealizable, but who will allow this to be done? Britain is not Georgia at all...

      Destroying London and endangering London are two very different things.

      In general, when gentlemen who have never served in the army try to predict future armed conflicts, this is inevitably ridiculous. laughing

      I think you yourself actually served as an informant for the SBU in Ukraine and Israel on similar topics. The breed is felt, you can’t hide wink

      In general, when gentlemen who have never served in the army try to predict future armed conflicts, this is inevitably ridiculous. laughing

      In my first education, I had a chance to work a little in a specialized civil service. winked
    3. +4
      30 January 2022 11: 01
      Judging by your comment, you served in food warehouses. The frigate, firstly, will be able to shoot at the pier, and secondly, it will go out to sea and will feel quite confident there as long as there is cover from the shore. Britain is not Georgia. The territory is larger, which means that the consumption of ammunition will also be much higher, the only difference is this.
  7. -6
    29 January 2022 16: 41
    Why is the Boeing X-51 in the picture again?
    What problems do people worry about ... There will be a nuclear warhead on the mythical Zircon, there will not be. What difference does it make, no one will ever use these Zircons against the AUG, NATO countries, and even more so London and Washington, in a nuclear, not in the usual version. There are more than a hundred thousand sick today, this is a problem, and the problem of equipping Zircons with nuclear warhead daggers is not a problem at all. Not worth a damn.
    1. 0
      30 January 2022 09: 05
      What difference does it make, no one will ever use these Zircons against the AUG, NATO countries, and even more so London and Washington, in a nuclear, not in the usual version.

      Your problem and the problem of all bindyuzhnikov is that you consider the current regime with its policy a constant.
      Meanwhile, there will be Russia after Putin and Medvedev, and the policy towards "partners" can change very much. Then with London, and with the United States, and with Israel, the conversation will be different.
      1. -1
        30 January 2022 10: 57
        Quote: Marzhetsky
        Your problem and the problem of all bindyuzhnikov is that you consider the current regime with its policy a constant.

        You are mistaken, I don’t know how the Binduzhniki are, but I don’t consider the current regime to be eternal. In general, nothing lasts forever under the sun.

        Quote: Marzhetsky
        Meanwhile, there will be Russia after Putin and Medvedev, and the policy towards "partners" can change very much.

        Do you think it could get worse? As in a joke, we thought that we had reached the bottom, but we knocked from the bottom.

        Quote: Marzhetsky
        Then with London, and with the United States, and with Israel, the conversation will be different.

        Smart people just recently told you that there will be no winners in a nuclear war. I don’t know why Israel didn’t please you. But strikes against London and the United States will inevitably lead to strikes against Russian cities. Everyone understands this and it is hard to believe that the next leadership of the country will be so insane that they would not realize this. Yes, even in Israel, the sane leadership will not shoot.
        1. -2
          30 January 2022 11: 38
          Do you think it could get worse? As in a joke, we thought that we had reached the bottom, but we knocked from the bottom.

          I think it will be worse at first, and then better in the case of a left turn.

          Smart people just recently told you that there will be no winners in a nuclear war.

          There will be no nuclear war. Maximum local with the use of tactical nuclear weapons.

          But strikes against London and the United States will inevitably lead to strikes against Russian cities. Everyone understands this and it is hard to believe that the next leadership of the country will be so insane that they would not realize this. Yes, even in Israel, the sane leadership will not shoot.

          I have always been amazed at how Western liberals distort everything. Russia is not going to be the first to shoot at London or Tel Aviv. Only in response, and this is only a deterrent.
          1. -4
            30 January 2022 16: 02
            Quote: Marzhetsky
            I think it will be worse at first, and then better in the case of a left turn.

            And who in our country will carry out this left turn? Right-wing imperialists like you? Are there leftists in Russia at all? Udaltsov? Who else?

            Quote: Marzhetsky
            There will be no nuclear war. Maximum local with the use of tactical nuclear weapons.

            The local use of nuclear weapons against a country with strategic nuclear forces is fraught with a transition from local to global. So no one in their right mind would use it. As well as attacking such a country even without the use of nuclear weapons.

            Quote: Marzhetsky
            I have always been amazed at how Western liberals distort everything. Russia is not going to be the first to shoot at London or Tel Aviv. Only in response, and this is only a deterrent.

            After reading our forum, the feeling that they want to shoot through one, without thinking about the consequences.
            Are London and Tel Aviv going to be the first to shoot at Moscow?
            So it's you who calculates the distance from Kaliningrad to London. No need to overdo it. This works both ways, strikes against Russian cities will inevitably lead to strikes against enemy cities. And this is well understood here and there. At least I strongly hope so. Therefore, all your Zircons, whether with a nuclear warhead or with a conventional one, are one prank.
            1. 0
              31 January 2022 01: 19
              It's one thing if you hit Zircon with a tactical nuclear warhead at a NATO AUG off the coast of Russia, which is ready for an attack, and a completely different nuclear strike on London or New York, which will 100% lead to a nuclear retaliatory strike.
              1. -1
                31 January 2022 07: 01
                It's one thing if you hit Zircon with a tactical nuclear warhead at a NATO AUG off the coast of Russia, which is ready for an attack, and a completely different nuclear strike on London or New York, which will 100% lead to a nuclear retaliatory strike.

                Who and where carried out such differentiation, tell us? Is it possible here, but not here?
              2. -1
                31 January 2022 07: 16
                Quote: assault 2019
                It's one thing if you hit Zircon with a tactical nuclear warhead at a NATO AUG off the coast of Russia, which is ready for an attack

                Where is this off the coast of Russia? In the Mediterranean? In the North? That the AUG has prepared for the attack can only be determined by the aircraft that have taken off and are moving towards Russia. Then Zircon will already be purely moral satisfaction.
                How do you heal those who are prepared from simply conducting the teachings.
                This is all nonsense, no one in their right mind would attack a country with nuclear weapons.
                1. -1
                  31 January 2022 07: 23
                  That the AUG has prepared for the attack can only be determined by the aircraft that have taken off and are moving towards Russia.

                  Aviation AUG is tactical in nature. But the AUG is also an escort order, where there are hundreds of missiles capable of carrying nuclear warheads. And most importantly, the AUG is essentially covering the Ohio SSBNs with Trident-2 ICBMs, and this is the main threat.
                  You don't understand what you write.
                  1. -1
                    31 January 2022 15: 48
                    Quote: Marzhetsky
                    And most importantly, the AUG is essentially covering the Ohio SSBNs with Trident-2 ICBMs, and this is the main threat.



                    The AUG escort order includes multi-purpose Los Angeles, not Ohio.
                    Airplanes can't carry nuclear bombs?
                    And what will the Zircons do with Ohio?
                  2. -2
                    31 January 2022 18: 04
                    Ahhh ... Semyon Semenych, you meant that AUG defend Ohio, and not Ohio defend AUG. You just put it that way. Then I apologize for that.
                    Or, as the chief fleet specialist, can you clarify a couple of points.
                    1. From whom to protect Ohio? Does the Russian Federation have a grouping in the Atlantic? And what will the destruction of the AUG change?
                    2. AUG must be destroyed before the Tridents fly?
                    3. You said that "Maximum local with the use of tactical nuclear weapons." Are Tridents tactical weapons?
                    4. Most importantly, with what fright the Tridents will fly to the Russian Federation if their owners know that the response will definitely arrive and it is impossible to repel it.
                    1. -1
                      1 February 2022 12: 32
                      Ahhh ... Semyon Semenych, you meant that AUG defend Ohio, and not Ohio defend AUG. You just put it that way. Then I apologize for that.
                      Or, as the chief fleet specialist, can you clarify a couple of points.
                      1. From whom to protect Ohio? Does the Russian Federation have a grouping in the Atlantic? And what will the destruction of the AUG change?

                      That is why domestic liberals are drowning against aircraft carriers. So that there was no one there to hunt in Ohio.
                      1. -1
                        1 February 2022 14: 36
                        Domestic liberals in my person do not understand their meaning for the country's defense capability. The cost of one aircraft carrier (without a warrant, without setting up a base) is comparable to the cost of all medicine throughout our country in a year. It is better to invest in people than in useless pieces of iron. They tell us here that the Zircons reset the AUG. This means that the American wunderwaffe will reset our aircraft carriers. What's the point?

                        I really don’t understand, Ohio is floating, let’s say in America the leadership had a collective insanity and Ohio starts shooting Tridents. And what will the Russian AUG do? Before they start shooting, you can't drown. She shoots very quickly, it is unlikely that the AUG will be able to prevent this.

                        Today, neither the Russian Federation nor the United States is able to defend itself against a massive nuclear strike. And the presence or absence of AUG in the Russian Federation does not change a bit.

                        And you yourself stated that:

                        Maximum local with the use of tactical nuclear weapons

                        Tridents are clearly not tactical nuclear weapons. What's the point then? Do you really like aircraft carriers?
                      2. 0
                        1 February 2022 15: 31
                        Quote: Oleg Rambover
                        Domestic liberals in my face do not understand their meaning ...

                        The people of Russia have noticed this for a long time and no longer vote for you.
            2. -1
              31 January 2022 06: 55
              After reading our forum, the feeling that they want to shoot through one, without thinking about the consequences.
              Are London and Tel Aviv going to be the first to shoot at Moscow?
              So it's you who calculates the distance from Kaliningrad to London. No need to overdo it. This works both ways, strikes against Russian cities will inevitably lead to strikes against enemy cities. And this is well understood here and there. At least I strongly hope so. Therefore, all your Zircons, whether with a nuclear warhead or with a conventional one, are one prank.

              You do not know how to draw the right conclusion, I'll see.
              1. -3
                31 January 2022 12: 04
                And in my opinion it is you who do not know how to draw the right conclusions.
                1. -1
                  31 January 2022 12: 13
                  I don't care about your opinion. hi
                  1. -3
                    31 January 2022 12: 21
                    What a coincidence, I also don't care about your opinion.
                    1. -1
                      31 January 2022 13: 49
                      Why then scribble hundreds of comments to articles with my opinion? laughing
                      1. -1
                        31 January 2022 15: 35
                        I’m not as talented as you, I can’t pile an article on a topical topic, I have to express my opinion under yours.
                      2. 0
                        1 February 2022 12: 29
                        Everything is good. Yes
            3. -1
              31 January 2022 07: 09
              And who in our country will carry out this left turn? Right-wing imperialists like you? Are there leftists in Russia at all? Udaltsov? Who else?

              Normal leftists do not shine in public space because of the senselessness and danger.

              Are London and Tel Aviv going to be the first to shoot at Moscow?
              So it's you who calculates the distance from Kaliningrad to London. No need to overdo it.

              Of course, London is going to shoot. Then he keeps the nuclear submarine with the Tridents on board. And the Ukraine climbs for the same. The guarantee to get an irresistible answer is just what the doctor ordered. It is indicative how nervous you and the bindyuzhnik got. smile
              1. -2
                31 January 2022 14: 39
                Quote: Marzhetsky
                Normal leftists do not shine in public space because of the senselessness and danger.

                Ah... underground. We need to go to the hut, it's not far away, maybe they're hiding there.
                Or look in the shed.


                In fact, the left turn is carried out today, but only this happens in the "West" you adore. Russia is now moving further and further into the right.

                Quote: Marzhetsky
                Of course, London is going to shoot. Then he keeps the nuclear submarine with the Tridents on board.

                And that is, all sorts of vanguards with petrels are different? Or is the finally finished Mace with Boreas something else? What are you going to shoot, how did you determine? Have you read their minds?

                Quote: Marzhetsky
                And the Ukraine climbs for the same. The guarantee to get an irresistible answer is just what the doctor ordered.

                For what for the same? Bullet? Well, that's stupid. There will be no winners in the war with Russia. Moreover, it was so in the days of the USSR, it was so in the times of the Russian Federation until today, it will be so in the foreseeable historical perspective.
                This is your fantasy that someone will shoot at someone, based on almost nothing.

                Quote: Marzhetsky
                It is indicative how nervous you and the bindyuzhnik got.

                Well, there is little. It is asked to me that I, as a citizen of the Russian Federation, will feel the price of "greatness" in my own skin. Voronezh fell silent in anticipation of Putin's response to America.
                1. -4
                  31 January 2022 19: 15
                  Quote: Oleg Rambover
                  It asks me that I, as a citizen of the Russian Federation, ..

                  Rambover, for rent! Citizens of Russia say: "Seems to me ..." laughing
                2. -3
                  31 January 2022 19: 18
                  Quote: Oleg Rambover
                  There will be no winners in the war with Russia.

                  - Russia will win everyone, did I understand you correctly? love
          2. -4
            30 January 2022 16: 26
            Only in response, and this is only a deterrent.

            But, Putin: "If a fight is inevitable, you have to hit first"
            Therefore, NEVER in the Strategic Missile Forces the option - "strike at the appointed time" - did not go anywhere.
            In our time, in the era of the insane leaders of the collective West, the bigwigs of the "deep/pigeon government", the need to have this opportunity becomes even more urgent.
            Therefore - TO BE!
            And moreover, with the use of "Poseidons" and "Petrels" when they arrive at the selected targets at the same "appointed time".
            Let's say, is it a clear peaceful sky / or deep night on the "dog watch", nothing portends anything, and even the SPRYAU of the "Yankee Penguins" is silent, not seeing either the torches of the launching ICBMs or the warheads on the horizon, and here - here it is "The Phenomenon", distribution of free light and heat, in all its glory! This is a "preventive global irresistible and unrequited" blow in Russian execution. At the same time, all headquarters and centers that make flawed anti-human decisions will be "carried out". Let be afraid!
        2. -1
          31 January 2022 07: 04
          Smart people just recently told you that there will be no winners in a nuclear war. I don’t know why Israel didn’t please you

          What didn't I like about Israel? And this is what a fierce liberal asks?
          Or maybe because he annexed the Golan from our official ally Syria? You, a patented Russian liberal, are not embarrassed by this? do you see the "occupation" in Crimea, but don't you see it in the Golan?
          1. -2
            31 January 2022 15: 25
            Quote: Marzhetsky
            What didn't I like about Israel? And this is what a fierce liberal asks?

            I wonder who are "fierce liberals" in your understanding? And what is the connection between Israel and the "fierce liberal"?

            Quote: Marzhetsky
            Or maybe because he annexed the Golan from our official ally Syria? You, a patented Russian liberal, are not embarrassed by this? do you see the "occupation" in Crimea, but don't you see it in the Golan?

            What should bother me? The Golan Heights are occupied by Israel. I don't understand what is bothering you. That is, you think that the Russian Federation can occupy something, you demand to start a war with Ukraine and occupy it, but Israel cannot? Why such double standards?

            And now, for the events of half a century ago, are you going to shoot at Israel? Nuclear warhead? What would friend Assad (who probably, like his older comrades, considers the Russian Federation a small Satan) get his heights back? At the same time risking the lives of the Russian military in the region, and not only in the region? Do you really want this?

            Regarding aggressiveness, you yourself have been calling for more than one month, with the help of the media, to attack a neighboring country.

            Our president shows cartoons with Miami



            Kiselev threatens with radioactive ash



            Is that how you express your peacefulness?
      2. -5
        30 January 2022 18: 39
        Quote: Marzhetsky
        Then with London, and with the United States, and with Israel, the conversation will be different.

        One problem: God didn’t give horns to a vigorous cow ... (c) wassat
        1. -3
          31 January 2022 06: 56
          In due time your horns will be broken. Be sure.
          1. 0
            5 February 2022 07: 36
            Why are you like this? Let his horns grow large and branched.
  8. +2
    29 January 2022 16: 47
    The nuclear warhead on the Zircons is simply necessary, it is extremely stupid to deny this and not take it into account.
  9. +1
    29 January 2022 17: 07
    But aren't they?
    for barmaley, YabCh is redundant, and for the road to Paradise it is directly necessary.

    Target designation is fine, the exchange of information among flying missiles has long been announced, there is also a reb, why not be a target designator missile

    but by the way, yes, dagger, zircon, and in the picture again Amer's rocket. Not Russian.
    Casts bad thoughts so frequent .... "import substitutes"
  10. -3
    30 January 2022 01: 48
    The Zircons, as well as the Daggers that joined them, are an irresistible strike weapon against the US Navy AUG, capable of destroying any ship, "from a frigate to an aircraft carrier," without any problems.

    I wonder what kind of deceleration the fuse should have so that a hypersonic missile, going, for example, on the declared 8M could explode inside the ship, and not just pierce it through?

    8M near the ground is 2720 meters per second. The aircraft carrier, of course, is large, but there are smaller targets. For example, Arleigh Burke. He has only 18 meters from side to side. Which the rocket will overcome in just 0,006 seconds. That is, a fuse is needed at least 10 times faster than that of the currently used shells. There are such?
    1. -1
      30 January 2022 02: 23
      Quote: Half a century and a half
      I wonder what kind of deceleration the fuse should have so that a hypersonic missile, going, for example, on the declared 8M could explode inside the ship, and not just pierce it through?

      At this speed, you don't need to blow anything up at all. If the weight of a "dry" rocket is 1 ton, then its kinetic energy at a speed of 2720 m/s is 3,5 GJ. 300 kg of TNT produces 1,25 GJ.
  11. -3
    30 January 2022 03: 59
    The author is right, only without frigates and thousands of kilometers. The only successful chance against the AUG is when a nuclear missile is launched by a submarine from a minimum distance, considering the ship's ASW, of about 100 miles
    1. 0
      30 January 2022 11: 03
      this is a guaranteed death of the boat and no one will go for it.
      1. 0
        30 January 2022 11: 33
        How will you find and get the boat two hundred miles away? At best, only the launch area will be known
        1. 0
          30 January 2022 20: 29
          this is quite enough to destroy the submarine. The AUG has enough funds for this.
          1. -1
            31 January 2022 03: 51
            From this "prosperity", name at least one means of detection and destruction at such a distance, otherwise it starts to look like chatter
    2. -4
      30 January 2022 13: 10
      This is how the AUGs and everything around in the range of the Zircons are "blocked". Read, educate yourself, don't carry any crap.


      If in detail - https://aftershock.news/?q=node/1053237

      Under the USSR, the position of each AUG at sea was updated every half hour!. During this time, he could "leave" no further than 15 miles. A radius with this value is easily worked out by the missile seeker.
      At the present time, with the installation on the DF-21 database, Russian "Zircons" / Onyxes ... and so on - it's rare that an AUG is at sea. Why? The answer is known - it is "on the sight with guaranteed destruction."
      1. -1
        30 January 2022 13: 43
        A citizen with a horse surname, first get acquainted with the manners of communication, and then, a victim of patriotic television, before stuttering about the half-hour tracking of each American AUG in the Union, learn about NORPAK82
        1. The comment was deleted.
      2. -2
        31 January 2022 07: 00
        Under the USSR, the position of each AUG at sea was updated every half hour!. During this time, he could "leave" no further than 15 miles. A radius with this value is easily worked out by the missile seeker.
        At the present time, with the installation on the DF-21 database, Russian "Zircons" / Onyxes ... and so on - it's rare that an AUG is at sea. Why? The answer is known - it is "on the sight with guaranteed destruction."

        Do you even understand that the times and technical capabilities of the intelligence of the USSR are far behind? An admirer of Monsieur Gavrilenko?
        1. -2
          31 January 2022 10: 15
          Quote: Marzhetsky
          Admirer of Monsieur Gavrilenko

          who this will be - I don’t know and I don’t want to know!
          And I’ll answer you, as the author, as a last resort: You need to know that now the capabilities of the Russian Navy are significantly higher than the USSR, for at least two reasons -
          ZGRLS facilities are implemented, exist and operate; there is also an INTERACTION of forces and means with the PLA of the PRC, both space, air and other ground!
          And by the way, since such a DISTRESS has gone on, you should know that between the Russian Federation and the PRC there is a mutual distribution of targets for destruction - strategic, tactical ... including during joint patrolling of sea and air theaters.
          1. -1
            31 January 2022 11: 17
            And I’ll answer you, as the author, as a last resort: You need to know that now the capabilities of the Russian Navy are significantly higher than the USSR, for at least two reasons -
            ZGRLS facilities are implemented, exist and operate; there is also an INTERACTION of forces and means with the PLA of the PRC, both space, air and other ground!

            There are other opinions about this smile
      3. -1
        31 January 2022 14: 12
        This is how the AUGs and everything around in the range of the Zircons are "blocked". Read, educate yourself, don't carry any crap.

        About crap. Everything that this gentleman with an American flag painted so beautifully below will still run into the problem of target designation for Zircons.

        Nevertheless, for those who are just impatient to find out when it will really begin after the failure (long ago predicted and expected by Russia's CDF) of the negotiations in Geneva, I answer - - and it has been going on for a long time. And pointing it out -- it's not that easy, so let me explain a few key points:

        1. The 3M22 Zircon has just been officially adopted and this immediately changes the entire balance of power in the oceans, because the basis of the US military power is by no means the Army, with its more than modest achievements in the post-war period, but the Navy and their foundation - The Carrier Strike Group and the fact that it is not only a tool for projecting US power, but also purely visually. With the advent of Zircon to the surface fleet and in 2024 to the submarine fleet, starting with the SSGN pr. 885 (M) Ash. 

        Nowhere with this pathetic "crap refutation" I did not see a solution to this problem. hi

        there is also an INTERACTION of forces and means with the PLA of the PRC, both space, airborne and other ground!
        And by the way, since such a DISTRESS has gone on, you should know that between the Russian Federation and the PRC there is a mutual distribution of targets for destruction - strategic, tactical ... including during joint patrolling of sea and air theaters.

        That is, abroad will help us? Cool argument.
  12. 0
    30 January 2022 08: 38
    The case when you don’t have to wait ... Everything for partners ... the thickest ...
  13. -1
    30 January 2022 09: 40
    you need to have your own aircraft carriers with carrier-based AWACS aircraft for reconnaissance and target designation of Zircons, Caliber, Daggers and Onyxes, as well as carrier-based fighter aircraft for air cover for our ships, which have a frankly weak air defense system.

    Again, the aircraft carrier rescuers are raising a panic, it seems that their funding has been completely cut off))
    Firstly, the AWACS functions will be performed better than any deck carrier by the A-50U taking off from a coastal or island airfield with more powerful equipment than a deck carrier and, accordingly, a greater range.
    Secondly, fighter aircraft will operate from coastal and island territories in exactly the same way, the range of the Su-35 and Su-30SM is 1500 km.
    Thirdly, the Liana satellite constellation completely blocks the territorial waters of the Russian Federation and the waters of the world ocean adjacent to them for several thousand km, there are problems with the Southern Hemisphere, but for us they are not critical.
    The whole question is the speedy restoration of naval aviation regiments capable of carrying hypersonic Zircons and Daggers, supersonic Onyxes, X-31 ......
    1. -3
      30 January 2022 16: 35
      Dear, we will have aircraft carriers!
      True, not those mastodons whose era is gone and did not promise to return!
      There will be other, more adapted to the current tasks of the post Pan-American. With VTOL aircraft, UAVs, etc. and so on.
      For example, for the protection-defense of the new Nicaraguan canal, which will be built by the Chinese with the Russians. bully
  14. -2
    30 January 2022 10: 19
    In fact, without the possibility of equipping the SBC, no one would even consider the Zircon project. So everything is there.
  15. -1
    30 January 2022 11: 40
    Quote: assault 2019
    Firstly, the AWACS functions will be performed better than any deck carrier by the A-50U taking off from a coastal or island airfield with more powerful equipment than a deck carrier and, accordingly, a greater range.
    Secondly, fighter aircraft will operate from coastal and island territories in exactly the same way, the range of the Su-35 and Su-30SM is 1500 km.
    Thirdly, the Liana satellite constellation completely blocks the territorial waters of the Russian Federation and the waters of the world ocean adjacent to them for several thousand km, there are problems with the Southern Hemisphere, but for us they are not critical.

    I don't see the point in repeating the same thing over and over again. Your opinion is just your opinion. There are others. hi
  16. -1
    30 January 2022 12: 57
    The author, before writing on technical topics, needs at least a little familiarity with the subject.
    Just a little, it's not hard.

    So. ABC
    Guided homing projectiles / missiles need only a few things to hit their intended targets:
    - know your starting position,
    - coordinates of the target within reach.
    And that's it!
    The initial target designation (TA) of the rocket is entered into its memory in the form of a PZ (flight mission).
    TsU - the prerogative of intelligence. It can be obtained by any known method - radar, visual, satellite, aero ... even by "pigeon mail".
    Further, after the launch, the missile goes to the "designated area" and turns on its system of search, identification and target acquisition. This really is EVERYTHING! If a single missile works on one designated target.

    This is how the advanced "wolf pack" of supersonic Granites works (popularly popular) - https://aeroplan2010.mirtesen.ru/blog/43169335692/Granit:-zhizn-po-zakonam-volchey-stayi
    A "flock of Zircons" can also work.

    Why HRC?
    In the conditions of war, there is no time and no need to "play the dove of peace" - therefore, "at once and for sure with a guarantee." Against the AUG - all the more they do not go with conventional warheads, because after a strike on an aircraft carrier - events will certainly slide into the "nuclear plane".
  17. -1
    30 January 2022 13: 52
    Maybe the author is a doctor of military sciences to assert the absence of the possibility of using Zircon for the US AUG, but the use of the words "presumably", "apparently" and "probably" convinces me of the opposite. Usually written this way to make the reader doubt without the presence of supporting facts. This is a high-like school from the Americans. Russians do not do this: I don’t know - I don’t write.
    1. -3
      30 January 2022 19: 39
      Quote: Mazay Zaycev
      It is not customary for Russians: I don’t know - I don’t write

      Alas, this is accepted by 90% of the local commentators.
    2. -1
      31 January 2022 06: 58
      Getting personal is a common demagogic device when there is nothing to say about the case. hi
      Did you run from Kont?
  18. +1
    30 January 2022 15: 11
    I think it is more important to equip your head with reason. AND IMMEDIATELY!
  19. 0
    30 January 2022 23: 20
    Quote: BoBot Robot - Free Thinking Machine
    yes, there’s nothing to talk about - equip with thermonuclear and IMMEDIATELY!!!

    Why thermonuclear? Poison is enough. Slightly inferior in destructive impact and much cheaper. Further. Tritium and its derivatives do not live long. It follows from this that to store them for a long time is to shoot with cast irons, and not vigorous ones. Megatons are not needed, the shock wave weakens to the fourth power of distance, and, therefore, it is more effective to fuck two in 20 km than one in 40. It is better to have not x the number of megatons from the stock of uranium-plutonium, but 10 x kilotons. Don't you see, the penguins are gradually switching to small charges. So it makes sense.
  20. +1
    31 January 2022 09: 34
    Discussion of methods of warfare is an endless topic of the open press :)
  21. 0
    31 January 2022 13: 45
    It is necessary to equip a nuclear warhead FOR ANY CASE!
    I remembered how students of the philological faculty in Moscow read Yesenin in the 70s:

    I walked among the girls, it was freezing cold, I had three rubles in my pocket and ... I stood just in case!
  22. 0
    2 February 2022 06: 30
    Quote: Marzhetsky
    And what exactly is there to read? It is obvious that the nuclear warhead is needed, but there is 0 information on it?

    Why do you need any information on YABCh? It is enough to know the weight of the warhead, at least the same "Onyx" - it allows you to take 300 kg, i.e. you can put at least a nuclear warhead in one megaton there.
    There is the first problem: if it is shot down by the Aegis air defense system before approaching the aircraft carrier, all the work will be in vain ...
    There is a second problem: all Russian warships in the world's oceans, as well as those standing at the walls, will be sunk after this action ...
  23. 0
    2 February 2022 11: 43
    Quote: Half a century and a half
    Quote: sH, arK
    It is the scout who is engaged in maritime reconnaissance, and not AWACS!

    AWACS - the same scout, only with advanced functionality

    Exactly! But neither a reconnaissance fighter nor an AWACS aircraft will be able to approach an aircraft carrier in wartime closer than 550 km (X-22 launch range). They must have been shot down by the carrier's fighters before that. wink (Just information, from a long time ago).

    Quote: sH, arK
    in the air, on water, and on land, even with selection!

    RTK AWACS can operate in one of several modes or a combination of them:
    - Panoramic without beam scanning in the vertical plane
    - Surveillance with beam scanning in elevation to determine the flight altitude of air targets.
    - over-the-horizon search with cutoff of signals below the horizon line to increase noise immunity
    - review of the water surface with short pulses to suppress reflections from the sea surface.
    - passive direction finding of RI sources

    It is not at all clear why you decided that AWACS cannot act as a target designator. It has all the necessary functionality. This is not only an aircraft for detecting targets, but also for aiming at it (i.e., issuing target designation) and controlling (aircraft)

    Realistically: in wartime, only satellites can be the only source of AUG target designation for Russia.

    In the USSR, for example, there was a project of the Su-28KRTS carrier-based aircraft (based on the Su-27K), designed to conduct aerial reconnaissance in the interests of the strike formations of the fleet and issue target designation to the main missile armament of an aircraft carrier group. So having "your own" deck target designator is not only sound, it has been worked out.

    See above.
  24. 0
    2 February 2022 11: 49
    Quote: Marzhetsky
    That the AUG has prepared for the attack can only be determined by the aircraft that have taken off and are moving towards Russia.

    Aviation AUG is tactical in nature. But the AUG is also an escort order, where there are hundreds of missiles capable of carrying nuclear warheads. And most importantly, the AUG is essentially covering the Ohio SSBNs with Trident-2 ICBMs, and this is the main threat.
    You don't understand what you write.

    Nuclear submarines with ICBMs never cover the AUG. They are covered by torpedo submarines. Yes, with nuclear weapons and nuclear torpedoes as well. But ICBMs have nothing to do with it at all.
    1. -1
      2 February 2022 14: 45
      It's not written there at all.

      And the most important thing is that AUG essentially cover Ohio SSBNs with Trident-2 ICBMsand this is the biggest threat.

      It says that the AUG on the water cover nuclear submarines with ICBMs. smile And not Ohio SSBNs with ICBMs cover the AUG laughing
      You are not the first to misunderstand me, probably, an unsuccessful ambiguous wording turned out.
      1. 0
        2 February 2022 18: 11
        Perhaps I misread this passage. But this also looks like a sensation: AUG is guarding the Ohio SSBN with ICBMs ?? Who would have thought...
        1. -1
          2 February 2022 20: 28
          Let's just say that in order to hunt for Ohio in the DMZ, it is necessary to assemble and send search and strike anti-submarine groups and anti-submarine aircraft.
          Everything that we can send there will be drowned by the AUG in 10-15 minutes or shot down by AUG carrier-based aircraft. Something like this. request
          So in this context, the AUG, by controlling vast areas, is really protecting Ohio from negative actions on our part.
          1. 0
            2 February 2022 21: 40
            For some reason, I always thought that the best protection for SSBNs is its maximum secrecy. Moreover, the launch range of BR allows them to be launched practically from the borders of the United States.
  25. 0
    3 February 2022 03: 34
    YABCH is needed to drown the entire connection at once. And not to compensate for the mythical miss. Or to strike targets on land. Because such an expensive product can be spent with a conventional warhead on land only for an EXTREMELY important goal.

    (C)
    1. 0
      3 February 2022 07: 15
      YABCH need, to drown the whole connection at once. And not to compensate for the mythical miss.

      Was this written by a younger student? An aircraft carrier order in a combat situation contains two security rings, the center, of course, is an aircraft carrier, next to which is 1 (one) direct guard - a cruiser, or an Aegis destroyer. The diameter of the inner ring is ~60 km, the outer ring is ~120 km.
      Combat patrols are carried out ~200 km from the aircraft carrier in threatened directions: 1 "Hokkai" + 2 F-18E / F.
      And how did someone get together even with a megaton nuclear warhead (even assuming that the missile was not shot down) with one blow to cover these two rings? fool
  26. -1
    20 February 2022 13: 00
    Well, somehow they began to understand that Zircon is not anti-ship missiles at all. This is a quasi-ballistic ground-to-ground missile with reduced accuracy, due to the lack of a seeker and communication with GLONASS for additional aiming. And what will any warhead give if the target has gone tens of kilometers. Blind with a club?