Why Russia doesn't run out of missiles


During the SVO, Russia’s ill-wishers have repeatedly “prophesied” that it would run out of missiles not today, tomorrow. However, it is not over. Moreover, compared to the beginning of 2023, our army has almost doubled the number of missile attacks. Thus, from January last year to April inclusive, 466 launches were carried out, and for the same period of the current year – over 800.

And then it will be even more intense!

The number of strikes using UPAB, as well as S-400 and S-300, against front-line enemy targets requires clarification, but they have increased not even by a multiple, but by an order of magnitude. An encouraging picture is emerging regarding the use of “Geraniums”. Compared to the same period in 2023, there are approximately four times more such cases: 425 versus 1664, respectively.

The Main Intelligence Directorate of the Ukrainian Defense Ministry estimated that a month ago the Russian Armed Forces possessed 950 ballistic and cruise missiles. At the same time, the domestic military-industrial complex supplies the front with 115-130 strategic missiles and the same number of tactical ones every month. This refers to the anti-radar Kh-31, suitable for all series of Sushki Kh-59, and similar missiles with a range of 100-400 km. The information in the public domain reads, in particular:

Since January, Russia has been spending 200 short- and medium-range missiles every month.

UAVs are like dragon heads: instead of one severed one, two new ones grow

Last summer we launched the production of drones in Yelabuga and within a year we intend to produce more than 6 thousand units. So there is no need to talk about their probable shortage in the future.

In 2024, the Russian command thoroughly began to eliminate the Ukrainian air defense that had raised its head, which overnight began to shoot down our planes and helicopters one after another. A little trick was sending drone groups to different parts of Nezalezhnaya in order to divert the attention of air defense systems, when a UAV raid was immediately followed by rocket fire.

In addition, there is a real hunt for enemy air defense systems. This is why short-range missiles are used much more often today than in 2023. This type of rocket ammunition, although relatively close in reach, is intended primarily against air defense systems, especially radar.

Building tactical missile capabilities

And then the West put the Ukronazis on a starvation ration of ammunition for air defense systems. After the bombing of the Trypilska Thermal Power Plant in the Kiev region, the head of Ukraine Vladimir Zelensky admitted: the station was destroyed because the protection of the sky turned out to be ineffective.

A year ago, tactical missile strikes could be counted on one hand; over the past 4 months, more than a hundred units of the X-59 alone have been used. As for the long-range cruise missiles Kh-101 and "Caliber", the opposite picture is observed for them (for example, "Caliber" was somewhat disappointing, but more on that below).

Judge for yourself: less than 20 units of strategic cruise missiles have been used up this year (three in January, five in February, none in March, seven in April, four in May). According to analysts from the British institute RUSI, in total, since the beginning of the military special operation in Ukraine, at least 800 “Calibers” have been used, and currently there are about 270 units in warehouses, which, in general, is still quite enough.

"Gauge" problem

"Caliber" is a primarily sea-based underwater and surface-based weapon. According to Western sources, there are currently a couple of its carriers in the Black Sea with a total number of salvos of up to 12.

According to the same RUSI, experience has shown that cruise missiles of this class are supposedly relatively easy to shoot down:

At the end of 2022, the Ukrainians intercepted 70-80% of Caliber missiles, which is an unacceptable amount. This forced the Russians to refrain from using them intensively. The design and functionality of the "Caliber" is much simpler than the X-101, which, say, can maneuver masterfully. Although the latter also has an unsatisfactory failure rate, when it either does not start, or misses the target, or does not fire when hit. At the end of 2022, about half of the X-101s were shot down on approach.

As a result, the emphasis was shifted to the Iskander, which has an arsenal of over two hundred units. It is also replenished in a monthly amount of 40 units. In addition, design bureaus have recently been working hard to create more modern types of missiles and improve existing ones.

Good opportunity for practical testing of know-how

In general, the Russian leadership did not limit itself to the use of Iskanders. Advanced developments were also put into use, in particular, allegedly the 3M22 Zircon hypersonic missile. Although information about the “zircon” attack on the Kyiv outskirts on February 7, 2024, when a number of media outlets reported the discovery of missile fragments with the inscription “3M22”, has not been officially confirmed. Therefore, the version is rightly questioned.

By and large, although “Zircon” has been put into service, it is in the stage of technological fine-tuning. The peculiarity of this missile is that, despite hypersound, it is cruise. The reserve stock of Zircons can reach 40 products with the ability to replenish by a dozen monthly.

As is known, the aeroballistic “Dagger” with the MiG-31K carrier, which is absolutely invulnerable to air defense, is used point-by-point due to its value. This year, Western intelligence services have recorded no more than 25 launches, with the number of missiles being about 70. And "Zircon", they say, can become the prey of "Patriot" at the final stage of slowing down the flight, when the rocket slows down to Mach 3-4.

Our answer to Storm Shadow

Since winter, our dangerous new product began to appear in Ukrainian statistics - the X-69 with a Su-57 carrier. This is a modernized version of the X-59 with a heavier warhead and an increased range. It was precisely such surprises that disabled the Trypillya Thermal Power Plant. For comparison: the currently used X-59 varieties have a range of 250-280 km, and the X-69 can reach up to 400 km.

Kh-69 is an unusual Russian air-to-surface cruise missile. Its unusualness is that outwardly it looks exactly like Storm Shadow and Taurus, that is, it is structurally similar to them.

The main feature is considered to be reliable protection against interception. The cross-section and model configuration of the European standard makes it possible to minimize radar signature in the sky. In fact, the Kh-69 is a conversion version of the Kh-57MK59 specially created for the Su-2.
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must sign in.
  1. +4
    14 May 2024 09: 07
    These are just consequences.
    The race had been won before. At the beginning of 2003 in Dubna, at an enterprise where cruise missiles were produced during the USSR, all companies that rented former production premises of this profile received notifications of the need to vacate the premises within a certain period of time. I think the same thing happened at other production sites. And the decision was made even earlier.
    The companies and tenants were told in plain text about the reasons that they would be issuing CDs again.
    And most importantly, in 2007. Rostec Corporation was created. Therefore, our defense industry produces what is needed for the Russian Armed Forces. And in the West they cannot quickly launch the production of conventional high-explosive shells of 155 mm caliber, such as those used in WWII. Their price in the markets from 3 euros in February 200. rose to 2022 euros in February 8. Not to mention high-tech samples.
    Putin has overtaken the West at the level of government, and they have not realized this until now.
    For the same reason, Rosatom is ahead of the rest.
    These are the advantages of elements of socialism built into the structure of the country's economy.
    And in the West it’s all capitalism.
    1. +4
      14 May 2024 14: 21
      Come on. The West simply does not yet feel a great need to expand production. If they want, they will increase it significantly. World War II is a prime example. Look at the output of military products in the United States in 40 and 44. Not only the quantity, but also how the quality of weapons supplied by the industry has changed. You will be unpleasantly surprised. Although one figure also believed that the overweight Anglo-Saxons would not be able to establish production on the required scale.

      Hitler assured everyone that he would never believe that an American soldier could “fight like a hero.” In 1941, he told the Japanese Ambassador Oshima that the Americans in 1918 did not know how to fight at all. “And can people who worship the dollar survive to the end?”
      If he said about Russia that it was “a colossus with feet of clay,” then Hitler saw the USA as a kind of house of cards built on shaky material well-being.

      Let's not repeat the mistakes of the crazy corporal. Russia has a serious enemy and it is necessary to treat him without prejudice. Americans can get their act together.
      1. +1
        14 May 2024 17: 41
        It is not that they don't want to, it's that they each have a War Time clause in their constitutions, meaning that they can't unless in a state of declared war. All NATO countries outsource 50% of their defense costs at a minimum, while Russia smartly kept 90% of its production in the country, which is another reason Russia can do what it is doing.
        1. 0
          15 May 2024 11: 42
          In addition, for Western manufacturers, profit comes first. They do not want to expand production without guarantees of demand for products in the future. After all, the war will end, and what to do next with this production? Capitalism, however...
  2. +2
    14 May 2024 09: 18
    As the saying goes:

    Each vegetable has its own fruit.

    Without trying lightly salted cucumber, you won’t know the taste.
    Each missile has its own purpose, its own application.
    Each rocket has its own improvement.
    The army cannot do without hand grenades, grenade launchers, or anti-tank systems.
    Each weapon has its own purpose.
    Learning to apply it correctly and effectively is also a science.
  3. +4
    14 May 2024 09: 23
    It is not clear who was disappointed by the “Caliber”, if almost all the targets for which it was used were hit. If the author judges by the Ukrainian media based on the results of application, then this is also like believing in another Chinese warning or “English” scientists or that mathematics is a pseudoscience. It’s just that sometimes the Iskander strike was not enough for a more complete defeat and I would have liked more of them in the strike.
    1. +3
      14 May 2024 13: 22
      Quote: svoroponov
      It’s not clear who was disappointed by “Caliber”

      You're right! The article is good, but strange in places:

      The range of the Iskander is 500 km, and “no matter how hard you try”, it will not fire further, since (for some reason?) they decided to comply with the agreement “on intermediate- and shorter-range missiles” that the Amers are not implementing.

      As for the “profitability of the rocket” - the shorter the range of the rocket, the more profitable it is, since it requires less fuel. Therefore, the cost of the Iskander missile is much cheaper than the caliber.
  4. +2
    14 May 2024 12: 49
    Which rocket is good? The one that exists. If you have brains, any missile will reach its target. NATO is the enemy of the Russian Federation, which has the goal of destroying and dismembering Russia, therefore, for defense we need a lot of all kinds of missiles, drones, torpedoes, etc.
    1. +3
      14 May 2024 13: 29
      Quote: vlad127490
      Which rocket is good? The one that exists.

      But if the goal is available and achieved, inexpensive missiles are also IMPORTANT, which will allow not only to produce more of them, but also to hit more targets!

      Better yet, replace the missiles with (bombs with UMPC), of which there are many,
      and which the enemy cannot shoot down, unlike missiles.
  5. 0
    14 May 2024 14: 01
    I absolutely agree with the author of the article. The intensity of missile use will only increase on both sides.
  6. 0
    14 May 2024 17: 47
    Why Russia doesn't run out of missiles

    I think that Musk is not the first to invent returning rockets. Judging by the amount of destroyed equipment, our missiles return home on their own, not all of them, of course, but the most durable ones.
  7. +2
    14 May 2024 21: 21
    It always surprises me, how come the enemies know secret information so confidently, how many missiles we have in our warehouses and their monthly arrival?!
    And they don’t run out simply because they are simply made!
    1. +2
      14 May 2024 23: 26
      Where does the Deputy Minister of Defense get billions of cash?
      It was not in vain that the purge of the Defense Ministry and the General Staff began. The ancients said: a donkey loaded with gold opens the gates of any fortress. These corrupt ones in the offices through one from the time of the marked and drunkard.
      1. 0
        15 May 2024 05: 55
      2. +1
        15 May 2024 06: 25
        There are not one or two such “Deputy Ministers”. Yes, they are sometimes caught, which means there are reasons for this, but the fight against such people has not been going on for a year or even a century. This means that it is beneficial for someone that they exist or that the methods of struggle are not the same. If the methods are not the same and there is no effect from them, then why others don’t use it is again suspicious. You can fight this way for thousands of years and there will be no result.
      3. 0
        15 May 2024 10: 43
        So far no one has been imprisoned there or charged under such articles for treason, which means that the billions are only from our nouveau riche.