It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Son Of R-172: K-100?

page: 1
0

log in

join
share:

posted on Sep, 28 2007 @ 05:52 PM
link   


Remember this?

This picture was taken at MAKS '07. There was some fuss about it in the MAKS 2007 Pictures thread, and I've been trying to find something out about this odd-looking missile. Lo and behold, success.

The missile is the K-100, apparently a joint project to make the successor to the Novator R-172 which has been brooded over in this forum for some time now. As far as the information indicates the K-100 is just a renaming for the R-172 project, which seems to have forged ahead in the time that many have said it hasn't on the forum. I'll clump together what information I can find.


Firmer reports2 now exist re: Russia's ongoing development of the Novator K-100-1, which is based on the KS-172; it will have a reputed range of 200-400 km.


Orig inal Link

Pretty Good Information Here

Insert comments here.




posted on Sep, 30 2007 @ 12:06 AM
link   
What's old-looking you trying to find? The KS-172 called AWAC killer just like that pattern which it was a mockup.

here are some sources:

link1

link2

link3



posted on Sep, 30 2007 @ 12:34 AM
link   
So the MAKS 07 pics are those of a mock-up then?

It will work well with the Irbis PESA..



posted on Sep, 30 2007 @ 10:37 AM
link   

Originally posted by emile
What's old-looking you trying to find? The KS-172 called AWAC killer just like that pattern which it was a mockup.


I'm well aware that it looks like that pattern, which is probably the result of their being related (which they are). But take a look at the picture of the mockups you have, and look closely at these pictures. There are, in fact, some differences.

-The fins are different.
-The booster module appears to be a little bit longer
-The missile does not thin a bit at 2/3 of the way to the nose

Logically, these changes happened for a reason, and this reason is logically that it is still being worked on. How many people have said in this forum that the R-172 is vaporware and was dropped?



posted on Sep, 30 2007 @ 09:14 PM
link   

Originally posted by Darkpr0
How many people have said in this forum that the R-172 is vaporware and was dropped?


My opinion but you can roll out 32 different mock up versions for all I care. Unless you produce, test, evaluate, mass produce and equip your forces with said missile it's nothing but a paper weight. So, still no confirmed tests and real life data (or anything past mock up) for this missile...?



posted on Sep, 30 2007 @ 10:31 PM
link   

Originally posted by WestPoint23
My opinion but you can roll out 32 different mock up versions for all I care.


The idea here is that in such a case as a mock-up has been changed slightly, that there is logic behind such a change. Such logic may or may not be a result of the development this missile is supposed to be under. In the event that such a missile was not meant to be researched anymore, it would seem likely that no mock-ups would be present on a state-of-the-art Russian aircraft at a recent airshow. As many can see, this doesn't seem to be the case. It is logical, then, that the missile is still under development and planned to be deployed at some point in the future.



Unless you produce, test, evaluate, mass produce and equip your forces with said missile it's nothing but a paper weight.


Considering the amount of use that these modern missiles see, that would seem to be the end result regardless of how many were produced, tested, evaluated, mass produced, or equipped.



So, still no confirmed tests and real life data (or anything past mock up) for this missile...?


No. Which is completely irregular for a missile that is in its development stages. Especially one intended for use in a classified military manner.

Sarcasm aside, the point of this was to show that the missile's presence even as a mockup, which has been revised, means that it's still somewhere in the game. Can we say where? Not until details come about. But the point is that it is there.

But, of course, by the time the Russians develop the next mockup the AIM-120 H-19 will probably be out. So it won't matter anymore.



new topics

top topics
 
0

log in

join