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.

 

Russian Strategic Cruise missile with duel nuclear warheads

page: 1
0

log in

join
share:

posted on Aug, 20 2004 @ 01:57 PM
link   
AS-19 Koala / SS-N-24 SCORPION


The P-750 Grom supersonic winged cruise missile with a range of 3000-4000 km was developed for to replace the Kh-55 [AS-15 KENT]. The AS-X-19 Koala was an air-launched land-attack version derived from the SS-NX-24 Scorpion submarine-launched missile. A pair of AS-19 missiles was expected to arm the Tu-142 Bear-H bomber.

The missile carried two warheads independently guided to hit two targets 100 km apart. The letters BL in its American designation refer to the firing range in Barnaul, where it was tested; its Russian industrial index designation is not known.



  • Type: Air -to- Surface, supersonic winged cruise missile
  • Year: 1991
  • Range (km): 3000
  • Weight (kg): 2000
  • Lenght (m): 12 x 6
  • Speed (m/sec): 5 Mach
  • Weight of warhead: 2 x 200 kt nuclear



warfare.ru...

Does anyone have any ideas how tis sustem may work and what type of guidance it would use ?





[edit on 20-8-2004 by mad scientist]




posted on Aug, 20 2004 @ 02:03 PM
link   
it is a hyper sonic cruise missile, i can get you more info if you need..



posted on Aug, 20 2004 @ 02:07 PM
link   
Not exactly sure, but a dual warhead delivery within 100km would almost necessitate a high altitude flightpath, with the warheads being deployed from that altitude in order to guide themselves to the targets far below. From, say, 100,000 feet in order to hit their targets. Also remember, nuclear explosions need not be entirely accurate over a target to be effective.

Once the warheads are deployed, the delivery system would fall to earth without regard to loss of further life, I assume. (why would you care about killing a few more by crashing the missile after you deplao a nuke or two?)



posted on Aug, 20 2004 @ 02:20 PM
link   

Originally posted by everlastingnoitall
Not exactly sure, but a dual warhead delivery within 100km would almost necessitate a high altitude flightpath, with the warheads being deployed from that altitude in order to guide themselves to the targets far below. From, say, 100,000 feet in order to hit their targets. Also remember, nuclear explosions need not be entirely accurate over a target to be effective.


The high altitude would also be far more fuel efficient. I would have to assume that the accuracy ( especially with a service date of 1993 ) would be close to their best ICBM's otherwise why bother fielding it ? Possibly some inertial guidance using the Soviet/Russian version of GPS to put within the basket then use a TERCOM or DISMAC based system for final guidance.



posted on Aug, 20 2004 @ 02:23 PM
link   
That's pretty much the way I envisioned it, yes. If it is designed to be carried aloft by another aircraft prior to launch, then very little fuel would actually be rewuired at such high altitude and the resulting warheads would have that much more yield in megatonnage, so the accuracy of the final approach would have that much more of a margin for error and still effect the desired result.



posted on Aug, 21 2004 @ 03:04 PM
link   
I have to wonder what the odds are that this is or will become available to the Chicoms.
Would a Patriot be able to engage and destroy the warheads, or the Israeli Arrow 2 ?

In my opinion this missile would be a good template for a US cruise missile bunker busting system. Outfit it with a DSMAC system for accuracy ( if it doesn't already use it ), and fit it with an advanced penetrator. Hitting a target at Mach 6 would allow a warhead an order of magnitude more penetration than the current free fall weapons.



posted on Aug, 21 2004 @ 04:13 PM
link   

Originally posted by mad scientist
I have to wonder what the odds are that this is or will become available to the Chicoms.
Would a Patriot be able to engage and destroy the warheads, or the Israeli Arrow 2 ? In my opinion this missile would be a good template for a US cruise missile bunker busting system. Outfit it with a DSMAC system for accuracy ( if it doesn't already use it ), and fit it with an advanced penetrator. Hitting a target at Mach 6 would allow a warhead an order of magnitude more penetration than the current free fall weapons.


In thoery the Partiot shout be able to track and target each warhead. Im not really sure about soemting at Mach 6. The Navy's Standard 2 Block 4 missile is supposed to be able to. However, this may be something taken care of by THAAD if it is fielded.
In as far as a Mach 6 missile. Jelly Johnson of Skunk Works fame proposed a kinetic energy missile without a warhead that would be fired by the proposed B-12 (a bomber derivative of the A-12) that would have had huge penatrating power.

The Russians need hard cash, but there is a residual mistrust that goes back generations. I suspect they will hold back some of thier toys to keep an edge.


Must have been designed to go after a spread out CBG?



[edit on 21-8-2004 by FredT]



posted on Aug, 26 2004 @ 02:07 AM
link   

Originally posted by FredT


Must have been designed to go after a spread out CBG?



[edit on 21-8-2004 by FredT]


Possible, but why the duel warheads. I don't know if it's a cost saving measure or what. Why not just have one warhead and twice the missiles ?



posted on Aug, 26 2004 @ 02:37 AM
link   

Originally posted by mad scientist
Possible, but why the duel warheads. I don't know if it's a cost saving measure or what. Why not just have one warhead and twice the missiles ?


The Soviets did do some weird stuff. Rember that the Kirov cruisers had a nuclear reactor and a convertionl boiler for its steam turbines. Maybe they love the redundancy?



posted on Aug, 26 2004 @ 02:40 AM
link   
Gee, no resemblance to Blue Steel at all...



new topics

top topics



 
0

log in

join