Monday, November 8, 2021

I Am Abusing This Expression...

But again, what can I do under present circumstances, so it goes: no shit, geniuses. Get a load of this:

Boy, what a novel concept--creating a weapon which has a targeting. Wow! I am sure "intel community" in NATO was surprised, because considering the development of modern weapon systems in the West it is supposed to dominate...everything. Which it does not, not even close, that is why for them the news that Soviets/Russians were into the business of providing "targeting capabilities" since 1960s comes as a surprise. This is not to mention the fact of, obviously, not fully understanding of how targeting for anti-shipping cruise missiles is provided especially such missiles as hyper-sonic Kinzhal and Zircon. 

There is a strong empirical evidence that "intel community" was not really intelling anything since once Russians....ah, let me quote myself, because this is becoming tiresome commenting on "surprised experts" all the time:

Some people still cannot grasp the idea that USSR/Russia (as was disclosed by Russia's General Staff) practiced the long-to very long over-the-horizon salvos both on the platform-based (see Mineral radar, among many other things) and external targeting including based on the space assets such as modern day Liana and it really DOES NOT matter for targeting if its is 500 km or 2000. Modern targeting being an issue of datum concerns itself either with Bearing (Azimuth) and Range to target, or with Phi Lambda (geographic coordinates) of same. Period. Modern day systems provide virtually real time picture of surface and ground assets and can easily, based on the so called motion elements of the target--its course and velocity--provide initial targeting which in case of such weapon as Zirkon, at the range of salvo of about 800 kilometers, will have Tau (the delay time) of arrival to initial position of target a circle with the radius of R=Vtarget x Tau, or, if one wants to play with numbers:

1. Tau (at Mach=9) for Zircon = 4 minutes (for Kinzhal at M=11-12 will be around 3);

2. For target, say high speed carrier or DDG--30 knots, this is 30/6=5 cables per minute. 

3. Thus, the circle (pay attention--this is if we don't know target's course, if we do--the circle will become a sector) will have a radius:

         R=5 x 4=20 cables or 2 nautical miles, or roughly 4 kilometers. 

We know for sure (based on data on high selection-high ECM resistant radar seekers of such weapons as P-800 Onyx) that the minimal range of both radio and optronic seekers on either Kinzhal or Zircon is at least +-45 degrees angular coverage and range is at least 40 kilometers.  So, even if we shoot a single Zircon at the latest known position of target with Tau of 4 minutes, the range and width of coverage allow to find the target even if it has the speed of 60 and even 80 knots. In reality the width of the front will be:

                 W=R*2sin45=40 (ΠΊΠΌ) *2*0,707=40*1,414=56.56 

or roughly 57 kilometers. 

So, even in this primitive scenario, for the target (the ship) to be able to escape beyond the width of the frontal coverage of Zircon (or Kinzhal) it will have to have the speed of 57 kilometers / 4 minutes = 14 + kilometers per minute or 870 kilometers per hour which also happens to be the average speed of a commercial jet such as A-320 or B-757. Obviously there are no known surface ships which are capable to do so. I doubt there ever will be, but, as you already all know in a missile exchange you launch a salvo of 2-4-6 etc. missiles whose task is to provide a leaker, or a missile which will break through air defense. 

So, you see. Once we omit here a rather complex issue of a resolution of uncertainties, sensor fusion and probabilities, as well as the issue of a Zircon's systems working properly (INS, updates, seekers, propulsion etc.) we arrive to a rather obvious conclusion that those who view targeting as a requirement to "pointing" target's position with the accuracy of 1 inch, they better update themselves on a modern missile tech, like since 1970s, when rules of missiles' launch were all about delivering missile to the range of detection by the missile's seeker (they vary from purely TV, to more complex optronics to radar to other things, wink, wink) and then... Well, some Soviet vessels and ships, such as hapless Musson (Monsoon) where my classmate lost his legs, learned it the hard way what happens when seeker captures the wrong target. Things changed dramatically since then, and what I wrote here is merely to underscore, yet again, how backward and badly educated those "experts" are if they think that receiving the targeting  and hitting the target 500 kilometers away is such a big deal. Not for Russians--they did it for decades and decades.

Read my lips: this is not a bravado, this is not an arrogance but the fact is that Soviet Navy was built around this concept--massive missile salvos at the maximum ranges which grew from 40-60 kilometers for venerable P-15 Styx to underwater start of the 600 kilometers-capable P-700 Granit and now 1000+ kilometer ranges. Russians have been at this longer than anyone else, simple as that. Good ol' MKRZ Legenda provided accurate targeting for Soviet Navy... even at the Royal Navy's assets during Falkland War. South Atlantic, guys, no less. Why they remain "surprised" dumbfounds me completely. Soviet/Russian anti-shipping missile developments has been documented extremely well and since 1990s Russians never made a secret out of it. In fact, they warned non-stop for the last three decades that hyper-sonic weapons and their enablers are in works and they are coming. Well, they came--now live with them. And don't tell anyone that you haven't been warned. 

In related news. It seems that CIA Director Burns spoke to Putin while visiting Moscow, and since the visit was requested by the American side, there is very little doubt that Burns had a message to Putin from Biden (or whoever is controlling Biden). Dems need something from Russia. They know their hold on power is tenuous now (not that GOP is much better, only marginally) and some arrangements are needed and, possibly, related to China.  

No comments:

Post a Comment