SOCThere are two H-6s visible inflight over China, see if you can find them…
SOCI thought the F-101B could carry four AIM-4’s instead of the two AIM-4’s and two AIR-2’s?
No, it was two AIM-4s and two AIR-2s.
What would preclude it from carrying four Falcons in lieu of the two Falcon/two Genie loadout?
The design of the weapons door assembly. It was only fitted to carry each type on one side.
SOCI think I’ve demonstrated before that at least the “small” missile of the S-400 (9m96) system uses kinetic kill. Its warhead is to small for proximity kill, instead the explosives in the warhead are just a lethality enhancer, much the same way the PAC-3 missile carries explosives to enhance lethality.
According to Fakel, the weapon has an “intelligent warhead”. To me, that translates to a directional warhead, which is able to focus all of its energy in one direction (in theory, the direction of the target). That allows you to use a smaller warhead but still generate enough explosive power to get a kill.
If the small missile is kinetic kill the large missile almost certainly will be too.
Lots of AAMs have pretty small warheads and are still proximity fuzed. And missiles themselves (as in the kind you would be shooting at) are still relatively fragile, and a lower-speed target like an SRBM doesn’t need a massive warhead hit to get it to either miss its target or fail completely.
For the moment, the S-400 system uses only one type of missile – the 48N6. This is either the 48N6-2 originally developed for the S-300PMU-2 Favorit system or the longer-ranged 48N6-3. The latter has an improved warhead, and is carried in a container-launcher having a heavier rim at the base of the container and a greater number of reinforcing rings.
48N6 is the original missile, called 48N6E for export. The follow-on 200km missile was 48N6D, called 48N6E2 for export. The S-400’s variant is 48N6DM, with a 250-300 km range. No export name so far as far as I know, but it’d probably be 48N6E3.
The system is due to receive the 9M96, 9M96E and 9M96E2 family of medium-to-long range missiles
9M96 and 9M96D are the native designators, 9M96E and 9M96E2 are the export designators.
It is not clear in this upgraded system will be designated S-500, or if the latter designation covers a new ABM system.
The S-500 is intended to be a new system with both limited ABM/full ATBM and limited (as in LOE) ASAT capability. It will work with the S-400 to provide air defence on a national level. At any rate the S-500 is a separate, new system, different from the S-400 although it may share some components such as TELs and perhaps some radar systems in modified forms.
SOCHey SOC could I ask you opinion on the subject of this thread, you seem to be our resident Russian missile expert (I must confess a degree of jealousy;) ). This whole subject has me confused, I think I have made all the evidence fit but something just does not seem ‘right’?:confused:
I’ll give it a thorough look tomorrow, I’ve been in and out on vacation the past week or so!
The west had nuclear warheads for everything… including anti tank missiles… I am sure you know about the Davey Crockett… and of course it is the ideal name for such a system if you remember the Alamo… and I don’t mean the R-27.
Is there something wrong with me if the first thing that comes into my head when you say Alamo is in fact the Vympel AAM? 😀
And yeah, back in the day we did have nuclear warheads for damn near everything, there was even a nuclear hand grenade design.
Regarding the S-200 as an ABM…
From the ABM article on my blog:
While the Saturn mobile ABM project was cancelled at an early stage in May of 1961, it should be noted that there is evidence that the 5V21 was intended for use from fixed sites in a limited ABM capacity. In 1973 the 5V21 was tested at Sary Shagan in an ABM capacity, and a nuclear armed variant was accepted for service as a national ABM system in 1975. Intelligence data indicates that the nuclear warheads for the ABM role began to appear at 5V21 sites in 1974. Interestingly, the parameters of the now-defunct ABM Treaty of 1972 do not classify the 5V21 as an ABM system due to its low velocity, but when fitted with a nuclear warhead an intercept is at least technically possible provided adequate early warning and target tracking is obtained.
Some of the data came from here:
http://www.fas.org/spp/starwars/congress/1999_h/s106-339-5.htm
I’ll see what the Russian-language stuff I got recently has to say on the issue as well.
SOCNext film on my “to see” list, is this one:
The trailer is as awesome as it is perplexing. The image of the explosion in the middle of New York is one that is hard to forget!
I’d see it, if they cared enough to professionally film it…
I saw AVP: Requiem over the break, and it was both hilarious and thoroughly enjoyable. Greatly improved over the last AVP film, and the Predator is a real nasty character in this one. There’s a whole lot of attitude that comes across really well.
SOCNext film on my “to see” list, is this one:
The trailer is as awesome as it is perplexing. The image of the explosion in the middle of New York is one that is hard to forget!
I’d see it, if they cared enough to professionally film it…
I saw AVP: Requiem over the break, and it was both hilarious and thoroughly enjoyable. Greatly improved over the last AVP film, and the Predator is a real nasty character in this one. There’s a whole lot of attitude that comes across really well.
SOCEarly F-101s were tested at some point with a three-rail AIM-4 weapons bay, giving a total of six missiles, but the F-101B ended up using a two-missile arrangement along with the two Genies on the flip side of the door. Images of test launch footage attached below.
To clarify, F-101B armament consisted of two AIM-4s, and two AIR-2s. The weapons bay door was designed to carry two of each on separate sides, and they were not capable of carrying, say, two more Falcons instead of the Genies.
Sferrin, the model kit images you posted have a significant problem-the AIM-4s are either F or G models (identifiable by the wing extensions), which were only used by the F-106.
Also, the F-101B was perfectly able to use the two drop tanks as well as the internal/external weapons bay, there were no clearance issues.
SOCthe ABM system around Moscow was not capable of protecting all of Russia… if it could it could not have existed. :rolleyes:
That’s why they developed a nuclear warhead for the S-200…
SOCkh-96 is new missle for S-400
whit 500 km range & very high altitute ABM capability
The 40N6 is the new missile, joining the 9M96 and 48N6DM. Anything with a 500km range and ABM capability is probably going to be something associated with the new S-500 system, which will provide ABM and ASAT capability to work with the S-400 under the Samoderzhets concept of interconnectivity and integrated air defense (Samoderzhets not being an actual SAM system itself, but a concept of operations).
And anything Kh- is going to be an ASM.
SOCguys can some one tell me what this is please?
Where is it located?
Smells to me like Su-30KN
The Su-30KN was at KnAAPO for a bit, there’s an old GE screencapture on my blog, in the FLANKER article.
SOCSAM sites. A lot of them. Enjoy 😀
SOCI THINK this might be the MFI…….. :confused:
It’s on the MiG ramp, it has canards and it isn’t a Flanker…..
55 34 16.8 38 08 47.39
Ken
Trust me, that’s a FLANKER, apparently an Su-27M based on the paint scheme and the canards. Might even be 712, the engine testbed. I do see the “new” Su-35 nearby as well…thought I was looking at the old Su-37 711 for a minute until I remembered that it crashed a while back.
How do you know it is from August 2007?
In Google Earth there is an overlay you can select which shows you the areas imaged by Digital Globe. It’s then a matter of finding the one that was actually incorporated into the Google Earth database through trial and error. That’s how I figured out the imagery actually came before MAKS and not after; the post-MAKS imagery taken of that area had a good bit of cloud cover which is not present in the imagery incorporated into the database.
Does anybody know what is under the whited-out area (Near the blue car parks) south of the runway intersection?
That’s another hangar.
Actually, there are two Tu-128s at Rzhev.
You’re probably right, I just noticed the one on the ramp when I was investigating the number of MiG-31 arframes present.
SOCNo idea what the “something else” is yet, Arthur, but I’m investigating. I have a pretty nice overhead view of Zhukovskiy from an old IAPR issue that I’m going to compare with this one to see if there was something in that spot that maybe hasn’t moved.
Also, did you notice the Tu-128 at Rzhev?
SOCBTW – most of Chkalovskaya is now visible….
I just noticed that as well. They’ve got a few Tu-134UBLs on the ramp there. Ivanovo is also now visible, allowing us to view the A-50 fleet. There are a few An-22s on the ramp there as well.
SOCI can think of a bunch of SAMs that are a bit faster and as they are guided to targets, technically do travel in controlled flight.
As an aside, I wonder if this has anything to do with the former S225X AAM project?
Sign In
