Prologue
January 3, 2018, winter storm.
In the murky waters of the English Channel, the valuable cargo of the vessel "Nikifor Begichev" gets wet. A batch of 40N6 anti-aircraft missiles, designed for the S-400 systems, which are in service with the PRC.
A year later, in February 2019, the details of the unfortunate incident become known from the words of the head of Rostec, Sergei Chemezov, during his speech at the IDEX-2019 exhibition. The batch of damaged missiles is to be destroyed in its entirety. The missiles will be manufactured anew, in connection with which the implementation of the "Chinese" contract was delayed by three years and should now be completed by the end of 2020.
Bad business, someone else's negligence … However, the story with wet rockets takes on completely unexpected shades, if you look at the situation in a logical manner:
1. How could the missiles in sealed transport and launch containers get wet?
2. For what climatic conditions is the S-400 air defense system intended? How resistant is the anti-aircraft complex to precipitation in the form of rain and sleet? Is it possible to effectively use it in conditions other than the conditions of the Atacama Desert - the driest place on the planet, where the rainfall rate does not exceed 50 mm per year.
3. How high are the risks when transporting goods by sea? If any winter storm so easily destroys ultra-protected military equipment, then how is the bulk delivery of other, relatively fragile cargoes carried out by sea? Automotive, home and computer equipment, production equipment lines?
4. Why was it necessary to carry missiles from Russia to China across the Atlantic?
* * *
Rockets in a sealed transport and launch container (TPK) cannot get wet under everyday circumstances. This is the purpose of the TPK. Protected to the highest standards "packaging" with a pre-fueled, factory-sealed and ready-to-launch missile that does not require decades of maintenance. Relatively speaking, a TPK with a rocket can be dipped into a swamp, then removed and used for its intended purpose.
TPK provides the maximum level of protection against all kinds of shocks, vibrations, precipitation and other adverse external conditions, inevitable when transporting a multi-ton missile in combat conditions … Incl. cross country. Such a design is extremely difficult to crush with the help of incompetence, negligence and improvised means. To do this, you need to hook the TPK with a crane and properly "attach" from a height about the launcher. To wet a container by simply dousing it with sea water - this does not fit into the framework of decency. At the same time, not one rocket in any defective container got wet, but the whole party as a whole.
The 40N6 ultra-long-range anti-aircraft missile is a key component of the S-400 system. It is she who should provide the complex with the declared interception range of 400 km with the possibility of providing missile defense in near space. According to the data presented, a two-stage rocket is capable of developing a maximum speed of up to 3 kilometers per second in flight, has a combined targeting, incl. using its own active homing head.
The development and adoption of the 40N6 air defense missile system dragged on for 10 years. The last time the news about the testing of this missile sounded in March 2017, when Defense Minister Sergei Shoigu said at a conference call about the consideration of the results of state tests of a "promising long-range missile defense system." Earlier, in 2012, Major General Andrey Demin, Commander of the Air Defense and Missile Defense Forces, reported on successful tests of the "long-range missile for the S-400".
Taking into account all the paradoxes and difficulties in the development of 40N6, the strange incident in the English Channel, the strange choice of the supply route and the strange consequences of the accident, in which all those involved pretend that nothing special has happened, the only conclusion can be drawn. There were no missiles on board.
It is possible that the time will come, and my favorites will also “get wet” - “Zircon” with “Petrel”.
* * *
For several months now, passions have been raging around the "hypersonic anti-ship missile" and the "nuclear-powered cruise missile." The sensation is that the official media at the highest level started talking about the readiness of adopting technology, which only a couple of years ago appeared only in the works of science fiction writers.
You read the comments on the topics of the latest weapons and you feel that many simply do not represent all the paradox and significance of this moment. For many, Zircon and Burevestnik are simply state-of-the-art rockets that fly faster and farther than their predecessors.
However, these are not just rockets. We have reached a new, revolutionary milestone in the development of science and progress. This happens for the first time in history to two developed countries, who were still yesterday at the same technical level, the next morning they were separated by an impassable technological gap. So that yesterday both sides use bows and arrows, and today some continue to run with bows, and the others - a machine gun.
Sorry, some are creating a subsonic LRASM rocket, and we have a hypersonic 9-fly "Zircon".
The sudden emergence of supertechnology raises questions. Simply put, no one can imagine how this became possible.
The emergence of any technology is always preceded by discussions in scientific circles, as well as intermediate results. German "V-2" did not appear from scratch. The first working model of a liquid-propellant rocket engine was built by the American R. Goddard in 1926, the legendary GIRD was engaged in this topic, and everything was based on the formulas of jet propulsion obtained by N. Zhukovsky and K. Tsiolkovsky.
The Kinzhal aviation complex is based on the use of ammunition from the proven Iskander OTRK, and the air-launched ballistic missiles themselves have been known for at least half a century (for example, the Soviet X-15).
The Avangard hypersonic glider is another successful attempt to maneuver at cosmic speeds in the upper atmosphere. Before that, there were Spiral, BOR, Buran. Acceleration to a speed of Mach 27 with the help of ICBMs also raises no questions. The usual speed of warheads in the transatmospheric phase of flight.
The Shkval torpedo is often cited as an example, which, according to foreign experts, allegedly violated physical laws and, as a result, proved that the impossible is possible. This is just a beautiful legend. The phenomenon of supercavitation has been studied on both sides of the ocean. In the United States, the greatest authority on this topic in the 1960s. used the work of Marshall Tulin (this is the name, not the title); tests of high-speed underwater ammunition (RAMICS) were conducted. However, the military was not interested in unguided underwater weapons - neither slow nor high-speed.
And now we come to the creation of the 9-swing "Zircon". Absolute record. None of the anti-ship missiles that existed before it were able to develop even 1/3 of the indicated speed.
In the case of Burevestnik, we are talking about the creation of a nuclear installation, which has 25 times more thermal power than all known small-sized nuclear reactors. We are talking about reactors for spacecraft (Topaz and BES-5 Buk), the closest "analogues" in terms of mass and dimensions of the Burevestnik power plant.
A subsonic rocket keeping the dimensions of the "Caliber" and flying at a speed of 270 m / s, according to the laws of nature, will require an engine with a capacity of at least 4 MW. In the reserve, the designers have only about half a ton left for the installation of a nuclear rocket engine (instead of the usual turbojet engine and fuel reserves).
The most powerful and perfect of the small-sized reactors created in practice ("Topaz") with a dead weight of 320 kg had a thermal power of 150 kW. This is all that they could achieve with the existing level of technical development.
The 25-fold difference in power translates further conversation into a frivolous plane. It's like trying to build a truck with nothing more powerful than a lawnmower motor.
There are many more funny moments. For example, methods of heat transfer in a nuclear jet engine. It is useless to let the air flow through the hot zone of the reactor. At a flight speed of 270 m / s, the air will spend thousandths of a second in the working chamber, during which it simply will not have time to heat up. Its thermal conductivity is too low. To be sure of what has been said, it is enough to move your hand over the switched on stove for a second.
In a conventional turbojet engine, fuel particles are mixed with the working medium - air. When the mixture ignites, hot exhaust gases are formed, creating jet thrust. In the case of a turbojet NRE, you will have to spend a significant portion of the engine mass on an evaporating ablative coating working area. Hot particles in the form of a suspension (or steam) must mix with the air flow and heat it to temperatures of a thousand degrees, forming a jet thrust. Due to the presence of radioactive particles, the exhaust will be fatal. Those who launched such a missile risk dying before it reaches the enemy.
Is it possible to do without evaporation by providing heat transfer directly - when the walls of the core come into contact with air? Can. However, this requires completely different conditions.
American projects of the early 60s. solved the problem due to the speed of 3M, which made it possible to literally "push" the air between the fuel assemblies of a nuclear ramjet engine heated to 1600 ° C. At lower speeds, the working fluid (air) would not be able to overcome the resulting resistance with such an engine design.
Due to a different principle of operation and colossal energy costs, the SLAM rocket (Project Pluto, Tory-IIC) turned out to be a true monster with a launch mass of 27 tons. it other area of technology, which has nothing to do with the footage shown by the Petrel, which shows subsonic missiles with the dimensions of a conventional Caliber.
So far, no official explanation has been made on how the problem with flight tests of a "disposable" nuclear reactor at the moment of the inevitable fall of the rocket was solved.
Subsonic cruise missiles pose a threat due to massive use. In other conditions, a single ultra-expensive nuclear-powered missile launcher, circling in the air for hours, will become an easy prey for the enemy. The idea of a subsonic nuclear missile is devoid of any practical and military sense. Of the advantages achieved - only snail speed and increased vulnerability in comparison with existing ICBMs.
These are all trifles, the main problem is in creating a compact nuclear installation with a power of 25 more than that of Topaz, and sufficient reserves of evaporating core cover for long hours of flight.
* * *
Supporters of "Burevestnik" appeal to the achievements of technical progress, believing that modern technologies are dozens of times superior to the results of developments of the last century. Unfortunately, this is not the case.
In science fiction novels of that era, astronauts called Earth from Mars, spinning the dial of the phone. As in Belyaev: "Erg Noor sat down at the levers of the calculating machine." Alas, none of the science fiction writers guessed the direction of progress that turned to the path of improving microelectronics. With regard to nuclear energy, aviation and space technology, we are actually at the same technological level. Increasing efficiency and safety only marginally, while striving to reduce the cost of structures.
Above - the radioisotope thermoelectric generator of the Apollo-14 mission, in the lower illustration - the RTG of the New Horizons probe (launched in 2006), one of the most powerful and advanced RTGs ever created in practice. NASA with its stations and rovers in this regard are great entertainers. In our country, on the contrary, the direction with RTGs was not a priority, for reconnaissance satellites with radars, completely different capacities were required, so the stake was on reactors. Hence the results, such as Topaz.
What is the essence of these illustrations?
The first RTG had an electrical power of 63 W, the modern one produces as much as 240 W. Not because it is four times more perfect, but simply corny larger and contains 11 kg of plutonium, versus 3.7 kg of plutonium in the portable SNAP-27 from the distant 60s.
A little clarification is required here. Thermal power - the amount of heat generated by the reactor itself. Electrical power - how much heat is converted into electricity as a result. energy. For RTGs, both values are very small.
The RTG, despite its compactness, is completely unsuitable for the role of a nuclear jet engine. Unlike a controlled chain reaction, a "nuclear battery" uses the energy of the natural decay of isotopes. Hence the absolutely scanty thermal power: the RTG "New Horizons" - only about 4 kW, 35 times less than the space reactor "Topaz".
The second point is the relatively low surface temperature of the active elements of the RTG, heated to only a few hundred ° C. For comparison, the operating sample of the Tori-IIC nuclear rocket motor had a core temperature of 1600 ° C. Another thing is that "Tory" barely fit on the railway platform.
Due to their simplicity, RTGs are widely used. Now it is possible to create microscopic "nuclear batteries". In past discussions, I have been cited as an example of the RTG "Angel" as an obvious achievement of progress. The RTG has the shape of a cylinder with a diameter of 40 mm and a height of 60 mm; and contains only 17 grams of plutonium dioxide with an electrical power of about 0.15 W. How does this example relate to a 4-megawatt nuclear cruise missile engine is another matter?
The weak energy of RTGs is redeemed by their unpretentiousness, reliability and the absence of moving parts. Fortunately, existing spacecraft do not require a lot of energy. Voyager's transmitter power is 18 W (like a light bulb in a refrigerator), but this is enough for communication sessions from a distance of 18 billion km.
Domestic and foreign scientists are working to increase the electrical efficiency of "batteries", they are introducing a more efficient Stirling engine instead of a thermocouple with an efficiency of 3% (Kilopower, 2017). But, no one has yet managed to increase the thermal power without increasing the dimensions. Modern science has not yet learned how to change the half-life of plutonium.
As for the real small-sized reactors, the capabilities of such systems at the current level have been demonstrated by Topaz. In the best case, one and a half to two hundred kilowatts - with the mass of the installation in the region of 300 kg.
* * *
It's time to pay attention to the second hero of today's review. ASM "Zircon".
The hypersonic cruise missile project was initially of real interest, until the jump-like increase in speed began. From the original 5-6 Machs - to 8M, now it's already 9M! The project has turned into another exhibition of the absurd.
Those making such statements at least understand what a catastrophic difference lies between these values when flying in the atmosphere? A hypersonic aircraft at a speed of 9M should be radically different by design and energy from the original 5-Mach rocket, and the dependence there is by no means linear.
The difference in aircraft designs with an increase in speed - even at much more modest values (from one Mach - to 2, 6M), is clearly seen in the examples of cruise missiles ZM14 "Caliber" and 3M55 "Onyx".
The diameter of the subsonic "Caliber" is 0.514 m, the launch weight is ≈2300 kg, the mass of the warhead is ≈500 kg. "Dry" engine weight 82 kg, max. traction 0, 45 tons.
The diameter of the supersonic "Onyx" is 0, 67 meters, the launch weight is 3000 kg, the mass of the warhead is 300 kg (-40% compared to the "Caliber"). Dry weight of the engine 200 kg (2, 4 times more). Max. thrust 4 tons (8, 8 times higher), with the corresponding fuel consumption.
The range of these missiles at low altitude differ by about 15 times.
None of the known technical solutions allows you to come close to the declared characteristics of "Zircon". Speed - up to 9M, flight range, according to various sources, from 500 to 1000 km. With limited dimensions, allowing the placement of "Zircon" in the vertical shaft of the ship firing complex 3S14, intended for "Onyx" and "Caliber".
This fully explains the reluctance to share any details about "Zircon", there is not even rough information about its appearance (despite the fact that "Dagger" and "Peresvet" "shine" in all details). The publication of any specifics will immediately raise questions from specialists, to which it will not be possible to give a clear answer. It is impossible to explain all this with existing technologies.
It must be a UFO based on some completely new physical principles.
Hypersonic studies in practice, the results of which were publicly available, showed the following. X-51 "Waverrider" with a hypersonic ramjet engine accelerated to 5, 1M and covered 400 km at this speed. It is worth noting that the Americans overclocked a 1.8-ton "blank", the bulk of which was spent on thermal protection. Without any hint of a warhead, folding consoles or homing head, which are found on military missiles. The launch was carried out from the B-52 at a speed of 900 km / h in the rarefied layers of the atmosphere, which significantly reduced the requirements for the mass and size of the launch booster. Based on the analysis of various samples of rocket weapons, at least a ton was saved on the booster alone.
The latest news came from China - a test of the Starry Sky 2 hypersonic glider. As it turned out, not "Waverrider" at all. This is a hypersonic glider-wave flying, picking up speed 5, 5M using a ballistic missile and then gliding by inertia, gradually decelerating in the dense layers of the atmosphere. "Younger brother" of the domestic "Vanguard". Our eastern neighbors were able to provide the necessary thermal protection and the operation of the control elements on hypersound, but the creation of a scramjet is out of the question. The glider has no engine.
* * *
Explanation of the paradox? I can't even imagine how the story with super missiles will end. In principle, it will end in the most obvious way, like the "wet" anti-aircraft missiles from the Chinese contract. Another thing is how this will be explained to the public, who piously believed in the existence of such a weapon. With foreign NI experts, everything will be easier, they are still not able to distinguish a glider from an aircraft with a scramjet engine, for them everything is a "threat", no matter what you show.
"Zircon" with "Petrel" overcame all reasonable barriers and continue to plow intersonic space. Most likely, they will repeat the path of the legends of the early 2000s - the plasma "stealth generator" and the Kh-90 "Koala" rocket - the heroes of the publication of those years. However, from the "Koala", going to the target at an altitude of 90 km, at least there were some calculations and even a model.
