For a long time I thought about whether or not to write about the defense industry complex. Here the thing is, on the one hand, everyone knows that we produce good weapons, they buy them from us, and this is what we can really be proud of. On the other hand, emo-patriots have a bunch of reasons to go by themselves, that is, to belittle the dignity of their country, slander it and humiliate it. Their arguments are well known.
1. All the weapons we got from the USSR, we have not developed anything new.
2. All the same, the army is destroyed, and what is produced is exported. We ourselves fly on rusty airplanes and swim on troughs.
3. The mace still does not fly.
And so on. But I think these are the main theses. And interestingly, all of them, in fact, if we distract from the emotional coloring inherent in emo patriots, are faithful. Well, who will argue with them, after all, indeed, the lion's share of developments began in the USSR, and either finished there, or executed on their basis. Even the concept of a fifth-generation fighter began to be worked out in the USSR.
No one will argue the same way with the fact that not a lot of new equipment is currently going into the army, that much more went to the USSR, that the US army is stronger than ours. And you can't argue with the fact that the basis of both the aircraft fleet and the basis of the Navy are combat units built back in the USSR. It is a fact.
Well, on the third point, there is nothing to say, 5 relatively successful launches out of 12 - this is a clear failure.
With everything I agree with you, gentlemen emo patriots. But because of the usual stupidity, you do not understand one thing - the statement of fact is only the beginning of the thought process, its very top, and below there is the whole essence, the whole meaning. Your thinking is built on the simplest principle, and runs at the level of reflexes available even to a ciliate shoe. The algorithm is simple - we formulate a negative thesis, for example, "The mace does not fly" and draw a conclusion, which usually boils down to "shit like it rolls its own way." Well, how else?
Let's start with the first point. To begin with, I want to say that there is nothing wrong with the fact that Russia is using the USSR's achievements. Moreover, many admit that STP has slowed down a lot, and we have come to the end of a new round caused by a breakthrough in nuclear physics and semiconductor electronics. But the USSR gathered all the cream, finding itself on the crest of technologies, when the prospects were enormous, but they did not have time to invent much. Actually, under the same conditions in the United States, they also practically did not have something new in the past 20 years, and this is taking into account their capabilities. Well, yes, there is an F-22 Raptor, but is it really innovative? Stealth technology has been known for a long time, airplanes with cruising supersonic speed have existed for a long time, missiles hidden in the belly, it’s unprecedented. But the B-52s created back in the 60s are still in service, and instead of giving up this junk, the United States is going to modernize them. So why should we invent something of our own, when there is an excellent base left by the Union?
However, just "Bulava" is the very thing that was developed in Russia. I hear jokes of emo patriots, like "well, just not a flying rocket, we can do it." Well, not only Topol-M and Sineva, I'm not talking about the newest Yar complex were created in Russia, and they fly perfectly. The fact that something went wrong with the Bulava is rather an exception, not a regularity. The main thing is that no one doubts that the Bulava, in terms of its characteristics, corresponds to what the main enemy of the United States has (again, I remind you of the budget). There is also no criticism about its design. Problems in the quality of manufacturing, but forgive me, the fact that we can make a rocket, which even 5 times there are 12 of them, but still reaches where it is needed, this is a miracle, since a lot of production capacity, personnel, knowledge remained abroad, and how we are in 90 - we have saved what allows us to make a rocket, this is a mystery, this is a miracle. So it’s surprising not that the rocket flies badly, but that it can fly somehow.
The rocket will fly, but then what? And then, lo and behold, our government, for some reason it does not cut the newest nuclear submarines, but on the contrary, it builds them. One has already passed the tests, two are in a high degree of readiness and another is laid. Yes, gentlemen emo patriots, this is the case when weapons are not intended for export, but for us. Moreover, work on the rearmament of our strategic submarine fleet is proceeding in many directions, while they do not forget about current security.
1. Tests of a new missile Bulava are underway
2. The nuclear submarine "Akula" is being modernized for a ready-made missile, until the submarines of the "Borey" project were ready
3. Nuclear submarines of the Borey project are under construction
3. Until the rocket is ready, the nuclear submarines of the "Dolphin" project are being modernized and the not the oldest "Sineva" rocket is put on them.
See how everything is thought out, how large-scale and clear everything is. If the authorities didn't give a damn about our safety, our army, why was it necessary to hastily rebuild 6 submarines of the old project. Well, no one is threatening us yet, it would be possible to live without submarines. Moreover, there is also a nuclear submarine of the Kalmar project, there are land missiles. But they are being preserved and modernized. And not to the west, but for us, for the security of our Motherland. Well, we could have limited ourselves to modernization, because the Sineva is a good rocket, and the boats are not bad either. Moreover, the "Sharks", well, they would all be refitted, and they would have cost. But no, we are also building the newest nuclear submarines of the Borey project, and even 4 units at once!
Let's think about this, just as an example of a normal, broader style of thinking. How many countries have at their disposal a missile similar in characteristics to the Bulava? ONE country! And this is the United States, whose military budget is 10 times ours. No other country in the world has such a missile anymore. Yes, since the beginning of the 90s France has been developing the M51 rocket for the development of such a rocket, but has already reduced its characteristics several times, revised the project, as a result, planning its adoption in 2008, the rocket was never put into service (planned this year). So several countries (the consortium EADS Space Transportation) that are members of NATO participated in the development, which means to some extent used the technologies of the alliance, that is, the United States. At the same time, new warheads for this missile have not yet been developed, and are expected in 2015, but for now there will be gray warheads.
The Chinese JL-2 is inferior to Bulava, at least in the number of warheads. In total, it turns out that Russia is among such strong players as the European Union, and ahead of China. The United States stands out, which is not surprising given the size of the budget. By the way, many impute to our designers the refusal of some stages of testing, and replacing them with computer simulation. So after all, the same thing happens with the M51 rocket.
According to the statements of the responsible persons of this project, in the course of the work, the methods of mathematical and computer modeling were used much more widely than before, which ensured the choice of a number of optimal solutions and significant cost savings. It is assumed, for example, that the use of modern design technologies will reduce the volume of joint flight tests by at least three times.
This, it turns out, is a world practice, and we keep pace with the times. By the way, it is likely that the change in the old test procedure really entailed some problems, but you need to understand that you learn from mistakes, and if you do not start learning now, then it may be too late, other countries will overtake us, and we will continue to use the grandfather's, albeit reliable, but more expensive and time-consuming methods. So the designers did not invent anything, they just caught the global trend associated with the development of computing facilities.
So, Bulava can't fly? Yes, it does not fly. But the flying analogue is only in the USA, and the analogue which has not been adopted for service exists in Europe. What do you want? What would Russia, after what was done to it in the 90s, be ahead of the rest of the planet, that with a much smaller defense budget, it would overtake not the most backward countries in Europe, not to mention the United States? Yes, it's already great that we are not far behind, and the question is whether we are lagging behind, since the characteristics of the missiles are secret information, and it is not at all a fact that the several times cut M51 is actually a competitor to our Bulava and its warheads, which are used for the M51 old. And we also have "Sineva".
As you lead, it turned out a little longer than usually the conclusions of emo-patriots are obtained. But it turns out that Russia is not going anywhere, but quite the opposite, is creating a rocket that no country in the world except the United States can create. And it turns out that not only Russia has problems with the adoption of the missile into service, it turns out that a consortium of European countries has been pulling the Murka since 1993 to this day, for 17 years it has been making a rocket, and even without warheads, while Russia has spent only 12 years.
By the way, unlike Europe, which has stuffed a new missile into old submarines, Russia is building a new missile and a new nuclear submarine. One has already completed the tests, as I said. Well, emo patriots of course will grin, like there is a boat, but no rocket. Let me remind you that in the USSR there was a case when three boats were already afloat, but there was still no rocket. So it is in the USSR, with its possibilities!
This week, the next tests of the Mace are promised. Fingers crossed.
