Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

X-555 Criuise Missile: Russia

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #16
    Originally posted by Gun Grape
    Yea, its more of a rant on so many posters that think the Russians and Chinese are producing "Super weapons". We also have pundits that do the same.
    When in reality, both countries are producing avionic/electronics that are equal to what we had in the 70s.
    Yes Rusian is outdated in some pieces of avionics.... But it probably leads in another. Like US engineers had to copy the helmet mounted targeting systems.... it was total surprise to them when they got it on German MiG-29. Another item is backward radar...... and probably in future little counter missiels. The idea is the same as colchuga protection against the tank.... I heard they are already tested.

    Comment


    • #17
      Originally posted by Gun Grape
      Yea, 1st generation Tomahawk. Nowhere near what we use now.

      When they can do this call me: capability to reprogram the missile while in-flight to strike any of 15 preprogrammed alternate targets or redirect the missile to any Global Positioning System (GPS) target coordinates. Able to loiter over a target area for some hours, and with its on-board TV camera, allow the warfighting commanders to assess battle damage of the target, and, if necessary redirect the missile to any other target.

      Thats what we have ;)
      Read about Granit salvo and how the group of Granits are allocating targets... and how they coordinate.... Granits belong to 70-es.... Nothing like this has been made in the west (probably there were no need).

      We all can only guess what are capabilities of modern Russian cruise missiles. Lets remember that first reports on Russian supercavity torpedoes were ignored by US NAVY and considered a propoganda.....

      Comment


      • #18
        Originally posted by Gun Grape
        Yea, 1st generation Tomahawk. Nowhere near what we use now.

        When they can do this call me: capability to reprogram the missile while in-flight to strike any of 15 preprogrammed alternate targets or redirect the missile to any Global Positioning System (GPS) target coordinates. Able to loiter over a target area for some hours, and with its on-board TV camera, allow the warfighting commanders to assess battle damage of the target, and, if necessary redirect the missile to any other target.

        Thats what we have ;)
        How could you ask for more? Seriously? Other than improving the quantitative aspects (i.e. range, expense, power), what is there left to do that can improve upon that design? It's probably because I am not a big thinker, but I am stumped.

        Comment


        • #19
          Originally posted by cirrrocco
          Russia's new X-555 cruise missile operates better than its predecessor

          The innovation has put an end to the USA's monopoly in usage of high-precision long-range missiles

          Russia's newest aviation cruise missile X-555 created by the Tactical Missile Weapons corporation can easily get to a vent sash from the distance of over 2,000 kilometers. The new weapon will replace cruise missiles with nuclear warheads currently adopted by the Russian strategic aviation. X-555 missile

          Test of the new missile was conducted in August with President Putin's participation. The military say that the innovation has put an end to the USA's monopoly in usage of high-precision long-range missiles. Now, the Russian Air Force can use such missiles for any mission, including liquidation of international terrorist camps. ..........................

          ======================
          Pretty impressive, I must say..2000 km's
          Ok just to clarify these missiles arn't carrying nuclear warheads correct?

          Comment


          • #20
            Originally posted by Garry
            The idea is the same as colchuga protection against the tank.... I heard they are already tested.
            U meant, 'arena' protection?

            Comment


            • #21
              Originally posted by Gun Grape
              Yea, 1st generation Tomahawk. Nowhere near what we use now.

              When they can do this call me: capability to reprogram the missile while in-flight to strike any of 15 preprogrammed alternate targets or redirect the missile to any Global Positioning System (GPS) target coordinates. Able to loiter over a target area for some hours, and with its on-board TV camera, allow the warfighting commanders to assess battle damage of the target, and, if necessary redirect the missile to any other target.

              Thats what we have ;)
              Right, actually i think we do have that, you might want to check out BrahMos.


              Путин: Надо отделить мух от мяса.

              Comment


              • #22
                Originally posted by Rusky
                Right, actually i think we do have that, you might want to check out BrahMos.

                Not even close

                Comment


                • #23
                  Originally posted by Gun Grape
                  Not even close
                  You should really read into it before you talk. Just a hint.
                  Last edited by Rusky; 14 Jan 06,, 03:15.


                  Путин: Надо отделить мух от мяса.

                  Comment


                  • #24
                    Originally posted by Rusky
                    You should really read into it before you talk. Just a hint.

                    I have "read into it". I ain't seeing anything more than inflight target updates. Something Tomahawk was doing 20 yrs ago. Want to give me a reason to think its better than the current crop of hawks?

                    Comment


                    • #25
                      Originally posted by Gun Grape
                      I have "read into it". I ain't seeing anything more than inflight target updates. Something Tomahawk was doing 20 yrs ago. Want to give me a reason to think its better than the current crop of hawks?
                      Its faster and there is nothing Tomahawk got in the electronics that makes in significantly better.


                      Путин: Надо отделить мух от мяса.

                      Comment


                      • #26
                        Originally posted by Rusky
                        Its faster and there is nothing Tomahawk got in the electronics that makes in significantly better.

                        So guidance wise, you are almost where we were in the late 1980s. You just get where you thought you needed to be faster.

                        What would you call a significant difference?

                        Comment


                        • #27
                          Originally posted by Gun Grape
                          So guidance wise, you are almost where we were in the late 1980s. You just get where you thought you needed to be faster.

                          What would you call a significant difference?
                          Something that would allow it to complete its mission radically (a lot) better then BrahMos. Guidance wise we are on the level by the way, we have all the technologies you have, TV guidance, all that stuff.


                          Путин: Надо отделить мух от мяса.

                          Comment


                          • #28
                            Originally posted by Rusky
                            Something that would allow it to complete its mission radically (a lot) better then BrahMos. Guidance wise we are on the level by the way, we have all the technologies you have, TV guidance, all that stuff.

                            So you don't think the ability to loiter, provide BDA, switch to 15 preprogramed targets or a new previously not programmed in target midstream is better than Brahmos? Which can only recieve guidance updates.

                            If you are on the same Tech level guidance wise, why don't you incorporate it into some missiles? I mean the stuff I mentioned has been around since the mid 90s. We didn't just come out with it.

                            Comment


                            • #29
                              Russian tech is crap. The ruskies need to get over it. The X-555 is primative compared to the Tactical Tomahawk.

                              Comment


                              • #30
                                Can mods at least say a word about that ... kid? The value of a board is degrading because of people like this.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X