British Ordnance Collectors Network
This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!
Captured Hypersonic Russian Missile in Ukraine
- Thread starter M8owner
- Start date
This photograph was publied by the National guard of Ukraine through Reuters under the title:
"A Russian short-range ballistic missile, believed to be an unexploded Iskander missile, was found near Kramatorsk, Ukraine. "
Here is the Iskander M
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/9K720_Iskander#/media/File:Army2016demo-075.jpg
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/9K720_Iskander#/media/File:9T250-1_Iskander-M.JPG
The Kinzhal hypersonic missile is roughly of similar shape but had a second set of four smaller winglets behind the first set of four winglets on the tail.
https://lobelog.com/wp-content/uploads/2018_Moscow_Victory_Day_Parade_66.jpg
Here're both missiles one above the other
https://www.sandboxx.us/wp-content/uploads/2021/12/kinzhal.jpg
And here is the Tocha U which is also present in the same fighting area - the winglets are at the mid of the missile
https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipe...Yekat.jpg/1280px-Tochka-U_rep_parad_Yekat.jpg
"A Russian short-range ballistic missile, believed to be an unexploded Iskander missile, was found near Kramatorsk, Ukraine. "
Here is the Iskander M
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/9K720_Iskander#/media/File:Army2016demo-075.jpg
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/9K720_Iskander#/media/File:9T250-1_Iskander-M.JPG
The Kinzhal hypersonic missile is roughly of similar shape but had a second set of four smaller winglets behind the first set of four winglets on the tail.
https://lobelog.com/wp-content/uploads/2018_Moscow_Victory_Day_Parade_66.jpg
Here're both missiles one above the other
https://www.sandboxx.us/wp-content/uploads/2021/12/kinzhal.jpg
And here is the Tocha U which is also present in the same fighting area - the winglets are at the mid of the missile
https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipe...Yekat.jpg/1280px-Tochka-U_rep_parad_Yekat.jpg
Last edited:
Eggburt1969
Well-Known Member
It's a 9M79-1 close-range ballistic missile (CRBM) introduced with the 9K79-1 Tochka-U tactical ballistic missile system.
It is likely fitted with the 9N123K submunition or the 9N123F selectable proximity or impact fuzed high explosive fragmentation warhead.
Checking Russian source materials gives a figure of 1,036 m/s (2,317 mph, 3,730 km/h), though it is not clear that this is an average of peak speed.
It also depends on when you measure its speed. At sea level, under standard atmospheric conditions, Mach 1 is about 340 m/s. At high altitude, say 80 km, Mach 1 is about 225 m/s.
As hypersonic is above Mach 5 in the local atmospheric conditions. Mach 5 at sea level is about 1,700 m/s (3,800 mph, 6,120 km/h), whereas Mach 5 at 80 km is 'only' 1,125 m/s (2,515 mph, 4,050 km/h).
This fact is commonly used in marketing to make missiles sound faster than they are, or to confuse the average person.
Last edited:
I think this 'report' is merely disinformation. The Tochka is in service in the Ukrainian Armed Forces as well. I can't believe officials haven't been able to ID it. The case is more likely that everybody is speaking now about the deployment of Kinjal so they showed a 'Kinjal' to the public.
Eggburt1969
Well-Known Member
I pretty much ignore the mass media and their generally sensationalist news they produce when it comes to weapons. I just want accurate technical and non-sensationalist facts and you don't get them from those sources. And yes disinformation is rife, I've debunked quite a lot of it.
As to the obsession with hypersonic weapons, nearly all short-range (300-1,000 km) and onwards classes of ballistic missiles are likely to be hypersonic at some stage of their flight. As such hypersonic speeds aren't new.
You have to separate the wheat from the chaff. When the mass media go on about hypersonics there are two primary classes of potential game-changer weapons and one secondary class. These three can be classified by asking these questions:
1) Is it an air-breathing, or possibly other energy source, cruise missile that can fly for most of its flight at hypersonic speed?
2) Is it a hypersonic glide vehicle, i.e. a terminally-guided warhead/sub-missile that makes a series of climbs and dives to extend its range after being deployed by a parent ballistic missile?
3) Is it a ballistic missile that can use (orient) its body so that it acts as gliding surface to extend its range (at a cost of speed), which is still over hypersonic for most of its flight?
If it's none of these, or they don't even make the distinction, then the media article is trash and not worth the time to read other than to waste time.
An overall sort of comment with regards to hypersonic coverage by the mass media can be summed up by the aptly-titled Public Image record 'Don't Believe The Hype', with the pun on hype being very deliberate. While not necessarily disbelieving everything, take what is said by the mass media with a large pitch of salt.
Last edited:
A few data gathered to clarify the issue:
https://partyardmilitary.com/hypersonic-missiles-what-are-they-and-can-they-be-stopped/
A supersonic missile exceeds the speed of sound (Mach 1) but is not faster than Mach-3. Most supersonic missiles travel at a speed between Mach-2 and Mach-3, which is up to 2,300 mph.
The most well-known supersonic missile is the Indian/Russian BrahMos, is currently the fastest operational supersonic missile capable of speeds around 2,100–2,300 mph.
A hypersonic missile travels at speeds of Mach 5 and higher – five times faster than the speed of sound (3836 mph), which is around 1 mile per second.
Some missiles, such as Russia’s Kh-47M2 Kinzhal air-launched ballistic missile, are allegedly capable of reaching Mach 10 speeds (7672 mph) and distances up to 1200 miles.
Hypersonic missiles come in two variants: hypersonic cruise missiles and hypersonic glide vehicles.
Hypersonic cruise missile:
This type of missile reaches its target with the help of a high-speed jet engine that allows it to travel at extreme speeds, in excess of Mach-5.
It is non-ballistic – the opposite of traditional Intercontinental Ballistic Missiles (ICBM) which utilizes gravitational forces to reach its target.
Hypersonic glide vehicle:
This type of hypersonic missile utilizes re-entry vehicles.
Initially, the missile is launched into space on an arching trajectory, where the warheads are released and fall towards the atmosphere at hypersonic speeds.
Rather than leaving the payload at the mercy of gravitational forces – as is the case for traditional ICBMs – the warheads are attached to a glide vehicle which re-enters the atmosphere, and through its aerodynamic shape it can ride the shockwaves generated by its own lift as it breaches the speed of sound, giving it enough speed to overcome existing missile defense systems.
The glide vehicle surfs on the atmosphere between 40-100km in altitude and reaches its destination by leveraging aerodynamic force
When hypersonic missiles become operational, the gap between missile defense systems and missile offence becomes huge.
Simply put, there is no operational missile defense system that is capable of intercepting a hypersonic missile, which is why the race to develop hypersonic weapons is such an hot one.
Hypersonic missiles offer a number of advantages over subsonic and supersonic weapons, particularly with regard to the prosecution of time-critical targets (for example, mobile ballistic missile launchers), where the additional speed of a hypersonic weapon is valuable.
It can also overcome the defenses of heavily-defended targets (such as an aircraft carrier).
There is currently no operational or reliable method of intercepting them
Technologies such as directed energy weapons, particle beams and other non-kinetic weapons are likely candidates for an effective defense against hypersonic missiles
https://partyardmilitary.com/hypersonic-missiles-what-are-they-and-can-they-be-stopped/
A supersonic missile exceeds the speed of sound (Mach 1) but is not faster than Mach-3. Most supersonic missiles travel at a speed between Mach-2 and Mach-3, which is up to 2,300 mph.
The most well-known supersonic missile is the Indian/Russian BrahMos, is currently the fastest operational supersonic missile capable of speeds around 2,100–2,300 mph.
A hypersonic missile travels at speeds of Mach 5 and higher – five times faster than the speed of sound (3836 mph), which is around 1 mile per second.
Some missiles, such as Russia’s Kh-47M2 Kinzhal air-launched ballistic missile, are allegedly capable of reaching Mach 10 speeds (7672 mph) and distances up to 1200 miles.
Hypersonic missiles come in two variants: hypersonic cruise missiles and hypersonic glide vehicles.
Hypersonic cruise missile:
This type of missile reaches its target with the help of a high-speed jet engine that allows it to travel at extreme speeds, in excess of Mach-5.
It is non-ballistic – the opposite of traditional Intercontinental Ballistic Missiles (ICBM) which utilizes gravitational forces to reach its target.
Hypersonic glide vehicle:
This type of hypersonic missile utilizes re-entry vehicles.
Initially, the missile is launched into space on an arching trajectory, where the warheads are released and fall towards the atmosphere at hypersonic speeds.
Rather than leaving the payload at the mercy of gravitational forces – as is the case for traditional ICBMs – the warheads are attached to a glide vehicle which re-enters the atmosphere, and through its aerodynamic shape it can ride the shockwaves generated by its own lift as it breaches the speed of sound, giving it enough speed to overcome existing missile defense systems.
The glide vehicle surfs on the atmosphere between 40-100km in altitude and reaches its destination by leveraging aerodynamic force
When hypersonic missiles become operational, the gap between missile defense systems and missile offence becomes huge.
Simply put, there is no operational missile defense system that is capable of intercepting a hypersonic missile, which is why the race to develop hypersonic weapons is such an hot one.
Hypersonic missiles offer a number of advantages over subsonic and supersonic weapons, particularly with regard to the prosecution of time-critical targets (for example, mobile ballistic missile launchers), where the additional speed of a hypersonic weapon is valuable.
It can also overcome the defenses of heavily-defended targets (such as an aircraft carrier).
There is currently no operational or reliable method of intercepting them
Technologies such as directed energy weapons, particle beams and other non-kinetic weapons are likely candidates for an effective defense against hypersonic missiles
Eggburt1969
Well-Known Member
I see you've fallen for the Mach speed numbers without stating the local atmospheric conditions, tut tut!
As I understand it these new 'hypersonic' missiles would not travel at hypersonic speeds for the entirety of their flight so there would still be opportunity to engage them, though of course less target window than with existing, slower, systems. Air-dropped weapons such as the Kinzhal would enter hypersonic flight sooner (and be closer to target on launch) than missiles on a ballistic arc so this would make them harder to shoot down, but then the workaround would be to target the launch aircraft before missile release (assume these large missiles slung under an aircraft would make it slower, less maneuverable and significantly increase it's radar signature, increasing it's vulnerability). Hypersonic weapons have been talked about for quite some time now (of course ICBMs, that go hypersonic, have been around for decades) so an arms race will have been set in motion and it's reasonable to assume defence systems that will be able to engage them are not far behind in production - we've yet to see a weapons system that cannot be countered by another for very long. In the current conflict assume weapon cost is/will fast become a major consideration for Russia and dissuade use of what will be super expensive new technology like these when 'dumb bombs' might do the job; I guess the propaganda/shock value of an 'undefeatable' weapon is their main value right now.
Last edited:
I am afraid that in fact the opposite is true.
The most critical phase in an anti-missile system is the delay between detection and reception of information by the command center that can decide and activate the adequate response.
With ICBM and even with older medium range ballistic missile (Such as the SCUD and its clones/developments) you had a number of minutes for this.
An hypersonic missile launched from a flying platform poses a different problem than regular ICBM:
Imagine a launch from a flying jet at a distance of 400 km from the target.
You are beyond the regular range of acquisition of anti-aircraft defenses, the radar system "dealing" with the potential threat you represent is an anti-aircraft radar system not an anti-ballistic one.
The time between launch and impact is now a matter of seconds not minutes.
Decision time.....nil. Till the info gets to the command center the missile has already reached its target.
Presently there is no answer to such a problem.
If one can be confident that the radar acquisition can be solved somehow (even if this will mean operating in the near future anti-ballistic radars/ satellites early warning systems against ALL aerial targets in case of threat, something problematic in itself), the fact that the critical delay is now in seconds can only be addressed in 2 ways, both problematic by themselves:
1) preventive strike (but this is not often possible, even in an open war situation due to distance, lack of adequate intelligence, huge number of missiles spread over multiple airports/ flying platforms)
2) automated anti-ballistic launch decision (= artificial intelligence / algorithm instead of human command)
So the issue is a real one for the present and near future and not a simple propaganda item.
The most critical phase in an anti-missile system is the delay between detection and reception of information by the command center that can decide and activate the adequate response.
With ICBM and even with older medium range ballistic missile (Such as the SCUD and its clones/developments) you had a number of minutes for this.
An hypersonic missile launched from a flying platform poses a different problem than regular ICBM:
Imagine a launch from a flying jet at a distance of 400 km from the target.
You are beyond the regular range of acquisition of anti-aircraft defenses, the radar system "dealing" with the potential threat you represent is an anti-aircraft radar system not an anti-ballistic one.
The time between launch and impact is now a matter of seconds not minutes.
Decision time.....nil. Till the info gets to the command center the missile has already reached its target.
Presently there is no answer to such a problem.
If one can be confident that the radar acquisition can be solved somehow (even if this will mean operating in the near future anti-ballistic radars/ satellites early warning systems against ALL aerial targets in case of threat, something problematic in itself), the fact that the critical delay is now in seconds can only be addressed in 2 ways, both problematic by themselves:
1) preventive strike (but this is not often possible, even in an open war situation due to distance, lack of adequate intelligence, huge number of missiles spread over multiple airports/ flying platforms)
2) automated anti-ballistic launch decision (= artificial intelligence / algorithm instead of human command)
So the issue is a real one for the present and near future and not a simple propaganda item.
Last edited:
Yes I assume future defensive measures would necessarily involve long-range radar detection, and when I say propaganda/shock value is their main value right now I am referring the Kinzhal, and perhaps similar systems Russia may have already deployed, in the Ukraine conflict - I don't think they're really representative of the new generation of hypersonic weapons (but it's to Russia's advantage if they're touted as such).
Last edited:
Here is a photo of the remains of the weapon used on the train station at Kramatorsk, Ukraine. According to news reports, it has "For the children painted on it." If that is true, that is an interesting way of thinking for the people who fired it - the most polite thing I can think to say about it.
Attachments
Last edited: