Russia starts full-scale production of its 'unstoppable' 6,670mph Zircon hypersonic missile - Politics Forum.org | PoFo

Wandering the information superhighway, he came upon the last refuge of civilization, PoFo, the only forum on the internet ...

Talk about what you've seen in the news today.

Moderator: PoFo Today's News Mods

#15200212
It's unironically over for the US navy.

Russia today announced it has started serial production of its deadly 6,670 mph Zircon - or Tsirkon - hypersonic missile amid acute tensions with the West.
The 'unstoppable' weapon is being rushed into manufacture even before the end of state trials, reported TASS.
The go-ahead for full-scale production at a top-secret plant at Reutovo, near Moscow, follows recent 'successful' tests of the Mach-9 capable missile which Russia boasts will evade all Western defences.

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/articl ... ssile.html

This weapon is among a class of game changers that will precipitate and enable Russia's invasion and complete annexation of Ukraine, and eventually parts of NATO (Baltics). I expect Russia to dismantle NATO in eastern Europe by 2030.

I predicted Crimea, and my prediction for rest of Ukraine still stands-soon. Now I'm predicting that the Baltics will succumb to Russian ambitions. It's unironically over, the Russian Empire is returning.
#15200215
Igor Antunov wrote:It's unironically over for the US navy.


https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/articl ... ssile.html

This weapon is among a class of game changers that will precipitate and enable Russia's invasion and complete annexation of Ukraine, and eventually parts of NATO (Baltics). I expect Russia to dismantle NATO in eastern Europe by 2030.

I predicted Crimea, and my prediction for rest of Ukraine still stands-soon. Now I'm predicting that the Baltics will succumb to Russian ambitions. It's unironically over, the Russian Empire is returning.


The problem with hypersonic missiles have always been the same. It is not that we can't build them or fire them but that they are not accurate due to the fact that any kind of communication and guidance are blocked by the plasma that the missiles generate. So in best case they need to slow down at some point which kinda makes it no better than standard missiles.

Unless the plasma problem is solved then there is no use for this missile at all like there is no use for US or any other countries prototypes.

To demontrate that the problem is solved just fire it at a moving target lets say 500km away. Demontrastate that it can hit.
#15200219
JohnRawls wrote:The problem with hypersonic missiles have always been the same. It is not that we can't build them or fire them but that they are not accurate due to the fact that any kind of communication and guidance are blocked by the plasma that the missiles generate. So in best case they need to slow down at some point which kinda makes it no better than standard missiles.

Unless the plasma problem is solved then there is no use for this missile at all like there is no use for US or any other countries prototypes.

To demontrate that the problem is solved just fire it at a moving target lets say 500km away. Demontrastate that it can hit.


The missiles actually communicate with one another in real time and relay new targeting information independent of any ground station. Can be linked to ocean spotting sats too. They have cameras. Computer aided image recognition and AI is such that this is truly a fire and forget system. All it needs is the shape of a US carrier, a very general location and it will actively seek it out and then relay, the other 5 missiles communicating with it will go for the kill. I believe these can operate in swarms so there's no upper limit to how many can be networked in flight. The only real limit is their expense, so you'd only use any significant number on high value targets.

The fact the target is moving is irrelevant, the ships move at 20-30 knots, the missile moves at up to 10,000km/h. They might as well be stationary targets.

And the high explosive warhead is kind of irrelevant beyond its initial purpose to disperse the missile itself at point of impact. This is because the speed is such that the kinetic energy of the entire vehicle greatly exceeds the energy contained in the explosives. This means the missile body becomes the primary damage dealing component, dispersing it amplifies damage/creates area of effect so it doesn't cut neatly through the ship. These are effectively kinetic weapons.

Just one of these would sink any ship. And if your primary defensive doctrine against such a weapon is 'hum ho it's probably gonna miss because our giant 300m ship is moving very slowly in a straight line on the open ocean' then you're in for a really bad time.
#15200237
Igor Antunov wrote:The missiles actually communicate with one another in real time and relay new targeting information independent of any ground station. Can be linked to ocean spotting sats too. They have cameras. Computer aided image recognition and AI is such that this is truly a fire and forget system. All it needs is the shape of a US carrier, a very general location and it will actively seek it out and then relay, the other 5 missiles communicating with it will go for the kill. I believe these can operate in swarms so there's no upper limit to how many can be networked in flight. The only real limit is their expense, so you'd only use any significant number on high value targets.

The fact the target is moving is irrelevant, the ships move at 20-30 knots, the missile moves at up to 10,000km/h. They might as well be stationary targets.

And the high explosive warhead is kind of irrelevant beyond its initial purpose to disperse the missile itself at point of impact. This is because the speed is such that the kinetic energy of the entire vehicle greatly exceeds the energy contained in the explosives. This means the missile body becomes the primary damage dealing component, dispersing it amplifies damage/creates area of effect so it doesn't cut neatly through the ship. These are effectively kinetic weapons.

Just one of these would sink any ship. And if your primary defensive doctrine against such a weapon is 'hum ho it's probably gonna miss because our giant 300m ship is moving very slowly in a straight line on the open ocean' then you're in for a really bad time.


Cool story but you have no clue on even the most basic problem and all what you said is kinda uselese BECAUSE the basic problem was always the plasma bubble that blocks communication and navigation. This phenomenon has been known for god knows how long now especially since most spacecraft experience it on reentry to some degree and that is why we have no real time footage of reentries, only perhaps from outside or after it has landed. We have no real way to communicate with our technology through plasma bubbles in any stable manner.

Hypersonic missiles experience the same situation that they are coated by a plasma bubble when they fly making communications to the missile almost impossible along with any navigational and guidance systems on the missile itself unable to function properly.

There has not been any easy or ready solution for this since the start of man spaceflights.

So at best, what people figured out in prototyping is that the missile needs to slowdown to normal missiles speed to adjust direction and targeting but that makes it no better than a standard missile. Or if it doesn't slow down then it will not hit anything.

Also the things that you wrote, don't make any sense since these is not a cheap missile. It is not used to overload the defences because that is what cheap missiles do. So why does it need "communication" between other missiles. This is 1 shot, 1 kill missile by any standards. Also Russian Glonass network is very small and doesn't cover almost anything besides Russia and some other places nearby or where they have active operations. They have very few coverage compared to GPS. So I am not sure how will they target anything in the ocean which is folds larger if they can't even cover all the land that they would need.
#15200245
JohnRawls wrote:Cool story but you have no clue on even the most basic problem and all what you said is kinda uselese BECAUSE the basic problem was always the plasma bubble that blocks communication and navigation. This phenomenon has been known for god knows how long now especially since most spacecraft experience it on reentry to some degree and that is why we have no real time footage of reentries, only perhaps from outside or after it has landed. We have no real way to communicate with our technology through plasma bubbles in any stable manner.

Hypersonic missiles experience the same situation that they are coated by a plasma bubble when they fly making communications to the missile almost impossible along with any navigational and guidance systems on the missile itself unable to function properly.

There has not been any easy or ready solution for this since the start of man spaceflights.

So at best, what people figured out in prototyping is that the missile needs to slowdown to normal missiles speed to adjust direction and targeting but that makes it no better than a standard missile. Or if it doesn't slow down then it will not hit anything.

Also the things that you wrote, don't make any sense since these is not a cheap missile. It is not used to overload the defences because that is what cheap missiles do. So why does it need "communication" between other missiles. This is 1 shot, 1 kill missile by any standards. Also Russian Glonass network is very small and doesn't cover almost anything besides Russia and some other places nearby or where they have active operations. They have very few coverage compared to GPS. So I am not sure how will they target anything in the ocean which is folds larger if they can't even cover all the land that they would need.



Plasma bubble is a meme on the internet.

Glonass is global, I use it on my DJI drone here in Australia. You know nothing.
#15200253
Russia keeps on modernizing its weapons and constantly says it doesn't pose a threat to any country.
However, Ukraine keeps on yelling that Moscow is going to attack!
Notably, a few days ago over 400 bodies of killed Ukrainian soldiers were found in mass graves. They all died in combat actions in 2014 as Donetsk and Luhansk peoples republics' militia repelled the large-scale attack of Ukrainian army and neo-Nazi volunteer battalions. Moreover, Kiev doesn't want to search and take back the bodies of its dead soldiers.
Amid the narratives of Western and Ukrainian mass media about Russian aggression there is a reality showing us that war in Donbass continues and civilians die from Ukrainian army shelling.
But Kiev keeps on saying that it's Russia who is an aggressor. Sure! Look what great cutting-edge and deadly weapons they're having!
#15200265
@Rancid

Rancid wrote:There is certainly an arms race started by China/Russia.

Let's see where this goes.


I agree. We are developing our own hypersonic weapons too. From what I have read in the past we are actually more advanced in hypersonic technology than Russia (and I think China but I can't say for sure) it's just that we didn't put our research into weapons in regards to hypersonic technology. However, since China and Russia have and are testing and preparing to deploy such weapons, we are responding by developing our own weapons. I think we can at least catch up with them and perhaps surpass them given that we are now putting research effort into developing weapons in this technology area.

Other countries are also responding by developing their own hypersonic weapons since China and Russia have been testing them and preparing to deploy them. We are also looking at the possibility of using beam and particle beam weapons to potentially shoot down hypersonic missiles as well and putting satellites into space capable of tracking such hypersonic weapons when they are launched. So the arms race begins!
#15201418
This winter could Putin strike... his army has the advantage to be able to fight in the winter... Worst case scenario is a coordinated attack by Russia, China, Iran, North-Korea and Serbia.

As soon as Russia gets Ukraine easy, who says Putin will stop or will the beast get just hungry.

Currently is the west far behind in Rocket Technology.
#15201419
Igor Antunov wrote:I predicted Crimea, and my prediction for rest of Ukraine still stands-soon. Now I'm predicting that the Baltics will succumb to Russian ambitions. It's unironically over, the Russian Empire is returning.


Perhaps Russia should annex Serbia. :lol:

But in all seriousness, have you learnt nothing from Afghanistan? A missle isn't going to be enough to control a hostile country, let alone half a continent. It takes men and lives to do that. And Eastern Europe have enough men and military resources (as well and international pacts) to hold Russia back in any case. Not that I think Russia is going to invade Ukraine. Nor that I think the rushing of production of this missle in particular has anything to do with that. Russia are in an arms race. And the holding of such a weapon isn't to ever use against an enemy but to prevent an enemy from using such a weapon against you.
#15201526
B0ycey wrote:Perhaps Russia should annex Serbia. :lol:

But in all seriousness, have you learnt nothing from Afghanistan? A missle isn't going to be enough to control a hostile country, let alone half a continent. It takes men and lives to do that. And Eastern Europe have enough men and military resources (as well and international pacts) to hold Russia back in any case. Not that I think Russia is going to invade Ukraine. Nor that I think the rushing of production of this missle in particular has anything to do with that. Russia are in an arms race. And the holding of such a weapon isn't to ever use against an enemy but to prevent an enemy from using such a weapon against you.



Yes Russia has learnt all it needs to learn from failed american occupations.

You're swallowing too much western propaganda, ukraine is not 100% unified against russia, its unity is very low in fact. Recall the country's biggest political party was outright banned. The people supporting that party went nowhere. They're actively being suppressed by chicken kiev.

The largest share of ukrainian citizens and refugees went to...Russia. They will want to come back to their homes and businesses. 2 million of them.

For one see crimea. As smooth as it could go. 9,000 Ukrainian servicemen switched sides. No insurgency. There are entire sections of ukraine that are the same, rife with internal russia support. Russia will only focus on securing these loyal populations which will then be used to control the rest. Russian troops won't be controlling anyone. Russia will employ a top down approach, it won't be building a government from scratch. All the pro-russian political and demographic infrastructure already exists in ukaine, it is just being supressed by a western installed occupation regime. This alien regime will be ousted. Ukraine belongs firmly in the arms of mother russia which made it, piece by piece, literally.
#15201535
@Igor Antunov @Sandzak

Putin is bringing in a lot of combat power. If he were to go into Ukraine, he would probably take a swath of it. I don't think it will be cost free for Putin though in terms of lost Russian lives and economic sanctions. Nobody really knows how such an invasion into Ukraine by the Russians would turn out. The Ukrainian army has been getting Western aid and has more combat experience than it did before which can make it a more formidable foe for a Russian invasion. So, I wouldn't under-estimate the Ukrainians either. Still, Russia has enough combat power to take a good swath of Ukraine. Such an invasion of Ukraine would certainly bring swift sanctions upon Putin and his inner circle. Moreover, Biden would probably send more U.S. troops and combat equipment to the region to re-assure our NATO allies in that specific region and to bolster their defenses. Both sides probably have their artillery batteries zeroed in on specific areas along with their counter-batteries prepared. In such an invasion, the infantry would be doing the dying and the artillery would be doing the killing. Hopefully, Putin comes to his senses and doesn't invade.
#15201541
tomskunk wrote:@Igor Antunov @Sandzak

Putin is bringing in a lot of combat power. If he were to go into Ukraine, he would probably take a swath of it. I don't think it will be cost free for Putin though in terms of lost Russian lives and economic sanctions. Nobody really knows how such an invasion into Ukraine by the Russians would turn out. The Ukrainian army has been getting Western aid and has more combat experience than it did before which can make it a more formidable foe for a Russian invasion. So, I wouldn't under-estimate the Ukrainians either. Still, Russia has enough combat power to take a good swath of Ukraine. Such an invasion of Ukraine would certainly bring swift sanctions upon Putin and his inner circle. Moreover, Biden would probably send more U.S. troops and combat equipment to the region to re-assure our NATO allies in that specific region and to bolster their defenses. Both sides probably have their artillery batteries zeroed in on specific areas along with their counter-batteries prepared. In such an invasion, the infantry would be doing the dying and the artillery would be doing the killing. Hopefully, Putin comes to his senses and doesn't invade.


The sanctions meme is overblown. Russia has alternatives to swift, has distanced itself from the US monetary system and is trading with china using roubles and yuan. US would have to hurt Germany even more just to hurt Russia some. Russia can easily take ukraine up to the dnieper. It's the perfect border. Russia has enough firepower to take all of eastern europe. But I suspect putin has bigger amibitions on ukraine. He'll take all of it. Then Georgia will be next and if Finland starts making moves toward nato it too will be embraced by mother russia as its seen as a natural dominion of the empire, having been wrestled away from Sweden.
#15201616
@Igor Antunov

I don't know if he has enough troops massed to take all of Ukraine. At least not yet. If he does try to take all of Ukraine, he'll lose soldiers in the process. It is possible such loss of Russian lives could cost him politically at home. It will take more soldiers to seize all of Ukraine and Ukraine will put up a fight. That's a very risky move for Putin to take in my opinion. A move that a good military general would advise against. But then again, that doesn't mean Putin will listen or care. Personally, I think it is very unwise for Russia to invade Ukraine. You also have to bear in mind, such an invasion will bring more U.S. troops to the region to fortify NATO defensive positions to deter a Russian invasion of NATO member states.
#15201617
Igor Antunov wrote:You're swallowing too much western propaganda, ukraine is not 100% unified against russia, its unity is very low in fact.


Sure, Crimea 'was as smooth as it could go'. It was after all majority Russian and had the Russian armed forces and logistic capacity already there. And then there was no way Russia was going to allow a strategic port to fall under NATO control which I think is perhaps the most important aspect of all that.

Which then leads to the quote I have highlighted. I would actually say it is you who has swallowed too much Western propaganda given you think Russia is about to invade Ukraine. Are you aware that is the opinion and position of Biden and not Putin?

My opinion is solely based on logic. Donbass has been in a state of civil war for more than 7 years now and had Russia wanted to control Donbass, well they would have had the upper hand given it is being held by pro Russian militia. And yet, they haven't. Why? There is no reason to. Russia make money by supplying Donbass arms, there is no strategic advantage in occupation, it acts as a buffer between them and NATO and whilst Ukraine is in civil war the attention is away from Crimea. And all that would change if they declare war with Ukraine. If they invaded, NATO would come in aid of Ukraine and the UN would side on the country of sovereignty. The US would have an excuse to be right at the Russian border and they would by and large have most nations support. And that isn't even getting into how difficult it is to occupy hostile land, which Western Ukraine would be for Russia. So no, it seems you haven't learnt the lesson of Afghanistan and I suspect Russia have given they were there before the US.
#15201621
@B0ycey

The position of Biden is that Russia is massing troops to have a realistic, credible option to invade Ukraine. Its position is not that they know for sure if Russia indeed will invade Ukraine. So, it's important to clarify that. I think Putin will invade Ukraine IF he thinks the costs to him won't be too high. Some of those costs would include the political price he would pay at home when Russian troops come home in coffins during the invasion, which will happen if he orders such an invasion and how many will depend on how long Ukraine will be able and are willing to put up a fight (which I think the Ukrainians will put up a fight, but for how long, nobody would know). Of course, he might try to hide those casualties from the Russian public too, but the Russian public isn't dumb and will figure out that Putin is trying to hide those casualties from them if such an invasion were to occur. Invading Ukraine is a risky and ill-advised move for Putin in my opinion.

Because you do not read any factual evidence. I[…]

So much for the 'carbon tax', then -- back to t[…]

Boris Johnson is done

Some hardliners have defected as well. They are […]

Yeah, the tech from the video is admittedly mor[…]