NPOMash 3M22 Tsirkon Hypersonic Missile

Orel was repaired and got some minor modernization. It was never modernized to 949AM standard involving the weapons system swap.
 
It is still possible to house 3 Oniks in a Granit launcher , so I wonder if it would be possible to do the same with Slava class missile launchers.
 
It is still possible to house 3 Oniks in a Granit launcher , so I wonder if it would be possible to do the same with Slava class missile launchers.
Not a Slava, but they're supposed to be doing it to Petr Veliky in his refit. I would imagine it's possible for the box-launchers on the Slavas but we might not see the three for one swap.
 
Orel was repaired and got some minor modernization. It was never modernized to 949AM standard involving the weapons system swap.
Which would explain that, same as Tver got a refit but not to 949AM. I think that reduces 949AM to just Irkutsk and Chelyabinsk, then.
 
That’s weird. Why wouldn’t it get an upgrade for the latest weapons? Granit seems unnecessarily large in this day and age; I can’t imagine retaining any tubes for that purpose when there’s already a half dozen Oscars that don’t have an upgrade.
Mainly because while it's large, it's still one of the deadliest anti-ship missiles in the world, far beyond anything anyone else have.
 
It is still possible to house 3 Oniks in a Granit launcher , so I wonder if it would be possible to do the same with Slava class missile launchers.
Slava-class cruiser did not have P-700 Granits; they initially carry P-500 Bazalt, and now P-1000 Vulkan. Those missiles, while similar in capabilities to Granit, are not compatible.

(P-500 Bazalt was developed as successor of P-35 Progress cruise missile, for the same launchers. P-700 Granit was developed initially as submarine-launched weapon. Since P-700 Granit was more advanced than P-500 Bazalt, it was also adopted for the large surface combatants)
 

Russia’s Tsirkon hypersonic missile strikes naval target in White Sea test-launch

According to Russia’s Defense Ministry, the recording equipment data show that the hypersonic missile’s flight complied with the designated parameters and the target was destroyed by a direct hit

Tsirkon hypersonic missile test-launched Russian Ministry of Defense/TASS

Tsirkon hypersonic missile test-launched
© Russian Ministry of Defense/TASS
MOSCOW, November 18. /TASS/. A Tsirkon hypersonic missile test-launched from the Northern Fleet’s frigate Admiral Gorshkov struck a naval target in the White Sea with a direct hit, Russia’s Defense Ministry reported on Thursday.
"The recording equipment data show that the hypersonic missile’s flight complied with the designated parameters. The target was destroyed by a direct hit," the ministry said.
As Russia’s Defense Ministry specified, the hypersonic missile was test-fired against a sea target position in the White Sea.
"The Northern Fleet involved its surface ships and naval aviation to provide for the test-firings and close off the area," the ministry said.

A source earlier told TASS that the state trials of the Tsirkon hypersonic missile would begin in November and continue in December. Overall, five test-launches against sea and coastal targets are planned. On August 24, 2021, a contract was signed at the Army 2021 international arms show on the delivery of Tsirkon hypersonic missiles to the Russian troops.
 
Accodring to very "nice" article that was posted on this forum not long ago russians already used around whole yearly supply of serial production rate of Zirkon missiles in those tests.
 
Is it normal to fire this many test articles for a missile program? Do the Russians ever announce the goals of individual tests? Clearly fired from a sub and ship are very different things that will require their own separate test programs but haven’t there been a dozen tests now? I feel like LRASM had like three end to end tests, though admittedly it flies a much simplified flight regime and only from one platform type.
 
Very normal i think. In fact they might want to do more to fully understand the missile's behavior.
 
Is it normal to fire this many test articles for a missile program? Do the Russians ever announce the goals of individual tests? Clearly fired from a sub and ship are very different things that will require their own separate test programs but haven’t there been a dozen tests now? I feel like LRASM had like three end to end tests, though admittedly it flies a much simplified flight regime and only from one platform type.
It used to be normal in the US. LRASM is basically JASSM with a different guidance system. They've probably got thousands of hours test time with the seeker mounted on an aircraft/drone. All they were testing with the LRASM flights, really, was if the integration was good.

Re. testing here's a sample of Sprint & Spartan tests:




They don't test as much now, because if a thing isn't immediately successful they cancel it. This is why we're still using the half-century old Tomahawk instead of any of the plethora of supersonic/hypersonic programs since then.
 
Is it normal to fire this many test articles for a missile program?
This is a completely new type of missile weapon that has never been used in any army in the world before. So yeah it's ok
Why do they conduct Cirkons tests only on such a short range of 400 km, if the missile has a range of over 1000 km? which is almost 3 times larger
 
Testing a new weapon in Russia is a very long and exhaustive process, essentially for two reasons.
First one is that they doesn't have (because they DON'T want it) something equivalent to an IOC and LRIP production phase so they keep on testing until all the things of a new weapon is settled and declare them to be "in service" only when all the maintenance could be fully serviced by their own logistical structure (i.e. if the F-35 was their, it would still take YEARS before to be declared so, even with 500 actually operative).
Su-35 bombed three years in Syria before being declared "in Service".
Second, they are doctrine centered: state test doesn't just ascertain if a weapon is technically ready to be used but how to use it tactically, how to deploy, refurbish and train people to make the most out of them.
Needless to say: the more a weapon is innovative and "with no equivalent in the world" (to cite their most abused slogan), the more this last phase will take time.
So they have a LOT of new weapons that have passed the STATE TRIALS and reached the most sought letter O (i.e. ready for mass production) but are still mired in the SECOND STATE TEST phase (i.e. the one that have to ascertain how they will fit in the service) but for them this is not such a bad new...
Quite the contrary, it means that they have really innovative and game changing weaponries up into their sleeves (while the previous one are still in full production).
 
Last edited by a moderator:
FWIW the mouth watering expensive joint Army Long Range Hypersonic Missile/Navy Conventional Prompt Strike missile program, the Pentagon recent budget estimate of $28.5 billion is for 88 development/test missiles and 218 operational missiles, total 306, 29% development/test missiles.

 
Wow, 88 seems like a vast number of test/development missiles for any US program. That would probably cover every SM-3/THAAD test ever performed with room to spare, and that represents a couple of the longest, most technically challenging missile programs the US has had.

Fair points all on the new weapon pushing the envelop and the Russians having different testing regimes.
 
Wow, 88 seems like a vast number of test/development missiles for any US program. That would probably cover every SM-3/THAAD test ever performed with room to spare, and that represents a couple of the longest, most technically challenging missile programs the US has had.

Fair points all on the new weapon pushing the envelop and the Russians having different testing regimes.

Moving the reply to the last two posts in the US Hypersonic Weapon Thread:

 
Last edited:
Is it normal to fire this many test articles for a missile program?
This is a completely new type of missile weapon that has never been used in any army in the world before. So yeah it's ok
Why do they conduct Cirkons tests only on such a short range of 400 km, if the missile has a range of over 1000 km? which is almost 3 times larger
Probably coz it's pretty hard to make a 1000km restricted zone in international waters. Even if it's an Arctic Ocean. And, after all, this wouldn't make much sense. Usually ASM's are not being tested on their full range.

 
"Сегодня ночью, точнее под утро, проведен залповый пуск гиперзвуковой системы "Циркон". Это новейшая наша ракета, которая работает и по морю, и по морским целям, и по наземным целям. Испытания проведены успешно, безупречно." - В.В. Путин

“Tonight, more precisely in the morning, a salvo launch of the Zircon hypersonic system was maid. This is our newest missile, which works both at sea targets and at ground targets. The tests were completed successfully, flawlessly.” - V.V. Putin

 
Last edited:
Can you give us a quick summary of the conclusion? I've often wondered what exactly is its propulsion. It clearly has a rocket booster for surface launch, it looks like that is a relatively small affair normal to ground launched cruise missiles. I always assumed Zircon had to be a combined cycle ram/scram jet that started at relatively slow speeds and change combustion changer/inlet geometry as it accelerated. What is their take?
 
Can you give us a quick summary of the conclusion? I've often wondered what exactly is its propulsion. It clearly has a rocket booster for surface launch, it looks like that is a relatively small affair normal to ground launched cruise missiles. I always assumed Zircon had to be a combined cycle ram/scram jet that started at relatively slow speeds and change combustion changer/inlet geometry as it accelerated. What is their take?

I think it's this line of thinking, that Tsirkon/Zircon may be a rocket, not an air-breather.

View: https://twitter.com/TheDEWLine/status/1495822058147794950
 

I think it's this line of thinking, that Tsirkon/Zircon may be a rocket, not an air-breather.
This version was expressed and investigated at the Airbase.ru and Paralay boards more than a year ago.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
What if Zirkon is just Yakhont sent on depressed ballistic trajectory? Definitely missile from QuadroFX clip is behaving similar to Yakhont except trajectory. Definitely it is dropping inlet cover.
 
What was the result of this investigation?
Multiple penalties from moderators.

Speaking seriously, i'm the one who was tending to think it's a rocket.
But now i'm not so sure it is.

In the video below you can see the moment(at 0:32) when the solid booster-stage finished its job and disabled.
So, it's a liquid-fuel rocket motor or air-breather.
 
...Why this is still a controversy I have no clue. For me it was confirmed with some fairly recent, tho blurred, images, as well as some ruskie patent info that has come out. It is an air breather.
 
I'm surprised there was ever any debate about that. It isn't large enough to be a boost glide; look at the relatively tiny US SWERVE glider and how large the booster is. My question is whether anyone has discussed the mode of operation - it seems impossible to me that the weapons is boosted to anything like scramjet speed or altitude. But at the same time it is claimed to have a top speed of M8. I don't see how that isn't a combined cycle ram/scramjet, unless they are really pushing the envelope of ramjet performance or perhaps the M8 speed is the terminal dive speed not the cruise speed.
 
So, it's a liquid-fuel rocket motor or air-breather.
I'm leaning towards a ramjet or another air-breathing system but technically it could also be using a pulsed solid rocket motor. We just don't know definitively and they haven't disclosed this or shown a clear enough view to determine this.
 

Similar threads

Please donate to support the forum.

Back
Top Bottom