NPOMash 3M22 Zircon / Tsirkon (SS-N-33)

mokahete said:
Grainy image of supposedly zircon.
View attachment 803740

Though i guess we need to see HD close up of its nose without fairing, to definitely conclude.

Until then, its all my *trust me bro* source.
Click to expand...
That plume looks unusually bright. Is it a camera artifact or something strange with the solid fuel?
 
Last edited by a moderator:
FroggyFrog said:
I'm curious as to the purpose of the nose shroud if it isn't an air breather. Is it for aerodynamics? Protection? The Indian Shaurya is similar.
Click to expand...
Both have submarine launched varients & the teardrop shape of the cap is more hydrodynamic than a pointy nose.


The land based varients just retained it.
 
Last edited:
mokahete said:
Both have submarine launched varients & the teardrop shape of the cap is more hydrodynamic than a pointy nose.


The land based varients just retained it.
Click to expand...
If you look at the Yakhont/Bastion (and Brahmos) cruise missile, it has a very similar cap. It is used to tilt the missile off the vertical toward the desired launch azimuth, and then stop the rotation at the correct angle. It is then ejected as the rest of the main booster engines ignite. It actually is a pretty clever system.
 

Attachments

  • Brahmos Block III_keypublishing3.jpg
    Brahmos Block III_keypublishing3.jpg
    42 KB · Views: 118
  • Brahmos_saidpvo5.jpg
    Brahmos_saidpvo5.jpg
    177.9 KB · Views: 67
Last edited by a moderator:
Molodets said:
If you look at the Yakhont/Bastion (and Brahmos) cruise missile, it has a very similar cap. It is used to tilt the missile off the vertical toward the desired launch azimuth, and then stop the rotation at the correct angle. It is then ejected as the rest of the main booster engines ignite. It actually is a pretty clever system.

View attachment 810467
Click to expand...
That's a different mechanism than shaurya or zircon.

In shaurya's case it doesn't tilt the missile.
Same for zircon
(The image shows zircon gaining altitude at an angle, with cap removed)
 

Attachments

  • _e87e906a-07a4-11eb-adc0-f7cc04e39ce3.jpeg
    _e87e906a-07a4-11eb-adc0-f7cc04e39ce3.jpeg
    7.3 KB · Views: 110
  • Bez-tytu-u.png
    Bez-tytu-u.png
    57.1 KB · Views: 114
Last edited by a moderator:

Attachments

  • IMG_2828.jpeg
    IMG_2828.jpeg
    93.8 KB · Views: 80
Open-source evidence indicates that Russia's 3M22 Zircon is not the hypersonic cruise missile it is widely assumed to be, but a maneuverable quasi-ballistic system.
https://luftlage.substack.com/p/not-quite-a-diamond
1781699760459.png

Make of this what you will, there were a few parts where it seemed like the writer didn't really know what he was talking out for me.
 
NMaude said:
Isn't the SS-N-33 supposed to be ramjet or scramjet powered?
Click to expand...
If it isn't scramjet-powered, I can't see any reason why it would be harder ro intercept than an Iskander or Kinzhal, which are also quasi-ballistic. Maybe it has a partitioned motor but either of the other two missiles could also have been modified that way without a new design.
 
Whatever it is, it's made in such numbers that the Russians can afford to throw dozens of them at Ukraine each month, and so far i've only heard of one potential interception this year.
Impressive stuff.
 
Scaevola said:
Whatever it is, it's made in such numbers that the Russians can afford to throw dozens of them at Ukraine each month, and so far i've only heard of one potential interception this year.
Impressive stuff.
Click to expand...
AFAIK, they were used only several times, in specific cases. Those missiles are costly, and swarms of Geran drones combined with Kalibr missiles generally work sufficiently good.
 
The advantage of an air-jet engine is that you don't need to carry an oxidizer, so the rocket is lighter. Find a similar rocket with a mass of 3 tons and a range of 1,400 km using solid fuel
The Indians have a similar ballistic missile, but it is twice as heavy.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shaurya_(missile)
 
Last edited:
Forest Green said:
If it isn't scramjet-powered, I can't see any reason why it would be harder ro intercept than an Iskander or Kinzhal, which are also quasi-ballistic. Maybe it has a partitioned motor but either of the other two missiles could also have been modified that way without a new design.
Click to expand...
Flatter cruise profile compresses the OODA loop for terminal interceptors
 
Last edited:
paralay said:
The advantage of an air-jet engine is that you don't need to carry an oxidizer, so the rocket is lighter. Find a similar rocket with a mass of 3 tons and a range of 1,400 km using solid fuel
The Indians have a similar ballistic missile, but it is twice as heavy.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shaurya_(missile)
Click to expand...
Tbf this one carries a 1 ton warhead(nuclear)
 
paralay said:
The solid-fuel Iskander-M, weighing approximately 6 tons, flies a distance of 1,000 km. Its warhead weighs 450 kg.
Zircon is unlikely to have a warhead of more than 200 kg; a nuclear warhead weighs less.
Click to expand...
Where do those number come from? Iskander-M weighs ~4 tons. iskander-1000 (an upgraded variant) alledgedly makes 1,000km with a 300kg warhead.
 

Similar threads

Back
Top Bottom