The Pentagon will allocate $3 billion to create underwater drones. Underwater drone - what is it for and which model is better Underwater drone
What is "Status-6"?
Let us leave aside for now the completely unfounded assumptions that no underwater drone exists, and everything that is wrapped around it is one big demonstration of emptiness, disinformation organized by the Russian military. This assumption is made by some observers, basing their logic on the obvious oddities that accompanied the very appearance of “Status-6” among the topics that aroused public attention.
In fact, the device was shown on a sheet of presentation album during a meeting of high-ranking military personnel with the president of the country during a television broadcast. Those who have attended such events know very well that this is impossible. TV cameras have their own places, cameramen do not wander around the hall, and pool journalists also gather in a separate group. And most importantly, when it comes to topics not intended for the general public, the press is invited to come out. For a general to leaf through top-secret presentations in front of cameras is close to impossible... or intended.
Therefore, let’s leave aside for now the hypothesis that the entire underwater drone is just a picture and explanations for it. We also recognize that it was presented to the public specifically so that our American colleagues would appreciate the beauty of the concept.
What is this beauty?
The US is massing troops to southern borders Russia
Well, firstly, that something labeled “Status-6” must exist. It's crazy, but military intelligence The USA (RUMO) also eats bread for a reason. The guys were silent for two years anyway - obviously they were making inquiries. If we were really talking about a drawing on a piece of paper, it would not have come to the official US nuclear concept.
Secondly, it’s worth checking out the characteristics of the object indicated on that piece of paper, coupled with some leaks that later complemented the notorious picture. And the following is indicated on page 3 of the presentation.
The project is being developed by the Central Design Bureau marine technology(CDB MT) "Rubin". For those who understand, this is already a lot.
Defeat important enemy economic facilities in the coastal area and cause guaranteed unacceptable damage to the country's territory by creating zones of extensive radioactive contamination that are unsuitable for carrying out military, economic and other activities in these zones for a long time.
Third - specifications: an uninhabited underwater vehicle capable of diving to depths of up to 1000 m, covering distances of up to 10 thousand km and moving at a speed of 56 knots, that is, 103 km/h. It immediately clicks in the mind of any naval sailor: the depth is unattainable for any modern submarines, the speed is unattainable, the range allows the Russians to destroy the US fleet base in San Diego without going to sea and without looking up from a cup of coffee.
To complete the impression, however, possible carriers of such a “torpedo” are also indicated: submarines of project 09852 Belgorod and project 09851 Khabarovsk.
Nuclear submarine at the parade in Kronstadt in honor of the Day navy. Photo: forden/Shutterstock.com
And then a leak arose that Status-6 would be able to carry nuclear warhead lethality of 100 megatons. For the specialists with whom Tsargrad consulted, this sounds... well, strange. In principle, nothing is impossible, and in the museum of one closed city there is a model of such a bomb, created back in 1961. More precisely, not the AN602 bomb itself with a yield of 101.5 megatons, but the one under the same letter that was manufactured in kind, with a yield of 50 megatons. To do this, one component was excluded from the nuclear reaction process - the “Jekyll-Hyde reaction,” that is, the fission of uranium nuclei under the influence of fast neutrons formed as a result of the first thermonuclear reaction. Uranium was replaced with lead for reasons, firstly, of the inevitable too much radioactive contamination, and secondly, because of real fears of doing something wrong with the entire planet.
And the fears were not in vain, as tests showed. Only fire ball The explosion reached a diameter of almost 10 km. The shock wave circled three times Earth. The mushroom of the explosion grew to a height of 67 kilometers; its sound was heard on Dikson - almost 1000 km from the test site on Novaya Zemlya.
So the question of a 100-Mt warhead on an underwater drone only causes a shrug from those in the know, not to mention the technological problems in returning to the production of this kind of ammunition.
Political component
Putin's geopolitical genius: we are in the Mediterranean
But the idea seems to be not so much military as political and economic. Americans are quite realists and understand no worse than the average armchair strategist that this kind of weapon is actually a weapon doomsday. The agreements do not allow it to just lie on the bottom near the US Navy base in Norfolk. Just to shoot like that... well, this is where the obvious noise from a body with a diameter of six to seven meters rushing under water at a speed of 100 km/h comes into play. Just sailing so quietly near the American coast - the Americans have a well-developed tracking system. Although it suffered epic failures a couple of times, when Russian submarines were spotted almost at the mouth of the Potomac.
The purpose of such an apparatus is rather not military, but political: in essence, to “nullify” all US strategic arms projects.
In fact, as the famous military observer Igor Korotchenko points out, for example,
Given the US desire to create a missile defense system to intercept Russian intercontinental ballistic missiles, it is obvious that our military leadership thinks about how to resolve the issue of defeating the enemy in the event real war, including using non-traditional means delivery nuclear charge to enemy territory.
As soon as this problem is solved - and it is precisely this that “Status-6” solves in an unconventional and radical way - all American system Missile defense is losing its meaning. Depreciates.
In the same way, the entire American concept of a rapid global disarming strike is devalued. Well, let's say, the Tridents destroyed several positions of the Ivanovo division of the Strategic Missile Forces, most of the Yars did not take off, and those that took off were countered by anti-missiles generously scattered all over the world. But no one will do anything with an underwater drone at a kilometer depth. And especially if it operates simultaneously with missiles delivered to the coast, or even to the US ports themselves in standard cargo containers.
In general, it turns out that all US military efforts over the course of decades have been devalued. For decades, America has been building a system of unanswered nuclear attack on the USSR/Russia. That is, one in which retaliatory damage would be excluded or minimized. And every time it didn’t work out. While they could bomb it with strategic aviation, the Russians could respond by capturing Europe, that is, throwing the United States into the sea from the “Heartland” mainland. Unacceptable. Then the bet was on nuclear submarines. The Russians responded again by creating missiles as a means of delivering nuclear warheads to the United States.
North America from space (NASA filming). Photo: www.globallookpress.com
Today, the bet was placed on the first global non-nuclear strike, coupled with missile defense systems to protect one’s territory and atomic bombs new generation, brought to Europe as a means of protecting Europe from the Russians ground forces.
And now “Status-6”, by its very appearance on television screens, devalues this US strategy. They built, as they say, they built, but the Russians still found a way to deliver their cold revenge to its destination! And what’s most important is that they don’t even have to try too hard! Blow up just a dozen ports on both coasts, cause economic shocks, and the Americans will do the rest themselves. If a simple flood was enough for them to destroy New Orleans, then what will they do to the country after a man-made tsunami in New York?
And we already need to think not about the first global strike, but about how to build a defense system against Russian underwater drones along the entire coast North America. And this is a system for monitoring the underwater situation along the entire maritime border, the creation of response and interdiction means, the restructuring of the continental defense system (who said that a drone will only blow itself up, and not, say, launch a small missile?) and civil defense.
These are countless costs!
And then, if you, having sunk a lot of money into unproductive expenses, wiped away the sweat and sat down to drink a glass of whiskey, from South Pole"Sarmat" flies up with a dozen Yu-71 hypersonic gliders, and you are again eager to rebuild the entire missile defense system for all-round defense. If you have time. And you think:
Maybe the Russians were right when they suggested living together?
It is not without reason that a certain former employee of the US Department of Defense, Mark Schneider, expressed the feelings of the Americans to one of the publications:
"Status-6" is the most irresponsible program for creating nuclear weapons, which was invented by Putin’s Russia.
Yes, buddy! This is true! With only one amendment: not the most irresponsible.
And the most responsive.
According to latest Review nuclear potential(Nuclear Posture Review), Russia is developing a new nuclear torpedo/drone dubbed "Status-6". Although the torpedo has some alarming capabilities (I already wrote about this in my article), this is not the first such weapon that the Russians are working on. More importantly, Status-6 appears to have fatal flaws that limit its practical effectiveness in combat scenarios.
background
Nuclear torpedoes have been actively developed over the years cold war. The earliest development is the Project 627 November nuclear attack submarines, which were considered as carriers nuclear torpedo T-15, designed to attack NATO port facilities. These torpedoes provided the Soviet Union with the ability to limit NATO's naval dominance and were also seen as an alternative means of attacking the United States.
However, the range of the T-15 torpedo was only about 40 kilometers (25 mi), and its speed did not exceed 25 knots, and therefore it was difficult to imagine a situation in which a submarine could successfully carry out this type of attack. The project was closed, and the Novembers themselves were rebuilt and became normal nuclear attack submarines. Later the United States and Soviet Union nuclear torpedoes optimized for tactical missions will be adopted.
Possibilities
Judging by the currently available information, it can be assumed that “Status-6”, after separation from the carrier submarine, begins to move towards the intended target under its own power and under its own control. The speed of the underwater drone reaches 56 knots, it is capable of diving to depths of up to 1,000 meters, and its range of action is 10 thousand kilometers (6,200 miles). Its diving speed and depth pose a challenge to the Navy's existing capabilities, as its depth and speed are superior to most existing torpedoes.
If this unmanned underwater vehicle is ever put into service, the United States will likely respond with its own underwater drone. Given its range, this drone could be launched from shore installations, although its launch data may indicate that fighting will soon begin, whereas in a critical situation they will serve as a casus belli, that is, a reason for war.
Context
In the USA they thought about precision weapons Russia
AldriMer.no 01/10/2018Cyborgs and Kalashnikovs 2.0
Gli Occhi Della Guerra 11/30/2017The updated “Leader” will hold back the USA
Sina.com 05.12.2017It is not yet clear what kind of communication the Russians will be able to maintain with the underwater drone once it is launched, although its characteristics suggest that it will be controlled by surface ships. This is by no means a trivial question. When launched from maximum distance, the Status-6 drone is expected to take up to four days to reach its intended target. This is extremely dangerous in a crisis, since the political dynamics at the time of launch may differ from what will happen at the time of striking the target. Moreover, the prospect of having a weapon that moves independently to its target within four days is alarming, to say the least.
Status-6 could likely be used as a strategic deterrent, designed to provide another capability for a strike against the United States that cannot be prevented by ballistic missile defenses. Despite its extensive nuclear arsenal Russia has long expressed security concerns about its second-strike capabilities, given the possibility of a combined strike from the United States and improved missile defense systems. But, as Brian Clark notes (quoted in his article by Dave Majumdar), Status-6 cannot be called a practical means of deterrence.
For first strike weapons, the drone's usefulness will depend on extreme secrecy and high reliability; if the Americans are able to detect its launch, or for some reason it is late in reaching the target, then the element of surprise will be lost. As a means of deterring the final blow, this underwater drone may have the double disadvantage of approaching the target after the main events of the conflict, and, in addition, it may not have a “switch-off” system that the Russian political leadership could use as a bargaining chip in negotiations.
It can be assumed that Status-6 is also capable of attacking a concentration of warships, including American carrier strike groups. However, this will require a more advanced command and control system, or it will be necessary to make the device autonomous enough to make decisions regarding the choice of target and the time of detonation.
conclusions
As some analysts have noted, the idea of using a long-range, nuclear-armed underwater drone is alarming, but it does not seem entirely realistic. It is uncertain and difficult to imagine the conditions under which the Russian political leadership will decide to use weapons that can hit the intended target only a few days later.
In fact, such an underwater drone could serve more as a test model for the development of other technologies. It may also be used by some design bureaus to maintain its funding, but it can hardly be called a ready-to-use combat complex.
However, one lesson is that against a determined opponent anti-missile system will never work, and in most cases it will be very expensive. Powerful nations like China or Russia at least have the means to develop weapons that can destroy or penetrate missile defenses, thereby destroying the security umbrella to which the United States has conditioned itself. Status-6 may not be exactly such a weapon, but it is clear that Russia is exploring any means that might work.
The second lesson is that the old ideas seem to be truly dead now. The nuclear torpedo, almost literally, was the first idea that the Soviet Union came up with, hoping (at the time) to overcome the significant superiority that the United States possessed in the field of delivery vehicles. After 60 years, it appears someone has revived the idea for a new Cold War cycle.
InoSMI materials contain assessments exclusively foreign media and do not reflect the position of the editorial board of InoSMI.
Last week shipbuilding company Huntington Ingalls and aerospace giant Boeing have announced they are teaming up to create the Echo Voyager underwater drone. The goal is to arrange supplies of underwater unmanned systems to the US Navy as quickly as possible.
Work on the fifty-ton Echo Voyager has been going on since 2014 in collaboration with DARPA, and recently it became known that Boeing has begun testing this drone no longer in a test pool, but in. Echo Voyager is the largest underwater drone in development so far, which belongs to the XLUUV (extra large unmanned undersea vehicle) class. So far there are short-term dives to shallow depths, but at the next stage it is planned to send the drone to greater depths for a long time. According to the creators, it will be able to sail autonomously for months, independently return to base, float to the surface and transmit information. The drone itself consists of modules, which allows you to equip it with a specific filling for different tasks.
Underwater drones are considered as one of the priority areas of development naval forces. Potential adversaries of the United States, that is, China and Russia, are improving their armed forces and American dominance on the surface of the water is becoming less obvious and guaranteed.
Another problem is the increasingly sophisticated tracking systems of large submarines. The Americans assume that China is building the so-called “great underwater wall” - a system of sensors that track underwater and surface targets in real time.
The third factor is the cost of maintaining large submarines with large crews on board. Autonomous drones, cheap and without people, look like an attractive replacement in the near future.
Therefore, the Pentagon came up with an idea - to go under water and take advantage of the technological advantage there, creating drones that are small and less noisy than submarines. Ideally, the creation of “mother” underwater drones is being considered, which would carry entire swarms of smaller drones underwater for a variety of purposes.
Last year, Rear Admiral Mathias Winter said: “The Office of Naval Research (ONR), which is developing advanced technologies in the field of unmanned underwater vehicles, plans to deploy an 'Eisenhower backbone' on seabed in all areas of the world's oceans... We want drones to go out to sea on a mission once and then operate in the depths of the seas for decades.”
It's about on the creation of underwater bases or technical stations where underwater drones could independently charge or undergo maintenance, transmit and store collected information.
Back in 2015, supervision of underwater unmanned systems was assigned to the Assistant Under Secretary of the Navy. In October 2016, the US fleet participated in the international exercise Unmanned Warrior off the coast of Scotland. During the maneuvers, the autonomous submarines worked in conjunction with drones in the air, exchanging intelligence and then broadcasting it to ground forces, The Washington Post reports.
“The US Department of Naval Research (ONR), which is developing advanced technologies in the field of unmanned underwater vehicles, plans to place an “Eisenhower backbone network” on the seabed in all areas of the World Ocean,” said the head of this department, Count -Admiral Matthias Winter at a conference organized by.
According to the admiral, the ultimate goal should be “large-scale deployment of unmanned underwater vehicles.”
“We want such devices to go out to sea on a mission once and then operate in the depths of the seas for decades,” added Matthias Winter.
So far, this large-scale Eisenhower Network project is at the concept stage. The US Navy proposes to create a system of underwater stations at the bottom of the seas and oceans in the historically foreseeable future. Maintenance. For her there is already official name: Forward-based system for recharging, communicating and servicing underwater unmanned vehicles.
“These will be points where it will be possible to obtain fuel for unmanned underwater vehicles or charge devices, receive or transmit the necessary information, and also store data,” Frank Herr, head of the department of naval research, explained to reporters.
The Pentagon is already testing underwater vehicles that can operate for many weeks or even months in one trip to sea.
In his opinion,
while Russia and China are investing huge amounts of money in the large-scale construction of submarines of the most different classes The Pentagon is seeking to take the lead in unmanned underwater technology.
“The Pentagon realizes that the United States, due to its geostrategic position, simply has a vital need to conduct submarine warfare and carry out anti-submarine defense much better than any other country in the world,” he stated in an interview with The Washington Post Researcher Center for Strategic and Budgetary Assessments Brian Clark.
According to Clark, the ultimate goal is for the US Navy to have unmanned underwater vehicles (UUVs) deployed from conventional (manned) submarines, and eventually from large autonomous submarines. Clark compared this deployment of underwater drones to the situation when fighter jets take off from aircraft carriers.
China and other countries have deployed sonar anti-submarine systems on the seabed to detect and identify submarines.
However, such systems, according to Clark, are capable of detecting large manned submarines, but they are ineffective against relatively small unmanned underwater vehicles.
“The trend towards robotization of all types of armed forces and branches of the armed forces will only increase, and at an accelerated rate. Taking humans off the battlefield is a fundamental trend, and every effort must be made to Russian army“I didn’t miss this revolution,” states Makienko.
Is a nuclear underwater drone really a relic? Soviet era, as they believe in America
The Pentagon has officially admitted that Russia is developing a fundamentally new type of deterrent weapon, which significantly exceeds the capabilities of traditional intercontinental weapons. nuclear missiles both in power and in the secrecy of preparing to strike. We are talking about a nuclear torpedo with a range of 10,000 km and a charge power of up to 100 megatons.
This was reported by Defense News magazine, citing a preliminary draft of the new “Nuclear Posture Review” - a document defining the role of nuclear weapons in strategy national security USA. It is currently being prepared for President Donald Trump. The review contains a diagram that illustrates the development of the Status-6 intercontinental unmanned nuclear torpedo, called Kanyon in the United States.
American intelligence became convinced of the reality of the existence of this development back in November 2016, when, with the participation of a submarine special purpose B-90 "Sarov" tests of "Status-6" were carried out.
It is quite understandable that there was a strong response to this news American media. The overwhelming majority of them took the prospect of the appearance of fundamentally new nuclear weapons in Russia more than seriously. And this is quite understandable and explainable.
True, “optimistic” statements were also made. Thus, Nikolai Sokov, senior researcher at the American James Martin Center for Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons, on the pages The National Interest expressed doubts about the effectiveness of Status-6, calling it a “relic of the Soviet era.”
“This concept is very old, dating back to the days when intercontinental ballistic missiles and submarine-launched ballistic missiles were few in number, unreliable and vulnerable, Sokov said. - These days it's hard to see much value in a 100 megaton slow vehicle».
It would be impossible to disagree with this if we consider Status-6 a torpedo. Yes, indeed, if you launch it at hour “H”, then it will arrive on the shores of America when everything is already finished. However, functionally this weapon is a mine.
“Status-6” is sent on an autonomous voyage in advance. And he, having a certain artificial intelligence, approaches the mainland at the distance required for effective operation. After which it goes into standby mode, which can last as long as desired. At hour "H" "Status-6" will work almost instantly - with a delay for the passage of the radio signal from Europe to America.
This weapon became known in November 2015, when, during a meeting in Sochi on the development of the defense industry, which was chaired by President Vladimir Putin, two federal television channels, as if by mistake, showed a slide labeled “Top Secret.” It contained the concept of the Status-6 ocean multi-purpose strike system. They highlighted both the developer, the Rubin Central Design Bureau, and the purpose of the system being developed. The purpose is as follows: “to defeat important enemy economic facilities in the coastal area and cause guaranteed unacceptable damage to the country’s territory by creating zones of extensive radioactive contamination, unsuitable for carrying out military, economic and other activities in these zones for a long time.”
It must be said that Nikolai Sokov, who declared the “antiquity” of the “Status-6” concept, is absolutely right. In the early 60s, the T-15 torpedo was developed in the Soviet Union, which had the same purpose. It was not difficult to place a 100-megaton warhead in a body that was 24 meters long. It was much more difficult to achieve long range move, since at that time there were no compact nuclear reactors For power plant. And engines using other energy sources could provide a torpedo with a mass of 40 tons with a travel of no more than 50 kilometers.
Half a century later, the problem with the compact reactor was solved, and therefore Russian designers remembered the “ancient” concept. At the same time, significant technological breakthrough occurred not only in nuclear energy, but also in electronic components, control systems, and materials. “Status-6” is a completely different development; it has only the concept and the power of a nuclear charge in common with the T-15.
Enough is known about Status-6 to assess its real capabilities to deter an attempt to use weapons against Russia mass destruction. Its probable characteristics were the result of a transcript of a Ministry of Defense slide that appeared on television. Experts, both domestic and foreign, conducted an analysis of this weapon, taking into account the scientific, technical and technological potential of the Russian military-industrial complex.
Most experts agreed that the reactor could have a power of 8 MW. It has a liquid metal coolant, which makes it possible to significantly reduce noise, that is, increase the stealth of the torpedo. The combination of such a powerful power system with a water-jet propulsion allows it to reach speeds in the range from 100 km/h to 185 km/h.
When analyzing the strength of the torpedo hull, it was found that its working depth can reach 1000 meters. And this further increases its stealth, since NATO submarines operate at a depth of 200-300 meters. It is extremely difficult to detect even at maximum speed. However, the speed of Status-6 may vary depending on the situation. Since, as stated above, the autonomous execution of a combat mission is entrusted to a computer system that makes the torpedo an underwater robot, “smart electronics” makes optimal decisions regarding how to overcome anti-submarine defense zones. And in particular the global SOSUS system, which controls the US coast. Status-6 is much more difficult to detect than the world's quietest submarine, Varshavyanka. According to calculations, at a speed of a promising torpedo of 50 km/h, it is impossible to “see” it at a distance of less than 3 kilometers.
It is quite clear that in order to perform spatial and high-speed maneuvers when overcoming anti-submarine defense zones, Status-6 must have “sense organs”, that is, an effective sonar.
However, even if Status-6 is detected and torpedoed, its interception is practically impossible. The fastest US torpedo, the Mark 54, has a speed of 74 km/h, that is, according to minimal estimates, 26 km/h less. The deepest European torpedo with the formidable name MU90 Hard Kill, launched in pursuit of maximum speed at 90 km/h it can travel no more than 10 km.
It is quite clear that deterrent weapons, if used, must cause maximum harm to the enemy who has decided to transfer the conflict to the nuclear phase. Based on these considerations, the Status-6 warhead should have a cobalt section, which should lead to maximum radioactive contamination of vast areas. It is estimated that when using a warhead of the same power as the promising one Russian torpedo, and with such features, at a wind speed of 25 km/h, a rectangle measuring 1700 × 300 km will be susceptible to long-term infection.
In conclusion, it must be said that an unmanned underwater robot is a multi-purpose weapon. It can also be used to solve other problems. For example, with a non-nuclear warhead it is capable of destroying the largest enemy ships, which primarily include aircraft carriers. Or conduct reconnaissance operations and return to the base submarine with the information collected. With his participation, it is also possible to disrupt enemy naval communications.
Rate the news
Partner news: