Russian Strategic Weapon Modernization Plans

chuck4 said:
1. It take up to twice as much kenetic energy to send something into low earth orbit as it does to send the same thing into a intercontinental ballistic trajectory with range of 6000 or 9000kms.

2. Becuase lower energy of ballistic trajectory, throw weight of a ballistic missile on intercontinental ballistic trajectory is typically much higher than the weight the same missile booster can put into low earth orbit. Some intermediate range Missiles can have impressive throw weights without the energy to put any payload at all into orbit.

3. To convert typical missile into satellite launcher usually requires very substantial alterations like adding a additional upper stage, and/or auxiliary boosters to handle the added weight during liftoff. A typical ballistic missile thus converted probably won't fit back into the same silo.

4. Unlike most solid fueled missiles the SS-18 can put a large payload into orbit without major modifications like adding an additional stage or putting on strapon boosters. It can in theory come straight out of its silo and send a satellite, or a FOBS bus, into orbit.

5. Tell me, when your favorite hawkish commentator say Iran is a quarter turn of screw driver away from nuclear weapons, do you think they meant some mullah has a literal screw driver in a slot, and is flexing his weists to make that quarter turn? Or do you take that to mean they are merely closer to it then is comfortable?
Click to expand...

zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz. The SS-18 wasn't and isn't a FOBS missile - ever. Get over it.
 
RyanCrierie said:
sferrin said:
And thus no, "quarter turn of a screwdriver".
Click to expand...
More like "a day's work in the missile silo" to swap out the warheads.
Click to expand...

And flight testing (and then the jig is up), software developement, probably a different bus, etc. etc. . .
 
sferrin said:
RyanCrierie said:
sferrin said:
And thus no, "quarter turn of a screwdriver".
Click to expand...
More like "a day's work in the missile silo" to swap out the warheads.
Click to expand...

And flight testing (and then the jig is up), software developement, probably a different bus, etc. etc. . .
Click to expand...


zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz


They had the hardware developed, the entire process tested and deployed. They had the FOBS bus in ACTUAL service. The only difference is that was on the SS-9, not the closely related development of SS-9, the more capable SS-18.

Read up on how many strategic offensive concept they flight tested during the 1980s without giving US any actionable hint of what they were up to. After they nominally decommissioned the SS-9 FOBS, they flighted tested an new manned orbital nuclear bombardment space station called Polyus under Ronald Reagan's nose without the US being the wiser. They flight tested SS-18s that's been modified into trigger vehicles with electronic signaling packages to control the launch of the entire soviet strategic missile force in a second strike, without the US being the wiser.

They have more experience than anyone else in putting things into orbit on liquid fueled boosters, and more experience than anyone else in taking things down from orbit. They know how to hide the nature of what they flight test, while validating all key concepts, and verify all important risks are managed, without giving the game away.

So give up the ignoramus nitpicks.
 
chuck4 said:
Jesus won't help you. They are so close to being the same thing they share the same designation within the Soviet strategic missile forces.
Click to expand...
So do the Pershing I and II. Hornet and Super Hornet. Blinder and Backfire. I guess they're all identical too?
 
Moderators please don't lock the thread it is a good thread but language like what is being used is unacceptable!
 
I've removed some of the last posts, which in the end led to unacceptable behaviour.
When there are different opinions, they can be debated, but there always is a point, where
the discussion should be ended, even if the other one hasn't changed his mind. Insults can be
screamed at the monitor, shouted out in front of the house, BUT, PLEASE, NOT POSTED !
 
chuck4 said:
they flighted tested an new manned orbital nuclear bombardment space station called Polyus under Ronald Reagan's nose without the US being the wiser.
Click to expand...

What. Skif-DM was supposed to be a laser weapon system, a Soviet Star Wars counterpart. Unfortunately two things happened: 1) the demonstrator failed to achieve a stable insertion after separating from the Energiya booster and ended up falling back to Earth, and 2) Gorbachev cancelled the entire program, probably in part because he realized that it was a massive stretch to be developing Skif while preaching to Reagan about giving up Star Wars.
 
Here is the configuration of Polyus. Note the nuclear space mines:
polyus2.jpg
 
chuck4 said:
3. To convert typical missile into satellite launcher usually requires very substantial alterations like adding a additional upper stage, and/or auxiliary boosters to handle the added weight during liftoff. A typical ballistic missile thus converted probably won't fit back into the same silo.
Click to expand...

In the case of Russian converted SLVs, they often use demilitarized ICBM launch silos.

chuck4 said:
Here is the configuration of Polyus. Note the nuclear space mines:
Click to expand...

That idea was for ASAT capability/defense, not bombardment of terrestrial targets.
 
I believe the only silo launched ICBM derivative was based on the SS-18. SS-19 based SLV all had to launch from from normal surface launch sites.


I have seen different descriptions of the functionalities of Polyus. Some explicitly claim Polyus's had a decapitating first strike capability and role, and Polyus were given low IR and low RO capability to facilitate this. Suddenly dropping nuclear warheads out of orbit does seem both operationally and texhnically feasible. I have not seem anything about exactly how it's nuclear mines were to be used in ASAT role since deploying nuclear weapons to attack different satellites in different orbit is necessarily a protracted process requiring lengthy orbital maneuvering.
 
chuck4 said:
I have seen different descriptions of the functionalities of Polyus. Some explicitly claim Polyus's had a decapitating first strike capability and role
Click to expand...

All the descriptions I've personally come across of the Polyus refers to its armament as being for anti-satellite/anti-spacecraft use. The surface attack option is new to me, so a reference to the source(-s) you mention would be much appreciated.

Regards & all,

Thomas L. Nielsen
Luxembourg
 
This is somewhat out of the blue:

http://rianovosti.com/military_news/20130305/179831565/Russia-to-Resurrect-Titanium-Submarines.html

(H/t WilliamB over at MilitaryPhotos.net.)
 
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ozOjgA3sUOk#t=93

Russian RS-26 Avangard anyone care to translate for me ;D
 
http://rbth.com/news/2016/05/04/first-tests-of-russias-brand-new-sarmat-icbm-planned-for-2016_590093
 
Another story a bit hyperbolic in the language but includes a video of an SS-19 launch supposedly carrying a boost glide warhead.

http://www.mirror.co.uk/tech/russia-test-unstoppable-satan-2-7935675
 
http://www.upi.com/Business_News/Security-Industry/2016/05/17/Russia-to-revive-missile-trains-as-US-launches-European-defense-system/2451463505980/
 
http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/pdf/10.1080/00963402.2016.1170359
 
Yes something's I post for the hidden facts in a ridiculous article

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3582907/Russia-ready-test-new-generation-nuclear-missiles-capable-punching-NATO-s-shield-blowing-area-size-FRANCE.html
 
http://freebeacon.com/national-security/russia-flight-tests-anti-satellite-missile/

http://nationalinterest.org/blog/russias-next-super-weapon-crush-america-combat-16393
 
Why Does Russia Revive the 'Nuclear Train' Program?

"BEIJING --- Research and development of the missile-carrying train for Russia's future Barguzin "combat railway missile complex" (BZhRK), also referred as the "nuclear train" for its transportation and launch of strategic nuclear missiles, is in smooth progress, according to Russian media reports.

The Barguzin complex's intercontinental ballistic missile had a successful Pop-up launch test recently, and further flight design testing may begin in 2017. Sergei Karakayev, commander of Russian Strategic Missile Forces, said the nuclear train is expected to be deployed in the strategic missile troops in 2020 and assume combat duties.

The BZhRks was called the "ghost trains" during the Cold War. The US and former Soviet Union invested a lot of scientific research resources and capital in its development and manufacturing, and the US didn't abandon this program until the Soviet Union was disintegrated and the Cold War ended.

The Soviet strategic missile troops were equipped with 12 BZhRKs with 36 intercontinental ballistic missiles in total from 1987. After the Cold War, Russia and the US signed the Strategic Arms Reduction Treaty (START), according to which 10 BZhRKs were destroyed, and the remaining two were placed in an exhibition hall after being "demilitarized". "

So this would be what, the THIRD type of ICBM they're putting into production?

http://www.defense-aerospace.com/articles-view/release/3/179294/china-questions-russia%E2%80%99s-revival-of-%E2%80%98nuclear-train%E2%80%99-program.html
 
sferrin said:
Why Does Russia Revive the 'Nuclear Train' Program?

"BEIJING --- Research and development of the missile-carrying train for Russia's future Barguzin "combat railway missile complex" (BZhRK), also referred as the "nuclear train" for its transportation and launch of strategic nuclear missiles, is in smooth progress, according to Russian media reports.

The Barguzin complex's intercontinental ballistic missile had a successful Pop-up launch test recently, and further flight design testing may begin in 2017. Sergei Karakayev, commander of Russian Strategic Missile Forces, said the nuclear train is expected to be deployed in the strategic missile troops in 2020 and assume combat duties.

The BZhRks was called the "ghost trains" during the Cold War. The US and former Soviet Union invested a lot of scientific research resources and capital in its development and manufacturing, and the US didn't abandon this program until the Soviet Union was disintegrated and the Cold War ended.

The Soviet strategic missile troops were equipped with 12 BZhRKs with 36 intercontinental ballistic missiles in total from 1987. After the Cold War, Russia and the US signed the Strategic Arms Reduction Treaty (START), according to which 10 BZhRKs were destroyed, and the remaining two were placed in an exhibition hall after being "demilitarized". "

So this would be what, the THIRD type of ICBM they're putting into production?

http://www.defense-aerospace.com/articles-view/release/3/179294/china-questions-russia%E2%80%99s-revival-of-%E2%80%98nuclear-train%E2%80%99-program.html
Click to expand...
No worries the US will be fully modernized in 2030................. :'(
 
http://freebeacon.com/national-security/russia-conducts-fifth-test-new-anti-satellite-missile/
 
http://www.nextbigfuture.com/2016/12/russia-should-begin-production-of-3m22.html?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+blogspot%2Fadvancednano+%28nextbigfuture%29&utm_content=FaceBook
 
http://thediplomat.com/2017/01/russia-is-putins-deadliest-weapons-program-in-trouble/
 
From Russian Forces website (Pavel Podvig)

Flight tests of Barguzin rail-mobile ICBM are said to begin in 2019

The on-and-off rail-mobile ICBM program seems to be going forward after all, although rather slowly. Although it was said to be suspended in April 2016, it showed signs of life that culminated in what is said to be an ejection test in November 2016. Now a source in the industry telling the Russian press that the flight tests of the missile will begin in 2019.
 
http://www.nextbigfuture.com/2017/01/russia-launching-its-quietest-submarine.html?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+blogspot%2Fadvancednano+%28nextbigfuture%29&utm_content=FaceBook
 
http://thediplomat.com/2017/03/russia-to-arm-nuclear-subs-with-new-supersonic-cruise-missile/
 
http://nationalinterest.org/blog/the-buzz/russias-most-powerful-nuclear-attack-submarine-ever-almost-19775
 
https://special-ops.org/news/tech/russian-navy-receive-biggest-unique-nuclear-submarine-world/
 
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iKhOgYA2L30&app=desktop

Russian Forces 2035
 
http://www.defensenews.com/articles/russias-putin-drafts-new-rearmament-program

According to Kommersant, the outlines of the next Russian modernization program will focus heavily on building up Russia’s nuclear triad. The document reportedly calls for the completion of three intercontinental ballistic missile development programs: the RS-26 Rubezh (a development of the Yars-M), RS-28 Sarmat and the rail-based Bagruzin by 2020.
Click to expand...

As for the Navy, the 2025 program will again prioritize the construction of new nuclear submarines and small (no larger than frigate-type) surface combatants. Although Russia’s new Borei- and Yasen-class submarine fleets have yet to be completed, the 2025 program calls for a new fifth-generation ballistic missile submarine known as the Husky class.
Click to expand...
 
Russia successfully test fires SLBM and associated systems under simulated Cindy conditions:

http://www.newsweek.com/russias-nuclear-submarine-tests-ballistic-missile-fire-arctic-sea-629187?utm_source=RC+Defense+Morning+Recon&utm_campaign=907a02010f-EMAIL_CAMPAIGN_2017_06_27&utm_medium=email&utm_term=0_694f73a8dc-907a02010f-85348829

Russia’s nuclear-powered Yuri Dolgoruky submarine has successfully test-launched an intercontinental ballistic missile in the Barents Sea in the Arctic, according to state news agency Itar-Tass.
 
Im curious if Husky will really be an SSBN. Given Rubin design bureau dominance in that area.
 
https://news.usni.org/2016/06/03/admiral-warns-russian-subs-waging-cold-war-style-battle-atlantic#undefined.uxfs
 
https://www.realcleardefense.com/articles/2017/11/04/russian_icbms_an_aging_but_mixed_arsenal_112582.html
 
http://www.popularmechanics.com/military/navy-ships/a13990706/russias-new-missile-submarine-sure-looks-familiar/
 
https://medium.com/dfrlab/meanwhileinthearctic-prince-vladimir-submarine-sets-sail-71cebd22f77d
 

Similar threads

Please donate to support the forum.

Back
Top Bottom