Military Review

Putin's trump cards in strategic preference (part of 1)

74
"Six Trumps"


Dear readers, let us try to understand in the first approximation what we heard in the Message from the President and the Supreme Commander about new types of weapons. Yes, of course, talking about the very "gorgeous six" systems.

Vladimir Putin spoke successively about the 5-generation Sarmat liquid heavy intercontinental ballistic missile (ICBM), an unnamed cruise missile (KR) with a nuclear power plant (NPI) and an unlimited radius, an oceanic underwater multi-purpose system with unmanned underwater vehicles with nuclear power plants, Dagger aircraft missile system with a hypersonic guided missile, on an unnamed laser complex.

First of all, what does their show mean? According to "Sarmat" - that he started the flight design tests (LCI), a throwing start was shown with checking the output from the silo launcher (silo) with checking the silo equipment, control system (SS), powder pressure accumulator (PAD) with the subsequent launch of the first stage engines (DU-1). PAD is what pushes the ICBM from the silo at a "cold", "mortar" start. In the video you can see how after the release of the rocket from the silo in the direction of a solid-fuel engine took some kind of pan - this is the element that protects the rocket from the gases produced by the PAD.

Putin's trump cards in strategic preference (part of 1)

In this frame, you can see how the solid-fuel engine takes the pallet to the side, and the rocket pushed out of the silo rocket launches the DU-1

By the way, the launch of the DU-1 at the first “launch” launch already means that the designers are confident in the design of the rocket already enough so that instead of the purely “throwing” launch there was a “throwing with the launch of the stage” (it is clear that with a minimum fuel supply). And this is already a somewhat higher stage of testing, and it was immediately transferred to it.

For the rest of the systems, we see that the Dagger is already in pilot operation, R & D, in fact, is being completed, and mass production is being prepared. According to Avangard - the completion of OCD and the series is being deployed. By the way - the final stages of OCD, except, perhaps, a cruise missile with a nuclear reactor. That is, all these systems are either already close or come into a series, or are not very far from it (except for “Sarmatian” and unnamed KR).

Heavy "Sarmat"

Of these 6 systems, the PC-28 (as it is called in open sources) "Sarmat" was known before, and not so little. The appearance was known, photos of separate components of the rocket were displayed on the Web, from the appearance of which the people who knew the question could already draw a number of conclusions. There was, however, a confusion with the take-off weight of the “product”, from the light hand of one of our generals, who probably deliberately launched into the media a bike about the weight of 100 tons and payload (PN), while in 10 tons. This, in principle, should have alerted many, because miracles do not happen, and it is impossible to have a rocket weighing more than half the size of the current heavy XB-XM generation ICBM of the P-4M36 (2A15M) “Voivod”, forcing the weight to be removed than hers (18). Moreover, there are also constant hints of the global range of the new product - the ability to bring light and heat in the USA free of charge not only during the flight "by Chkalov" through the pole and similar relatively short ways, but also through the Antarctic and in general . Which, by the way, was confirmed by the President.

There were other estimates of weight and payload - 120, 160 and even 180 tons, and MON in 5-5.5, including those with weight in 100. Probably 100 tons - this arose in the early design stages, when the look of the system was determined, there could be a “economical” proposal to make a rocket based on the dimension of the 3-generation ICBM UR-100NUTTH (15A35), but on new technological solutions. But then it was rejected in favor of a more serious option. But the most reasonable people assumed that the replacement for the “Governor” would be a rocket of similar mass and dimension. And the photos of a number of system elements that appeared confirmed this.

Well, now, after Putin’s statement about “more 200 tons”, the global range and the “payload and the number of charges is greater” than that of the predecessor - the question is completely clear. Suppose, therefore, that the weight, say, from 200 to 210 tons, and MON - in the area 10t. The dimension also corresponds approximately to the "Governor". Steps, judging by the image below - three.


The first and before 1 of March is the only official image of the ICBM "Sarmat"

By the way, Americans have these data, for whom data on size, mass, payload, appearance of the rocket and transport and launch container were provided after the start of the test, according to the Treaty, but they will not disclose this data, as well as detailed and the number of carriers and charges on them from the exchange data of the START-3. The parties have an agreement on what to disclose about each other, and what is not. And one more thing that can be noted from the video clips shown and the previously published information about the new cargo handling and transport and installation units for Sarmat - it seems that the old and new BRK are unified in their service equipment, at least in part, which, of course, will facilitate the rearmament and retraining of personnel of the Strategic Missile Forces assigned under the Sarmat. However, this is still far away - there are several years ahead of the flight design and state tests of the complex, and only then its deployment. And how things will go - it is not known, in general, not a single DBK was easy and trouble-free, especially complex and staged. Let us recall the epic of testing and refinement of the 3М30 SLBM "Bulava", or, say, a large hole, which the XPNXXX15M "Voivode" arranged on the first silo site in the first launch, just as unsuccessful, yes and all of the more 18 test crashes it still lacked.

True, about the number of warheads of the new heavy "queen of the ICBM," you need to make a clarification. As is known, the “Voevoda” had 2 of the combat equipment type (BO) - or 10 warheads of the “megaton class” (it is believed that 800ct, but officially the data on the capacities in the USSR and the Russian Federation were not disclosed), or so-called "light" monoblock "multi-megaton" power (estimates vary from 8-9Mt to 20-25 MT). Other BO variants were also planned, including with a "heavy" monoblock, with controlled BB and a combination of controlled and unmanaged. It is clear that with a solid complex of means for overcoming missile defense (PRO). Variants of combat equipment with more than 10, the number of BBs were worked out, but not implemented for contractual reasons.

"Vanguard"

Obviously, for Sarmatian there will be BW variants with both a large number of unmanaged BBs, and, as is already clear, with a hypersonic maneuvering and planning device, or 2-3 devices capable of delivery, capable of delivering one or more charges of varying power, from medium to large. That is, with what is already known as the “U71 apparatus”, as well as the notation 15Ü71 or “4202 object” or “42-02 theme” and a number of others. And now it is also known as the Avangard complex, which passed and successfully completed flight design and state tests on the basis of the ICBM UR-100НУТТХ (15А35) with the same apparatus. Probably, the same apparatus will be used, in different dimensions and, say, with a BB of lower power, and on light-duty ICBM versions.

About this hypersonic gliding and maneuvering apparatus, you should say this. Even before 2004, announced the first successful test of a prototype of this weapons (and not the fact that it was not a device at all, let's say, of a different generation than the current final product), the subject of guided and maneuvering BBs (UBB / MBB) in the USSR and the Russian Federation were dealt with. You can recall the above mentioned BB 15F173 for Voyevoda, the development and testing of which was stopped at Yuzhnoye Design Bureau. But even after it, UBB / MBB was engaged - you can recall the Ikar, which was not given up even before the primary tests of the Yuzhmashivsky ICBM R-36М3, where something was also considered, as well as the Albatros project 15P170. This one was developed by the NPO Mashinostroyenia from Reutov, and contained as equipment the first-generation maneuvering and planning BB, already capable of maneuvering both in height and course. Capable in theory. The NPOM complex itself offered as a universal base for both mine and mobile versions. But this caused tough opposition from both the Yuzhniy Design Bureau and the MIT - the Moscow Institute of Heat Engineering. As a result, instead of “Albatross”, they began to develop the “Universal”, the future “Topol-M”, but the planning planner itself was not abandoned even in 90-s. There were even flight tests of this very apparatus, on the basis of the special carrier K-65МР. But then, on the baggage of this project, a new, hypersonic aeroballistic hypersonic combat equipment project (or, if you will, planning and brought to the primary "flying iron" to 2004, began to be tested. Well, in the end, we now have a workable system, the production of which has begun.Now, obviously, different variants of this device of different dimensions and for different missiles are next in line.Also, probably, on the basis of the "hundreds" itself (UR-10 UTTKh - 15A35), can be placed a certain number of such systems, the benefit, "Sarmat" will not be very soon, as the missile is available.

The new device most of the trajectory passes or on the standard trajectory of the ICBM, or on a gentle flat trajectory, which is much faster, but where much more energy. Therefore, ICBMs are far from being all, and not all targets can shoot at normal targets, the range may not be enough, more often such a trajectory is available for SLBMs, and then - not from the "indestructible NSNF bastions" on its shores, but it is necessary to get closer. But in this case our apparatus then proceeds to the stage of its active flight, still falling and entering into relatively dense layers of the ionosphere and stratosphere, maneuvering for several thousand kilometers along the course and tens of kilometers in height. Well then, in the area of ​​the target, depending on the version, either the target itself attacks, or the homing strike (combat unit) drops. Of course, no existing missile defense system, in principle, will not help here, as well as air defense. Of course, this is only an assumption, and what specific executions this type of combat equipment will have - time will tell.

Although you can immediately say that the US missile defense system with the PR GBI, which so far has not intercepted even the usual intercontinental target, limited to much simpler targets (and this through 15 years of deployment and "successful" tests), and naval missile defense with PR SM -3 Block 2A and even more so, will not be able to withstand this weapon. By and large, there is nothing to be afraid of and the promising uncontrollable combat equipment of this missile defense system. Let us remember what it should have been (and is approximately like this now), according to statements from Major General Vladimir Vasilenko, then head of the 4 Central Research Institute MO, more than a decade ago (in the original source is no longer available, but distributed on the Internet, let me quote from there a piece, with some bills).

The priority measures in this direction, sufficient to maintain the strategic balance and ensure guaranteed containment of foreign countries in the context of the deployment of missile defense for the period up to 2020, consider priority activities based on the completion of the implementation of the achieved technologies in the field of maneuvering hypersonic warheads, as well as significant reducing the radio and optical visibility of both standard and prospective combat units of ICBMs and SLBMs in all sectors of their flight to targets. At the same time, the improvement of these characteristics is planned in combination with the use of qualitatively new small-sized atmospheric false targets.

The achieved technologies and the created domestic radio-absorbing materials make it possible to reduce the radar visibility of warheads in the extra-atmospheric part of the trajectory by several orders of magnitude. This is achieved by implementing a whole set of measures: by optimizing the shape of the body of the combat unit — a sharp elongated cone with rounding of the bottom; rational direction of separation of the unit from the rocket or the stage of dilution - in the direction of the toe to the radar station; using lightweight and efficient materials for radar absorbing coatings applied to the block body - their weight is 0,05-0,2 kg per m2 surface, and the reflection coefficient in the centimeter frequency range 0,3-10 cm - no more -23 ...- 10 dB and better.

There are materials with screen attenuation coefficients in the frequency range from 0,1 to 30 MHz: on the magnetic component - 2 ... 40 dB; on the electrical component - at least 80 dB. In this case, the effective reflective surface of the combat unit may be less than 10-4 м2, and the detection range is no more than 100 ... 200 km, which will not allow the block to be intercepted by long-range interceptors and significantly interferes with mid-range antimissiles.

Taking into account the fact that in the composition of promising missile defense information a significant proportion will be made up of detection equipment in the visible and infrared range, efforts have been made and are being implemented to significantly reduce the optical visibility of warheads both in the extra-atmospheric segment and during their descent in the atmosphere. In the first case, the radical solution is to cool the surface of the unit to such temperature levels when its thermal radiation will be fractions of watts per steradian and such a unit will be “invisible” to optical information reconnaissance means of the STSS type. In the atmosphere, the luminosity of its co-wake has a decisive influence on the optical visibility of the block. The achieved results and realized developments allow, on the one hand, to optimize the composition of the heat-shielding coating of the block, removing materials from it most conducive to the formation of a trace. On the other hand, a forced injection of special liquid products into the trace region is performed in order to reduce the radiation intensity. These measures allow to ensure the likelihood of overcoming the outer and high atmospheric boundaries of the missile defense system with probability 0,99.

However, in the lower layers of the atmosphere, the considered measures to reduce the visibility do not play a significant role, since, on the one hand, the distances from the combat unit to the missile defense equipment are rather small, and on the other, the intensity of the blocking in the atmosphere is such that it cannot be compensated .

In this regard, another method and countermeasures corresponding to it - small-sized atmospheric false targets with a height of 2 ... 5 km and relative weight in 5 ... 7% by weight of the combat unit come to the fore. The implementation of this method becomes possible as a result of solving a dual task - a significant reduction in the visibility of the combat unit and the development of qualitatively new atmospheric false targets of the "wavelength" class, with a corresponding decrease in their mass and dimensions. This will allow instead of one combat unit from the multiply-charged head part of the rocket to establish up to 15 ... 20 effective atmospheric spurious targets, which will increase the probability of overcoming the atmospheric missile defense line to the level in 0,93-0,95.

Thus, the overall probability of overcoming the 3-x boundaries of the promising missile defense, according to experts, will be 0,93-0,94.


As you can see, dear readers, even ordinary non-maneuvering BBs, covered up with similar PCB missiles, may not be afraid of the US missile defense even by the one she painted in the rosy dreams of American generals at that time and in the justifications for the US Congress committees. And the fact that it is implemented and used on the 5 generation, supplied by the DBK, such as Yars and Yars-S, Bulava, is beyond doubt, too many successful tests have taken place over the past decade. with the launches of the Topol-E special carriers along the “short highway” between Kapustin Yar and Sary-Shagan, where, far from the reconnaissance equipment of the “partners,” they are tested by such means.

So why do you need Avangard? The development of a missile defense system in a possible "partner" is not worth it, however. This is now almost no progress, but suddenly it will appear in the course of 15-20 years? And if not, when drawing up programs for the development and rearmament of strategic nuclear forces, the leadership of the Armed Forces and the country cannot proceed from any likely scenario, except the worst. Because if you are ready for the worst - everything else is ready too.

Продолжение следует ...
Author:
74 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must sign in.
  1. Vard
    Vard 5 March 2018 07: 08
    +14
    The dagger is good for the one who has it ... and bad, for the one who does not have it ... In Russia, through the efforts of the West, then war, then the restoration of the ruined ... and Putin’s goal ... to give us some more quiet time, in order to catch his breath and get up from his knees ... Oh, he showed a big baton and, while the West is recovering, he wants to implement the economic block of the message ...
    1. Artek
      Artek 5 March 2018 07: 35
      0
      before Putin’s speech, they said that this Sarmatian would be 100t, but in fact it’s -200t
      1. Thor
        Thor 5 March 2018 22: 26
        +2
        In fact, nothing is a fact. And "Sarmat" is somehow sharply similar to the "Governor"
      2. Thor
        Thor 5 March 2018 22: 37
        +5
        Putin's trump cards in strategic preference (part of 1)

        Yohharrny ...
        The 135th suction of election noodles has begun ..
        Also in the "parts". This, unfortunately, is a bad trend on the site. negative
        The technological breakthrough of these "cards" in political technology cooking - noodles on the ears begins to boil in the brain.
        In fact, nothing is a fact.
        "Sarmat" is somehow sharply similar to the "Governor"
        An unnamed laser and wing reactor ...
        Next in line is the "death star"?
    2. Andrey Yuryevich
      Andrey Yuryevich 5 March 2018 07: 52
      +17
      Putin's trump cards in strategic preference
      Putin’s “preference”, not only strategic (in the literal sense), but also pre-election. With one shot, two birds with one stone. The other candidates, against this background, have nothing to say. They all were put up as losers. a patriot who is crazy about cartoons will go after the GDP in vain, not paying attention to the failures of all previous promises, believing that the new weapon is a personal invention of the GDP, and the liberal government smiles quietly. I am not against Putin, I am against the fact that He is too little Putin. Against his government, in which corruption was rampant, the district mayors imagined themselves to be untouchables by kings, if several especially presumptuous governors were "unlucky", then these "petty" ones on whom the life and well-being of the people living in THIS territory depended were completely unbelted. Putin learned about the troubles of his people, only on the Straight Line, and partially, and rushed to "settle the barracks" ... It should not be. If in the army that did not comply with the Order, the Tribunal immediately “shone” (at least), then the “subordinates” of the Commander-in-Chief sent orders to the decrees, and they didn’t ... how can this be? now, to the Elections, new promises, the authorities again "saw" the people ... for how long ??? it’s impossible to constantly deceive, our people “suffered” of course, but they are terrible in anger ...
      1. voyaka uh
        voyaka uh 5 March 2018 11: 59
        +8
        In fact of the matter. Trump cards are not laid out at the beginning of the game.
        At the beginning of the game, they bluff.
        Bluffing, by the way, sometimes leads to unexpected results.
        In the USSR, somehow at a military parade over the stands flew
        new strategic bombers. In order for the effect to settle down, their
        drove in a circle - flew several times.
        The Americans were shocked: "Russian bombers are like dirt!"
        Congress was alarmed and gave money for the mass production of bombers.
        As a result, the Americans turned out to be hundreds, while the USSR had several dozen.
        There were no war, fortunately. And if there was? recourse What would bluffing be at the parade?
        1. cats
          cats 5 March 2018 12: 27
          +9
          Are you so complacent? Bluff..
          We are in no position to bluff.
          Although, maybe for the better that you think so .. hi
          1. voyaka uh
            voyaka uh 5 March 2018 13: 02
            +5
            Not all are bluffs. A dozen Sarmatians will be put on duty in the mines in a few years.
            Without any maneuvering gadgets. With conventional warheads from Yars.
            And quite enough, by the way.
            1. cats
              cats 5 March 2018 13: 18
              +11
              I do not want to seem rude, but you are one of those Jews on the site who not only speaks but also listens. hi
              Putin is the man who knows at ten, and will say that he knows at six.
              I think in this case, he rather downplayed the natural modesty,
              do you know.. hi
              1. Russia
                Russia 5 March 2018 13: 50
                +9
                Quote: Kotovsky
                I do not want to seem rude, but you are one of those Jews on the site who not only speaks but also listens. hi
                Putin is the man who knows at ten, and will say that he knows at six.
                I think in this case, he rather downplayed the natural modesty,
                do you know.. hi

                Ooh ... this is not a lieutenant’s speech, but a lieutenant’s good
                1. cats
                  cats 5 March 2018 16: 24
                  +4
                  repeat In the army of the terrible sailor they offered for a liter of potion .. refused.
                  And here, protecting the state interests, the star fell on the epaulette .. soldier laughing
              2. voyaka uh
                voyaka uh 5 March 2018 16: 13
                +8
                Russia's military budget was reduced in 2017 and 2018 and will continue
                decline in the coming years. Not by pacifist desire. There is simply no money.
                Compare this to the delivered speech. And get some contradiction with the desire to get the latest weapons and the financial ability to get it.
                Indeed, in addition to R&D, industrial production of products (state order) will be required.
                Even the current, almost complete cessation of Navy funding will not release
                money for voiced expensive missile projects.
                This is an explanation of my bluff statement. hi
                1. cats
                  cats 5 March 2018 16: 19
                  +6
                  The mind does not understand Russia ..
                  Do not try to count what is visible.
                  For the sake of this belt, we would tighten with understanding, but I don’t think
                  what will have to. If anything, we have a large pantry .. hi
                2. Barabashka 68
                  Barabashka 68 5 March 2018 18: 27
                  +5
                  Eh, my Jewish brother, the third world war flares up near you and you strive to lick the foam.
                  Putin answered Trump to their new program, and added something from himself. And how many pencils he pushes into pencil cases - no difference, that's enough for everyone. (((
            2. 75 hammer
              75 hammer 5 March 2018 15: 13
              +3
              The plans of the General Staff of the Russian Federation leaked to the Mossad? Oh yes, God's chosen ones, everyone knows!
        2. Operator
          Operator 5 March 2018 16: 12
          +5
          Quote: voyaka uh
          As a result, the Americans turned out to be hundreds, while the USSR had several dozen

          This is called a military trick - to force the enemy to invest in ancient bombers, and to stamp the latest ballistic missiles themselves.

          This was not the first (and not the last) case when we lit the enemy as a sucker laughing
          1. d.antonov
            d.antonov 5 March 2018 17: 42
            +2
            This is called election campaigning, when Efremov states that Russia (and everyone) has problems with hypersound and it is impossible to solve them in the near future. And a month later, everything is ready, yeah. Then Rogozin says that only 640 were able to replace western components from 200 types of weapons. Again everything is ready.
            I’m silent about the laser. Sabutov wrote 100 times why this is impossible. And there is simply no physical refutation of his words. Actually, as well as the words of GDP, there is nothing about the laser
            1. cats
              cats 5 March 2018 18: 01
              +4
              Yes lie kaneshno..Etozh Russian .. wassat
              The lapotniki are dark, they pull the striped ... fool
            2. Operator
              Operator 5 March 2018 18: 10
              +3
              This is called porridge in your head: Herbert Efremov talked about the impossibility of creating a hypersonic ramjet engine running on kerosene (due to the short time for the formation of the fuel mixture in the combustion chamber), and Vladimir Putin about:
              - hypersonic non-motor planning BB "(Vanguard");
              - hypersonic medium-range ballistic missiles with a liquid rocket engine and air launch ("Dagger");
              - a supersonic intercontinental cruise missile with a nuclear ramjet.

              Are you able to distinguish the Russian words "nuclear", "supersonic" and "rocket" from the Russian words "kerosene", "hypersonic" and "non-motor"? laughing
            3. Setrac
              Setrac 5 March 2018 21: 59
              +1
              Quote: d.antonov
              I’m silent about the laser. Sabutov wrote 100 times why this is impossible.

              The sun is above our heads and do not know that this is not possible?
          2. Yuyuka
            Yuyuka 5 March 2018 21: 46
            +1
            Quote: Operator
            Quote: voyaka uh
            As a result, the Americans turned out to be hundreds, while the USSR had several dozen

            This is called a military trick - to force the enemy to invest in ancient bombers, and to stamp the latest ballistic missiles themselves.

            This was not the first (and not the last) case when we lit the enemy as a sucker laughing


            good it’s enough to read at least about the Second World War, in Soviet times there were a lot of books about such operations on “breeding rabbits,” I still have some in my library. Unfortunately, these are now unpopular, and there are almost none on sale. It would seem that so many documents have become available, and there are no new Julian Semenovs. Just recently, the announcement was the book "Legendary Scouts-2", with great interest read, I advise
          3. Wild ferret
            Wild ferret 5 March 2018 22: 27
            +1
            Frankly, I know only one grand KGB scam. This is project B-2, and the subsequent B-2B. I don’t want to paint everything now, but on the whole a terribly disastrous and space-expensive project. It seems that even a wave of protests against these aircraft was rising.
            1. Mimoprohodil
              Mimoprohodil 6 March 2018 10: 26
              +1
              And so PAK-DA will be in the form of a flying wing
      2. Cherry Nine
        Cherry Nine 5 March 2018 12: 48
        0
        Quote: Andrey Yurievich
        Putin learned about the troubles of his people, only on the Direct Line

        No, it's charming.
      3. businessv
        businessv 5 March 2018 19: 05
        +1
        Quote: Andrey Yurievich
        Putin learned about the troubles of his people, only on the Straight Line, and partially, and rushed to "settle the barracks" ... It should not be.

        I agree with you, dear! It should not be like that! But you are mistaken that the commander in chief is not up to date on all matters. I know! Just moving forward is very hindered by measuring the degree of utility of the official, his devotion to the owner. Yes, the trouble of Russia is the bureaucratic apparatus, which has grown more than 2,04 times in comparison with the USSR (!!!)! This is open data, including Rosstat. Here's what to do with it - question number one. The Commander-in-Chief did not use the Message as a platform for the pre-election race, he has complete order with this, but, of course, to announce the warning to our “partners”. It would be very cool to change the prime minister and comrades! IMHO, there is a candidate who is shamelessly shook by all the federal media - PN Grudinin. An intelligent man, it is only noticeable that he does not have experience of an undercover fight.
  2. Ascetic
    Ascetic 5 March 2018 08: 43
    +16
    The video shows how, after the rocket leaves the silos, the solid-fuel engine took some kind of pallet - this is an element that protects a rocket from gases produced by PAD.


    The author, you already do not demonstrate obvious technical illiteracy, This pallet is the element of the PAD, and smaller fragments, obturator rings.



    Start diagram with a description of the stages

    1. Starting the powder pressure accumulator (PAD)
    2. The exit missiles from silos
    3.PAD
    4.PAD
    5. Launch of the 1st stage remote control
    6. Reset of obturator rings
    7.Rocket flight

    Yars and Yars-S

    YRS -What kind of beast is this?

    there have been too many successful trials over the past decade with launches of special carriers "Topol-E" along the "short route" between Kapustin Yar and Sary-Shagan, where, far from the intelligence of the "partners", and tested such tools.


    Tests of such planning winged units as without the Albatros or 15Y70 engine and the Avangard equipped with remote control are carried out using the UR-100NU / 15A35P ICBM or
    ICBM RS-18B / 15A35 / UR-100NUTTH, "Stiletto" Poplar is not suitable for this military equipment, because it is rather weak against a hundredth.
    Poplar E is used as a test of controlled BBs for the effectiveness of overcoming missile defense, and therefore they shoot at Sary-Shagan.
    1. dim7ka
      dim7ka 6 March 2018 09: 00
      0
      YRS -What kind of beast is this?

      One of the yars with letters and numbers
      A missile regiment equipped with the Yars-S mobile-based missile system will take up combat duty in the second quarter of 2017 near Yoshkar-Ola, Colonel Oleg Teterkin, interim commander of the 14th missile division, said.
  3. BAI
    BAI 5 March 2018 09: 14
    +5
    There is nothing to talk about until the rocket takes up combat duty. With "Bulava" how much they messed around. Boats made under were not decommissioned without receiving the promised weapons.
    Adoption is also not an indicator. "Osu" and "Condenser" have adopted in the amount of, it seems 18 pieces, for the parades - "imperialists" scare. They did not make ONE shot at the landfills! I'm not talking about any real military operations, of course, in a nuclear-free version.
    1. Lopatov
      Lopatov 5 March 2018 10: 48
      +4
      Quote: BAI
      Adoption is also not an indicator. "Osu" and "Condenser" have adopted in the amount of, it seems 18 pieces, for the parades - "imperialists" scare.

      First, the Oka
      Secondly, they were not accepted into service, and prototypes rode around Red Square.
      1. alovrov
        alovrov 5 March 2018 12: 23
        +3
        And in the third - they fired, nefig kizdet.
  4. Ural resident
    Ural resident 5 March 2018 09: 34
    +1
    Why do they always talk about missile defense in the context of the destruction of warheads ?. As far as I understand, the essence of missile defense is precisely to destroy ICBMs in an accelerating vulnerable area. Although it is not clear to me how it will be technologically realized, except that by undermining a nuclear charge in the atmosphere.
    1. Andrei from Chelyabinsk
      Andrei from Chelyabinsk 5 March 2018 10: 42
      +11
      Quote: Resident of the Urals
      as far as I understand, the essence of missile defense is precisely to destroy ICBMs in an accelerating vulnerable area.

      You misunderstood. In order to destroy the ICBMs in the upper stage, it is necessary to deploy a missile defense system in Siberia.
      1. Ascetic
        Ascetic 5 March 2018 11: 09
        +9
        Quote: Andrey from Chelyabinsk
        need to place a missile defense system in Siberia.

        Or in Kharkov, Kaunas or Tartu for divisions of the European part of Russia.
        1. Cherry Nine
          Cherry Nine 5 March 2018 12: 59
          +2
          Quote: Ascetic
          As far as I understand, the essence of missile defense is precisely to destroy ICBMs in an accelerating vulnerable area

          This cannot be done with missile defense. Unless the Americans return to space-based SDI developments.
          The GBI has a range of 5K and a reach in height of 2K, that is, it knocks down heads in a passive area. Standard 3 works in the downstream section, THAAD works in the atmosphere. At the same time, the possibilities of both the Standard and THAAD against ICBMs are still speculative.
          Quote: Ascetic
          Or in Kharkov, Kaunas or Tartu for divisions of the European part of Russia.

          No. Missiles from Tartu Yarsa from the Ivanovo region will not catch up. The only working version of this scheme is a base in northern Norway that closes Gadzhievo.
    2. Operator
      Operator 5 March 2018 16: 30
      +1
      Quote: Resident of the Urals
      the essence of missile defense is precisely to destroy ICBMs in an accelerating vulnerable area

      Theoretically, you are right - there are American destroyers with Aegis and SM-3 for this.

      But - to detect Russian missiles in the active part of the trajectory before separating the warheads, radars (land, sea, and in the future space-based) are naturally used, which are naturally neutralized by a dozen Russian high-altitude nuclear explosions before the start of missiles - such as Surprise! laughing

      And after separation of the BB, their stealth coating (reducing the ESR of the BB to 0,0001 square millimeters) and cooling of the shell with nitrogen (reducing to zero the intrinsic and reflected thermal radiation of the BB) operating in space, as well as heavy false targets along with maneuvering, take effect controlled BBs operating in the atmosphere at the reduction site. At the same time, high-altitude nuclear explosions are also welcomed at this stage of the trajectory - such as the second Surprise! laughing

      Only the suckers like the Cherry Nine believe in the ability of the missile defense to repulse a massive Russian / American / Chinese nuclear missile strike.
  5. sib.ataman
    sib.ataman 5 March 2018 09: 46
    +3
    Quote: BAI
    There is nothing to talk about until the rocket takes up combat duty. With "Bulava" how much they messed around. Boats made under were not decommissioned without receiving the promised weapons.
    Adoption is also not an indicator. "Osu" and "Condenser" have adopted in the amount of, it seems 18 pieces, for the parades - "imperialists" scare. They did not make ONE shot at the landfills! I'm not talking about any real military operations, of course, in a nuclear-free version.


    Oh well! People money throwers! Is it that you are a cheap pleasure-arming serial weapons? Do not forget that in the first place, the strategic nuclear forces today is a club in politics! And then only weapons, and thank God that it is so, and not vice versa! GDP has made it clear that I have a club and you are not afraid of me! If you hear torn mattresses, you can spend money more economically, and not all at once on rockets. Well, no, no and no trial, hold on!
  6. Old26
    Old26 5 March 2018 10: 39
    +11
    Quote: A resident of the Urals
    Why do they always talk about missile defense in the context of the destruction of warheads ?. As far as I understand, the essence of missile defense is precisely to destroy ICBMs in an accelerating vulnerable area. Although it is not clear to me how it will be technologically realized, except that by undermining a nuclear charge in the atmosphere.

    It is physically impossible. Unless only in a situation where the enemy will have a missile defense system with space-based echelons of the same SDI. It is impossible to destroy a missile (well, or almost impossible, if we talk about us), since the active section ends even over the territory of Russia, and there are no long-range missile defense missiles with the required range and speed on American ships. Therefore, we are talking about (and always) talking about the destruction of the BB. Destruction of a rocket is an extreme case, possible only under certain conditions. far from always feasible conditions

    Quote: Artek
    before Putin’s speech, they said that this Sarmatian would be 100t, but in fact it’s -200t

    What the president said does not mean that it is fully true. What the “assistants” wrote to him, he voiced it. There is a video of the BI "Sarmat". There is already on the network what they call EMNIP hi-rez. That is the storyboard of this test. There you can see a lot with your own eyes. In particular, to conduct its "intelligence operation" using the analytical-mental apparatus. There is something to build on. In particular, from the format of the tires to the transport device on which the TPK is being transported. There are people nearby. That is, it is possible to calculate the diameter of the container with a fairly high degree of accuracy. It is clear that the diameter of the rocket will be smaller. Knowing the approximate diameter of the rocket, in the photograph of the output of the product from the silo (it is there in a white and black cell), you can calculate the size of the cell. And accordingly the length of the rocket. And then it turns out that "the truth is somewhere nearby" (in the middle). After all, the stupidity of voicing the figures of 100 tons is somewhat different. It was said initially. What is it a hundred-ton heavy rocket. . It was already physically physically unable to have a weight of 100 tons (and everything was transformed into this figure thanks to our media), because according to contractual parameters, a missile with a launch or throwing weight greater than the heaviest of the lungs is considered heavy. This starting weight, its ceiling, the border is 106 tons. Everything above is heavy, below is light. The 10-ton payload, as they wrote, is also stupid. In the Strategic Missile Forces there is no such thing - a payload. It is only in space affairs that there is such a term. In the missile forces there is such a term - throwing weight. And it consists of everything. From the breeding stage, engine and fuel of the breeding stage, combat and false blocks. In fact, it turns out that the weight of the warheads itself ranges from 40 to 60% of the weight cast. Even the same Voivode does not throw 8,8 tons of warheads. This is her abandoned weight of everything. They immediately say that "they will deliver 10 tons to the enemy." The president really just said - MORE. That is, it turns out that the cast weight of such a rocket should be 14-16 tons. But here's how bad it turns out. There are no miracles in the world and the specific load of missiles does not increase significantly. That is, if the Governor, for example, it was 4,5%, then expecting another to have 5 or 8% is stupid.
    And in the result it turns out that if you believe the tales that they will bring 10 tons to the adversary, then the starting weight of such a rocket should be 300-400 tons at least. However, if you "count" the black and white "cells", then a situation emerges that the diameter of the "Sramat" is slightly smaller than that of the "Governor", and the length is somewhere 1 / .... less. And what, two with different sizes will have the same starting weight? I do not believe. But there are already many tales. If you look at the picture, then in general we can assume that the "Sarmatian" has a diameter of 7 meters laughing laughing
    Here is a picture. On the right is a human figure. If you compare it with the wheel, and then with the diameter of the rocket, it will work out that way. But you can’t believe everything? Or is it possible?
    1. Ascetic
      Ascetic 5 March 2018 11: 37
      +4
      Quote: Old26
      What the president said does not mean that it is fully true. What the “assistants” wrote to him, he voiced it. There is a video of the BI "Sarmat".


      The dimensions of the silos practically did not change, respectively, according to the MGH Sarmat is approximately equal to the Governor.
      R-36M2 / 15A18M rocket:
      Length - 34.3 m
      Diameter - 3 m

      Starting weight:
      - with RGCH IN 15F173 - 211.4 t
      - with warheads of the "light" class 15F175 - 211.1

      Mass of the head:
      - with RGCH IN 15F173 - 8.73 t
      - with warhead "light" class 15F175 - 8.47 t
      Fuel mass:
      - I stage - 150.2 t
      - II stage - 37.6 t
      - breeding steps - 2.1 t
      Maximum range:
      - with RGCH IN 15F173 (10 BB with a capacity of 0,8 Mt) and KSP PRO - 11000 km
      - with the "light" monoblock warhead 15F175 with a capacity of 8,3 MT and KSP PRO - 16000 km

      Almost the same in terms of MGH and throwing weight.
    2. Operator
      Operator 5 March 2018 16: 40
      +2
      Quote: Old26
      not bad

      Yes, yes, yes: GDP does not understand the issue, but Old26 will help him in this. laughing

      Just admit your mistake in the starting mass of "Sarmat" and you will have respect and respect laughing
      1. The comment was deleted.
        1. Operator
          Operator 5 March 2018 21: 23
          +2
          You, Mr. Nida, registered on December 29 of the 2017 of the year - just at the beginning of the campaign for the election of the President of the Russian Federation, and you already managed to fuck up your “comments” on the VO.

          Do not mow under the fan of the Old 26, it will not work.
          1. The comment was deleted.
    3. gridasov
      gridasov 5 March 2018 17: 36
      +1
      All this and there is no need to know. Although it is worth recognizing a specialist. I will explain a little differently. There is an algorithmic dependence, which suggests that it is impossible to increase the infinitely take-off body weight using fuels with volume-weight parameters. Therefore, it is worth concentrating on key rocket devices that can get away from these problems. And this device is a turbo fuel supercharger. So, the modern design of any turbine is such that during its operation and increase in rotation speed and increase in the required fuel supply, three stages of pressure drop occur. Up to its complete absence, this means that it is impossible to create a reference flow of such an energy density potential in order to increase take-off weight without increasing the weight and volume of fuel. In fact, this is the way of modern solutions of designers. Therefore, the creation of such a process in which there will be no pressure drop with an increase in the rotor speed, which means it will increase the flow rate and can instantly not only solve the real problems of both the military and civilian, nl and will allow you to really move into the future. Therefore, we focus on our method and device in which there is no pressure drop in the hydro-gas-dynamic flow at incredibly high rotor speeds of any radius
  7. dgonni
    dgonni 5 March 2018 13: 16
    +1
    Nda! GDP for the elections drew a picture, speech and cartoons. Well cartoons would be okay. But why? in a cartoon show florida and warheads flying at it? Looks like they thought the mattresses would get scared and go to negotiations. But they were not afraid and stupidly requested additional funds for their missile defense and the deployment of new hypersonic developments after 2 years. And if before the show of cartoons, Congress would allocate money or maybe not. Then at the moment they will allocate without questions in the volumes that the Pentagon will request. An ugly mnogokhodovochka turned out :(. Especially considering that all these weapons are not in the troops as such. And Sarmat, as the most real project, will be put into service according to plans no earlier than 2020. We are silently silent about the rest of the projects.
    1. cats
      cats 5 March 2018 16: 41
      +5
      Johnny, your fingers aren’t freezing? Or are you from warm Russia crap ..
      Why do we need negotiations? Now they need it. While thinking how to explain to the population
      that managed ..
      You’d better think about yourself, but how can a gigimon not be up to you .. winked
    2. Barabashka 68
      Barabashka 68 5 March 2018 17: 52
      0
      “An ugly mnogokhodovochka turned out :(.” - Nothing of the kind happened, it turned out wonderfully. Now the adversaries know where our aim will be. :-))) But there’s no difference what they shoot, Voivode or Sarmat, they still won’t catch them. Although the Voivode may not reach the southern islands. Here the Vanguard will come in handy, as a needle Kashchei. The wise does not do unnecessary movements.
  8. The comment was deleted.
    1. Cherry Nine
      Cherry Nine 5 March 2018 14: 02
      +6
      Quote: Serge Serdyukov
      Vovan thought a little and then said:

      Voronezh is definitely not one of ours!
    2. vlad_vlad
      vlad_vlad 5 March 2018 14: 16
      +8
      from Germany, looking at all the hysteria about the “war on the doorstep / enemy at the gate” looks like a distraction from the real problems of Russia.
      no sewage - "bear it, money is needed for rockets"
      no roads - "endure, money is needed for tanks"
      pensions in .ope - "endure, money is needed for Syria"

      bear people shorter. it is not a country for people, but people for a country.
      1. cats
        cats 5 March 2018 16: 31
        +3
        vlad_vlad Something in your name is too much masculine ... don't you find?
        Read the article about the German anthem. Judging by the article, you have no more problems there at all.
        1. vlad_vlad
          vlad_vlad 5 March 2018 16: 39
          +3
          Quote: Kotovsky
          vlad_vlad Something in your name is too much masculine ... don't you find?
          Read the article about the German anthem. Judging by the article, you have no more problems there at all.


          on the topic of the number of idiots we can readily measure with you. I assure you that we have no fewer of them than yours. But ours, probably, choose safer topics for their eccentricities.
          1. cats
            cats 5 March 2018 17: 45
            +4
            Eccentricities are different, I agree.
            We are arming ourselves, maybe to the detriment of the stomach, there is a reason.
            You disarm, grow your stomach, and become asexual so that there is no reason.
            And so eccentricities .. hi
          2. The comment was deleted.
      2. Soho
        Soho 6 March 2018 06: 41
        +1
        vlad_vlad Yesterday, 14:16 ↑
        from Germany, looking at all the hysteria about the “war on the doorstep / enemy at the gate” looks like a distraction from the real problems of Russia.

        that is, when the war in Yugoslavia was muddied in order to divert public attention from the scandal, you don’t care, but then it’s gotten hot under the tail ....
    3. KirovMK2
      KirovMK2 5 March 2018 16: 43
      0
      This is a joke? You have to laugh, right?
  9. Operator
    Operator 5 March 2018 16: 09
    0
    And some at VO until recently claimed that the starting mass of Sarmat could not be 200 tons laughing
  10. Radikal
    Radikal 5 March 2018 16: 39
    0
    Quote: Rusland
    Quote: Kotovsky
    I do not want to seem rude, but you are one of those Jews on the site who not only speaks but also listens. hi
    Putin is the man who knows at ten, and will say that he knows at six.
    I think in this case, he rather downplayed the natural modesty,
    do you know.. hi

    Ooh ... this is not a lieutenant’s speech, but a lieutenant’s good

    Such an offset, take it higher - an extraordinary "major" wassat tongue
    1. cats
      cats 5 March 2018 17: 50
      +2
      Maybe it’s also time for me to comrade Stalin to stick on an avatar?
      Solid, and you can be sabotage .. tongue hi
  11. Mikhail Zubkov
    Mikhail Zubkov 5 March 2018 17: 32
    +2
    The author loads us with technical details - why? It is important for us to testify that there is a new powerful missile system, in the final regime of state tests and in the initial period of being put on combat duty. And in the old renovated mines with experienced personnel. For worldwide joy, the training launch from Plesetsk through the South Pole is not enough for the purpose at our training ground in Kamchatka, with a maneuver somewhere above the Atlantic and Pacific oceans. That's all for a short time!
  12. Kathernik
    Kathernik 5 March 2018 20: 42
    +1
    Quote: voyaka uh
    In fact of the matter. Trump cards are not laid out at the beginning of the game.
    At the beginning of the game, they bluff.
    Bluffing, by the way, sometimes leads to unexpected results.
    In the USSR, somehow at a military parade over the stands flew
    new strategic bombers. In order for the effect to settle down, their
    drove in a circle - flew several times.
    The Americans were shocked: "Russian bombers are like dirt!"
    Congress was alarmed and gave money for the mass production of bombers.
    As a result, the Americans turned out to be hundreds, while the USSR had several dozen.
    There were no war, fortunately. And if there was? What would bluffing be at the parade?

    This is not a bluff. I understand you: it's hard to die from the fact that the son of your classmate presses a button ....
  13. Old26
    Old26 5 March 2018 21: 16
    +1
    Quote: voyaka uh
    In fact of the matter. Trump cards are not laid out at the beginning of the game.
    At the beginning of the game, they bluff.
    Bluffing, by the way, sometimes leads to unexpected results.
    In the USSR, somehow at a military parade over the stands flew
    new strategic bombers. In order for the effect to settle down, their
    drove in a circle - flew several times.
    The Americans were shocked: "Russian bombers are like dirt!"
    Congress was alarmed and gave money for the mass production of bombers.
    As a result, the Americans turned out to be hundreds, while the USSR had several dozen.
    There were no war, fortunately. And if there was? recourse What would bluffing be at the parade?

    Not just such a bluff. At the parade they sometimes showed models of non-existent missiles, such as GR-1. Also rolled. After the mass demonstration of rockets in the late 50s and early 60s, the Americans even introduced a new designation to distinguish real from experienced and not serial ...

    Quote: Ascetic
    Quote: Old26
    What the president said does not mean that it is fully true. What the “assistants” wrote to him, he voiced it. There is a video of the BI "Sarmat".


    The dimensions of the silos practically did not change, respectively, according to the MGH Sarmat is approximately equal to the Governor.
    R-36M2 / 15A18M rocket:
    Length - 34.3 m
    Diameter - 3 m

    Starting weight:
    - with RGCH IN 15F173 - 211.4 t
    - with warheads of the "light" class 15F175 - 211.1

    Mass of the head:
    - with RGCH IN 15F173 - 8.73 t
    - with warhead "light" class 15F175 - 8.47 t
    Fuel mass:
    - I stage - 150.2 t
    - II stage - 37.6 t
    - breeding steps - 2.1 t
    Maximum range:
    - with RGCH IN 15F173 (10 BB with a capacity of 0,8 Mt) and KSP PRO - 11000 km
    - with the "light" monoblock warhead 15F175 with a capacity of 8,3 MT and KSP PRO - 16000 km

    Almost the same in terms of MGH and throwing weight.


    Dear comrade! We do not know what change ShPU Voevody will undergo before Sarmat is placed in it. No one will place a new complex in a converted silo. Surely you know. that “18 with M” could not be put into the mine from “18 without M” without re-equipment. As far as I heard, the counterparts of the product did not coincide with the “Sh” index in the shaft and on the product.
    To say that a mine from 18M corresponds to a mine of the 28th product is impossible. The only frame where the TPK is shown above is no reference point or anything that could be taken as a reference.

    Placing Sarmat in the PR divisions now equipped with Voivode - here two factors are involved.
    1. To place a heavy ICBM in the division where the lungs are located - if there was one, then either at the very beginning of the Strategic Missile Forces, or when the entire division was re-equipped from one complex to another.
    2. The volume of work in mines from 18M will still be slightly less than the volume of work in the mines of other complexes. At 100N UTTKh, the mines are designed for gas-dynamic start. Mines from 18M - on mortar. The volume of work in the first case is much larger. Moreover, the choice is small. In principle, there remained free mines in addition to Dombarovsky and Uzhur only in Tatishchevo. In Kozelsk they are being modernized under the Yars.

    As for what I said a little earlier about dimensions - look and count for yourself. But the fact that a rocket with dimensions (conditionally) of 25 x 2,5 meters will weigh as much as 34,3 x 3 meters - I really, really doubt it
  14. Radikal
    Radikal 5 March 2018 23: 10
    0
    Quote: Kotovsky
    Maybe it’s also time for me to comrade Stalin to stick on an avatar?
    Solid, and you can be sabotage .. tongue hi

    I could tell who you are and where to stick - I'm afraid the censorship of the site will not miss! wassat
  15. Old26
    Old26 6 March 2018 00: 24
    +2
    Quote: Operator
    - hypersonic non-motor planning BB "(Vanguard");
    - hypersonic medium-range ballistic missiles with a liquid rocket engine and air launch ("Dagger");
    - a supersonic intercontinental cruise missile with a nuclear ramjet.

    You, Andrey, have a mistake on a mistake
    1. "Vanguard" not motionless. He has control (steering) and auxiliary engines. Without an engine, he could only make evolution in one plane (horizontal), and even then in a narrow range. And in the vertical plane ....

    2. It is difficult to call a ramjet engine a liquid rocket engine. And accordingly, a ballistic missile. The missile (the so-called “Product 75”) is equipped with a direct-flow air-propelled engine “product 70” manufactured by the Turaevsky Design Bureau “Soyuz”. . Moreover, the reconstruction and re-equipment of production is under way with the aim of producing these engines. Until 2020 (the completion date for the reconstruction), production should yield up to 50 engines per year. Moreover, it is impossible to draw a conclusion on the basis of the two-second video about what configuration this “Dagger” is, and you don’t provide that it can have such a scheme (covered by a fairing) (you can ignore the aerodynamic planes) ??


    3. If this is a supersonic missile, then why on all the "presentations" is the subsonic missile body, an analog of our X-55 and the American Tomahawk ???


    Quote: Operator
    Quote: voyaka uh
    As a result, the Americans turned out to be hundreds, while the USSR had several dozen

    This is called a military trick - to force the enemy to invest in ancient bombers, and to stamp the latest ballistic missiles themselves.

    This was not the first (and not the last) case when we lit the enemy as a sucker laughing


    Well, it was most likely very tricky military trick as a result of which we achieved parity with the Americans only closer to the beginning of the 80s. True, it is not clear who bred whom as suckers? Are we Americans or ourselves? If you claim that they bought to show the "mass" of bombers, and we began to rivet the latest missiles, then how can you explain the following figures.

    1959 year.
    USA . Number of ICBMs - 6, the number of SLBMs - 0, the number of strategic aviation aircraft 1854 of which 488 B-52
    the USSR . Number of ICBMs - 0, the number of SLBMs - 33*, the number of strategic aviation aircraft 105

    1960 year.
    USA . Number of ICBMs - 12, the number of SLBMs is 32, the number of strategic aviation aircraft 1735, of which 450 V-52
    the USSR . Number of ICBMs - 2, the number of SLBMs - 30*, the number of strategic aviation aircraft 121


    1961 year.
    USA . Number of ICBMs - 57, the number of SLBMs is 80, the number of strategic aviation aircraft 1526, of which 500 V-52
    the USSR . Number of ICBMs - 10, the number of SLBMs - 57*, the number of strategic aviation aircraft 133

    1962 year.
    USA . Number of ICBMs - 203, the number of SLBMs is 144, the number of strategic aviation aircraft 1595, of which 555 V-52
    the USSR . Number of ICBMs - 36, the number of SLBMs - 72*, the number of strategic aviation aircraft 138

    1963 year.
    USA . Number of ICBMs - 597, the number of SLBMs is 160, the number of strategic aviation aircraft 1335, of which 525 V-52
    the USSR . Number of ICBMs - 99, the number of SLBMs - 72*, the number of strategic aviation aircraft 150

    It should be borne in mind that all the SLBMs of the Soviet Navy for this period are R-13 missiles with a range of 600 km, which before launch had to rise from the mine along with the launch pad. All American SLBMs for this period of time are the Polaris A-1 with a range of 2200 km underwater launch. So we lit them with our military cunning so that in 1963 they had only 597 ICBMs against ours as much as 99 ??? Indeed, 10 years have passed since the moment the mass of bombers were shown at the parade. Where are those latest missiles that we began to punch, scattering Americans like suckers on bombers ??? Yes, cool divorce suckers good

    Quote: Operator
    Yes, yes, yes: GDP does not understand the issue, but Old26 will help him in this laughing
    Just admit your mistake in the starting mass of "Sarmat" and you will have respect and respect

    No need to ascribe to me words that I did not say. Everywhere and everywhere I write that the GDP seems to have been seriously framed by his assistants, who were preparing a report to him. Or do you think that in the evenings he himself sat and wrote down sheets ??? He does not need to understand what speed the rocket has at the end of the 1st stage operation, after how many the 1st stage will stop its operation and how much it will burn fuel. But if he has such consultants as Boldyrev, Borisov, Esin and the rest from the category of storytellers - then everything can be.
    And why should I admit my mistake, as you say? Just because the president said it? I prefer to trust a few other sources. albeit not so high-ranking, but working in this system.
    1. region58
      region58 6 March 2018 01: 42
      +2
      Quote: Old26
      his assistants set up

      And not for the first time. One video from Apache worth ...
      1. Pingo
        Pingo 6 March 2018 10: 18
        0
        Do not hang your ears. Against the facts, the USSR is trying to impress on the backwardness. Even Sputnik and R-7 contrary. I also forgot to count the American ground-based ballistic missile systems, the total number of UBCs in the countries for which carriers were needed, and who made the first launch from the submarine.
        1. region58
          region58 6 March 2018 13: 45
          +1
          Quote: Pingo
          Do not hang your ears.

  16. Old26
    Old26 6 March 2018 00: 43
    0
    Quote: Mikhail Zubkov
    It is important for us to testify that there is a new powerful missile system, in the final regime of state tests and in the initial period of being put on combat duty

    Do you call the final state test regime the only throwing start? Oh well. "Voivode", which was created on the basis of the previous modification - R-36M UTTH, before being put into service, completed 26 test launches as part of state tests. And you have one throw-it is the final state test regime and the initial period of statement on the database ??? And you are aware that there has not yet been a public procurement contract for the conversion of mines under the Sarmatian site. Everything was. And the alteration of the mines in Kozelsk under the Yars, and in Dombarovsky under the tests of the Vanguard - and then silence. Do not tell me for what reason?
    1. dim7ka
      dim7ka 6 March 2018 08: 42
      +1
      And you are aware that there has not yet been a public procurement contract for the conversion of mines under the Sarmatian site. Everything was. And the alteration of the mines in Kozelsk under the Yars, and in Dombarovsky under the tests of the Vanguard - and then silence. Do not tell me for what reason?

      And apparently there won’t be any global alterations of mines) They decided to stuff Sarmat from economy into the old TPK Voivod
  17. Brs2
    Brs2 6 March 2018 12: 22
    +1
    Is the Military Review website also involved in campaigning for the incumbent president?
  18. Old26
    Old26 6 March 2018 13: 27
    0
    Quote: dim7ka
    And apparently there won’t be any global alterations of mines) They decided to stuff Sarmat from economy into the old TPK Voivod

    In the TPK Governor? Or maybe TPK R-36M UTTH? Do you say there will be no global alterations? For God's sake. But not global alterations will be?
    And that means there will be applications on the public procurement website. Moreover, even when the Voivode was put into the mines from R-36M UTTKh - and then work on remaking was carried out, it just did not work to put a new one in the old one. There were details that did not allow this. In addition, you are sure that this is a container from Veyovody, and not a container assembled from separate sections
    container "Voivode", that is, not identical to the "voivode" ???

    Quote: Pingo
    I also forgot to count the American ground-based ballistic missile systems, the total number of UBCs in the countries for which carriers were needed, and who made the first launch from the submarine.

    Not only that counted? The cunning military plan was such as to force the Americans to rivet weapons, and then we should catch up with them for a decade and a half?
    The total number of SBN was also not in favor of the USSR. And the first launch from a submarine is only a political move regarding priority. In 1965, we had only missiles in the fleet that had to be raised from the mines to the top of the deckhouse and so launched over 600 km. And those same Americans had a Polaris with a range of 2200 and an underwater launch. So then what is the cunning military plan that he writes about Operator and thanks to which we led the Americans like suckers, showing them old planes?
  19. Pingo
    Pingo 6 March 2018 20: 56
    0
    Quote: Old26
    And the first launch from a submarine is only a political move regarding priority.

    everything is clear with the client ...
    Who would doubt that the fad would again be on Soviet backwardness.
    The political move is not to count on the ICBMs since 1957 and again not to count the infantry ballistic missiles, which America was not able to create anything better in range then.
    In the absence of a missile defense, there is no need for a lot of carriers if there is not enough of the SBN itself.
    In 1955, the Americans did not have anything from the SLBM in the Navy. Limited obstacles to such launches appeared only after the Caribbean crisis. The first Soviet submarine launches since 1959. In 1962, the USSR had an underwater launch from 1400, in 1968 - 3000. This is not counting cruise missiles, a coastal city or base is generally destroyed by a torpedo from the UBC.
    And your corn baker, who stands for rockets, cut the strategic Storm to please America. It probably looked like a plane.
    1. Cherry Nine
      Cherry Nine 6 March 2018 23: 28
      +2
      Quote: Pingo
      all clear

      Everything is clear with you. Stary26 is one of the few specialists who remained on the site.
      Quote: Pingo
      and again, not to consider the BRL, the best of which America could not create anything in range then.

      Who what could and what could not Old26 described quite fully.
    2. Town Hall
      Town Hall 6 March 2018 23: 38
      0
      Old 26 is one of the most balanced, competent and respectable visitors to this site.


      Troll elsewhere
    3. Pingo
      Pingo 7 March 2018 01: 56
      0
      Specialist brains if only composted. 100500% - a pro-Western procurement nomenclator or in touch. The operator is at least technically competent. Sknakebyte is still your field berry. In general, only a schoolboy or an inadequate admirer of democratic values ​​could write the cited, but they work for such cookies for cookies:
      en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Project_submarine_submarines_611
  20. Comrade Kim
    Comrade Kim 7 March 2018 00: 29
    0
    Quote: Pingo
    And your corn baker, who stands for rockets, cut the strategic Storm to please America. It probably looked like a plane.

    No need to put pressure on the sore spot again!
    You would still remember how the Crimea clown handed over to the Ukrainian SSR, and in Novocherkassk the Army sent the People to kill.
    I recalled a story from memoirs (I don’t remember anymore, Speer or some other authoritative genosses): before the Second World War, our delegation visited tank factories in Germany, Soviet engineers who were part of the delegation were extremely unhappy that the Germans did not show them the production of heavy tanks (German engineers did not show such production in the USSR, of course).
    So the Germans concluded that if the Russians so insistently demanded to show it, then they have it (production of heavy tanks)!
    1. Pingo
      Pingo 7 March 2018 02: 05
      0
      Thank you for such an informative addition, Dear Comrade!
      Quote: Comrade Kim
      Would you still remember how this clown

      it would be too much for one time
      he has followers here.
  21. Old26
    Old26 8 March 2018 15: 27
    0
    Quote: Pingo
    Who would doubt that the fad will again be at the Soviet backwardness ..

    Are you always like that, sorry ... "slowed down" or exclusively on some days? Why did you drag your phrase here
    Who would doubt that the fad would again be on Soviet backwardness.


    Do you live in this reality or in some parallel? Or a statement of the historical fact that only since about 1964 our submarines began to be equipped with ballistic missiles of the underwater launch for you fad about Soviet backwardness? Yes, there were lagging behind and our first missile boats with BR, that nuclear project 658, that diesel project 629 were equipped with such missiles before modernization (D-2 complex with R-13 missile). And only after the re-equipment of these boats in 1964-1965 they received missiles underwater launch R-21 complex D-4. But in range these missiles were still losing to the Americans ....

    And the project AB-611 boats, also called Zulu-V according to the Western classification, were generally until 1965 (when they were finally decommissioned) were equipped with R-11FM missiles with a range of 150 km and, again, a surface launch.
    On submarines with cruise missiles - surface launch missiles could generally be found until the end of the 80s. Especially on the project 675 nuclear submarines and on the diesel project 651. Despite the fact that there were already boats that were equipped with an underwater launch boat. But in the parades of the early 70s in the same Leningrad one could also meet diesel boats from the Kyrgyz Republic of Project 644 and 665. So what ???

    Quote: Pingo
    The political move is not to count on the ICBMs since 1957 and again not to count the ballistic missile registers, which America could not create anything better in range then ..

    Since 1957 ??? And why would it? The countdown was conducted from the year when the first ICBMs began on alert duty. The first was delivered to the Americans in 1959, and to us in 1960. The table clearly shows how this one was implemented according to the numbers The operator Soviet Tricky War Plan. Or do you have other data? The construction of the BRDS for the Americans was secondary. They had enough troops and weapons in Europe and Asia, mainly aviation. Yes, the total number of infantry fighting vehicles in our country increased from 32 in 1959 to 654 in 1963 .. They only have 105. But they didn’t need more. By the way, and only 54 of our 654 were superior in range to the American. The bulk is approximate equality in range.

    Quote: Pingo
    If there is no missile defense, there is no need for a lot of carriers if the SBNs themselves are not enough ..

    Well, first of all, you forget (or don’t know) that at that time (the end of the 50s - the beginning of the 60s) the doctrine of "Mass retaliation" was in force, envisaging the total destruction of the enemy. According to the SIOP-62 plan, 3,5 thousand munitions with a total capacity of 7800 megatons were supposed to fall on us and China only in the first strike. ABM was still in its infancy. As for your phrase
    there is no need for a lot of carriers if the SBN itself is not enough
    then you just showed your ignorance of the issue. Or do you think that a large number of American carriers (since we had few of them) did not have enough charges?
    Well, you should not say anything without knowing.
    In 1959, the United States had 7006 strategic nuclear weapons, approximately 8462 tactical. A total of 15468 charges. As of 1963, they already had 7098 strategic. As you can see, the number has not grown much. This is due to the fact that by increasing the number of BZ on missiles (ICBMs and SLBMs), they removed from the atomic bombs intended for bombers. Tactical at 1963 they had 21151 charges. Only 29249. Do you think this is not enough for the number of carriers that was announced earlier ????

    Quote: Pingo
    In 1955, the Americans did not have anything from the SLBM in the Navy. Limited obstacles to such launches appeared only after the Caribbean crisis. The first Soviet submarine launches since 1959. In 1962, the USSR had an underwater launch from 1400, in 1968 - 3000. This is not counting cruise missiles, a coastal city or base is generally destroyed by a torpedo with a warhead.

    Too shy to ask. And where did you see the date of 1955 from me, what do you write now, that in 1955 the USA did not have anything in the fleet of SLBMs ???? I have black and white, in Russian it is written that for 1959 (the year of reference, when the first ICBMs appeared on the database), the Americans had 0 in the fleet (zero) SLBM. Why is this a trump card in 1955 ??
    Underwater launches of LAYOUTS - yes they were in 1959. LAYOUTS, NOT ROCKETS. In particular, the C4.5 layout had a gas station for 4,5-5 seconds of operation.

    A missile with a range of 1400 km (R-21 of the D4 complex) was put into service in May 1963. It was FIRST SOVIET UNDERWATER LAUNCH. How could the USSR have an underwater launch in 1962 ????

    Cruise missiles - yes, they were indeed in boats. But during the period in question - 5 years - these were surface launch missiles. Nuclear submarines of projects 659, 675, diesel 644, 651, 665. there were no underwater launch missiles for firing along the shore at that time. Only anti-ship.
    In order to destroy a base or city with a torpedo, you need to approach it at a distance of a shot. And with those fleets that the USSR and the USA had at the beginning of the 60s, this was one chance out of a thousand.

    Quote: Pingo
    And your corn baker, who stands for rockets, cut the strategic Storm to please America. It probably looked like a plane.

    Actually, I did the right thing. There is a good Russian proverb. "Better to have a tit in hand than a crane in the sky". R-7 missile - it was a tit in the hands, put on combat duty in 1960. Could carry a multi-megaton charge at a distance of 8000 km or 1,35 mt at a distance of 11500 km.
    "Storm" was the same crane, which is unknown when it will be. For the same time, one missile was put on combat duty, began to be used for space needs, and the other for the same time - 19 launches, of which 4 were completely successful. Three were partially successful, with failures. The remaining 12 are emergency. And why is it necessary to have a missile with a TTT range of 7500 km and a speed of 3,5M (which by the way has never been reached by range) if there is already a missile that has already been worked out ???
  22. Pingo
    Pingo 8 March 2018 22: 25
    0
    Too many letters, you forgot to twist this:
    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Project_submarine_submarines_611
    Quote: Old26
    And the first launch from a submarine is only a political move regarding priority.


    No one would spend the LV on the output of the civil load (Satellite), before installing at least a few pieces on the database.