Trident versus Mace. Different but equal?


Rocket launch UGM-133A Trident II


Russia and the United States have developed strategic nuclear forces (SNF) with a full-fledged naval component. A key element of the latter are submarine ballistic missiles (SLBMs). The latest examples of this kind are the Russian product R-30 “Bulava” and the American UGM-133A Trident II (D5). These missiles are seriously different from each other, but have the same value for the national defense of the two countries.

Old american rocket


The development of the future UGM-133A started in the early seventies and was seriously delayed. It was possible to complete the tests of the finished product only in the late eighties, and in 1990 the missile officially entered service. The main customer of SLBM Trident II (Trident-2) became the US Navy. Also missiles entered service with Great Britain. The deployment of missiles was carried out on SSBNs of two types of American and British construction.

The UGM-133A is a three-stage solid-fuel intercontinental ballistic missile. The product has a length of 13,5 m with a diameter of 2,1 m and a starting weight of more than 59 tons. Guidance is achieved through inertial and satellite navigation with astro correction.

The casting weight of Trident II reaches 2800 kg. Separating warhead (RGC) can carry individual warheads (BB) of the individual type W88 (475 ct) or W76 (100 ct) - 8 and 14 units, respectively. However, missiles do not carry full ammunition to improve other characteristics. Last year, the production of the W76-2 unit with a capacity of not more than 5-7 kt was launched to solve special problems.


American SSBN USS Tennessee (SSBN-734) type Ohio. Photo: USNavy / Wikimedia.org

At full combat load, the UGM-133A shows a firing range of 7800 km. The maximum range obtained by reducing the number of warheads is 11300 km. Probable circular deviation - up to 90 m, depending on the guidance method.

New Russian product


Work on the Russian missile system based on the R-30 Bulava SLBM started in the late nineties, and already in 2004 the first tests took place. In September 2005, the first full-scale shooting was carried out. By the beginning of the tenth years, production was prepared, and production of serial missiles began. However, the order of adoption was issued only in June 2018.

“Bulava” - a three-stage solid-fuel ballistic missile with the possibility of carrying RGCH IN and means to overcome missile defense. The length of the rocket is 12,1 m with a diameter of 2 m. Launch weight is 36,8 tons. The cast weight is estimated at 1100-1200 kg. Control systems include inertial navigation aids made on the basis of modern components.

According to various sources, the P-30 carries from 6 to 10 BB individual guidance. The power of these products is estimated at 100-150 ct. There is information about the development of warheads with the ability to maneuver on the trajectory. Together with warheads, the missile carries false targets and other means of overcoming missile defense. The maximum firing range reaches 9300 km. Accuracy indicators are not known, but unofficial sources claim that the KVO does not exceed 90-100 m.

Media Question


The US marine strategic component includes 14 Ohio SSBNs. In the past, there were 18, but 4 ships were converted into carriers of cruise missiles. The oldest of the Ohio combat boats entered the Navy in 1984. The latter has been in service since 1997.


USS Wyoming SSBN deck covers (SSBN-742). Photo: Rebecca Rebarich, US Navy

The Ohio missile launcher holds 24 silo launchers for the UGM-133A missiles. Thus, the U.S. Navy can simultaneously put out to sea up to 336 SLBMs of the Trident II type. The maximum number of warheads is from 2688 to 4704. However, the terms of the existing treaties allow deploying no more than 1500 BB. It is also necessary to take into account that the Ohio do not go on patrol at the same time as an entire group.

The main ally of the United States, Great Britain in 1993-1999. commissioned four Vanguard SSBNs. Such ships carry 16 missiles each - up to a total of 64. At the same time, there are quite strict restrictions on the number of warheads.

The real carrier missiles of the R-30 SLBMs are strategic missile submarines of strategic design, pr. 955 Borey. To date, three such ships have been built and put into service by the Navy. The fourth, built on pr. 955A, recently completed state tests and will soon be handed over the fleet. Four more new SSBNs are at various stages of construction.

Borey submarines of all types have 16 mines for Bulava missiles. Thus, at present they can deliver to the patrol areas only 48 missiles with 288-480 warheads. In the coming months, such fleet capabilities will grow, but even after that, the quantitative indicators of the Boreev and Bulav will remain limited.


RPKSN TK-208 "Dmitry Donskoy" pr. 941UM - an experienced carrier of SLBM R-30

However, one should not worry about the potential of the marine component of the Russian strategic nuclear forces. Until a sufficient number of Boreevs have been built, the main work in this area rests with the older SSBNs, Project 667BDR Kalmar and 667BDRM Dolphin. Now there are six such ships in service, each of which carries 16 SLBMs of the R-29RM family. Over the next few years, the Dolphins will maintain the status of the basis of the marine component of the strategic nuclear forces, but then they will give way to the Boreas.

Trident versus Mace


Of great interest is the comparison of two modern SLBMs of the leading nuclear powers. A simple comparison of tabular data can lead to unambiguous conclusions, but not so simple.

From the point of view of the main indicators - the maximum range and the cast weight - the American rocket looks the clear leader. However, it cannot send all 2,8 tons of payload to the ultimate range of 11,3 thousand km. The Russian Bulava has more modest indicators, but it is not yet clear how the maximum values ​​of its characteristics are combined. The firing accuracy is comparable, which allows to obtain close results of blows.

The situation with military equipment looks interesting; moreover, it is complicated by the lack of accurate data. BB nomenclature for Trident II is probably a little wider, and in addition, it includes more powerful products. A low-power W76-2 charge has also been developed for special tasks.


Submarine Alexander Nevsky and his crew

A Russian missile carries up to 10 blocks with a capacity of up to 100-150 ct. Given current trends and in combination with achievable accuracy, this is enough to defeat typical SLBM targets. An important feature of the Mace is the modern anti-missile defense countermeasures system, which increases the likelihood of successful passage of warheads to targets. At the same time, it is possible to equip the R-30 with a full set of warheads without the risk of exceeding the established limits.

According to known data, the Bulava has the advantage of increased resistance to missile defense even at the initial stage of flight. Like other modern Russian ICBMs, the R-30 is distinguished by improved engine power and a shorter active area — up to 3-4 times in comparison with its predecessors. Accordingly, the time for the reaction of an enemy missile defense operating on take-off ICBMs is reduced. As far as we know, the older Trident has a “normal” flight profile.

The most important advantage of UGM-133A SLBMs is their potential and actual numbers provided by carriers. The US Navy has 14 Ohio-class submarines and can deploy a large number of SLBMs and BB. This opportunity is actively used, and in recent years, the marine component of the strategic nuclear forces accounted for at least half of all deployed combat units.


"Prince Vladimir" - the first representative of the improved project 955A

Russian indicators of this kind are much more modest, even taking into account the older R-29RM missiles. However, this is due to a different approach to the formation of strategic nuclear forces. Our nuclear forces rely mainly on ground-based missiles. They account for the bulk of deployed BB.

Customer requirements


Considering modern SLBMs of leading countries, it is necessary to take into account one of the most important factors - the customer’s views when forming tactical and technical requirements (TTT) for the future arms.

TTTs for the promising UGM-133A were formed more than 40 years ago, and the finished missile entered service in 1990. Since then, the military-political situation has changed, some old threats have disappeared, but new ones have appeared. To meet the new requirements and wishes of the military, it is necessary to modernize the existing SLBMs - with the known limitations of such processes.

R-30 “Mace” was created later, and the customer took into account all modern and future threats, needs, limitations of contracts, etc. Thus, this SLBM more fully complies with current requirements and takes into account modern views on defense in general and the role of the naval component of strategic nuclear forces in particular. This can explain the significant difference in the characteristics of the Mace and previous domestic missiles, as well as the difference from the American Trident.


Start of the "Mace" from the board of "Prince Vladimir", October 30, 2019

However, it cannot be ruled out that certain technological limitations affected the characteristics of the finished R-30. The development and production of this missile was not preceded by a very simple period, which seriously hit science and industry. In the absence of such problems, TTTs for promising SLBMs might look different.

Different but equal?


In terms of performance characteristics, the modern SLBMs of Russia and the USA are seriously different. The UGM-133A Trident II has advantages in a number of parameters, but in others the P-30 Bulava shows itself better. With all this, both models are in service and ensure the strategic security of their states.

The fact that the Bulava and the Trident are in service and cannot be replaced, although modernization is being carried out, directly indicates compliance with the requirements of the operators and existing strategies. Accordingly, the two SLBMs under consideration are equally good within the framework of the defense doctrines of their countries and are suitable for solving the tasks posed. And these factors are far more important than total kilometers and kilograms.
Author:
Photos used:
Russian Ministry of Defense / mil.ru, US Navy, Bmpd.livejournal.com
Ctrl Enter

Noticed a mistake Highlight text and press. Ctrl + Enter

113 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must to register.

I have an account? Sign in

  1. NAVIAVI 25 May 2020 05: 29 New
    • 19
    • 19
    0
    Come on you.
    There, in addition to the eternally raw "Mace" of problems for the tonsils.
    What Klimov constantly writes about.

    https://mina030.livejournal.com/24483.html
    1. The comment was deleted.
      1. The comment was deleted.
    2. Bar1 26 May 2020 10: 38 New
      • 2
      • 1
      +1
      the first Borey looked distinctive, the tilt of the wheelhouse forward, no one did so, and on the second they abandoned their originality and made an influx on Amer’s boats from below, which looks worse, but in American style.
  2. NAVIAVI 25 May 2020 05: 37 New
    • 11
    • 16
    -5
    And what about the rocket, so it has already been discussed.

    https://shoehanger.livejournal.com/444008.html

    "Nevsky, when exiting, was shot by a specially prepared factory rocket. Then he left. Upon arrival in Vilyuch, a group worked from the factory. One person from there, he said. The error is the technical gap between the rocket and the container. The width is about the palm of your hand. More precisely, this gap is insufficient. Either reduce the diameter of the rocket, or increase the container, but it does not increase — the size of the boat’s shaft end to end. The reason is the lack of experience and not taking into account the influence of the aquatic environment.
    While there were throwing in the surface, everything is OK. (2003,2004). When they started from underwater 2005 and 20006, problems arose. The difference in pressure at the exit-release of the rocket. The corps walked beyond TU. The refusals. Then the corps began to lead. They tried to re-arrange some of the devices inside. This is the period when it was planned to transfer the production of the rocket from Votkinskiy to another manufacturer. This is in 2009. But they convinced the NGS that they could handle it themselves.
    In Vilyuchinsk, factory workers tested the idea of ​​changing the pressure on a missile’s release from a powder source, or from a powder accumulator. I did not understand this.
    Chel said the idea was bad, but they were sent. They were there for half a year. Then they left. His resume, I guarantee that the rocket will go out normally and fly where necessary. They give 70 percent ..... If you shoot from the surface, then about 90. "
    1. Fizik M 25 May 2020 07: 39 New
      • 10
      • 6
      +4
      I repeat
      I believe that the shooting of the “Bulava” with the Pacific Fleet this year will be, moreover, with a probability of “four nines” - successful
      however, this does not cancel the "Clubs" problems
      1. NAVIAVI 25 May 2020 09: 33 New
        • 8
        • 12
        -4
        I think they’ll write to me. All the same, aviation will provide.
        Maybe even a photo will be thrown.
        Although five years already weary :-) Scary.
      2. KCA
        KCA 25 May 2020 10: 28 New
        • 4
        • 5
        -1
        In fact, on October 30, 2019, they successfully shot from the underwater, they showed on TV and there are a lot of videos on the Internet
        1. NAVIAVI 25 May 2020 11: 17 New
          • 15
          • 15
          0
          Where, what rocket and in what conditions.
          No need to mix facies and honey.
          They didn’t shoot with the Bulava Pacific Fleet. Five years, "Nevsky" is sitting there. Sometimes it comes out to play catch-up.
          I did not shoot, I did not go to the BS.
          The Nevsky missiles of the first series are crammed. Before improvements. Shooting them is dangerous.
          They no longer shout about it, but scream. And you all in somnambulistic delirium broadcast their visions about comparing Trident and Mace.
          1. KCA
            KCA 25 May 2020 11: 26 New
            • 5
            • 5
            0
            Which Nevsky, which Pacific Fleet? What are you talking about? Flight of thought? I'm talking about "Vladimir":
            https://rg.ru/2019/10/30/atomnaia-podlodka-kniaz-vladimir-vpervye-vystrelila-raketoj-bulava.html
            1. NAVIAVI 25 May 2020 11: 34 New
              • 13
              • 13
              0
              “I am writing what I see, what I do not see and I am not writing” (c). I served in the Pacific Fleet, about which I broadcast.
              Do you know the treasured word "window dressing"?
              1. sgrabik 26 May 2020 10: 48 New
                • 3
                • 5
                -2
                Whom to serve deigned, not really the commander of a submarine ??? And then, after all, now there are a dime a dozen of such "connoisseurs", and all those well-informed that you are simply amazed, aren’t they directly reporting everything in detail to them personally from the Ministry of Defense ???
                1. NAVIAVI 26 May 2020 19: 46 New
                  • 5
                  • 2
                  +3
                  Strange you :-)
                  My VUS was "Planning and Management of the Fleet."
                  Who else but me should be aware of?
                  Here on the site already laid out.
                  1. NAVIAVI 27 May 2020 08: 13 New
                    • 1
                    • 1
                    0
                    A hundred times discussed.
                    The point is not only in the rocket, but in the quantity of their delivery and the "density" of the use of forces.
                    CON.
                    They had it higher. Optimistically by a third, pessim.-In half.
                    During the union they took the number and inhuman tension of forces. Pig conditions of service, let’s say so.
                    1. NAVIAVI 27 May 2020 08: 15 New
                      • 1
                      • 1
                      0
                      Still.
                      How did I do anal belay
                      1. NAVIAVI 27 May 2020 08: 20 New
                        • 1
                        • 1
                        0
                        For the Ohio type, three autonomous units per case per year, each for 90 days, and there were 110, it was stressful, but pulled.
                        Now two on average. Maybe by the virus am
            2. Fizik M 25 May 2020 16: 13 New
              • 4
              • 2
              +2
              Quote: KCA
              I'm talking about "Vladimir":

              lol
              actually in decent places it's called "get off topic" wink
        2. Fizik M 25 May 2020 11: 50 New
          • 7
          • 5
          +2
          Quote: KCA
          In fact, on October 30, 2019, they successfully shot from the underwater, they showed on TV and there are a lot of videos on the Internet

          do not break the trampoline with zeal
          AT LEAST ONE ROLLER of the “Mace” work with the Pacific Fleet you will find?
          1. codetalker 25 May 2020 13: 52 New
            • 2
            • 3
            -1
            Why exactly with the Pacific Fleet? The rest does not count? Can you give an example, test / training launches of the BR from the Pacific?
            1. Fizik M 25 May 2020 16: 05 New
              • 4
              • 3
              +1
              Quote: codetalker
              Why exactly with the Pacific Fleet? The rest does not count?

              because there are DOCUMENT REQUIREMENTS
              written on the basis of EXPERIENCE
              and they clearly say that these firing MUST be
              acc. if they are not there, it very hints that "something died in the conservatory"

              See the screen below about the salvo launch (by the way at the place of the censors, I would NOT have allowed this to be shown in the media), the salvo launch is a very costly undertaking, and if it is properly organized and properly set up, it is done in such a way as to get the most data from it.
              In our particular case, we were clearly AFRAID of doing it, which also “hinted at” ...
    2. KCA
      KCA 25 May 2020 09: 30 New
      • 28
      • 9
      +19
      What are you any nonsense from the Internet pull? All that concerns the test and the technical condition of the nuclear submarines and Bulava - state secrets, for disclosure up to 6 years, with grave consequences up to 7, but what about treason to the Motherland up to 20, where do the authors of these opuses write from? From Lefortovo or from the colony ?? Were Wi-Fi connected to the defendants at Lefortovo?
      1. Operator 25 May 2020 10: 23 New
        • 19
        • 20
        -1
        From the White Pillars bully

        From new information: the old man "Trident-2" crap in full in terms of range with a maximum load (7800 km) compared with the newcomer "Bulava" (9300 km) with a comparable specific weight of military equipment.

        And as russophobes proceeded on shit - kargokulturisty of all stripes on these indicators.
        1. merkava-2bet 25 May 2020 11: 44 New
          • 10
          • 10
          0
          The fact that Trident-2 with a maximum speed shoots at 7800 km, we know this and there are facts, including the official statement of the company itself and the US Navy.
          But what we don’t know is which head has the Mace, that is, the number of BBs, weight, power, accuracy, etc., and most importantly the flight range with a full head.
          So where did you get the data, the namesake brought the forty on the tail. And yes, only officialdom is accepted, without flooding and a chatter of magazines.
          1. Operator 25 May 2020 13: 48 New
            • 8
            • 10
            -2
            You will poke in your "promised".
          2. forpost 28 May 2020 17: 50 New
            • 1
            • 2
            -1
            “we know it,” “But what we don’t know” - who are you? Are you Dohua there?
            1. merkava-2bet 28 May 2020 20: 42 New
              • 0
              • 2
              -2
              For those who do not understand the syntax and vocabulary of the great and mighty Russian language, by the way, he is my native language, we mean forum users who read and participate in a fruitful and constructive conversation, and not those individuals who try to seem smart by swearing and swearing.
              And yes, we are legion.
              1. forpost 5 June 2020 10: 05 New
                • 0
                • 2
                -2
                And right all forum users agree with your opinion or is it an attempt to pass off their opinion as an indisputable truth? Judging by the minuses, you are less than zero
        2. Fizik M 25 May 2020 11: 49 New
          • 9
          • 7
          +2
          Quote: Operator
          From the White Pillars

          belay
          eco YOU ​​pushed lol ... usually YOU wrote from under the white POWDER lol
          YOU are there ... more careful ... take care of yourself
          laughing
      2. NAVIAVI 25 May 2020 11: 29 New
        • 12
        • 17
        -5
        No need to pretend to be a holy fool.
        Napoleon: "As soon as a weapon enters the troops, it ceases to be secret."
        In addition, there is an exchange of information, according to the agreements.
        About Lefortovo, he remembered :-)
        Let's talk about the Gulag, why trifle :-)
      3. Fizik M 25 May 2020 11: 42 New
        • 13
        • 14
        -1
        Quote: KCA
        state of the nuclear submarine and Bulava, a state secret, for disclosure up to 6 years, with grave consequences

        especially The fact of the fact that None of the launch of the "club" with the Pacific Fleet so far was not
        YOU when the owner is "discussing" wink bed from zeal on smash lol
        1. sgrabik 26 May 2020 11: 08 New
          • 2
          • 3
          -1
          It's just ridiculous to read all this nonsense, what other fact, where this fact came from, that, directly from Min. The defense personally reported this fact to you, or else someone is stubbornly trying to wishful thinking, this is now a favorite method of liberal and pro-Western scribblers !!!
          1. Fizik M 26 May 2020 16: 58 New
            • 3
            • 1
            +2
            Quote: sgrabik
            It's just funny to read all this nonsense.

            fool
            Monsieur, delirium? so take it and “refute” it! why are you spawning here? - Bring at least ONE START FACT "Clubs" with the Pacific Fleet!
            1. NAVIAVI 26 May 2020 19: 51 New
              • 3
              • 2
              +1
              FSB ear.
              Familiar habits :-) GB fell apart, but the methods are the same.
              You are careful.
              1. Fizik M 26 May 2020 21: 32 New
                • 3
                • 1
                +2
                Quote: NAVIAVI
                FSB ear. Habits familiar

                everything is much more prosaic
                the boy is apparently stupid on the MIT "tugriks" (and the "MIT tugriks" is not a "version", but facts)
            2. forpost 28 May 2020 17: 55 New
              • 0
              • 1
              -1
              and what not from Indian?
    3. Angelo Provolone 25 May 2020 10: 44 New
      • 7
      • 5
      +2
      The corps walked beyond TU. The refusals. Then the corps began to lead.

      Clear business. I went for a walk, drank, and that’s led the message. He’s such a body ...
    4. Usher 25 May 2020 17: 53 New
      • 2
      • 5
      -3
      Chel said))) And you believe
      The reason is the lack of experience and not taking into account the influence of the aquatic environment.
      Lack of experience? Do you yourself understand what you are writing?
  3. Mikhail m 25 May 2020 05: 42 New
    • 15
    • 7
    +8
    The trouble is, since the cobbler will start the pies, And the boots will stitch the pastry, And things will not go in the way.
    MIT gnawed the order, and it turned out what happened.
    1. Mavrikiy 25 May 2020 08: 14 New
      • 9
      • 3
      +6
      Quote: Michael m
      The trouble is, since the cobbler will start the pies, And the boots will stitch the pastry, And things will not go in the way.
      MIT gnawed the order, and it turned out what happened.

      Market, his mother. Who has a paw longer, that rowing for themselves. Them. Makeeva has been engaged in SLBMs for a hundred years, although liquid, but the whole specifics of underwater launches of SLBMs, which is called in his own way ..... but against Muscovites .... request Yes, that’s how you say the market, but in my opinion the capital letter “B”. angry
      1. Alexey RA 25 May 2020 10: 48 New
        • 10
        • 3
        +7
        Quote: Mavrikiy
        Them. Makeeva has been engaged in SLBMs for a hundred years, although liquid, but the whole specifics of underwater launches of SLBMs, which is called in his own way ..... but against Muscovites ....

        It's just that the Navy after R-39 is somehow afraid of a solid-propellant rocket from Makeevtsy. smile
        Not only did they have to make a “water truck” for this monster, so the Makeyevites didn’t fit into the TK either the first or the second time. They promised to fit in with the third (future “Bark”), but then the Union collapsed.
        1. Mavrikiy 25 May 2020 11: 22 New
          • 1
          • 2
          -1
          Quote: Alexey RA
          It's just that the Navy after R-39 is somehow afraid of a solid-propellant rocket from Makeevtsy.

          Well, so they rosette in the hole and swims. repeat
        2. Fizik M 25 May 2020 11: 45 New
          • 4
          • 9
          -5
          Quote: Alexey RA
          It's just that the Navy after R-39 is somehow afraid of a solid-propellant rocket from Makeevtsy. Not only did they have to make a “water truck” for this monster, so the Makeyevites didn’t fit into the TK either the first or the second time. They promised to fit in with the third (future “Bark”), but then the Union collapsed.

          YOUR avatar is faithful lol
          I’ll only notice that they keep suckers in Olgino, and they have “chocolate rabbits” on Nikoloyamskaya Street at a known address (YOU won’t get there - they’ll lol )
          1. Alexey RA 25 May 2020 13: 09 New
            • 4
            • 1
            +3
            Quote: Fizik M
            I’ll only notice that they keep suckers in Olgino, and they have “chocolate hares” on Nikoloyamskaya Street, at a well-known address

            Alas for me - I did not find for the avatar a photo of a plate with a famous address on Savushkina. smile
      2. Bad_gr 25 May 2020 11: 18 New
        • 4
        • 0
        +4
        Quote: Mavrikiy
        Them. Makeeva has been engaged in SLBMs for a hundred years, though liquid,

        Why, only liquid, and the R-39U rocket, the D-19U complex -?
        1. Mavrikiy 25 May 2020 11: 23 New
          • 0
          • 1
          -1
          Quote: Bad_gr
          Why, only liquid, and the R-39U rocket, the D-19U complex

          I agree. Simply, for a long time I did not pick up checkers. repeat
  4. NAVIAVI 25 May 2020 06: 03 New
    • 12
    • 13
    -1
    By the way, according to the aforementioned Nevsky and Tankovid, Klimov had an article.
    "G. Tonkovid, holiday is a holiday, but why lie to society why?"
    Surname, he really is inaccurate.
    https://mina030.livejournal.com/20459.html?thread=131307#t131307
    And to the question "Why do not boats go to the BS and there has not been a single shooting from the Pacific Fleet in 5 years," no one answered.
    Although almost at every exit to the BS 667BDR they shot at Chizham.
    Shooting, checking and autonomous.

    Although judging by the comm "Nevsky" tried to go.




    1. asv363 25 May 2020 08: 38 New
      • 10
      • 7
      +3
      Valentin, are we discussing an article on VO or LJ Klimova MA?
      1. NAVIAVI 25 May 2020 09: 36 New
        • 13
        • 9
        +4
        Any information requires rechecking. At least the number of sources. Klimov and I have mutual acquaintances who are ready to vouch for his competence and decency.
        I do not know the author of the article, I did not serve with him .... Is it available?
  5. codetalker 25 May 2020 06: 24 New
    • 2
    • 2
    0
    The idea is periodically expressed that no simulations or tests can be compared with real experience in combat use. From this point of view, the “routine” of reasoning / comparisons / predictions related to strategic nuclear forces looks very interesting. I caught myself thinking while reading an article :)
  6. The comment was deleted.
  7. Viktor Sergeev 25 May 2020 08: 19 New
    • 11
    • 12
    -1
    Everyone pounced on the Mace. How many Tridents do you think will come out of the mines? Really did not think? There will always be problems. The strength of the missiles is not in reliability, but in the fact that they are there and the enemy has no desire to check the truth whether they write in the media?
    1. smaug78 25 May 2020 08: 40 New
      • 6
      • 9
      -3
      How many Tridents do you think will come out of the mines?
      so tell us how many Tridents and which mines will not work ...
      1. Viktor Sergeev 25 May 2020 08: 44 New
        • 9
        • 8
        +1
        God forbid to check it, as well as for the Mace.
        You just don’t need to water the Mace, as if the USA is doing great.
      2. dzvero 25 May 2020 11: 37 New
        • 4
        • 1
        +3
        But no one knows how much the Americans did not carry a full salvo of Trident. The same is true for the Mace.
      3. 5-9
        5-9 25 May 2020 12: 21 New
        • 0
        • 5
        -5
        Recently I went out, but immediately fell .... it happens ...
      4. sgrabik 26 May 2020 11: 46 New
        • 0
        • 1
        -1
        This will become clear only when, in a combat situation, these missiles are launched from their mines, it is not possible to foresee everything completely in advance and failures are quite likely not only from our side, but also from the American one !!!
    2. Mavrikiy 25 May 2020 08: 42 New
      • 6
      • 2
      +4
      Today JSC “Academician V. P. Makeev State Missile Center” JSC (GREC Makeev JSC) is the lead developer of strategic solid-fuel and liquid missile systems with ballistic missiles designed for installation on submarines.
      Quote: Victor Sergeev
      Everyone pounced on the Mace.
      Well, the Mace cannot fly, as God put it, it does not have wings.
      According to numerous experts, including foreign ones, Sineva is recognized as the best underwater missile in the world.
      A "Sineva" everywhere, even for 11500 km
      .Total specialists of the GRTs im. Makeev was assembled about 4 thousand serial naval missiles, more than 1200 missiles were shot, the success of launches was more than 96%.
      what
      1. Andrey NM 25 May 2020 14: 47 New
        • 12
        • 0
        +12
        Last week Viktor Kirillovich Gupalov, the former director of KRASMASH, was buried. He headed the company for 30 years. Hero of Socialist Labor, laureate of state award, professor. When he took into service the D-9, D-9R, D-9RM appeared "Sineva" with the "Liner". He did not let the plant fall apart, although there were many attempts. We can say that thanks to him, KRASMASH is still working, and Sarmat, although with a creak, is moving. After him, the directors changed already 4 times. I was the head of the diploma in the 90s, when we and two other colleagues received a second education ... And after all, nothing in the media. I think that this was a person at the Makeev level. He once had a chief engineer Anatoly Vaganov, who had previously been deputy of Makeev. The whole era is leaving ...
        1. Fizik M 25 May 2020 16: 06 New
          • 4
          • 1
          +3
          well they wrote, I will try to fix this thing
        2. Fizik M 25 May 2020 16: 19 New
          • 1
          • 1
          0
          Quote: Andrew NM
          Last week Viktor Kirillovich Gupalov, the former director of KRASMASH, was buried. He headed the company for 30 years. Hero of Socialist Labor, laureate of state award, professor

          pager look
        3. sgrabik 26 May 2020 12: 00 New
          • 1
          • 0
          +1
          And our illustrious “effective managers” come to replace our illustrious designers and heads of defense enterprises, who are absolutely illiterate in technical and technological plans, but they know where and how to save money to the detriment of quality and manufacturability when releasing such extremely important and complex products, and especially this economy is aimed at replenishing their personal ambitions and broad pockets, the security issues of our state are of little interest to them at the same time !!!
    3. arkadiyssk 25 May 2020 09: 23 New
      • 8
      • 4
      +4
      Much will come out of the Trident mines. Without a doubt. The Americans are shooting at 5-8 Tridents a year, and since 1987 they have already shot at 200 missiles, there seem to be no particular problems. We seem to have 5-7 launches a year, but because of the zoo of missiles it’s actually one type of missile per year, so we’ll have worse statistics in case of war.
      http://www.planet4589.org/space/lvdb/launch/Trident2
      1. 9PA
        9PA 25 May 2020 13: 49 New
        • 3
        • 3
        0
        There the super series goes on accident-free launches. 115 chtoli
  8. asv363 25 May 2020 08: 23 New
    • 5
    • 0
    +5
    However, the terms of existing contracts allow you to deploy no more 1500 BB.

    Dear author, the limit on the number of BBs according to START-3 (START) is 1550 pcs.
  9. smaug78 25 May 2020 08: 39 New
    • 6
    • 9
    -3
    Pest article. The difference between the products is 28 years old, and the author has "everything is fine marquise" ....
    1. Mavrikiy 25 May 2020 09: 33 New
      • 4
      • 9
      -5
      Quote: smaug78
      Pest article. The difference between the products is 28 years old, and the author has "everything is fine marquise" ....

      Well, why so cool. Simply, you need to make excuses that Kaka does not fly. The BRTT was initially inferior to the BRT in all its characteristics, but the start-up preparation time was minimal. Stored in curb form.
      the Americans immediately chose BRTT for the submarine though, although they have a low% of successful launches. The principle is to quickly throw missiles, let half of them fall into the ocean. At the initial stage of the arms race, it took place. And then the restrictions on the number of missiles went and arrived. Ours was also forced to plunge into kaku, to catch up on the development of BRTT. The grand dough cut dough, under the motto "No worse than theirs."
      BRZhT (generally BRZHD - the engine, but for a similar designation T) "Sineva" deviation from the target - up to 500 m,
      R-29RMU2 "Sineva" has a launch range from 8300 to 11 500 km, depending on the combat load. A missile can carry up to 10 individual guidance warheads with a power of 100 kt each, or 4 units with a power of 500 kt each with enhanced anti-missile defense systems. The circular probable deviation of these missiles is 250 meters. The R-29RMU2 “Sineva” marine rocket and its development, the R-29RMU2.1 “Liner”, are superior in energy-weighted perfection (technical level) to all modern rockets in the USA, China, Great Britain and France without exception, the Makeev’s GRC official website notes. Their use can make it possible to extend the operation of strategic nuclear submarines of Project 667BDRM Dolphin until 2030.
      BRTT does not have and will not have stability of rocket launches; during storage, fuel blocks can crack, deform, or lag behind the internal surface of the engine, depending on the mechanics. Now there are no more processes of spontaneous combustion and decomposition, the stabilizers swell and thereby reduce the fuel TX.
      1. KCA
        KCA 25 May 2020 10: 35 New
        • 7
        • 7
        0
        Actually, this was done not to “like theirs”, but in order to unify and, accordingly, reduce the cost, “Poplar”, “Poplar-M”, “Yars”, “Bulava”, probably, “Yars-S”, have essentially the same design with a large number of identical elements
        1. Fizik M 25 May 2020 11: 46 New
          • 5
          • 4
          +1
          Quote: KCA
          Actually, this was done not to “like theirs”, but in order to unify and, accordingly, reduce the cost, “Poplar”, “Poplar-M”, “Yars”, “Bulava”, probably, “Yars-S”, have essentially the same design with a large number of identical elements

          fool
      2. 5-9
        5-9 25 May 2020 12: 34 New
        • 1
        • 2
        -1
        For solid fuels, they have shorter AUTs - they start faster, lower the probability of a missile defense defeat in the form of Standard-3
        1. Fizik M 25 May 2020 13: 38 New
          • 4
          • 2
          +2
          Quote: 5-9
          For solid fuels, they have shorter AUTs - they start faster, lower the probability of a missile defense defeat in the form of Standard-3

          this is an absolutely moronic excuse from MIT and its hangers-on
          for if standards can work on BRs, then CARRIERS are not residents
          those. the "model of application and effectiveness" itself is erroneous, and it is just necessary to exclude the situation when, according to BR, they can work from the ranges of the Standard
          1. 5-9
            5-9 25 May 2020 14: 13 New
            • 2
            • 2
            0
            Well, the Americans about the SM-3 ranges got into some kind of crazy about the size and mass of the range missiles. On the other hand, the Mk57 is bigger and the rocket can be made bigger, the Mace is not done for 10 years ....
            1. NAVIAVI 25 May 2020 15: 20 New
              • 5
              • 5
              0
              Yes they all shine :-)
              And they were not on the Moon, and Musk brechet and their new station was made of cardboard. By the way, I wonder if the 27th will fly or not?
              And the middle class they have 17 thousand, but not rubles.
              ))) "This is me naughty ... that is, I dabble" (c)
          2. Andrey NM 25 May 2020 15: 05 New
            • 8
            • 0
            +8
            I have written about the "Mace" more than once here.
            In the dashing 90s, Americans sponsored the disposal of everything that did not suit them. At the end of the 90s, a letter came to Krasnoyarsk to the senior representative of the customer from the Naval Aviation Administration to substantiate the impossibility of further production of 3M-37 and the need to close the enterprise. The officer had the intelligence and courage to gather meetings at related enterprises and the head office and prepare documents on the readiness of the enterprises for further work and send these documents over their heads. As a result, the modernized Sineva and Liner appeared, and the enterprise was operating. If not for the director of KRASMASH V.K. Gupalov and not a senior military representative, we would have been around for 20 years as if there had been no liquid rockets, especially the Sineva missiles.
            In 1998, a company consisting of Urinson, Dvorkin, Solomonov, Sergeyev and Kuroedov began body movements along the "Bulava". The land office began to design marine products. Financing was taken from Design Bureau named after Makeev and they began to sculpt. As a result, the rocket flew only after connecting to the work of the Makeyevites. Relatively recently, there was information in the media about an order to Makeyevtsy to develop a new product for submarines. With almost equal mass with the Blue, the Mace has a smaller payload mass and flight range.

            The "solid" products and the "liquid" products have their positive and negative sides. Everywhere should be the golden mean and do not rush from one extreme to another.
            1. sgrabik 26 May 2020 12: 13 New
              • 0
              • 0
              0
              There’s even nothing to add, or rather you won’t say, everything is so !!!
          3. bk0010 25 May 2020 19: 22 New
            • 0
            • 0
            0
            this is an absolutely moronic excuse from MIT and its hangers-on
            Replace Standard with Thaad, will it become relevant? The active site is now being reduced.
            1. Fizik M 25 May 2020 21: 52 New
              • 2
              • 1
              +1
              Quote: bk0010
              Replace Standard with Thaad, will it become relevant?

              on land it's uncritical
              for 1 BR = 1 carrier
              but on the sea, alas ...
              see my article here (in VO) on the Arctic
        2. Mavrikiy 25 May 2020 14: 33 New
          • 2
          • 2
          0
          Quote: 5-9
          For solid fuels, they have shorter AUTs - they start faster, lower the probability of a missile defense defeat in the form of Standard-3

          1.Solid fuel shorter than aut - bad, ballistic trajectory, shortage of speed and range.
          2.sharper start - bad, hit the mine and submarines.
          3.lower chance of missile defense - the probability increases, the possibility of maneuver decreases.
          and in general in TT a lot of muck is stuffed, stabilizers, phlegmatizers, plasticizers, etc. reducing specific impulse.
          1. Usher 25 May 2020 17: 58 New
            • 1
            • 3
            -2
            Quote: Mavrikiy
            Quote: 5-9
            For solid fuels, they have shorter AUTs - they start faster, lower the probability of a missile defense defeat in the form of Standard-3

            1.Solid fuel shorter than aut - bad, ballistic trajectory, shortage of speed and range.
            2.sharper start - bad, hit the mine and submarines.
            3.lower chance of missile defense - the probability increases, the possibility of maneuver decreases.
            and in general in TT a lot of muck is stuffed, stabilizers, phlegmatizers, plasticizers, etc. reducing specific impulse.

            fool Can you read?
    2. Usher 25 May 2020 17: 57 New
      • 1
      • 2
      -1
      Quote: smaug78
      Pest article. The difference between the products is 28 years old, and the author has "everything is fine marquise" ....

      Sorry, they didn’t ruin the country. If the USSR would have been launched into the Bark series before the 2000s.
  10. d4rkmesa 25 May 2020 09: 12 New
    • 6
    • 6
    0
    Recently, I began to suspect that Minya is not lying. Problems with missiles and carriers. The Americans passed this stage 40 years ago.
    1. NAVIAVI 25 May 2020 09: 42 New
      • 6
      • 6
      0
      It's not about Mina.
      Occam's razor.
      If the animal looks like a cat, purrs like a cat, meows like a cat .... then this is definitely not a turtle. :-)
      There is no other explanation for the 20-year-old tales of the "Mace".
    2. zwlad 25 May 2020 09: 44 New
      • 2
      • 3
      -1
      Are ours worse? And ours will pass.
      1. Mavrikiy 25 May 2020 10: 38 New
        • 2
        • 3
        -1
        Quote: zwlad
        Are ours worse? And ours will pass.

        Americans went out the window, broke arms and legs, healed. But we are worse, we also want to break everything, so we broke it. fool
        1. zwlad 25 May 2020 11: 58 New
          • 2
          • 4
          -2
          and you first try to develop something new and then bring to serial production at our factories. and then tell how much it took time and how much what was stated in Tech. you did the job. hi
          1. Fizik M 25 May 2020 13: 36 New
            • 7
            • 2
            +5
            I personally (including "very informally") am familiar with a very large number of chief designers, including The main ones are with BIG letters. Alas, these are not all. There are ... "the product is afraid of water because" water " [marine tests] afraid of his chief designer "
            And on the basis of the experience and results of the Principal (with a capital letter) I can say with confidence that it is quite possible to make a topic within the set time frame and means, successfully passing the tests even in our "zoo".
            One of those from whom I learned this - GK "Mayevka", just FIRED.
            And the real reason for this is that the man worked for RESULT, and it is very "eye-piercing" for those who are used to "working" for "PROCESS"
  11. Maks1995 25 May 2020 09: 40 New
    • 4
    • 5
    -1
    uh ... The open characteristics are better than the UGM-133A Trident II years ago, but in the classified ones that the author does not know is the new Mace. ??? And so they are equal.
    Good article! with TTX, and not just water on wood.
  12. Angelo Provolone 25 May 2020 11: 26 New
    • 2
    • 2
    0
    Trident versus Mace. Different but equal?


    let's better see the cartoon
    Who is the Mace, and who is the trident? make bets.

  13. Fizik M 25 May 2020 12: 44 New
    • 6
    • 1
    +5
    about volley

    It is noteworthy that both shafts are located near the mid-frame of the rplnSN, while for testing it would be most useful to look and check the volley from the shafts farthest from it (because in this case the boat receives the greatest disturbances that can lead to exit for NUS (initial launch conditions) missile weapons complex).
    There is an assumption that they were afraid to shoot in such a (complicated) way, to put it mildly.
    https://mina030.livejournal.com/19061.html
  14. iouris 25 May 2020 13: 15 New
    • 0
    • 0
    0
    The author is not sure. Apparently there are good reasons.
  15. Bersaglieri 25 May 2020 14: 00 New
    • 3
    • 1
    +2
    Not equal. Equals are D-5 and Blue. "Mace" on PN is C-4
  16. Old26 25 May 2020 14: 25 New
    • 4
    • 3
    +1
    Quote: Michael m
    The trouble is, since the cobbler will start the pies, And the boots will stitch the pastry, And things will not go in the way.
    MIT gnawed the order, and it turned out what happened.

    It all starts for the first time. The GRC also started not with SLBMs, but with the famous SCAD. Then he took up SLBMs.
    MIT never engaged in SLBMs (although it was engaged in anti-submarine missiles), but at the “Bulava” at some point there was cooperation with the GRZ (the problem of exiting the submarine mine). Another thing is that there are very few such ground-based mining and mining from the stand along the Bulava. The submersible stand was not used at all (immediately launches from Donskoy). And the fact that the "raw" or "unsuccessful", so the gods do not burn pots. The same Makeevskaya R-39 was adopted almost after 35-40 test launches.
    Now the same GRC is engaged in absolutely unusual work for him. It develops a silo ICBM with a launch mass of 1,5-2 times greater than any product it ever created. Let's see how the Sarmat starts flying, which it has already been announced that it will become operational next year ...
    1. NAVIAVI 25 May 2020 15: 38 New
      • 4
      • 3
      +1
      Thread Tools Old 26
      ..... but according to the "Bulava" at a certain stage there was cooperation with the State Regional Center (the problem of exiting the submarine mine). Another thing is that there are very few such ground-based mining and mining from the stand along the Bulava. The submersible stand was not used at all (immediately launches from Donskoy). And the fact that the "raw" or "unsuccessful", so the gods do not burn pots. The same Makeevskaya R-39 was adopted almost after 35-40 test launches ....



      Well, thanks for noticing.
      I wrote about this.
      The problem arose during underwater launches with real missiles, not MMG.
      And when they got to the bottom of the reason, Oops .... it was too late to admit, so they dragged on time, while in KB they "rearranged the blocks" ....
      Probably a launching demonstration missile will be brought from the factory to Kamchatka.
      Ruslan? We’ll see how the board lands in Yelizovo. I doubt that the ship will be taken.
      It will be fun if the rocket is lucky with the return flight "Academician Chersky" ...))) There is a pipe, there is a pipe ....
      1. Usher 25 May 2020 18: 02 New
        • 2
        • 5
        -3
        Quote: NAVIAVI
        Thread Tools Old 26
        ..... but according to the "Bulava" at a certain stage there was cooperation with the State Regional Center (the problem of exiting the submarine mine). Another thing is that there are very few such ground-based mining and mining from the stand along the Bulava. The submersible stand was not used at all (immediately launches from Donskoy). And the fact that the "raw" or "unsuccessful", so the gods do not burn pots. The same Makeevskaya R-39 was adopted almost after 35-40 test launches ....



        Well, thanks for noticing.
        I wrote about this.
        The problem arose during underwater launches with real missiles, not MMG.
        And when they got to the bottom of the reason, Oops .... it was too late to admit, so they dragged on time, while in KB they "rearranged the blocks" ....
        Probably a launching demonstration missile will be brought from the factory to Kamchatka.
        Ruslan? We’ll see how the board lands in Yelizovo. I doubt that the ship will be taken.
        It will be fun if the rocket is lucky with the return flight "Academician Chersky" ...))) There is a pipe, there is a pipe ....

        Do you have fun? What's so funny?
        1. NAVIAVI 25 May 2020 19: 03 New
          • 4
          • 4
          0
          When a person repeatedly steps on a rake that the viewer hides from him. But still, in a mystical way, the forehead and the arm meet regularly.
          I'm a spectator, I'm funny.
          Who are you in this situation?
    2. Andrey NM 25 May 2020 16: 15 New
      • 5
      • 0
      +5
      I believe that land-based ICBMs are somewhat simpler. What is the course, speed, depth of the underground mine? Right, none. And one still does not need to take into account the sea waves and many more various disturbing influences, the underwater section of the movement, etc. .. Those. start conditions - a constant value. And the mass of the product is not so critical, other things being equal. More plays the role of dimensions for delivery to the place of duty and maintenance of the product. Starting coordinates are generally known to a millimeter. Entire systems work on boats to eliminate these errors and several officers with subordinate personnel are responsible for their work. There is a bike that one of the top leaders of MIT asked a question: "Something I did not understand, but what, does the boat really shoot on the go?"
    3. sgrabik 26 May 2020 12: 29 New
      • 0
      • 0
      0
      Yes, with “Sarmat” things are going on just the same much more successfully and faster than with the “Mace”, but if it were also brought to mind as the “Sarmat”, then it would already be a rocket with 100% reliability and the best TTX.
  17. Usher 25 May 2020 18: 00 New
    • 4
    • 11
    -7
    Immediately visible mishandled, under the guise of their own. they start to scream "everything is lost" "we are fools" "smart Americans" "we have junk" "missiles do not fly." How fussed a “Valentine” with his some kind of Klimkin. I’ve read some fakes from the dull Internet and is afraid of everyone, such as iksperd.
    1. NAVIAVI 25 May 2020 21: 35 New
      • 8
      • 5
      +3
      Nothing I'm not "Someone")))
      Repeatedly banned here Semenov, author of "Non-traditional" and much more.
      He graduated from flying on IL-38, the last position in the anti-submarine warfare department of the Pacific Fleet headquarters.
      If I’m no longer an expert, then appoint another.)))
      1. Fizik M 25 May 2020 21: 56 New
        • 5
        • 2
        +3
        Quote: NAVIAVI
        If I don’t already go to experts

        "appoint me" laughing
        and we (with you wink ) somehow agree angry
        1. NAVIAVI 25 May 2020 22: 28 New
          • 4
          • 5
          -1
          I confirm. Maxim expert!
          I'm just having fun, killing time and teasing different stubborn ones.
          I can’t get it from Kiev. Long away.
      2. Usher 27 May 2020 19: 28 New
        • 0
        • 0
        0
        Yes, I’m parallel to who you are, show your CSV elsewhere. You don’t even get the point. You persistently push your Klimkin, that I don’t even want to know what kind of subject, like Rezun or what? “Klimkin then” “Klimkin se” that the wedge rested on him with light?
    2. Fizik M 25 May 2020 21: 54 New
      • 4
      • 4
      0
      Quote: Usher
      Klimkin

      remember the saucepan, Klimkin in 404
      1. Usher 27 May 2020 19: 30 New
        • 1
        • 0
        +1
        What? Can you write humanly? And where does the saucepan have to do with it? are you this to me Can you read? Read first, then think.
  18. Old26 25 May 2020 18: 05 New
    • 4
    • 2
    +2
    Quote: Andrew NM
    I believe that land-based ICBMs are somewhat simpler. What is the course, speed, depth of the underground mine? Right, none. And one still does not need to take into account the sea waves and many more various disturbing influences, the underwater section of the movement, etc. .. Those. start conditions - a constant value. And the mass of the product is not so critical, other things being equal. More plays the role of dimensions for delivery to the place of duty and maintenance of the product. Starting coordinates are generally known to a millimeter. Entire systems work on boats to eliminate these errors and several officers with subordinate personnel are responsible for their work. There is a bike that one of the top leaders of MIT asked a question: "Something I did not understand, but what, does the boat really shoot on the go?"

    Any missile system is a complex mechanism. With regard to the launch, we can only say that the launch of a ground silo is easier than from a submarine. The launched product does not pass through a dense medium, secondly, the movement of the boat plays the role at the moment the rocket leaves the submarine mine, there may also be some problems when crossing the border of two media (I don’t know, but it is possible).
    No one spoke about the criticality of the mass of the product for ICBMs. I wrote only that at the GRTS them. Makeeva NO EXPERIENCE working with products of such a starting mass. Agree that for a mortar launch of a product weighing 1 ton of 50 tons, 100 tons, 150 or 200, not the same PADs are needed at all. GRC has very little experience with this. Throwing Starts Only
    1. Andrey NM 26 May 2020 06: 14 New
      • 3
      • 0
      +3
      Quote: Old26
      I wrote only that at the GRTS them. Makeeva NO EXPERIENCE working with products of such a starting mass

      On the R-39, the PAD weighed about 450 kg, the rocket "started" already in the water after leaving the mine. The crew of Alexander Alekseevich Bogachev in general released 2 ammunition during the year without any problems, and Bogachev himself “shot” about 60 pieces. This is no longer a throw test. The "mace" generally "starts up" after exiting the water. And MIT also did not have experience in designing such systems. By the way, how did the products come out on the K-140 RPKSN? It seems to be also thrown by the PADs. Designed St. Petersburg Design Bureau "Arsenal". As far as I remember, K-140 constantly stood at the pier in Gadzhievo, was assigned to 31 divisions. They carried out the disposal of missiles by shooting, as in the 941s, but not all came out. In the early 90's, the boat was decommissioned. The complex did not go into a series.
      Quote: Old26
      Agree that for a mortar launch of a product weighing 1 ton of 50 tons, 100 tons, 150 or 200, not the same PADs are needed at all.

      Liquid rockets usually start in mines, they don’t need PADs. Reactive gases are themselves "PADs".
  19. Andrey Vasilievich 25 May 2020 21: 59 New
    • 0
    • 1
    -1
    Why Trident, Not Trident?
  20. Old26 26 May 2020 01: 13 New
    • 4
    • 0
    +4
    Quote: Andrey Vasilievich
    Why Trident, Not Trident?

    Yes, because in Russian the TRIED. But the Ukrainian coat of arms is TRIZUB
  21. vVvAD 26 May 2020 01: 42 New
    • 0
    • 0
    0
    The casting weight of Trident II reaches 2800 kg. Separating warhead (RGC) can carry individual warheads (BB) of the individual type W88 (475 ct) or W76 (100 ct) - 8 and 14 units, respectively.

    Not beating 475x8 = 3800 + the weight of the dilution mechanism, and quite considerable, which is clearly seen from the number of BB W76. There cannot be W88 8 pcs at least while maintaining the same range.
  22. Old26 26 May 2020 14: 59 New
    • 2
    • 1
    +1
    Quote: Andrew NM
    Quote: Old26
    I wrote only that at the GRTS them. Makeeva NO EXPERIENCE working with products of such a starting mass

    On the R-39, the PAD weighed about 450 kg, the rocket "started" already in the water after leaving the mine.

    Let's figure it out, Andrew.
    SLBM R-39 "loaded" into the shaft of the boat in the TPK. And this means that in order to "throw" the rocket out of the mine, it will be necessary to activate the PAD at the time T + 00. It was the powder accumulator of pressure that "threw the rocket out of the TPK and, accordingly, the mine. Moreover, all this time the mine was dry, not filled with overboard water. The compartment with the pad was already in the air just before the main engine was turned on.
    SLBM engine turned on in the shaft of the boat, which before starting was filled with water

    Quote: Andrew NM
    The crew of Alexander Alekseevich Bogachev in general released 2 ammunition during the year without any problems, and Bogachev himself “shot” about 60 pieces. This is no longer a throw test.

    Andrew! Honor and praise to the crew of A.A. Bogachev But I talked a little about something else.
    P-39 "crawled out" as far as possible. Nevertheless, about 40 test launches were carried out. The "mace" was started to be tested according to a simplified program. In addition, the GRC had tremendous experience working with boat missiles, which Solomonov did not have. Although the mall participated in certain stages of product development. But at R-39 all the jambs got out at the stage of LI and were eliminated, at the “Mace” it seems not. I don’t want to evaluate this product right now, it is quite possible that the MIT specialists have already completed it, but the “speed test method” came out sideways for them.

    Quote: Andrew NM
    The "mace" generally "starts up" after exiting the water. And MIT also did not have experience in designing such systems.

    All solid-fuel rockets (and liquid ones with a mortar launch) include marching engines after leaving the transport and launch container.
    Do not quite understand your phrase that MIT had no experience? Experience of what? Creating a ballistic missile launched from a submarine or experience creating missiles with a mortar launch? If the first - then I agree to all 1000%. Therefore, the GRC was involved at certain stages of the development of the complex. If we are talking about a mortar launch, then all medium-range and intercontinental MIT missiles used a mortar launch. This is Temp-2S, and Pioneer (of all modifications), and Topol, and Topol-M, and Yars of all modifications

    Quote: Andrew NM
    By the way, how did the products come out on the K-140 RPKSN? It seems to be also thrown by the PADs. Designed St. Petersburg Design Bureau "Arsenal". As far as I remember, K-140 constantly stood at the pier in Gadzhievo, was assigned to 31 divisions. They carried out the disposal of missiles by shooting, as in the 941s, but not all came out. In the early 90's, the boat was decommissioned. The complex did not go into a series.

    Using PAD. That is, the PAD was turned on in the mine, threw it out of the water, after which the 1st stage marching engine was turned on.
    The rocket was stabilized in the underwater segment of the trajectory by a caverning device that was fired after leaving the water.
    In fact, if my respected Victor Petrovich Makeev, being in addition to the fact that the GRC Central Committee and also a member of the CPSU Central Committee would not have "devoured" a competitor - Pyotr Alexandrovich Tyurin (chief designer of R-31), then the fleet might eventually have received solid fuel a rocket and not a 90-ton mass. By the way, the R-31 was our first SLBM, starting with the help of the PAD.

    Quote: Andrew NM
    They carried out the disposal of missiles by shooting, as in the 941s, but not all came out. In the early 90's, the boat was decommissioned.

    According to various sources, from 2 to 4 missiles (the first more frequently encountered figure) did not come out (there were 6 stages of shooting). Those who did not leave were disposed of ashore

    Quote: Andrew NM
    Liquid rockets usually start in mines, they don’t need PADs. Reactive gases are themselves "PADs".

    Not all. Chelomeevsky missiles had and have a gas-dynamic launch method (on their engines). Yangeli - MR-UR-100, the R-36M family (R-36M, R-36M UTTKh, R-36M2 Voevoda) and unrealized due to the collapse of the Union R-36M3 Ikar had a mortar launch with the help of PAD

    Quote: vVvAD
    The casting weight of Trident II reaches 2800 kg. Separating warhead (RGC) can carry individual warheads (BB) of the individual type W88 (475 ct) or W76 (100 ct) - 8 and 14 units, respectively.

    Not beating 475x8 = 3800 + the weight of the dilution mechanism, and quite considerable, which is clearly seen from the number of BB W76. There cannot be W88 8 pcs at least while maintaining the same range.

    Your mistake, Vadim, is that you multiply the power of the W-88 warheads by their number. The weight of the BB EMNIP is about 300 kg
    1. Andrey NM 26 May 2020 18: 48 New
      • 3
      • 0
      +3
      Quote: Old26
      Let's figure it out, Andrew.
      SLBM R-39 "loaded" into the shaft of the boat in the TPK.

      No. R-39 was "naked", TPK was not. She "hung up" by the head "at the ARSS, which was a kind of launch pad and sealed the mine. By the way, the last step was still liquid. There were 2 shock absorber belts that crumbled after the start. Outwardly, the belts were somewhat similar to the 4K-10 and 3M-20, they also flew off after the start, or when you hook the cart unsuccessfully during loading. The engine started when the output sensor was triggered. Upon exit from the water, a pyroelectric node triggered, which “cut off” the ARSS, which in turn was also diverted by the pyroelectric nodes. The tail compartment was detached. At ARSS, there was still a system that made a gas cavity for moving a rocket under water. PAD was at the bottom of the shaft in the cavity of the nozzle.
      MIT had no experience with missiles for submarines.
      Quote: Old26
      In liquid SLBMs, the engine was switched on in the boat shaft, which was filled with water before starting

      Once upon a time it was my institution :)) ...
      About K-140 asked the question more to himself, because previously just did not think about it. At one time, almost every day passed by a pier with K-140 for a umpteen years. The boat was still under decommissioning.
      To be honest, I was not interested in land-based ICBMs before.
      Quote: Old26
      Do not quite understand your phrase that MIT had no experience? Experience of what? Creating a ballistic missile launched from a submarine or experience creating missiles with a mortar launch? If the first - then I agree to all 1000%. Therefore, the GRC was involved at certain stages of the development of the complex.

      In general, the height of cynicism is to take away the work from specialists, and then involve the same specialists in the same works, which, due to the lack of knowledge and curvature, cannot be completed. But grandmas pass through themselves.
      1. Fizik M 26 May 2020 21: 04 New
        • 3
        • 0
        +3
        Quote: Andrew NM
        In general, the height of cynicism is to take away the work from specialists, and then involve the same specialists in the same works, which, due to the lack of knowledge and curvature, cannot be completed. But grandmas pass through themselves.

        it has become "the rule rather than the exception" ...
  23. demchuk.ig 26 May 2020 16: 26 New
    • 3
    • 0
    +3
    “Sineva” and “Liner” - these are rockets! MITs “pumped up” the development of what they never did. The lobby got hurt. And now we have the shit that we have.
  24. Dzafdet 28 May 2020 07: 23 New
    • 1
    • 0
    +1
    Quote: KCA
    What are you any nonsense from the Internet pull? All that concerns the test and the technical condition of the nuclear submarines and Bulava - state secrets, for disclosure up to 6 years, with grave consequences up to 7, but what about treason to the Motherland up to 20, where do the authors of these opuses write from? From Lefortovo or from the colony ?? Were Wi-Fi connected to the defendants at Lefortovo?



    People meet, people communicate. Well, let’s put the Mace aside. MIT ALWAYS handed over
    in the Strategic Missile Forces are raw complexes, which then brought to mind through training and test launches. These are words of the deputy. commander of the Strategic Missile Forces. It is clear that with the solid fuel sector, we have always been bad. Backward chemistry of fuels, materials, electronics. Therefore, the problems were and will be. But what to do to the sailors who were loaded in the boat the first options of the Mace? Play Russian roulette?
    1. NAVIAVI 28 May 2020 11: 17 New
      • 0
      • 0
      0
      They won’t do anything.
      Discuss in the garage for a glass of awl and reach for iron. The main task is the length of service, Kamchatka allowances, pension, an apartment in the suburbs of St. Petersburg and a quiet life.
      At least the majority of the submariners whom he knew reasoned like that.
      Well, hope is lucky and there will be no war.
  25. Old26 28 May 2020 13: 16 New
    • 1
    • 1
    0
    Quote: demchuk.ig
    “Sineva” and “Liner” - these are rockets! MITs “pumped up” the development of what they never did. The lobby got hurt. And now we have the shit that we have.

    Everyone does something for the first time. The first missile for the submarine was generally royal. And Makeev did not begin with missiles for submarines. And from the operational-tactical mobile ground-based missile - now famous throughout the whole world, SCAD. Before him, the design of missiles for submarines was dealt with by Yuzhnoye Design Bureau.
    Now the same GRC them. Makeeva is engaged in something that has never been done before - the creation of a ground (mine) ICBM.

    Quote: Dzafdet
    Quote: KCA
    What are you any nonsense from the Internet pull? All that concerns the test and the technical condition of the nuclear submarines and Bulava - state secrets, for disclosure up to 6 years, with grave consequences up to 7, but what about treason to the Motherland up to 20, where do the authors of these opuses write from? From Lefortovo or from the colony ?? Were Wi-Fi connected to the defendants at Lefortovo?


    People meet, people communicate. Well, let’s put the Mace aside. MIT ALWAYS handed over
    in the Strategic Missile Forces are raw complexes, which then brought to mind through training and test launches. These are words of the deputy. commander of the Strategic Missile Forces. It is clear that with the solid fuel sector, we have always been bad. Backward chemistry of fuels, materials, electronics. Therefore, the problems were and will be. But what to do to the sailors who were loaded in the boat the first options of the Mace? Play Russian roulette?


    Raw always handed over? Remind me what concrete complexes I’ve handed over raw, well, except for the “Clubs” ?? And do not confuse the lag in solid fuels in 50-60 years with the situation in 80-90. So raw were delivered to the troops in such quantity. Temp-S - more than 1200 missiles, Pioneer - 728 missiles and 405 SPU, Topol - almost 400 launchers were in service, Topol-M - under 60 only launchers, "Yars" under one and a half hundred. I no longer mention such complexes as Luna and Luna-M, which were supplied in the amount of 470 and 750 complexes, respectively. I don’t even mention missiles. Only in 1990 in Afghanistan was the 1000th launch of Luna-M. And you continue to claim that everything is bad. As it was in the 50s, and now
  26. Dzafdet 29 May 2020 19: 46 New
    • 1
    • 0
    +1
    Quote: Old26
    Quote: demchuk.ig
    “Sineva” and “Liner” - these are rockets! MITs “pumped up” the development of what they never did. The lobby got hurt. And now we have the shit that we have.

    Everyone does something for the first time. The first missile for the submarine was generally royal. And Makeev did not begin with missiles for submarines. And from the operational-tactical mobile ground-based missile - now famous throughout the whole world, SCAD. Before him, the design of missiles for submarines was dealt with by Yuzhnoye Design Bureau.
    Now the same GRC them. Makeeva is engaged in something that has never been done before - the creation of a ground (mine) ICBM.

    Quote: Dzafdet
    Quote: KCA
    What are you any nonsense from the Internet pull? All that concerns the test and the technical condition of the nuclear submarines and Bulava - state secrets, for disclosure up to 6 years, with grave consequences up to 7, but what about treason to the Motherland up to 20, where do the authors of these opuses write from? From Lefortovo or from the colony ?? Were Wi-Fi connected to the defendants at Lefortovo?


    People meet, people communicate. Well, let’s put the Mace aside. MIT ALWAYS handed over
    in the Strategic Missile Forces are raw complexes, which then brought to mind through training and test launches. These are words of the deputy. commander of the Strategic Missile Forces. It is clear that with the solid fuel sector, we have always been bad. Backward chemistry of fuels, materials, electronics. Therefore, the problems were and will be. But what to do to the sailors who were loaded in the boat the first options of the Mace? Play Russian roulette?


    Raw always handed over? Remind me what concrete complexes I’ve handed over raw, well, except for the “Clubs” ?? And do not confuse the lag in solid fuels in 50-60 years with the situation in 80-90. So raw were delivered to the troops in such quantity. Temp-S - more than 1200 missiles, Pioneer - 728 missiles and 405 SPU, Topol - almost 400 launchers were in service, Topol-M - under 60 only launchers, "Yars" under one and a half hundred. I no longer mention such complexes as Luna and Luna-M, which were supplied in the amount of 470 and 750 complexes, respectively. I don’t even mention missiles. Only in 1990 in Afghanistan was the 1000th launch of Luna-M. And you continue to claim that everything is bad. As it was in the 50s, and now




    Well yes. well yes. To me, who has the VUS and the Luna-m complex, you will tell me about it. It was impossible for a long time to carry a rocket with a nuclear warhead from the moon on a tank chassis. Large loads were on the rocket. On the Moon, M is better, but there the accuracy was + - 1500 meters. No matter how comme il faut. Americans would have made a rocket with such a range less, but fuel, fuel ...
    Do not overwhelm me with numbers of complexes like Temp or Pioneer. The same Pioneer had three modifications, what does this mean? Blinded quickly, and then began to bring to mind. With Topol the same song. The weight of the complexes and the length of the rocket grew. because of this, it was necessary to lengthen the chassis, and this is also the weight. why did the weight grow? There was no fuel and electronics to make the car smaller ....