Military Review

Rogozin announced the start of flight tests of the RS-28 "Sarmat" ICBM

86

Flight tests of the newest intercontinental ballistic missile "Sarmat" will start in the near future, "Roskosmos" is already preparing for them. This was announced by the head of the state corporation Dmitry Rogozin.


Speaking at the Korolev Readings in Moscow, Rogozin announced the start of flight tests of the Sarmat ICBM, announcing their beginning in the near future. At the same time, the head of Roscosmos did not speak about specific dates.

Now the main work to be done in the near future is preparation for flight tests of the Sarmat heavy intercontinental ballistic missile

- he said.

Earlier, Russian Deputy Defense Minister Alexei Krivoruchko announced the start of testing of the Sarmat ICBM in an interview with the Krasnaya Zvezda newspaper. According to him, the stage of missile drop tests has been completed successfully and the Ministry of Defense is moving on to flight tests.

According to the data provided by the Ministry of Defense, the end of flight design tests of the new Sarmat ICBM is set in 2021. Also this year, the industry will have to master the serial production of a new weapons and related systems. The deployment of the Sarmat ICBM on combat duty of the Strategic Missile Forces is scheduled for 2022. This information was confirmed by the commander of the Strategic Missile Forces Sergei Karakaev.

The RS-28 "Sarmat" ICBMs are being prepared to replace the world's most powerful silo-based ICBMs, the RS-20V "Voevoda" (NATO - SS-18 "Satan"); the missile will become the carrier of the Avangard hypersonic blocks.
86 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must sign in.
  1. forty-eighth
    forty-eighth 30 March 2021 13: 43
    +7
    We hope that there will be no difficulties.
    1. hrych
      hrych 30 March 2021 13: 45
      +7
      Quote: forty-eighth
      We hope that there will be no difficulties.

      Difficulties temper wassat Of course, Sarmat will not carry the Vanguard. This is the work of the carrier UR-100UTTH (Stiletto). Sarmat is for separating individual guidance units, and Vanguard is a maneuvering monoblock, apparently of decent power.
      1. El Chuvachino
        El Chuvachino 30 March 2021 14: 13
        +6
        Still how it will be, especially in the future. Stilettos are limited in number, and Sarmat on himself will be able to carry several Vanguard blocks at once.
        1. hrych
          hrych 30 March 2021 14: 37
          +7
          The stylet is not limited. There are several dozen of them unfilled from warehouses and ampullated, of which there will be enough. You don't need a lot of vanguards, the survivability is high due to maneuvering and the charge of a megaton class. At Satan and her son Sarmat, blocks are purposefully thrown at targets by a breeding platform or "bus". A completely different algorithm. Sarmat "sows" a large number of blocks on the territory of partners, and with the possibility of an attack through the southern direction, and not through the North Pole. By leveling all the missile defense towns that look to the north, therefore, a sufficient number of missiles and an already worked out complex with the Vanguard makes Stiletto a priority. It makes no sense to make Sarmat universal and to deal with the problems associated with it. By and large, even at the end of the USSR, when designing the Albatros maneuvering unit based on the Spirali (Laptya) shuttle, a ready-made carrier UR100N UTTH was chosen. Those. Not the UR100N UTTH was created for the Vanguard, but the Vanguard was created for the UR100N UTTH.
          1. bk316
            bk316 30 March 2021 16: 27
            0
            Satan and her son Sarmata blocks are aimed at targets by the breeding platform or "bus"

            Probably no longer a Bus but a MARV ...
          2. ironic
            ironic 30 March 2021 16: 56
            -3
            If my memory serves me, then there were 30 of them. 4 were launched at the test stage, 12 are to be on alert (4 are already on standby), and are no longer planned from open sources. Theoretically, it would be possible to fill 6 more mines, but they seem to have already been redone according to Yarsy.
            With a full load of 10 blocks, plus blendes, Sarmat will not fly through the southern direction.
            1. hrych
              hrych 30 March 2021 18: 53
              +1
              Precisely, probably a Mystery, but supposedly the Russian Federation has more than one and a half hundred stilettos, including storage with unfilled tanks. 360 of them were produced. war has not happened yet, then disposal, including the Rokot launch vehicles for example. A couple of dozen Vanguards are enough to provide a cluster. They are not alone, Yars, Bulava, Sineva, Poplars and heavyweight Satan / Sarmat have not gone anywhere. The main work is all the same for the RGCH IN. 10 blocks, if they are not powerful, will fly completely from the South. Through the South Pole - journalistic illiteracy. Correctly "south direction". If through the North Pole (again conventionally) on the path of the mildest direction, then why the South Pole? It's just that the ballistic trajectory is laid in such a way that the blocks will fly into the United States from the south.
              1. ironic
                ironic 31 March 2021 15: 16
                +1
                As far as the data from open sources were passed, under the Vanguards they are remaking just of these 30, which were taken during the disarmament of Ukraine. It turns out that only they have sufficient potential for alert time. Perhaps the specific year of release matters. Under the Rokoty there are rockets that cannot be put on long-term combat duty. Therefore, they are shot. And the 12 planned for sure are of those missiles that will confidently withstand more than a decade after being installed in mines. For such a project of serious alteration and mastering of new technologies, for the sake of 10 years, they definitely do not start in normal, serious design bureaus. 12 pieces are two shelves. Theoretically, there are 6 more mines in which the old stilettos stood. This is another regiment. But they seem to have been remade and filled with Yars. Two regiments for a total of one and a half thousand charges on the DB is a drop in the ocean. How the assimilation of technology and a trial political leverage will come down, how is it really something that changes the combat factor, of course, in such a number - no. The nuclear shield of the Russian Federation today is Topol-M, Yars and Bulava. On the fighting heads of the Russian Federation has already approached the border of the treaty, due to the active rearmament of the Yars and Bulavs. At the same time, today Yars carries 4 heads. The maximum payload of Yars from open sources is 1250 kg, which is 4-6 warheads of 100-150 Kt. Those. If even 15 warheads of 100 Kt are loaded into Sarmat, it will probably fly through the southern direction. But how many of these missiles can still be put on alert without violating the treaty? Again, it will turn out, as with the Vanguard, which does not fundamentally change the layout of the quantity, at a considerable price, complex maintenance and preparation for the launch of a liquid-propellant rocket? These single copies will cost the Russian Federation in gold, and their combat value will be minimal, while the threat from destruction will be the first to be the first.
        2. ironic
          ironic 30 March 2021 16: 59
          -3
          The question is how much. Maximum payload on open sources 10T. Stiletto - about 4.5T carries one block. How much it weighs is not known exactly. Those. maximum three, more realistically two. An extremely expensive, huge, complex, liquid and hardly justified solution.
          1. bk0010
            bk0010 30 March 2021 18: 19
            +2
            Quote: ironic
            The question is how much.
            3 Vanguards on 1 Sarmat (they spoke on TV).
            1. Alex777
              Alex777 30 March 2021 19: 45
              +1
              And not only on TV. yes
              1. ironic
                ironic 31 March 2021 15: 25
                +1
                When put on alert, we will find out more precisely. The number of blocks is not hidden due to the current contract.
            2. ironic
              ironic 31 March 2021 14: 44
              +1
              Talking a lot on TV, so I try not to watch them at all. For this, the Vanguard must be no more than 3.3T in weight, but then the attack through the South Pole is canceled. With a full load, Sarmat is 2-3 thousand km longer than the Voevoda, and this is not enough for the southern direction. And if there are only two, then it is not economically profitable to fence in such a garden as Sarmat. The scarecrow turns out.
              1. bk0010
                bk0010 31 March 2021 15: 32
                0
                Quote: ironic
                For this, the Vanguard must be no more than 3.3T in weight, but then the attack through the South Pole is canceled.
                A missile defense breakthrough with the help of a maneuvering unit and a missile defense breakthrough using orbital warheads are two different things, they will not be done at the same time. Has the ban on the use of orbital warheads been lifted? R-36orb was prohibited in some of the contracts.
          2. Alex777
            Alex777 30 March 2021 19: 40
            +1
            Stiletto - about 4.5T carries one block. How much it weighs is not known exactly.

            But it is known that the Vanguard has a 2 Mt charge. wink
            https://tass.ru/armiya-i-opk/5047200
            1. ironic
              ironic 31 March 2021 14: 45
              +1
              That already indirectly speaks about the non-steep accuracy of such a block. yes
              1. Alex777
                Alex777 31 March 2021 15: 03
                0
                That already indirectly speaks about the non-steep accuracy of such a block.

                Which directly speaks about the reliable defeat of the target. wink
                We're not going to seize enemy territory, are we?
                And he has the illusion that a nuclear war can be won and continue to live in peace. A harmful illusion.
                1. ironic
                  ironic 31 March 2021 15: 33
                  0
                  If the target is a large military base or city. But a large military base will be empty before the guest arrives, leaving the city. Those. people have a nightmare. But the point infrastructure will not suffer from such megababs or will suffer little. And given their number, it is safe to say that an exchange of ICBM strikes will not lead to the end of hostilities, although no one will continue to live in peace, no one has any illusions on this topic. There are illusions that even the infliction of unacceptable damage will be the end of hostilities in the Hepothetical TMV, with a maximum number of 1550 warheads on alert. This is not enough to knock out the military logistics of the world's largest military players, especially those who pledged for it in building the military infrastructure.
                  1. Alex777
                    Alex777 31 March 2021 16: 00
                    0
                    But a large military base will be empty before the guest arrives.

                    I don’t think so. Theoretically, this is possible, but in practice, squiggles always happen. hi
                    1. ironic
                      ironic 31 March 2021 16: 11
                      0
                      Well, yes, if this is a war, somewhere they hesitated, and somewhere they miscalculated, but on average I wrote correctly. A warhead with a capacity of more than 300 Kt is not needed for solving the overwhelming majority of tasks in modern warfare. You can understand the blocks already on the database for Topol-M or, say, W87 / 88, it is not economically profitable to change until they have defended their own, but new blocks of huge capacities are being made today either out of hopelessness or in the calculation of the political aspect of the scarecrow. yes
                      1. Alex777
                        Alex777 31 March 2021 16: 30
                        0
                        A warhead with a capacity of more than 300 Kt is not needed to solve the vast majority of tasks in modern warfare.

                        Everything is simple and rests on one thing: either you believe in victory in a nuclear war or not.
                        I do not believe. And GDP, as far as I'm aware, too. wink
                        And the United States considers such a victory possible and is reducing the yield of warheads to prepare for a "limited nuclear war."
                        God be their judge. hi
                      2. ironic
                        ironic 31 March 2021 17: 12
                        0
                        I do not rely on faith, only knowledge. And those that I have (in this case, as not an expert), say that the exchange of ICBMs will not lead to the end of the world, and even to the end of the war, too. Moreover, it will also whip up the countries that did not participate in the first exchange, and will hurry up against the weakened superconductors. The use of low-power ammunition or ammunition of a directed underground explosion is logically justified in certain situations. Technology today has provided opportunities that were not there yesterday. Naturally, the military is the first to adopt them. What's wrong? It's like that. yes
                      3. 3danimal
                        3danimal 31 March 2021 20: 18
                        0
                        And GDP, as far as I'm aware, too.

                        He once mentioned a certain "paradise". I will assume that this is the name of special bunkers with all the conveniences.
                        And the United States considers such a victory possible and is reducing the yield of warheads to prepare for a "limited nuclear war."

                        Somewhat earlier, a number of sources said that the weakness of the United States lies in a small number of tactical nuclear weapons. They say, to throw such a charge at their steel, and they will not dare to use a powerful "strategist", this will bring the conflict to another level
                        Obviously, they were concerned about the issue and decided to increase the number of low-power charges. Which, with significant accuracy, are no less effective.
                      4. ironic
                        ironic 31 March 2021 20: 46
                        0
                        They have it mainly in free-fall bombs and in this regard it is even less than that of the Russian Federation and is concentrated in certain points. Therefore, there was a question about low-power warheads for submarine ICBMs, and possibly for the Kyrgyz Republic.
              2. 3danimal
                3danimal 31 March 2021 20: 07
                0
                About 1550 warheads: there is such a nuance - according to START-3, one bomber counts as one warhead, regardless of how many bombs or missiles with nuclear warheads it can carry.
                And who has more strategic bombers is known.
                1. ironic
                  ironic 31 March 2021 20: 39
                  0
                  With regard to bombers, there is another point. This is not an ICBM and it must still fly to the launch point of the CD, and this will happen after the exchange of ICBMs, even if they fly out some time before the start of mass launches.
                  1. 3danimal
                    3danimal 31 March 2021 21: 00
                    0
                    It is understandable, but nevertheless it changes the picture of strategic potentials.
                    As well as the fact that without cover by a sufficient number of MAPLs, a considerable part of the SSBNs will be destroyed before launches. And remaining "at the pier" - will turn into a convenient static target.
                  2. ironic
                    ironic 31 March 2021 21: 07
                    +1
                    Yes, this is so, and in this light, a waste of money on an expensive project of the Sarmat type, which is unlikely to have a speed of more than two missiles per year, is still productive from the point of view of defense, subject to consideration of a potential adversary whose tactical boats have everything in place and bombers more and the CD will also be noticeably more.
  • ironic
    ironic 30 March 2021 15: 31
    -6
    Difficulties that arise is normal. The question is different, given the Topol-M with a megaton (0.8M?) Unit and the successful rearmament of the old Topol on Yarsy, which is going to its logical conclusion, why do we need this rocket, probably for a lot of money. What will it be an alternative to? What is she against?
    1. El Chuvachino
      El Chuvachino 30 March 2021 16: 53
      +3
      What will it be an alternative to?

      Voivode
      What is she against?

      Against hot heads
      1. ironic
        ironic 30 March 2021 17: 33
        -3
        This is not an alternative, but a replacement. There is no alternative. Is it necessary?

        Against such goals, as they say on VO? Nobody in the world develops anything like this or collects it. All nuclear countries have given up megababs. The most powerful warhead in the west is 475Kt, and if they upgrade, then with a decrease in power for the sake of weight and accuracy. The optimum in terms of productivity is considered to be the range of 100-300.
        1. El Chuvachino
          El Chuvachino 31 March 2021 11: 27
          +1
          Quote: ironic
          This is not an alternative, but a replacement. There is no alternative.

          You have problems in causal relationships, because according to your own logic, there was no alternative to the Voevoda.
          Quote: ironic
          And whether it is necessary?

          It is necessary, necessary.
          Quote: ironic
          Against such goals, as they say on VO?

          Against the likes of you.
          Quote: ironic
          Nobody in the world develops anything like this or collects it.

          They don't have such technologies, so they don't. They are neither a decree nor a guideline for us.
          1. ironic
            ironic 31 March 2021 14: 40
            -1
            No, you just don't know what it is. The voivode also did not exist, and this is a relic of Soviet gigantomania, designed to compensate for the lack of accuracy of warheads with their power and number in one launch, which is on the verge of the technical ability to be on duty. How many of them actually remain out of the last 46 is hard to say.

            And why is this necessary if, in addition to spending money, it only creates an image of an attempt to intimidate, which is already no one more than the arsenal of the Voevod, which was definitely not afraid of anyone in the USSR, especially in light of the limitations of strategic offensive arms?

            And who are like me? A citizen of a country that is on the map with difficulty and is located noticeably closer to the minimum radius of destruction of missiles of this class? Why does the Russian Federation even need something against people like me? Where does the threat of the Russian Federation come from people like me?

            Those. Do they have heavy rockets to launch into space, but do not have the technology? This is nosens. They do not do it because no one needs this gigantomania and do not want to spend money on it.
            1. 3danimal
              3danimal 31 March 2021 16: 10
              0
              Those. Do they have heavy rockets to launch into space, but do not have the technology? This is nosens.

              This is Rogozin's hairpin, by the way, which promises everything to the Lunar program (it is strange that it does not fly to Alpha Centauri).
              Impossible without a heavy carrier.
              1. Alex777
                Alex777 31 March 2021 16: 20
                0
                This is Rogozin's hairpin, by the way, who promises everything for the Lunar Program ... Impossible, without a heavy carrier.

                Angara went into production.
                We agreed to build a lunar station with China.
                Although Rogozin does not understand what has to do with it ...
                1. 3danimal
                  3danimal 31 March 2021 19: 45
                  0
                  We agreed to build a lunar station with China.

                  This is great, but also a little sad. That it took the help of a strong player.
                  Although Rogozin does not understand what has to do with it ...

                  Because it was he who promised the station, first by 2020, then by 2024-25.
                  IMHO, it won't be ready by 2025, even with the help of China request
                  People may be able to land, but after the Americans.
                  Angara went into production.

                  Angara-5 (24,5 tons for LEO) there were only 2 successful launches with mass-dimensional mock-ups and one (with a satellite) canceled
                  Falcon Heavy (63t at LEO) made 3 successful launches, more suitable for such missions (compare payload).
                  The heaviest, Angara-5V, has not yet flown and still puts less load on the LEO (38t).
                2. 3danimal
                  3danimal April 1 2021 12: 32
                  +3
                  But, in fact, the actual plan of events around the Moon for the next 10 years: ours are planning only a manned flyby in 2028.
                  There will be no lunar station on the surface in the near future, but for the 24th year an analogue of the ISS in the orbit of the Moon is in the plans.
                  1. Alex777
                    Alex777 April 1 2021 13: 28
                    0
                    And here, in fact, is the current plan of events around the Moon for the next 10 years.

                    Thank you! good
              2. ironic
                ironic April 1 2021 15: 26
                +1
                Everything needs money, and the issues of crediting long-term programs in the Russian Federation, apparently, do not really want to deal with due to the struggle to get into the state budget surplus. This is very convenient for the indicator of the success of the leadership, but the fact that there is not enough money is ... hold on.
            2. El Chuvachino
              El Chuvachino April 1 2021 13: 17
              0
              Quote: ironic
              this is a relic of Soviet gigantomania, designed to compensate for the lack of accuracy of warheads with their power and number in one launch

              It is a holdover from the West's threat from the Cold War, which, as it turns out, does not end. The enemy fears more power than unnecessary precision for weapons of mass destruction.

              Quote: ironic
              And why is this necessary if, in addition to spending money

              This is not the first time you have entered our wallets. It's none of your business what and how we pay from our arsenal.

              Quote: ironic
              And who are like me?

              Ideological or salary trolls, who here day after day, under the guise of intelligence, are trying to sow doubts covered by false theses.

              Quote: ironic

              Those. Do they have heavy rockets to launch into space, but do not have the technology? This is nosens. They do not do it because no one needs this gigantomania and do not want to spend money on it.

              We could have done it. But they can't.
              1. ironic
                ironic April 1 2021 15: 36
                +1
                There is no threat of the West with megatons of heads since that same Cold War, because they even then abandoned megababs for the sake of accuracy, smaller dimensions and manufacturability, including maintenance. The enemy is only on the battlefield. And since there was no battle, then, accordingly, only opponents. But they have not been afraid of anything for a long time, especially when comparing the total potential at the peak of the USSR's nuclear power and what is on the DB today.

                I do not climb, but I am interested. It's your business, but my interest. Including how you pay out of pocket. Knowledge has never interfered with anyone.

                Yeah, your unprincipled and unpaid nonsense, is it not trolling? Well, yes schaz. Doubt is the lot of thinking people. Those who do not think have nothing to doubt. False are your categorical statements, yes.

                Not all that is possible is needed.
            3. 3danimal
              3danimal April 1 2021 20: 21
              +1
              By the way, Falcon Heavy, the most lifting missile in operation, flies only on Space X engines.
    2. bk0010
      bk0010 30 March 2021 18: 24
      +3
      Quote: ironic
      why do we need this rocket, for sure for a lot of money. What is she against?
      Rocket mines to pick the Minutemans.
      1. 3danimal
        3danimal 31 March 2021 16: 04
        0
        With sufficient accuracy, a 100-300 kT warhead will suffice.
        In addition, the bulk of their nuclear warheads are located on SLBMs, invulnerable to a disarming strike.
        1. ironic
          ironic 31 March 2021 16: 28
          +1
          With sufficient accuracy, even a 50Kt B-61-12 is enough.
      2. ironic
        ironic 31 March 2021 16: 13
        0
        For this, it is definitely not needed.
        1. El Chuvachino
          El Chuvachino April 1 2021 13: 17
          0
          Our MO just forgot to ask you.
          1. ironic
            ironic April 1 2021 15: 21
            -1
            Yes, I forgot, by the way, too. wink
    3. Vasia
      Vasia 30 March 2021 23: 44
      0
      What will it be an alternative to? What is she against?

      Someone withdrew from the treaty on the limitation of anti-missile defense systems, they are strenuously "sawing" it, they themselves believe that they have "deceived fate", telling us that it is against Iran. This is what Sarmat is doing for this, so that partners do not lose touch with reality.
      1. ironic
        ironic 31 March 2021 16: 17
        0
        And why, if there is Topol-M, Yars (C) and Bulava? Why, if SMV-III and the limitation of 1550 heads per OB remain in effect? Why, if their number does not affect the overall picture? How much time and money will it take to replace 46 Governors, if today, partially finished, Stilettos are being modernized for the Vanguard, two a year? And here we are talking about a twice as large liquid-propellant rocket from scratch.
      2. 3danimal
        3danimal 31 March 2021 20: 01
        0
        If missile defense is capable of intercepting at least 10% of missiles, it already makes sense.
        Moreover, at ranges of the order of 2000 km (GBI).
  • syndicalist
    syndicalist 30 March 2021 18: 11
    -6
    Quote: forty-eighth
    We hope that there will be no difficulties.

    If Ragozin announced, then they will definitely arise.
  • Soldatov V.
    Soldatov V. 30 March 2021 13: 55
    +1
    "Satan" is a multi-head missile, and how many "Vanguard" can be put in a block? If one is good, if about ten, then the US Secretary of Defense needs to practice jumping out of the window.
    1. ironic
      ironic 30 March 2021 15: 27
      -4
      Well, if UR100N UTTH, with its ability to carry almost 4.5T of load, is carried by one unit, then ...
  • bk316
    bk316 30 March 2021 13: 58
    +8
    I don’t really understand what Roscosmos has to do with it.
    Is he responsible for ICBMs?
    1. Nikon OConor
      Nikon OConor 30 March 2021 14: 05
      +4
      it's a matter of development. When a rocket capable of launching satellites into orbit appeared in the USSR, everyone realized that the USSR had the first intercontinental carrier of nuclear weapons.
    2. d4rkmesa
      d4rkmesa 30 March 2021 14: 30
      +5
      JSC Krasmash is reassigned to Roscosmos. And the GRTs Makeev seems to be too.
      1. bk316
        bk316 30 March 2021 16: 00
        +1
        JSC Krasmash is reassigned to Roscosmos.

        Indeed, I missed it. Thanks.
    3. 210ox
      210ox 30 March 2021 18: 09
      0
      Did you get worried right away?
  • CastroRuiz
    CastroRuiz 30 March 2021 14: 04
    .
    Rogozina slushat, sebia neuvazhat.
    1. The comment was deleted.
      1. CastroRuiz
        CastroRuiz 30 March 2021 14: 29
        -6
        Ya ne russkiy i muzhchina 62 let i vpolne spokoyen s moyim urovnem znania russogo yazika.
        Nu i bezhite uchit kogo to drugogo.
        1. Mordvin 3
          Mordvin 3 30 March 2021 14: 52
          -3
          I do not understand .. UAZ?
          1. CastroRuiz
            CastroRuiz 30 March 2021 15: 04
            -6
            Da, rechi. Spokoyen?
            1. Mordvin 3
              Mordvin 3 30 March 2021 15: 06
              0
              Quote: CastroRuiz
              Da, rechi. Spokoyen?

              I didn't get shit. Sorry... sad
              1. CastroRuiz
                CastroRuiz 30 March 2021 15: 37
                -4
                Ya oshibsa s yazikom eto nepravilno, dolzhno bit rech.
                Nadeyus teper Vam poniatno. :)
                1. Mordvin 3
                  Mordvin 3 30 March 2021 15: 53
                  0
                  Quote: CastroRuiz
                  Ya oshibsa s yazikom eto nepravilno, dolzhno bit rech.
                  Nadeyus teper Vam poniatno. :)

                  Got it..
        2. loki565
          loki565 30 March 2021 15: 33
          +2
          Ya ne russkiy i muzhchina 62 let i vpolne spokoyen s moyim urovnem znania russogo yazika.
          Nu i bezhite uchit kogo to drugogo.

          This is understandable, but nevertheless it is desirable to write in Russian, this is also spelled out in the rules of the site, just many do not quite understand you)))
          1. CastroRuiz
            CastroRuiz 30 March 2021 15: 36
            -2
            Dla menia klava s azbukou ochen slozhno i medleno. U menia est i biznis i druzia v RU, bez problem oni spravlyayutsa s foneticheskou perepiskou na russkom.
            1. Genry
              Genry 30 March 2021 15: 59
              +2
              Quote: CastroRuiz
              Dla menia klava s azbukou ochen slozhno i medleno.

              Put the layout: Russian (American, phonetic) and you will be happy.
  • ironic
    ironic 30 March 2021 14: 48
    .
    Actually, today Sarmat is an extra missile for Russia. Its goal is ultimately political. Today Russia does not need it as a means of nuclear counting.
    1. bk316
      bk316 30 March 2021 15: 59
      +8
      As a means of nuclear counting Russia does not need it today.

      counting ???? laughing
      eprst here are our experts on the Strategic Missile Forces now am
      1. ironic
        ironic 30 March 2021 16: 44
        -3
        I write in transliteration, so it is printed. I didn't pay attention. Are you satisfied?
    2. Vladimir61
      Vladimir61 30 March 2021 16: 05
      +4
      Quote: ironic
      Actually, today Sarmat is an extra missile for Russia.

      Fine! An extra ... bolt in the ass of our "partners" will not hurt.
      1. ironic
        ironic 30 March 2021 16: 47
        -5
        Well, if you agree to pay for this flying column out of your pocket, for the sake of a dubious attempt at political pressure, through gigantomania ...
        1. Vladimir61
          Vladimir61 30 March 2021 17: 01
          +3
          Well, you are a well-known expert, worthy to get into the Book of Records. It is necessary to manage, in two months (registered on February 24, 2021), to gain "enormous popularity".
          1. ironic
            ironic 30 March 2021 18: 19
            -6
            And who are the experts in the comments? Units. And as a rule, for some reason they do not have gold shoulder straps. And who are the judges? I know a couple of these who regularly give me disadvantages. They write regular nonsense on this they scored marshal ratings. At the time I am proud of the negative rating from such marshals.
            1. Vladimir61
              Vladimir61 30 March 2021 18: 33
              +4
              Quote: ironic
              I know a couple of these who regularly give me disadvantages.

              Respected! There are such, but these are, as a rule, your opponents personally, and not in the knowledge of the subject at the expert level. Experts can be those who have specialized education, and the appropriate level and experience. Here 99,99% of ordinary people, with their own views, beliefs, concepts and so on. But to manage, even from such a motley community on VO, to get such an "assessment" of your participation, but for such a short period, sorry ... Maybe you should look in the mirror?
              1. ironic
                ironic 31 March 2021 15: 24
                +1
                So there are very few such experts here, as I wrote. And there are a lot of opponents with knowledge of the technology of tricycles and a coil of barbed wire, accompanied by the shouts of a hurray and with golden shoulder straps. They drive each other away with might and main. So why should I pay attention to such ratings? Wherever I am smortrel, the ratings here are determined by these gold diggers, not thinking people. Everything is fine with mirrors, I comb my hair every day. But the fact that in just two months I counted hundreds of extremely racist statements in the comments, this is definitely not all normal with the "heterogeneity" and with a mirror in which these users look.
  • rocket757
    rocket757 30 March 2021 14: 52
    +1
    A formidable weapon, a flying apocalypse, if you figure it out / dream up ...
    1. ironic
      ironic 30 March 2021 16: 48
      -5
      ... it turns out superfluous, huge, expensive, limited by the agreement on the number of charges ... well, in short, everything is like that, down to earth.
  • Old26
    Old26 30 March 2021 16: 56
    +4
    Quote: V.
    "Satan" is a multi-head missile, and how many "Vanguard" can be put in a block? If one is good, if about ten, then the US Secretary of Defense needs to practice jumping out of the window.

    10 "Vanguards" simply will not fit under the fairing. Well, if 3-5, and even then purely theoretically, because the mass dimensions of the "Vanguard" are not exactly known to us

    Quote: ironic
    Actually, today Sarmat is an extra missile for Russia. Its goal is ultimately political. Today Russia does not need it as a means of nuclear counting.

    In this situation, "Sarmat" is a means of maintaining parity in BB (this is in-1), in-2 - a means of defeat, capable of carrying heavy blocks due to its large enough throw weight. There is no alternative. UR-100N UTTH - it is running out, and it can now carry 1 "Vanguard", as a carrier of uncontrolled BB it is no longer there
    1. ironic
      ironic 30 March 2021 17: 10
      -3
      If three fit, then it will be good, judging by the fact that one fits into the UR.

      In terms of warheads, it is easier and cheaper to create parity with Yarsami, especially since the Russian Federation has fewer carriers than the States, and therefore there are more opportunities in this regard for strategic offensive arms.
      Huge blocks with less precision are less efficient than the more accurate 100-300. Destroying one launcher is more painful. The production and maintenance of this flying convoy is clearly both more complicated and costly, and all potential opponents have long ago abandoned megablocks. Yars-S is more than sufficient to contain a number of more powerful units, and Topol-M is still on duty. It was wiser to create a more compact powder replacement for the UR-100N UTTH for one unit in the mobile version.
  • lis-ik
    lis-ik 30 March 2021 18: 39
    -2
    Maybe experts will explain, where does Rogozin and "Roskosmos", before, in my opinion, other organizations were engaged in such products?
  • iouris
    iouris 30 March 2021 21: 11
    -1
    And they won't make a soft landing like Musk's?
  • Old26
    Old26 30 March 2021 22: 59
    +3
    Quote: hrych
    but allegedly the Russian Federation has more than one and a half hundred stilettos, including storage with unfilled tanks.

    Cut the sturgeon every 5, there will be a figure closer to reality.

    Quote: hrych
    360 of them were produced. war has not happened yet, then disposal, including the Rokot launch vehicles for example.

    Much more of them were produced. 360 - these are only those that were in service.
    During tests of all types, combat training launches and space launches, 208 missiles were used up. Another 180 missiles (which had previously been on the database) were disposed of under the supervision of the Americans in Ukraine. So 50, as you wrote just above, is not in sight.

    Quote: ironic
    If my memory serves me, then there were 30 of them. 4 were launched at the test stage, 12 are to be on alert (4 are already on standby), and are no longer planned from open sources. Theoretically, it would be possible to fill 6 more mines, but they seem to have already been redone according to Yarsy.

    We were given a slightly larger number, met the figure 32-34, but not the essence. This number of items was "dry". How many of them, after carrying out routine maintenance, were found fit for further operation is unknown. How much was used in space launches - too. But they really plan to put into service TWELVE PRODUCTS... According to the product test program Yu-71 was launched FIVE carriers (the last three tests are successful, the first two are not)
    Someone did not alter any 6 mines for "Yarsy" (in order to deploy additional 6 "Vanguards" there). "Vanguards" are deployed in the positional area of ​​the 13th division, and there the "Yars" have never been based and are not based there.

    Quote: Nikon OConor
    it's a matter of development. When a rocket capable of launching satellites into orbit appeared in the USSR, everyone realized that the USSR had the first intercontinental carrier of nuclear weapons.

    In fact, an intercontinental launch vehicle appeared earlier than a space rocket.

    Quote: ironic
    In terms of warheads, it is easier and cheaper to create parity with Yarsami, especially since the Russian Federation has fewer carriers than the States, and therefore there are more opportunities in this regard for strategic offensive arms.

    Not quite simpler and, most importantly, cheaper. If, for example, the planned number of "Sarmats" is deployed, it will take about 5 years of time. To reach parity in BB with Sarmat, it will be necessary to create Yars in the amount of about 1,7 times more than Sarmat. This means that the number of launchers will increase in the same proportion. This means time for their modernization and deployment.
    There will be no more strategic offensive capabilities. We are at the limit in terms of the number of blocks. In order to deploy the same number of blocks using only light missiles, it will be necessary to reduce their combat equipment and deploy additional regiments, which is also worth something

    Quote: ironic
    Huge blocks with less precision are less efficient than the more accurate 100-300.

    And no one calls to deploy monoblocks of 1,5-2 tens of megatons.
  • squid
    squid 31 March 2021 07: 53
    -2
    I wonder what Rogozin has to do with it. Where is the Ministry of Defense with its ICBMs and where is Roskosmos with Rogozin.