Military Review

Perspective ICBM: appearance and timing

67
The last two months have been rich in news about the development of domestic ballistic missiles. At the very beginning of September, it became known that by the 2018 year, the Russian strategic rocket forces would receive a new intercontinental missile. The purpose of this development was the replacement of the obsolete ICBMs of the P-36М2 “Voyevoda” model. By the stated date, the old missiles were planned to be completely decommissioned and disposed of or used to put spacecraft into orbit. In general, the good news, although not without debate about the feasibility of the new project and its optimal appearance.

For the next few weeks, there were no promising ICBMs on the project. But in recent days, the news again went one after another. First, on October 19, Interfax, citing a source in the defense industry, announced the presentation of a draft sketch of a new missile to the Ministry of Defense. The military was generally satisfied, but with some reservations. They demanded that developers correct some unnamed nuances and start preparing a full-fledged project. The main developer of the new rocket became the State Rocket Center named after. V.P. Makeeva (Miass), the Reutov NPO Mechanical Engineering is also involved in the creation of the project. According to available data, the requirements of the Ministry of Defense for the new rocket imply a starting mass of about one hundred tons, the installation of liquid engines and a new anti-missile defense system. Other details of the technical specifications and appearance of the rocket while remain secret. Moreover, at the moment there is no data on the name of the project.

Based on known information, several interesting conclusions can be drawn. For example, lovers of conspiracy thesis can “cling” to the fact that the new rocket for ground use is not made by the Moscow Institute of Heat Engineering, which had previously created the Topol family and the Yars rocket, but by the Mias State Regional Center named after Makeev, who over the past sixty years has been exclusively engaged in the development of ballistic missiles for submarines. From a certain point of view, a change in the lead developer may seem like confirmation for assumptions about the lack of a serious future for MIT due to a number of unsuccessful launches of the R-30 Bulava missile. However, the transfer of a purely “land-based” missile project to an organization that had previously dealt only with marine issues could have a much simpler and more prosaic explanation. The fact is that in recent years, the Institute of Heat Engineering, so to speak, has monopolized the land-based missile industry. Moreover, this fall is expected to adopt the naval fleet a new ballistic missile R-30 "Bulava", thanks to which the development of MIT will serve not only on land. GRC them. Makeeva, in turn, until recently, for a number of reasons, was forced to deal only with the modernization of existing rocketry. In the course of these works, for example, the R-29RMU2.1 “Liner” rocket was created, designed to replace previous R-29 family missiles. However, the Liner is proposed for use on submarines of old projects, and new submarine missile carriers are now being built with the design for the Bulava. Thus, the order to develop a new missile for the Strategic Missile Forces, and not for the fleet, looks like a kind of lifesaver for the famous Ural enterprise.

It is also worth staying at the announced starting mass. The new MBR will weigh about one hundred tons against twice the mass of the planned P-36X2 replacement. The double discrepancy raises certain questions. First of all, they relate to the payload, and not the flight range. Everything is clear with the latter - even a solid propellant rocket with half the weight can have a range over 10-11 thousands of kilometers, as the latest developments of MIT demonstrate. But the head, in turn, is the subject of controversy. If you try to present a promising ICBM as a reduced P-36М2 with corresponding mass-dimensional characteristics, it turns out that it will be able to deliver warheads with a total weight of about four tons to the target. This “calculation” does not pretend to be true and has as its goal only a rough idea of ​​the characteristics of the rocket. Naturally, about any ten warheads, like the "Governor", is no longer in question. In addition, requirements to overcome the enemy's missile defense system hint at the composition of the payload. Probably the new warhead will receive a relatively large number of false targets and warhead simulators. It is obvious that an increase in the number and mass of the breakthrough means will directly affect the size and power of the combat units used. A certain difficulty in trying to predict the composition of the head of the new missile is made by previous domestic ICBMs. Of the latest missiles, the separable warhead is available only on the PC-24 Yars. The Topol family, in turn, carries a monoblock warhead. At the same time, the promising ICBM from the State Rocket Center belongs to the class of heavy missiles, which makes it possible with a high degree of probability to equip with a still divided head part, even if it is more modest compared to the P-36М2.

The appearance of a promising rocket, of course, is of great interest. However, some statements by officials of the Ministry of Defense can make the situation even more curious and even controversial. Almost simultaneously with the news on the approval of the draft design of RIA Novosti, the consultant to the Commander-in-Chief of the Strategic Missile Forces, Colonel-General Retired V. Esin, was quoted as saying. According to him, the production of a new liquid MBR will begin at the end of the current 2012 of the year. In the light of the September statements by the command of the rocket forces, such information can raise many questions. First of all, it is not quite clear how the dates, previously called and called now, are related to each other. If only a preliminary draft has been approved, at best, new missiles will fly after 2014-15. But Esin said about 2012. Most likely, in this case we are dealing with a phenomenon that is commonly called a spoiled telephone. The individual components of the new rocket, which need to be tested in the course of R & D on the topic, may well be made this year, but these are just individual parts and assemblies, and not a complete delivery system. As for the assembly of the entire rocket, this is the case of the next years. SRC them. Makeeva is known for her thoroughness in projects and is unlikely to be in such a hurry.

The picture of the creation of a promising intercontinental ballistic missile of a heavy class that has taken shape in the media has turned out to be quite interesting. To the usual secrecy in such matters and the gradual discovery of the details, an incomprehensible situation with terms was added, which puts the whole picture upside down. The conclusion about the lack of awareness of one of the sources of information suggests itself, but so far there has been no official confirmation or refutation of information about the launch of the rocket construction this year. It remains only to wait for new applications and fresh news. If the assembly work really starts this year, then we will soon be told about them.


On the materials of the sites:
http://interfax.ru/
http://ria.ru/
http://lenta.ru/
http://makeyev.ru/
http://i-mash.ru/
http://arms-expo.ru/
Author:
67 comments
Ad

Subscribe to our Telegram channel, regularly additional information about the special operation in Ukraine, a large amount of information, videos, something that does not fall on the site: https://t.me/topwar_official

Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must sign in.
  1. sv-sakh
    sv-sakh 23 October 2012 08: 58
    +30
    ICBMs are still protecting the right of just 143 million people (2% of the world's population) to occupy 17098242 km²
    The news can not but rejoice.
    1. Lech e-mine
      Lech e-mine 23 October 2012 09: 01
      +5
      As the famous saying goes, a good revolver SMITH AND WESSON (P-36M2) equalizes the chances of a BANDIT (USA) AND ITS VICTIMS.
      1. Forget
        Forget 23 October 2012 09: 08
        0
        Leha e-mine,
        and why SMITH AND WESSON, then TT
        1. Lucky
          Lucky 23 October 2012 15: 09
          -1
          then really Nagan)
          1. crazyrom
            crazyrom 23 October 2012 18: 08
            -1
            Then Swift!
      2. Esso
        Esso 23 October 2012 09: 29
        +1
        R-36M2 is our temporary suppressor of US democracy. While the terms of missiles are extended. What happens with the terms of missiles is generally unclear, here is an example
        Production of a new 100-ton liquid-fuel intercontinental ballistic missile (ICBM) will begin before the end of this year, retired Colonel-General Viktor Esin, consultant to the Strategic Missile Forces commander, told RIA Novosti on Friday.
        Earlier, the commander of the Strategic Missile Forces Sergei Karakaev told the agency that Russia will create a new heavy 100-ton MBR by 2018. It will replace the R-36M2 Voevoda heavy ballistic missile known throughout the world, known in the West as Satan, with a payload of up to 10 tons. Prior to that, all the latest Russian developments of intercontinental ballistic missiles - both sea-based (Bulava) and land-based (Topol-M, Yars) - were solid-fuel.
        "In early October, the Russian Defense Ministry generally approved the draft design of the new missile, some points were entrusted to the designers for revision. The production of the missile will begin before the end of the year," Yesin said, adding that development work had already begun.
        The interlocutor of the agency refused to comment on the question of what improvements the Ministry of Defense of the Russian Federation indicated, citing state secret.
        First we talked about 2018, now the end of 2012. Either we have a serious breakthrough, or the ranks from defense mines messed up everything, or this is a duck of journalists. Nevertheless, we urgently need such a rocket, after Syria and Iran, the democrats will turn all eyes to us !
        1. nikoli25
          nikoli25 23 October 2012 14: 21
          +5
          or maybe they have been developing it for a long time, they just kept silent about it, but this year they’ll already test it
    2. Forget
      Forget 23 October 2012 09: 06
      -4
      Quote: sv-sakh
      occupy 17098242 km²

      Well, move to the Far East and Siberia, otherwise there will be more than millions of people who speak a different language smile , and at the same time unload Moscow traffic jams
      1. sv-sakh
        sv-sakh 23 October 2012 09: 44
        +20
        Actually, I live in Yuzhno-Sakhalinsk ...
        And do not tell people what to do ...;)
        1. 755962
          755962 23 October 2012 13: 10
          0
          Strategic Missile Forces of Russia: production of the latest heavy ICBMs will begin before the end of the year
          More: http://www.arms-expo.ru/049051124050057050050055.html
          1. alexng
            alexng 24 October 2012 14: 35
            0
            Probably greatly impatient. And there are still some trump cards in a zashashnik, and we will soon become witnesses of this.
        2. Forget
          Forget 23 October 2012 14: 21
          -4
          Quote: sv-sakh
          And do not tell people what to do ...;)

          Well, then do not resent the dominance of visitors wink
      2. crazyrom
        crazyrom 23 October 2012 18: 10
        +1
        Do not tell people what to do if you do not want to be told where to go laughing
      3. dastan13
        dastan13 24 October 2012 08: 26
        +5
        In fact, it’s time to move people from the west of Russia to the east ..... it’s time to explore open spaces .........
    3. crazyrom
      crazyrom 23 October 2012 18: 07
      +1
      Quote: sv-sakh
      ICBM is what still protects the right of all 143 million people

      already 144mln good
    4. Gecko
      Gecko 23 October 2012 21: 17
      -1
      17098242 km² is 12,65% of all land !!!
      1. patsantre
        patsantre 24 October 2012 15: 19
        +1
        Maybe the Earth’s surface?
    5. Civil
      Civil 24 October 2012 18: 49
      -1
      Somehow it’s calmer for the children when the ICBMs are on duty and a replacement is being prepared quickly ... the development speed is amazing
  2. vylvyn
    vylvyn 23 October 2012 09: 22
    +9
    Quote - "The last two months have been rich in news about the development of domestic ballistic missiles. At the very beginning of September, it became known that by 2018 the Russian strategic missile forces will receive a new intercontinental missile."

    I can imagine how Gorbachev got into the toilet with this news and muttered "The West will help me, the West will help me"
    1. Indigo
      Indigo 23 October 2012 14: 34
      +3
      Quote: vylvyn
      I can imagine how Gorbachev got into the toilet with this news and muttered "The West will help me, the West will help me"

      with good news, you really (h .......... mo) do not remember, so as not to excite the old wounds ....
      1. lotus04
        lotus04 23 October 2012 19: 25
        0
        Quote: Indigo
        with good news


        In good times, such "news" did not flow into the media. First, a rocket appeared, then units of the Strategic Missile Forces of the entire country were armed with it, and then it was reported that the target in the area of ​​"Novaya Zemlya" was hit exactly in the "count". And that's all, silence, the rest should not bother anyone, let them be afraid. Now what? There is no "bear" yet, but the "skin" is already being divided.
    2. Lucky
      Lucky 23 October 2012 15: 12
      0
      Our rockets have always been the best in the sky, and hit the squirrel in the eye!
  3. keylogger
    keylogger 23 October 2012 09: 25
    0
    Great news. For quicker you need to mount the defense. With a head!
  4. PSih2097
    PSih2097 23 October 2012 09: 35
    +1
    Miass State Historical Center named after Makeev, who over the past sixty years has been exclusively engaged in the development of ballistic missiles for submarines.

    And also the R-39 UTTH “Bark”, which was supposed to replace the R-39 SLBMs that were on the 941th project, and this is a design bureau that was constantly engaged in liquid rockets.
    R-39 UTTH
    Type of warhead: RGCh-8
    Starting weight, tons: 81,0
    The thrown weight, tons: 3,05
    Maximum range, thousand km: about 9.
    1. alex86
      alex86 23 October 2012 21: 28
      +2
      And how do you like the version that 100 tons is approximately, and in fact the new ICBM is the version of the R-39 with the corrected performance characteristics, which is why such early delivery dates are strange. For the current state of the defense industry and leadership's striving for spectacular steps, the solution is logical (and perhaps not the worst)
      1. Bronis
        Bronis 25 October 2012 23: 22
        +1
        Very navryatli. R-36M weighs over 200 tons. and casts 7,5 tons. A promising rocket promises to be about 100 tons and throw about 5 tons. So the "prototype" is more likely the UR-100N. As for the terms, they are not so short. In addition, we have a decent amount of research and development work on liquid-propellant missiles. The USSR, in fact, specialized in them. The experience will be used, only now there will be new production chains (many suppliers in Ukraine have remained or have passed away). So "clones" of old missiles will not work. There will be something new, but with the maximum amount of experience and reliable tech. solutions. We are waiting for the premiere ...
        1. alex86
          alex86 26 October 2012 21: 02
          0
          So the fact of the matter is that Bark is Miass and Krasnoyarsk. There is hardly any R&D, brought to the product, and it is easier to make a "clone" from Bark (add a "bus", increase the length, more powerful fuel - all this is possible, Bark with a nozzle for passing ice was tested - there is a margin of safety). In addition, in conditions of permanent theft of allocated funds, it is more correct to rely on what has already been tested than on the newly created - Bulava is an example of this. Of course, if it is supposed to be exactly liquid, then all this is past, except for the version with a "bus" (liquid). In general, the devil only knows, all of a sudden the silversmiths from Miass secretly did - and did - then the lowest bow to them and the deepest respect (in addition to just deep) ...
          1. alex86
            alex86 26 October 2012 21: 22
            0
            But such a stupid idea - but maybe it’s just that they will give us the Hangar for a new ICBM? Excuse me...
            1. Bronis
              Bronis 27 October 2012 18: 29
              0
              "Angara" even in the lightest version will not fit into a standard shaft - the dimensions are "cosmodrome", and the weight is about 150 tons and more.
              With "Bark", too, not, firstly - solid fuel, and secondly, the performance characteristics do not coincide. And it’s strange to remake a sea rocket for land, even if the start is dry (although we have already been naughty with the Bulava).
              Whatever we are now wondering, the main thing is for a new heavy ICBM to appear and be able to replace old heavy carriers, otherwise the Strategic Rocket Forces will lose at least 2 / 3 of their potential ...
  5. Bronis
    Bronis 23 October 2012 09: 45
    +2
    A heavy carrier for the Strategic Missile Forces is very necessary for a number of reasons. And this is not only (and not so much) the American missile defense system as banal arithmetic, coupled with the economy. The main part of the Strategic Missile Forces warheads (in the region of 700-800) are deployed on heavy R-36M and UR-100 missiles. The Topolin family is numerically larger, but collectively carries no more than 250 warheads. Moreover, more than 100 "Topol" (not "Topol-M") will also have to be withdrawn from service in the foreseeable future - again, age ... So it turns out that in order to preserve the potential of the Strategic Missile Forces, missiles with MIRVs are needed, moreover, different - in order to have adequate counter-strike potential. From this ideology emerged "Yars" with "only" 3 BB, but mobile and weakly vulnerable to the CD. A heavy ICBM with a large number of BB and a missile defense penetration system will also appear from here. By the way, it is quite possible that it will carry 10 BB, and maybe more. The only question is their power. If the KVO is reduced, then the requirements for the charge are reduced. This is a trend of the last 30 years. Previously, Megatons were thrown. Now - kilotons. There is a lower reasonable power limit, not 100 Kt, probably, but 200-250 Kt is also a very weighty argument.
  6. Ascetic
    Ascetic 23 October 2012 09: 49
    +7
    Of the latest missiles, a split warhead is available only on the Yars RS-24. The Topol family, in turn, carries a monoblock warhead. At the same time, the promising ICBM from the State Missile Center belongs to the class of heavy missiles, which allows us to assume with a high degree of probability that it will be equipped with a separable warhead, even if it is more modest compared to the R-36M2.


    And here the author is not in the know. Topol "and" Topol-m "- have the ability to carry MIRV. So on Topol they carried a database with a monoblock warhead exclusively observing the Agreements with WWS and START with the Americans. The same Poplar has the ability to carry 3 BB.
    Poplar -M more precisely, the 15Zh65 rocket is equipped with a monoblock thermonuclear warhead but can be in the shortest possible time
    re-equipped RGCH IN with the number of BB from 3 to 6 with a capacity of 150kt.
    Power monoblock BB-550kt.
    Possible rocket equipment
    maneuvering warhead, which does not allow its interception and destruction
    promising and advanced missile defense systems (new warheads planned to be installed on
    mine "Topol-M" and SLBM "Bulava"),
    Powerful solid propellant engines allow the rocket to gain speed much
    faster than all previous types of missiles, respectively, the height of the final
    points of the active section of the flight path. The ICBM also had the opportunity to limit
    maneuver in the active part of the trajectory. All this allows significantly
    to reduce the likelihood of its defeat in the most vulnerable, initial, flight section.
    In addition, the 15Zh65 missile carries a whole range of missile defense missile defense systems that
    It is from passive and active false goals and means of distorting the characteristics of the warhead.
    False targets are indistinguishable from warheads in all ranges of electromagnetic radiation.
    values ​​and allow you to simulate the characteristics of the BB in almost all respects on
    outside the atmosphere and a significant part of the atmospheric section of the downward trajectory
    flight. The means of distorting the characteristics of the warheads consist of a radar absorbing coating,
    generators of radio interference, aerosol sources of infrared radiation, etc.
    "now Topol-M has a probability
    overcoming the US missile defense systems 60-65 percent, and there will be - 87 percent "according to Yesin.



    The video is a bit old, some performance characteristics are approximate, the Complex has some more "goodies" for our partners which, for obvious reasons, cannot be talked about.
    1. klava
      klava 23 October 2012 17: 33
      0
      Now the time has come. I just want to say. "A trifle, but nice."
      But before it was the other way around, they walked along the blade. It was scary.
  7. sxn278619
    sxn278619 23 October 2012 09: 54
    +1
    As you know, there are 3 options for a nuclear conflict.
    First strike, retaliatory strike and retaliation.
    The structure of nuclear forces suggests what kind of strike is planned.
    The United States had a nuclear triad, which increased survival for a retaliatory strike.
    And the first missile defense covered the position of ICBMs for the same purpose.
    The Satan missile (Voyevoda variant) with its 10 blocks of 750 kilotons was undoubtedly the first missile of the first strike.
    How to use prospective ICBMs?
    1 - in the first preventive strike.
    2 - in a retaliatory strike (does anyone believe that at a flight time of 20-30 minutes, two out of three people have time to press a button in their suitcases?).
    3 the rocket will not be able to participate in the retaliatory strike, because it will be inundated in the mine.
    Where to install it?
    In old mines - it’s cheap, but the danger of being hit by a missile defense system at the launch site.
    It means beyond the Urals and to develop and establish a positional missile defense.
    How many warheads?
    Probably 10 to 150 clt.
    The rest are imitators.
    As you know, light imitators are bad.
    They are identified at the entrance to the atmosphere, at the beginning of maneuvering by a warhead and, in the future, with a pulsed laser irradiation of a missile defense.
    Therefore, the best simulator - a warhead without a nuclear charge - is another ten.
    1. sv-sakh
      sv-sakh 23 October 2012 10: 21
      -2
      Quote: sxn278619
      with an arrival time of 20-30 minutes
      Oh, have hypersonic engines for ICBMs been invented in your alternative reality ??? or do you have a smaller planet ??? wassat recourse
      1. borisst64
        borisst64 23 October 2012 13: 59
        0
        sv-sakh

        And how long does the ICBM fly from Sakhalin (Kamchatka) to America (Alaska)?
        1. postman
          postman 23 October 2012 23: 44
          +1
          Quote: borisst64
          And how long does the ICBM fly from Sakhalin (Kamchatka) to America (Alaska)?

          Not at all. They are simply not there.
          There is
          Sakhalin Energy Investment Company Ltd.
          / OAO Gazprom 50% +1 share, Shell 27,5%, Mitsui 12,5% ​​and Mitsubishi 10%. /

          Sakhalin-1 oil is produced by the American company Exxon,
          Sakhalin-2 - Sakhalin Energy consortium (Rosneft-Sakhalinmorneftegaz, Sakhalin Oil Company, Petrosakh).
        2. sv-sakh
          sv-sakh 25 October 2012 04: 36
          0
          Oh .. cap was going to fight?
          From Sakhalin (Kamchatka) - this entry, what does it mean? :)
          Even if there were mine-based ICBMs on Sakhalin, then it wouldn’t be limited to the Far Eastern ICBMs ... Russia, you know it is sooooo long and all these data on approach speeds are extremely relative .. we are not talking about two Liechtenstein or other microworlds, but about two giants, where from Kaliningrad to Kamchatka several hours of flight in supersonic.
          Even when starting over the pole, the time is calculated in hours ...
          Mine ICBMs are located not at the border, but in the rear, just so that the mines are not overwhelmed with the first strike.
          At the borders of usually mobile-based ... and how will you hunt nuclear weapons mobile launchers? :) Very interesting...
          Sit down, two ... fool laughing
    2. bootlegger
      bootlegger 23 October 2012 12: 47
      +2
      And what's the point in an empty unit, without a nuclear charge, if it matches the mass and dimensions of a conventional warhead? They just take its place and that’s it.
      Light simulators are certainly bad, but up to 80-100 km in height they are not very distinguishable from ordinary blocks in speed and their EPR corresponds to warheads.
      It turns out that the time it takes for combat units to fall from this altitude is no more than 20 seconds at an average speed of about 5 km per second. In addition, warheads can maneuver in speed and adjust to false targets.
      As a result, up to about 50 kilometers of height, the false blocks will not differ much from the combat ones, and this gives only 10-15 seconds to aim and launch the anti-missile missiles. What can be done during this time?
      1. Wedmak
        Wedmak 23 October 2012 13: 07
        0
        And what's the point in an empty unit, without a nuclear charge, if it matches the mass and dimensions of a conventional warhead? They just take its place and that’s it.

        The meaning is a false target for interceptor missiles. Breeding of blocks occurs at high altitude, where they can still be intercepted.
        In addition, warheads can maneuver in speed and adjust to false targets.

        Maneuver in speed ??? This is how sorry? In terms of course and altitude, it’s still clear, but what about speed? The warhead does not have engines, if that. And parachutes for braking too.
        As a result, up to about 50 kilometers of height, the false blocks will not differ much from the combat ones, and this gives only 10-15 seconds to aim and launch the anti-missile missiles. What can be done during this time?

        For clarity, look at the launch speed of the 53T6 rocket. http://multimedia.mil.ru/multimedia/video/clips/[email protected]
        s
        Still think that 10-15 seconds is a lot?
        1. bootlegger
          bootlegger 23 October 2012 14: 31
          0
          You carefully read. If a unit has a mass and dimensions identical to a combat unit, then it will simply take its place in the holder. A combat unit is not so expensive (compared to a missile) that it would make sense to save in this way. So why not replace it with an ordinary combat unit? simulation blocks in that they do not take up much space and do not reduce the thrown mass neutralize anti-missile systems.
          The block has it all. If you allow maneuver in course and altitude, why don't you allow it in speed? All in all, you need to slow down and equalize it with lighter simulation blocks, which will slow down faster. To do this, at a speed of 5-7 km a parachute is not necessary per second. Any braking element of a few square centimeters will create sufficient braking force.
          10-15 seconds is not a lot or a little it is a real window of time in order to bring down a block. And if there are no easy imitations of blocks, selection of targets will occur even at the moment of separation of blocks. This will greatly simplify the task.
          1. Wedmak
            Wedmak 23 October 2012 18: 48
            -1
            So why not replace it with a conventional combat one? The meaning of the imitation blocks is that they do not take up much space and do not reduce the thrown mass to neutralize anti-missiles.

            Yes, only light blocks are sifted out relatively easily. But BB and heavy false targets are just the same difficult to distinguish, and the cost of the spoon is not very high compared to the BB.

            What is the point of a combat unit braking to a false speed ??? To make it easier to bring down? To have more time to think?
            Its task is to bypass or break through the missile defense as quickly as possible, which reduces the risk of being shot down and bringing a hot present to the target.
            The block has it all.

            Scheme in the studio please. I am not an expert, but I think from a position of reason and logic. At a speed of 5-7 km / s and a flight duration of 15-20 seconds, which propulsion device can move the BB off course? Only some retractable element, and then, just below 50 km, where there is already something to lean on. And this element should be very small, otherwise the whole block to hell will fall apart.
            Now maneuver in speed. How much will you slow down in a few seconds? Let’s say they lowered somehow, we’re flying all together, military and false. But the false ones start to burn / lag / etc. (they are not as well protected as BB) what’s next? Reduce another speed? Logic tells you to accelerate. Than? Rocket engine? Need fuel and more. And this is the weight, each gram is expensive, and we still have an additional N-th number of engines with fuel for each BB shove ??? And in the end we get the BB, it is not clear how dangling along the trajectory as .... target!
            1. bootlegger
              bootlegger 23 October 2012 21: 48
              +1
              I don’t understand your logic. We (for example) have a warhead of 8 blocks. But you replace 4 of them with false ones, right? Let's say that when approaching 4 blocks are shot down. What do we have?
              Since the blocks are identical, then according to probability theory they knock down 2 false and 2 real blocks. This means that 4 blocks flew to the targets, and only 2 of them were combat ones.
              And if all 8 blocks are combat, then 4 battle blocks will reach the target.
              If we consider another option, that 6 out of 8 blocks were shot down, then the result is even worse, one combat unit will reach the target altogether. In the case of installing all combat units there will be 2 of them.
              And then what is the benefit of replacing warheads with false ones?
              Regarding the benefits of speed drop.
              If you have 8 combat and 20 false light compact blocks, then, with equal speed and EPR, the system will not determine which of the blocks are false. Of course, if the BBs slow down and do not overtake the simulation ones. That is, the system will have to track 28 blocks, instead of 8 and shoot them all.
              Of course, at a certain height, differences in speed will still appear, but there will be no time left to shoot the warheads, and the same probability theory says that most of them will break through.
              Of course, you are right in that it makes sense to slow down and adjust to the information security only to a certain height and speed. Then it makes sense to stop the speed drop and just break through.
              Regarding the possibility of braking in the upper layers, remember that the lower stable orbits of the satellites lie at an altitude of more than 200 km. Everything below
              slows down even with a discharged atmosphere very quickly.
              Designs of systems for changing the coefficient of resistance of a block in bulk. For example, I saw a design with an aerodynamic needle that is pulled out behind the block.
              1. Wedmak
                Wedmak 23 October 2012 22: 08
                -1
                Warhead as it was, and remains in full. No matter how many blocks there are. They all rush into the breakthrough at maximum speed, some knocked down, some fly. False heavy blocks (like light and other nonsense to clog radar screens) are transported separately, and are just designed to increase the chances of a breakthrough fighting.
                I admitted that you can slow down. Tell me now how to disperse the BB again? He will not fly in full view of the entire missile defense / air defense to fly at the speed of an airplane ??? When braking, we lose the most important trump card breakthrough - the speed at which their interception is not yet possible.
                And if we do not slow down, then not 8 or 10 blocks fly to the ground, but 20 pieces! And the fact that the number of BBs is less than the total number of heavy ones .. Apparently this is dictated by a) you should not put all your eggs in one basket, they may be beaten b) somewhere I read that the breeding unit is also limited in maneuvers and especially BB on the sides are not you spread out - roughly speaking, there is a "defeat strip" for which you cannot throw a block.
                1. Wedmak
                  Wedmak 23 October 2012 22: 33
                  -1
                  I’ll clarify
                  And if we do not slow down, then not 8 and not 10 blocks, but 20 pieces will fly to the ground!

                  flies at a tremendous speed of 20 blocks. And FIG knows which one is nuclear. There is little time for reaction. The chance of a breakthrough is increasing. The task is actually simple - to overcome that part of the trajectory where you can shoot down blocks with the least combat losses.
                  And it turns out that not only does a bunch of warheads fly (expensive, and why hit the target with two warheads at a short distance? We have enough deserts ..), but also at a snail's speed. Which can be destroyed easily and naturally by any modern missile defense / air defense system, since there is already enough time for reflection and response.
                2. bootlegger
                  bootlegger 23 October 2012 23: 03
                  +1
                  How can you combine this? Nobody canceled the capabilities of the rocket to deliver cargo. You have an abandoned mass of 800 kg (for example). Blocks weigh (say) 100 kg. If you put full-fledged simulation blocks, then more than 8
                  you can’t put it in any way. And what kind of imitation or fighting will they be and in what proportion is another question. Next is the mathematics that I brought up.
                  But you can put 100 1 kg each in a cartridge instead of one warhead.
                  Then you will have 7 combat and 100 simulation blocks. Beneath them all track and knock down.
                  I’m all trying to explain to you that flying together with combat and simulation blocks makes sense only TEMPORARY, so that the target selection system does not recognize false targets in advance. And braking of combat blocks is also conditional.
                  If they have a speed difference of 100-200 meters per second, this will have little effect on the time of approach to the target and will not increase the ability to destroy them.
                  But for a selective target system, these 100-200 meters are enough. Is there a difference at what approach distance it will separate false targets from real ones?
                  That is, instead of 107 he will see 7 real ones? What is the best speed of warheads at 100 meters per second more or disguise in a large number of false targets?
                  1. Wedmak
                    Wedmak 23 October 2012 23: 13
                    +1
                    I don’t understand what are we arguing about? All the same, breakthrough algorithms, and even more so breeding warheads are secret, all the same false targets are busy, both heavy and light.
                    Abandoned weight is measured in tons. How much BB weighs - only those who developed and installed it on a rocket know. How many false blocks in a rocket, too, hell knows. We can hoarsely argue about how to break through missile defense, but we only learn about effectiveness only 2 minutes before the end of the world ... or inefficiency ... Do we need it?
                    1. bootlegger
                      bootlegger 23 October 2012 23: 23
                      +1
                      This is so of course. But here most of the debate is for the sake of argument. smile
    3. Nik_One
      Nik_One 23 October 2012 16: 40
      0
      Quote: sxn278619
      The Satan missile (Voyevoda variant) with its 10 blocks of 750 kilotons was undoubtedly the first missile of the first strike.

      Why such a statement?
    4. Ascetic
      Ascetic 23 October 2012 17: 00
      +5
      Quote: sxn278619
      2 - in a retaliatory strike (does anyone believe that at a flight time of 20-30 minutes, two out of three people have time to press a button in their suitcases?).


      Believe it is not necessary to know the principles of the CBU "Monolith" and ASBU "Signal"
      I'm already silent about the RBU channels (the notorious briefcases with buttons), all this at least under the SS stamp. In real life, it is enough to pick up the telephone of government communications and say a few words to the CDF of the Strategic Missile Forces in the most worthless scenario. Only ONE person who is the Supreme Armed Forces of the Armed Forces of the Russian Federation is entitled to this order. Again, in the case of the most time-consuming case, in case of a sudden strike and bringing the order, the combat calculation of the launch of the RP (rdn) is NOT in the AUTOMATED MODE, no more than 4 minutes are allotted.
      Task number one - the launch from the BG is constant when an order is received by other means of communication. The foundation of all training of the SRF of the Strategic Missile Forces

      Quote: sxn278619
      3 the rocket will not be able to participate in the retaliatory strike, because it will be inundated in the mine


      in the 1980s in the USSR, a very interesting option was proposed (but not implemented) for hiding the exact location of the silo launcher. For this, a vertical entrance shaft of the usual type is being erected, only of a greater depth than usual. A horizontal adit is arranged from its bottom to the sides, at the end of which a “blind” trunk comes off (without access to the earth's surface), in which an underground launch complex is mounted. The length and direction of the adit is the main secret: the enemy knows only the location of the entrance mine, and where exactly the ICBM is located - the main target for enemy missiles - is unknown ...
      At the same time, the enemy does not know how many missiles are actually placed in position — there is only one entry barrel, and the number of branches from it is unknown. The following operations are performed to launch an underground rocket: a miniature high-speed tunneling machine - “mole” - displays a container with a rocket to the surface of the earth, the container opens and the ICBM is launched in the usual manner. We studied options for pushing the earth's thickness with a special durable container tip using hydraulic jacks, as well as opening the barrel to bring the rocket container to the surface of the earth in an explosive way ..
      The Soviet project also does not comply with the Soviet-American agreements on SALT and is only one of the likely options for our famous "asymmetric" response to a possible violation of the Treaty by the American side. And a worthy answer which our leaders love to talk about
      1. Ascetic
        Ascetic 23 October 2012 17: 23
        +8
        By the way, the ICBM mine is not so vulnerable as it seems to many according to experts and analysts. In the 80s at the Semipalatinsk test site during a series of experiments under codenamed "Argon" everyone is perfectly convinced of this in practice. My father took part in these tests, too much can not be said, the only thing that is impressive is how the huge "tentacles" of the jacks raked the debris above the cover and powerful hydraulics "squeezed" the antennas through these debris. My father said that at the moment of the simulated explosion (the mine cover was covered with TNT, the explosion power of which was equivalent to and even exceeded the power of the BB of the American "Peacemaker") they were five (!!) km away and it felt like an air bombing plus the shock wave passed like a tornado
        The experiment looked something like this- At the training ground there were specially constructed launchers of all types of our mine missiles. They put the cars themselves. They were twice tested full-scale nuclear explosions. The third time they tried to hit ordinary explosives, the equivalent explosion power of which corresponded to nuclear. In the mines, even the paint did not sprinkle. And then the missiles were successfully launched.
        for effective destruction of mine missiles, it is necessary to undermine the ammunition not in a hundred meters from the mine, but in a dozen. Technically, this is not feasible. If we talk about high-precision weapons, then the accuracy of its action should be even higher. But here it must be borne in mind that the mines are in the depths of our territory and we have the technical means that can prevent this.
    5. I think so
      I think so 23 October 2012 21: 39
      +5
      Dear snx278619 do not grind nonsense.
      1. Governor for the first strike. I did not hear more nonsense. Just this rocket is sharpened on a counter retaliatory strike. For your information, no one is going to strike the first blow with missiles with a flight time of 20-30 minutes. The first disarming strike will be made by missiles with a flight time of 5-10 minutes, and only after reaching the target will they begin to finish off with these already heavy and far-reaching missiles. But the counter strike with a missile like Voivod is the most.
      2. Nonsense about "suitcases" and even four pieces - did you come up with it yourself or who suggested?
      3. In a retaliatory strike, a Voyevoda-type missile will be able to participate if it was in the missile defense zone and survived.
      4. Well, there is nothing to say about the "old mines". How will the "new" ones beyond the Urals be better than the old ones in any other place?
      Bad-footing in vain - only to be dishonored ....
  8. John from the USA
    John from the USA 23 October 2012 10: 03
    0
    disu, disinformation driven.
    Secret services, as always, lead their games.
  9. master_rem
    master_rem 23 October 2012 10: 49
    0
    sv-sakh,
    and they won’t tell you where to go laughing
  10. Simple
    Simple 23 October 2012 11: 45
    0
    with a new rocket with a starting weight of about 100 tons, you can
    "Tag" to organize the adversary ...
    1. Wedmak
      Wedmak 23 October 2012 12: 01
      -1
      What are the spots?
  11. Simple
    Simple 23 October 2012 12: 21
    0
    From which he has naked pain.

    From which he will be more meek. wink
  12. PLO
    PLO 23 October 2012 13: 05
    0
    article nonsense
    MIT spent all his life exclusively engaged in solid-fuel rockets and it’s extremely foolish to entrust him with the creation of a new heavy liquid ICBM
    while the GRC was developing precisely liquid missiles, and from a sea missile to make a land missile is simpler than simple (on the contrary, more difficult)
    1. Ascetic
      Ascetic 23 October 2012 17: 48
      +10
      Quote: olp
      MIT spent all his life exclusively engaged in solid-fuel rockets and it’s extremely foolish to entrust him with the creation of a new heavy liquid ICBM
      while the GRC was developing precisely liquid missiles, and from a sea missile to make a land missile is simpler than simple (on the contrary, more difficult)


      Everything that pours out in the press is simply an absentee dispute between Solomonov and his opponents, in particular Efremov from the NPO Mashinostroeniya, therefore it is not necessary to trust such information so seriously and globally. This is a tactical showdown of heavyweights from the series who are cooler than an elephant or a whale, liquid or TT ICBMs.
      For example, Solomonov puts forward an argument about the so-called short flight path of solid-propellant missiles. That is, the car starts faster. Reaches the block breeding area faster, making it difficult to detect and intercept. Efremov claims that everything is not so simple. The difference between the "short" and "long" (as in liquid-propellant rockets) trajectory sections is not so great. It is not so much the breeding time that is important here, but the ability to maneuver. This indicator for liquid-propellant missiles is incomparably higher than that of solid-fuel ones. We must also take into account the fact that if a really working missile defense system is created, then the breeding of 6-10 blocks using the so-called "bus" technology will be carried out in a very short time. Not in the variant of the group "scattering" of blocks, as Solomonov speaks of, but thus by a "bus" with delivery according to a slightly different algorithm for selecting targets on the enemy's territory.
      Solomon against the "bus". He is confident that the future belongs to individually guided units. This means that each of them will have their own control system. At a certain moment, they seem to scatter in different directions according to the principle of a crowd, which makes it difficult to intercept them, and after that each one is already flying towards the intended target. This means that each of them must have their own high-precision control system, so as not to lose accuracy if needed. Have your own propulsion system with a supply of fuel. Each also needs a set of technical means to overcome missile defense.
      Efremov claims that it requires one and a half times more mass costs, and even entails a loss of flexibility in overcoming missile defense. Such a solution can be implemented only on missiles with a large casting weight, that is, heavy liquid ones.
      That's about the way it is. Let's hope that truth will be born in dispute.
      . Judging by the latest info, the leadership is leaning towards the position of Efremov.
      1. 11Goor11
        11Goor11 24 October 2012 13: 33
        0
        Thank you, Stanislav, always looking for your comments good
      2. I think so
        I think so 25 November 2012 16: 05
        -1
        Solomonov has already "got" the leadership of his chatter. All his promises were ruined by him ... And how can you believe the words of a person who does not fulfill his promises? He is balabol and balabol in Africa ... Thanks to Solomonov, the country still (!) Does not have a naval missile in service ... if it were not for the Makeyevites with the "Liner" then in general how to attack the enemy from the sea? Solomonov's promises? It is not yet known how much "Topol" and "Yars" can fly ... It is possible that they, like the "Bulava", fly (the ax floats) ... Although they will be put into service ... get up with the country ... we have already seen this many times ...
  13. cachekmosa
    cachekmosa 23 October 2012 13: 07
    0
    cool complex, at first it was only allowed to shoot on the right side
    1. Wedmak
      Wedmak 23 October 2012 13: 10
      0
      And what, on his left side are bad words written? smile
      (just the first time I hear about this)
      1. Jin
        Jin 23 October 2012 15: 39
        0
        Wedmak,
        It was, I remember ... Yes, x / s what he has there. I just don’t remember which side it was impossible to ...
  14. sxn278619
    sxn278619 23 October 2012 16: 00
    +2
    Flight time of ICBMs at a range of 8000km 29 min (distance from Moscow to NEW YORK 7457 km).
    The duration of the atmospheric section is 60 - 100 seconds.
    For example, the flight speed of a detached warhead rocket R-12, which was 4 km / s at the end of the AC, at an altitude of 25 km was 2,5 km / s. The magnitude of the speed of meeting the BB of modern ICBMs with the Earth's surface is secret.
    The limitation of warheads is related to the total limitation of the number of
    blocks under the contract.
    Even 10 blocks on one rocket are many, because reduces the number of carriers (they are targets for the enemy).
    Therefore, the installation of full-size simulators is the optimal solution.
  15. sxn278619
    sxn278619 23 October 2012 16: 37
    0
    The payload weight of the Mace is 1150 kg with 9 warheads and false targets and counter resistance.
    The projected 4 tons, i.e. it is capable of carrying 10 warheads and a minimum of 20 simulators with its false goals.
    Given that the departure of blocks to the target occurs along the entire trajectory (the principle of the grape cluster), destroying all blocks even using a nuclear warhead will be problematic.
  16. ism_ek
    ism_ek 23 October 2012 18: 10
    0
    amateurs of conspiracy theories can “cling to” the fact that the Moscow Institute of Heat Engineering, which previously created the Topol family and the Yars rocket, does not make a new rocket for ground use
    Yars and Poplar are solid propellant rockets. Liquid-fired land missiles in the USSR were developed in Ukraine.
  17. mazdie
    mazdie 23 October 2012 21: 14
    +1
    KB SOUTHERN remained in Ukraine, so what ???
    It has already been written above that marine rockets using liquid fuel were developed and built by the US, which, by the way, is close to 100 tons, and making a sea missile a land missile is much easier than making a sea missile.
  18. studentmati
    studentmati 23 October 2012 23: 49
    0
    I believe that the students of Korolev, Glushko, Kozlov, Makeev, Chertok ... will create a decent rocket that will be in service as long as the development of teachers!
  19. saturn.mmm
    saturn.mmm 24 October 2012 00: 05
    0
    If the "Voevoda" is 200 tons and the new one is 100 tons, then will they insert two into the mines for replacement and shoot a doublet?
    1. Wedmak
      Wedmak 24 October 2012 09: 33
      0
      Of course not. Do not confuse weight with dimensions. This is instead of the P-39 you can shove 4-5 Club, and then a maximum of one and a half missiles ...)))
  20. dastan13
    dastan13 24 October 2012 08: 32
    0
    I wonder if a promising Russian missile defense system can intercept promising Russian ICBMs. for example, S-500 and Cupid vs. Yars and Poplar -M?
    Is there any thread of thought?
    1. Wedmak
      Wedmak 24 October 2012 09: 33
      0
      You can hardly get the answer to this question.
      1. Ascetic
        Ascetic 24 October 2012 12: 50
        +3
        Quote: Wedmak
        You can hardly get the answer to this question.


        The answer can be obtained in the form of 8 years for disclosure and espionage. As a professor from Yekaterinburg.

        For the secrets of "Bulava" - eight years behind bars
        My webpage
        1. Wedmak
          Wedmak 24 October 2012 13: 43
          +1
          I can somehow manage without such gifts. smile
    2. patsantre
      patsantre 24 October 2012 16: 02
      +1
      To begin with, you are talking about non-existent missile defense systems.
      We continue by the fact that much depends on the proportions (how many S-500 launchers cover the affected area and how many ICBMs fly there)
      And we end up with the fact that even after the creation of these systems, the answer to this question can only be obtained by experience ...
  21. Nechai
    Nechai 24 October 2012 17: 17
    0
    Quote: vylvyn
    Gorbachev huddled in the toilet and muttered "The West will help me, the West will help me"

    Together with Eduard Avrosimych Shevarnadze. Neighbors no matter how, live under the German wing.
    Quote: bootlegger
    but up to 80-100 km in height they are not distinguishable from ordinary blocks in speed and their EPR corresponds to warheads.

    And who prevents to lower the threshold of the height of the effective work of false b / h? And to increase the speed of work in the atmosphere with "unpredictable" pirouettes, at the "final" stage? The contemplation only needs to include and discard the dogmas of formal logic ...
  22. Nechai
    Nechai 24 October 2012 17: 37
    0
    Quote: dastan13
    I wonder if a promising Russian missile defense system can intercept promising Russian ICBMs. for example, S-500 and Cupid vs. Yars and Poplar -M? Is there any thread of thought?

    Allegories only:
    In the domestic tank building there was (it seems already, unfortunately, in the past tense) the principle - the tank MUST successfully withstand shelling from its own artillery system, from the most likely attack angles.
  23. crambol
    crambol 24 October 2012 21: 32
    0
    If only a preliminary design has been approved, then in the best case, new missiles will fly after 2014-15.


    The indicated period for a product of this scale seems unlikely. Either this is a bluff, or the institute has a big reserve.
  24. qwerty_zxc
    qwerty_zxc 31 October 2012 13: 59
    0
    MIT is developing a marine missile, while Makeevtsy is developing a land missile. Verily, Raska is a wonderland
  25. I think so
    I think so 25 November 2012 15: 31
    0
    There is nothing supernatural at the beginning of the assembly of the rocket in the year 12. Every design bureau has groundwork in its profile. In fact, it can be said that the Makeevtsy long ago developed such a rocket. Now it remains only to clean up the details, which is exactly what they will do until the age of 18. These design bureaus are not balabol as MIT, if they promised something, they will do just that and in the promised time. Even with a 90% finished project, there are a lot of issues that need to be addressed. Some tests of ready-made missiles will take a couple of years ... And to start manufacturing, what will not be changed under any circumstances is very correct ... Well done Makeevtsy, MITU before them like cancer before Kiev ...