Military Review

Russia's nuclear sword in the 21 century

72
Russia's nuclear sword in the 21 century



The basis of the strategic nuclear forces of Russia in the future up to 2045-2050. the Topol-M, Yars, and Bulava complexes will be developed by the Moscow Institute of Heating Engineering and their further modifications. Due to the fact that in recent years there has been a lot of speculation in the media about the combat capabilities of these complexes, as well as the adequacy or inadequacy of replacing the old rocket systems with them, I would like to get a little closer understanding of some technical aspects of the case. I am not a rocket specialist. My article is based on information from open sources and on the fact that Yury Solomonov, the general designer of these systems, and also some officials of the Ministry of Defense spoke about this at various times.

The Yars and Bulava complexes belong to the new, fifth generation of strategic missile systems. The Yars complex with a PC-24 solid-fuel three-stage rocket was commissioned in 2009 and is a further development of the Topol-M complex. Compared to Topol-M, up to 50% of new elements are used in the Yars design. The missile is equipped with a separable warhead with the number of warheads, judging by photos from the Votkinsk plant, to 9-ti. The maximum range of the PC-24 is 10000-11000 km. Drop weight 1200-1500 kg. Thanks to the use of new fuel mixtures, the rocket has a much higher speed compared to the complexes of the previous generation. This allows it to gain altitude much faster before the enemy’s space reconnaissance satellites detect the start. The complex of means for overcoming the missile defense system of the RS-24 rocket includes false targets and other technical means. There is no more accurate data about it. There is evidence of means for overcoming missile defense systems of the Topol-M missile system. In particular, spurious targets are indistinguishable from warheads in all electromagnetic radiation ranges (optical, laser, infrared, radar), allow to simulate the characteristics of warheads in almost all selective features on the extra-atmospheric, transitional and significant part of the atmospheric section of the descending branch of the trajectory of the missile warheads are resistant to the damaging factors of a nuclear explosion and to the radiation of a super-power nuclear-pumped laser, etc. For the first time, false targets have been designed, capable of e resist radar with superresolution. The means of distorting the characteristics of the head part consist of radio-absorbing (combined with heat-shielding) coating of the MS, generators of active radio interference, aerosols-sources of infrared radiation, etc. The PCB PRO is designed to significantly increase the time required for a prospective enemy's probable enemy to detect warheads among a variety of false targets and interference, thus significantly reducing the likelihood of warhead interception. Probably, the complex of means for overcoming the PC-24 ABM system is even more perfect. Yury Solomonov said that on the Yars every combat unit has an individual guidance system, and its flight path is constantly changing. And the American “Patriots” and their European counterparts cannot bring down such ammunition.





After the Security-2004 exercises, President Vladimir Putin said that the RVSN will be equipped with "the latest technical complexes that are able to hit targets at intercontinental depth with hypersonic speed, high accuracy and the possibility of deep maneuver in height and course." Further, Putin stressed that there are no random words in his message, each of them has a meaning. Perhaps this statement concerned the Yars complex. Most likely, after the completion of the PC-24 third stage, warheads are separated from it, which continue to fly in a cloud of false targets, and already in a descending atmospheric part of the trajectory, false targets are lagging behind and in the counter-flow of air, the scramblers begin to work on the warheads, allowing them to actively maneuver on hypersonic speed. All this makes the interception of such ammunition today and in the future is hardly possible.

A three-stage solid propellant intercontinental sea-based Bulava rocket, the development of which was launched in the 1998 year, is now on experimental combat duty. The maximum range is 8000-9300 km. Maximum throw weight - 1150 kg. The rocket carries up to 6-ti individual targeting warheads with a power of 100-150 CT. Regarding the numerous speculations about the Bulava maneuvering warheads, Solomonov said in an interview with the National Defense magazine: “There is no secret here. When we talk about maneuvering warheads, all these things are recorded with telemetry information and are subject to accessibility by the observing party in if it monitors these launches. The rocket uses conventional ballistic type warheads, which, after separation from the carrier rocket, fly in the field of the earth as free the bottom of the falling body. With peculiar geometric shape, they have a certain aerodynamic resistance, which leads to various kinds of dynamic perturbations, and these dynamic disturbances lead to fluctuations in the combat unit around its center of mass, but in fact the center of mass combat unit moves along a ballistic trajectory. " Solomonov also said: "In 2010, we had a unique job that allowed us to make a fundamentally new step in creating a new type of combat equipment, which is the result of integrating ballistic-type combat equipment with individual means of breeding it instead of the so-called" bus "on combat missiles. This development will put an end to all the talk about our struggle with the non-existent missile defense system of the alleged enemy. " Solomonov added: "almost 30 years ago, we talked about the possibility of implementing such a combat equipment scheme as science fiction." "And last year we first put this science fiction into practice with a positive result." He explained that now "the rocket, as a whole, practically ceases to exist at the completion of the last march stage." "As is known, the existing rocket has a huge breeding ground for warheads in order to have certain defeat possibilities in the case of using multiple heads of a single rocket using multiple targets that are remote from each other."

Now the stage of breeding is not used, which alternately directs each combat unit to the flight path to the target. Apparently, now there is a simultaneous separation of all warheads from the platform. Each of them is induced by its own guidance system and engines, and then flies along a ballistic trajectory. Moreover, breeding becomes possible at a much greater distance than when using the "bus". This principle makes it possible to significantly increase the effectiveness of the complex in the conditions of overcoming the missile defense system.





The criticism of the Bulava project was that it has a range and a drop weight less than that of the American Trident-2 and the Russian Sinev liquid-sea missiles. True, with the maximum payload, these missiles fly to the same range as the Bulava. According to Yuri Solomonov, the reduction of the payload of the rocket is associated with its higher survivability: resistance to the damaging factors of a nuclear explosion and laser arms, low active site and its short duration. According to his statement, “Topol-M, and Bulava, the active site is smaller than 3-4 times in comparison with domestic missiles, and compared to American, French, Chinese - 1,5-2 times.” The 8000 km distance is sufficient to hit almost any point in the United States (with the exception of Florida and southern California) or any point in China even when launched from the pier. From combat patrol areas, a rocket can hit any point on the territory of these states. In addition, the Bulava should have a noticeably higher pointing accuracy (lower QUO) than previous generation missiles, which reduces the power requirements (and, therefore, the total drop weight) of the missile warheads, while simultaneously maintaining and fulfilling the probability requirements goals

Often, the Bulava and its developers were unjustly criticized in the media for a high percentage of failures at trial, but, for some reason, it was silent that there was approximately the same ratio of unsuccessful launches during the tests of many Soviet missiles. And subsequently these missiles were put into service and they flew without complaints. And the fact that the rocket at least once successfully passed the tests, says about the correctness of its design. And the very first launches of the Bulava were successful. As it turned out later, the problems of unsuccessful launches were related to the quality of components and assembly. In general, they are tested to understand what is wrong and correct if necessary. Another thing is when they begin to fail already adopted missiles.

Regarding the purchase of Topol-M complexes up to the 2012 year, despite the development of the multiply charged Yars, Yuri Solomonov said the following: "It was necessary to introduce complexes with a monoblock type missile into the mobile grouping, since the mobile-based grouping is faced with the task of defeating highly protected targets , including". According to various sources, the Topol-M uses a monoblock with a capacity of 0,55-1 Mt, while at Yars, warheads with a capacity of 150-300 CT are used.

In recent years, there has been a lot of talk about the need to create a new heavy-duty ICBM to replace the old Voyevoda and Stilet missiles. But, apparently, after the change of leadership of the Ministry of Defense, these plans changed. And in a recent interview on the channel "Rain", speaking of promising developments, Deputy Prime Minister Dmitry Rogozin said that "he does not know about the new rocket." Perhaps the decision to abandon the development of a new heavy rocket was influenced by the understanding that it was not sensible to focus on providing strategic deterrence to the mining complexes. Especially in light of the intensive development of long-range precision weapons in the United States. Perhaps the decision to develop a new liquid rocket was made in favor of the personal interests of some managers.

As for the promising development systems of MITA, which will be put into service after 2016, the work will be aimed at further improving the existing complexes, and will mainly concern the development of their combat equipment. Also, KAMAZ is carrying out OCR "Platform" to create a new ground chassis for the PGRK. Compared to the old chassis produced by MWTP in KAMAZ, many operational characteristics will be improved, a number of new technologies will be used, in particular, related to secrecy, etc.



It can be added that the measures taken in the field of developing strategic weapons allow us to look to the future with confidence. These measures allow our missiles to overcome any missile defense system, including only planned to build. And the fact that the structure of the promising grouping of the Strategic Missile Forces will comprise a significant part of the mobile-based complexes, will not give the likely adversary a second to doubt that it will be destroyed in response.

Primary Sources:
http://www.ria.ru/press_video/20101220/311162191.html
http://aeroplan2010.mirtesen.ru/blog/43414104042/Strategicheskoe-vooruzhenie:-segodnya-i-zavtra.-Generalnyiy-kons
http://newsru.ru/russia/27jan2011/antipro.html
http://www.rtc.ru/encyk/publish/art_040324_01.shtml
http://rbase.new-factoria.ru/missile/wobb/bulava/bulava.shtml
Author:
72 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must to register.

I have an account? Sign in

  1. fenix57
    fenix57 5 May 2013 06: 17 New
    43
    Orthodox, Christ is Risen! " ... the fact that mobile-based complexes will make up a significant part in the structure of the prospective group of strategic missile forces will not allow a probable enemy to doubt for a second that he will be destroyed in response."- this is what is needed! After all, the location of all mine ICBMs is most likely known to the potential enemy ...
    And given the area of ​​Russia and the branching of the railways, it’s optimal, it’s the BZHRK ... hi This will be a "headache" for the enemies of Russia! good
    1. Alexander Romanov
      Alexander Romanov 5 May 2013 06: 25 New
      18
      Quote: fenix57
      Orthodox Christ Risen

      Truly risen. Happy Holiday Valery!
    2. Sakhalininsk
      Sakhalininsk 5 May 2013 06: 38 New
      19
      Quote: fenix57
      Orthodox, Christ is Risen! "


      Truly risen! Happy holiday!
      Our Strategic Rocket Forces are now practically all of us, as long as we have a vigorous club, no sensible universal human-shit-democratizer will risk anything but a vicious hissing and barking overseas.
    3. GreatRussia
      GreatRussia 5 May 2013 08: 34 New
      +7
      Quote: fenix57
      Orthodox Christ Risen!

      Truly Risen!



      The basis of Russia's strategic nuclear forces in the future up to 2045-2050. will make up the complexes "Topol-M", "Yars", "Bulava"

      But what about:


      MOSCOW, November 20 - RIA News. The commander of the Strategic Missile Forces (Strategic Missile Forces), Colonel General Sergei Karakaev, confirmed that in Russia, work continues on the creation of a heavy hundred-ton liquid-fuel intercontinental ballistic missile (ICBM).

      The leadership of the Russian Defense Ministry previously stated that if the United States does not abandon its plans to create a missile defense system in Europe, Russia will take countermeasures, including the creation of a new heavy liquid-fuel missile. In turn, Karakaev in an interview with RIA Novosti reported that ICBM construction has already begun and will be completed in 2018.

      "In accordance with the State Armament Program for 2011-2020, work was carried out in 2012 to create promising missile systems, in particular, heavy missiles ", - Karakaev said on Tuesday, summing up the results of the Strategic Missile Forces this year.

      RIA Novosti http://ria.ru/arms/20121120/911411977.html#ixzz2SOCYrnkI


      And also:


      In September 2012, a decision was publicly announced on the development of a modernized version of the complex Yars-M (a source).

      http://militaryrussia.ru/blog/topic-430.html

      The administration of US President Barack Obama is preparing for a new round of strategic offensive arms reductions, and Russia's strategic offensive arms are undergoing major modernization, the Washington Times writes with reference to US officials.

      It is, in particular, about the new Russian missiles "Yars-М". “The details are kept secret, but it’s claimed that this is the fifth generation strategic nuclear weapons system,” - note the authors of the article.

      http://www.gazeta.ru/politics/news/2013/05/02/n_2887693.shtml
      1. nickname 1 and 2
        nickname 1 and 2 5 May 2013 09: 39 New
        +1
        Truly Risen!
        Quote: GreatRussia
        Truly Risen!


        However! Are you going to expose?

        DESA! This is also a weapon, sometimes the most effective!
        1. GreatRussia
          GreatRussia 5 May 2013 10: 37 New
          0
          Quote: nick 1 and 2

          However! Are you going to expose?

          DESA! This is also a weapon, sometimes the most effective!

          Do not understand. Why are you doing this? smile
    4. Rus2012
      Rus2012 5 May 2013 10: 03 New
      +8
      Quote: fenix57
      Orthodox, Christ is Risen! "


      Truly Risen!


      And about the article, its level is contained in these words - "I am not an expert in the missile field ..."
      Therefore, we will forgive the author for his flaws and fabrications with speculation ... Amen!
    5. self-propelled
      self-propelled 5 May 2013 10: 34 New
      +4
      Quote: fenix57
      And given the area of ​​Russia and the branching of the railways, the optimal is the BZHRK.

      to destroy BZHRK - it was a crime! and I (I think not only me) will only be glad to return to operation of such a complex! let the adversary tremble, in anticipation of retribution (if suddenly something). only one has to realize that nuclear weapons are only a deterrent force. and the government of any state from the "nuclear club" is well aware of the consequences of the use of these weapons. therefore, it is necessary to develop and increase the production of high-precision weapons and advanced weapon systems (hypersonic weapons, etc.). after all, such systems are the future, not nuclear weapons
    6. S_mirnov
      S_mirnov 5 May 2013 10: 39 New
      -11
      "We can add that the measures taken in the development of strategic weapons allow us to look with confidence to the future."
      - we can say that with such a leadership of the country and the economy, we and peaceful satellites will not be able to put into orbit soon, not that the ICBMs should be reached.
      Another question - why the heck was it to destroy the Scalpels (launchers based on railway cars (unique weapons of which there are no analogues)? Destroyed them on the orders of Putin, where did you get the idea that now he will act differently?
      1. Nitup
        5 May 2013 11: 43 New
        +9
        You know that the Americans in the early 2000s demanded that Putin abandon nuclear weapons altogether. And this is his great merit that such efforts during the lengthy negotiations managed to save him. Read what Michael McFaul said about Putin in the year 2000. This is on the Internet. He said that they would do the same with Putin as they would with Milosevic if he did not comply with the US demand. Would declare impeachment and all. And you say BZHRK. We don’t know much, but we undertake to judge everything.
        1. djon3volta
          djon3volta 5 May 2013 13: 16 New
          13
          Quote: Nitup
          You know that in the early 2000s, the Americans demanded that Putin abandon nuclear weapons altogether.

          that’s what Putin answers about this! good

        2. S_mirnov
          S_mirnov 5 May 2013 14: 56 New
          -1
          “You know that the Americans in the early 2000s demanded that Putin give up nuclear weapons altogether.” - you never know what the Americans demanded, he is not the president of impoverished Nigeria but the Russian Federation with nuclear weapons and has not yet been cut off by the army!
          “We don’t know much, but we undertake to judge everything” - so I don’t mind knowing A LOT. Let him tell everyone why the army and military education have been spreading rot since coming to power, what is the strategic intent, why Serdyukov is free?
          And my right to judge his activities is because I am a citizen of the Russian Federation, and the president is appointed for this purpose to protect the interests of citizens of the Russian Federation. And I and most citizens are interested in a strong army, including the BZHRK!
          1. Nitup
            5 May 2013 19: 02 New
            +7
            You say that 10 years before Putin, no one used to spread rot in our country, ridiculed military service, etc. Yes, in 1999, when it was necessary to defend the integrity of the country, from the 45000 million army they barely gathered 2008 combat-ready grouping from all over the country ... And by XNUMX, Georgia was defeated in a few days. In fact, although Putin appointed Serdyukov, he basically carried out his reforms under Medvedev. And when Putin became president again, he removed him without delay. You know, even Stalin once said: "There is a logic of intentions and a logic of circumstances. And the logic of circumstances is stronger than the logic of intentions." And I think that at the beginning of his presidency, and even now, Putin acts according to circumstances. Of course, it was possible then, at the very beginning of the presidency, to go head-on against the West. Having torn apart all the decisions made by the previous government, and for this to be healed to death somewhere in the Hague prison, having accepted a heroic death. But, it would be better for Russia - this is a big question. And so, the former nuclear forces were largely preserved, and new ones were developed. And the same nuclear trains are going to be recreated.
            1. S_mirnov
              S_mirnov 5 May 2013 23: 45 New
              0
              "although Putin also appointed Serdyukov, he basically carried out his reforms under Medvedev." - Do you seriously consider Dimona an independent political figure fool
              1. Nitup
                5 May 2013 23: 53 New
                +2
                No, I consider Dimon a compromise between Putin and the United States. And you, dear, I recommend not to twist your finger around an empty head.
                1. S_mirnov
                  S_mirnov 6 May 2013 00: 21 New
                  0
                  GDP agreed with the United States on a compromise solution, what will Dimon stand for? laughing
                  With your comment, you bring under the monastery GDP, Churov, Chaika and a bunch of officials!
                  You probably from these?
                  http://demotivation.me/5t5oaqz0kqv0pic.html#.UYZX6krvvlc
                  1. Nitup
                    6 May 2013 00: 27 New
                    +1
                    Everyone imagines himself a strategist, seeing the battle from the side. This is just about you.
      2. Andrew
        Andrew 5 May 2013 23: 20 New
        0
        They destroyed them according to the START-2 treaty, which was signed long before Putin. And this was one of the main conditions of the contract. And Putin, by the way, in response to the US withdrawal from the ABM Treaty, discontinued START-2 in 2003, but it was no longer possible to return the destroyed one (missiles taken out of service).
        1. S_mirnov
          S_mirnov 5 May 2013 23: 52 New
          -7
          Here the patriots of Russia gathered their claims to the destructive activity of GDP:
          http://www.krasnoetv.ru/node/12937
          "We accuse V. Putin of the systematic destruction of military science and military educational institutions, the destruction of Russian intelligence centers. At his command, Russia left the legendary military base in the Vietnamese Cam Ranh Bay, which has faithfully served our interests for more than 20 years. A powerful radio interception center, an airfield with several runways, a modern pier, an electronic tracking station, a school, a hospital, residential buildings, a separate mixed aviation regiment, which included four Tu-95 strategic bombers, four Tu-142 aircraft, Tu-16 and MiG-25 squadrons ...

          We have lost the strategically important bridgehead for Russia, which ensures our naval presence in the Indian Ocean and in the Persian Gulf zone.

          Not only Camran was left. They left the naval base in Tartus (Syria), having lost support in the Mediterranean Sea, left Svenfuegos in Cuba in the immediate vicinity of the American coast, closed three electronic intelligence centers in Angola, two bases in Somalia: the air base in Hargeisa and the military -sea - in Berber and in other places.

          After leaving Vietnam, the only intelligence base for the Russian special services remained the electronic intelligence center in Lourdes (Cuba). The capabilities of this Russian electronic center, modernized in 1997, made it possible to intercept even messages from American communications satellites, telecommunication cables, and control communications of the NASA center in Florida. Cuban Defense Minister Raul Castro, not without reason, stated that 70 percent of the intelligence information was received by Russian special services with the help of Lourdes ... And Putin eliminated this base.

          Ramona’s powerful electronic intelligence complex in the Korean city of Ansan, Hwangha Province, allowed our intelligence to control US aircraft in Japan, where, as you know, 11 US military bases are located only in Okinawa.
          The presence of our intelligence centers in Lourdes in Cuba and in Kamran in Vietnam was a vital moment in ensuring the security of the Russian Federation. They had to be kept. Vladimir Putin acted differently, destroyed them, fulfilling the will of the US administration and thereby inflicted tremendous damage to Russian interests. Even B. Yeltsin did not dare to do this, to which the Americans' similar proposals followed. The prosecution regards their destruction as an act of direct betrayal and sees in Putin’s actions not only signs, but also the full corpus delicti of treason.

          On March 22, 2001, at 8:59 am Moscow time, by decision of V. Putin, the Russian orbital station Mir was flooded, in other words, killed. "
          read the materials do not be lazy.
          http://vestiregion.ru/2011/02/12/prigovor-voennogo-tribunala-po-razrushitelnoj-d
          eyatelnosti-putina-vv /
          1. Nitup
            5 May 2013 23: 59 New
            +1
            Quote: S_mirnov
            Left the naval base in Tartus (Syria), having lost support in the Mediterranean

            What, and left Syria ??? When did you manage ??? We know such patriots. Probably, General Ivashov and other pseudo-patriots took part in this.
            1. S_mirnov
              S_mirnov 6 May 2013 00: 15 New
              -3
              http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bcveY4gdS0A
              Is this what you consider the base of the Navy? 4 Man and an old fuel truck! Wipe your eyes, son!
              1. Nitup
                6 May 2013 00: 25 New
                +1
                They showed it is unknown what and where it is unknown. Combined with this, some shots from Syria. They didn’t even show a single employee at the base. You don’t even have enough brains to understand that this is a scam for suckers, and you call me a son.
          2. Samaritan
            Samaritan 6 May 2013 03: 13 New
            +2
            Well, of course, you won’t write anything good about the president, here:
            !!! In terms of GDP, Russia overtook Germany and took 5th place in the world !!!
            According to the World Bank, in 2012, Russia's GDP at purchasing power parity of currencies exceeded that of Germany. Thus, in terms of the size of its economy, Russia climbed to 5th place in the world. Only the USA, China, India and Japan are ahead of us.
            At the end of 2012, Russia's gross domestic product at the national currency purchasing power parity (PPP GDP) amounted to 3 trillion 380 billion 073 million dollars. Such data are presented in recent studies of the World Bank, which should be trusted much more than traditionally less objective indicators of the pro-American IMF.


            Let me remind you that in 2000, our GDP at face value amounted to approximately $ 260 billion - that is, it was about EIGHT times less than the current one.
            1. S_mirnov
              S_mirnov 6 May 2013 09: 55 New
              -2
              believe in fairy tales?
              http://ns-rus.com/putinskie-skazki-ili/
              What kind of GDP did you accelerate when you were in factories?
              http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hMTT4jTj7Qs
              this is a Muscovite, ZIL now has a series and talk shows are being filmed.
              And when you watch "a minute of glory" - then you should know that it was filmed in the buildings of the former "Caliber" plant
              Where does your GDP grow from? From shopping centers? Of churches selling candles? Or maybe from Olympic facilities under construction?
              And the only thing where GDP can grow is from the drain the zabugar of our gas and oil, otherwise we will starve. In agriculture, we are degrading; we ourselves cannot feed our population.
              http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=vSRCFOfhubU
              this is proof to you not to be unfounded
              1. Samaritan
                Samaritan 6 May 2013 12: 22 New
                0
                Tie with mantras, no longer rolls!
                As for me: the chief engineer built two factories from the feasibility study to the start-up, and he was able to handle the GDP, your nonsense doesn’t work for me !!!
                1. S_mirnov
                  S_mirnov 7 May 2013 00: 55 New
                  -1
                  Are factories being built in our country? Coca-Cola and diapers production? Or is it still heavy industry? (servicing the gas and oil sector does not count, it is clear that pipes, valves and compressor stations are very necessary for trading in oil and gas) If really heavy industry, then I should reconsider my views.
                  "Yes, and I was working with GDP" - hmm, a dubious honor, I would not shake his hand.
  2. Belogor
    Belogor 5 May 2013 06: 36 New
    +3
    "The measures taken in the development of strategic weapons allow us to look to the future with confidence. These measures allow our missiles to overcome any missile defense systems, including those only planned to be created."

    This is the most important thing!
  3. Black
    Black 5 May 2013 07: 00 New
    19
    The grandfather who had gone through the war, when the parade was shown and the "strategists" were rolling out onto Red Square, always cried.
  4. treskoed
    treskoed 5 May 2013 07: 04 New
    +6
    Separating warheads, mobile complexes - truly new, this is the forgotten old! Only in this way, despite all the "demands" and "protests" of humanists and other foreign agents!
    1. self-propelled
      self-propelled 5 May 2013 10: 38 New
      +2
      Quote: treskoed
      Only in this way, despite all the "demands" and "protests" of humanists and other foreign agents!

      otherwise it cannot be, if it concerns the security of the state! let all those supporters of shit democracy scream to themselves ... good luck to them ...
  5. omsbon
    omsbon 5 May 2013 07: 43 New
    18
    CHRIST IS RISEN! Happy holiday to all Orthodox forum users!

    As the unforgettable Abdullah said in "White Sun" - "A dagger is good when you have it and woe to those who do not have it!" So it is with the Strategic Missile Forces.
  6. FC SKIF
    FC SKIF 5 May 2013 07: 43 New
    +6
    I have such an opinion about our asymmetric missile defense: two submarines, stuffed with uranium and putonium, float off both coasts of the USA and ... fry kebabs, and in case of war they repeat the Varyag feat and, due to ocean currents, amers move from the coasts to Utah and Klorado .
    1. Andrey57
      Andrey57 5 May 2013 10: 23 New
      +4
      After the "kebabs" it will be impossible to live either in Utah or in Colorado - the "barbecue" zones overlap very well bully
  7. v53993
    v53993 5 May 2013 08: 09 New
    12
    CHRIST IS RISEN! Happy Holidays to you Orthodox.

    The mace is not bad at all, especially in combination with cruise missiles. And BZHRK is generally scrap against which there is no admission.
    1. krokodil25
      krokodil25 5 May 2013 08: 56 New
      +4
      [img]http://im6-tub-ru.yandex.net/i?id=14848163-21-72&n=21[/img]
      Quote: v53993
      CHRIST IS RISEN! Happy Holidays to you Orthodox.

      Truly risen! Happy holiday to all Orthodox !!! drinks

      Regarding the strategic nuclear forces, we’ll tear everyone
  8. SPACE
    SPACE 5 May 2013 08: 59 New
    +3
    QUOTE ... "I am not an expert in the missile field. My article is based on information from open sources and on what the general designer of these systems Yuri Solomonov, as well as some officials of the Ministry of Defense, said at different times about this." ...
    MIT and Yuri Solomonov authoritative, but not the only designer of missiles in Russia, there is also Makeev’s design bureau, rationally their opinion also had to be cited. You can’t put eggs in one basket, liquid rockets have confirmed their properties, how long they have been extended, they have been in service for over 20 years, SATAN NEEDS THREE! Yuzhmash, too, cannot be discounted, it is Satan that is the main obstacle for radical democrats.
    QUOTE ... "And in a recent interview on the Dozhd channel, speaking about promising developments, Deputy Prime Minister Dmitry Rogozin said that" he does not know about the new rocket "...
    Rogozin are some of your MO officials? Tolley the author, toli Rogozin PR TV channel "rain" which does not pour, but rather pisses, if both are in place, especially in the light of recent reports about his problems with funding. IN GENERAL, reading the article, you feel a bad taste, flavored with good sauce.
    1. Nitup
      5 May 2013 11: 22 New
      +2
      When I wrote in this article that the decision to develop a heavy liquid rocket was canceled, I had to confirm it with something, so I quoted Rogozin. The only place I heard these words was in his interview on Rain. But this does not mean that I am promoting this under-channel. It was attended by different people, from Sergei Mavrodi to Zhores Alferov. As for Makeev Center, he also took part in the development of the Mace; many systems of the complex were developed precisely in Makeev Center. Just MIT is the lead in the cooperation of more than 600 enterprises. SouthMash now, sadly, is a foreign enterprise. And we cannot in any way rely on the development and production of strategic weapons in another country. It is not known what will happen tomorrow in the world.
      1. SPACE
        SPACE 5 May 2013 13: 21 New
        0
        Quote: Nitup
        interview on Rain. But this doesn’t mean that I’m promoting this under-channel

        “It seems to me, Billy King, you want to offend us.”
        “Take my colt, Martin, and shoot me if I'm wrong.”
        - I just think "" is not a word that should be used in decent company. bully
        Movie "The Man from Boulevard des Capuchins".
        It’s just that you give a one-sided assessment praising MIT, not who does not argue about the merits and need for MIT’s developments and products, but between Makeev and them, I hope you know there were friction. Anyway, Solomon, with all due respect to him, does not show due pragmatism, with his own without compromise hints that liquid rockets are not needed. Once again, LIQUID HEAVY-CLASS MISSILE CLASSES ARE ALSO NEEDED !!! Not one, one, but both must live. And do not talk about cost savings, operation, etc. THE SPEECH IS ABOUT THE DEFENSE OF THE COUNTRY, ABOUT ITS MAIN COMPONENT. And any reasoning leading away from this is, at best, simply a misunderstanding of this FACT.
        1. Nitup
          5 May 2013 14: 27 New
          +2
          Quote: SPACE
          And do not talk about cost savings, operation, etc. THE SPEECH IS ABOUT THE DEFENSE OF THE COUNTRY, ABOUT ITS MAIN COMPONENT. And any reasoning leading away from this is, at best, simply a misunderstanding of this FACT.

          Note that I did not write about the need for savings, nor about problems with operation. I just wrote that just the DEFENSE of the COUNTRY depends on what kind of strategic nuclear forces we will have. That is, we must have such strategic forces that are guaranteed in response that will destroy any aggressor. I think hardly anyone will argue with that. But, you see, destroying a rocket mine is much easier than a tractor with a rocket or a train. Moreover, we now hear that in the USA they are successfully testing high-precision hypersonic means of attack. Therefore, it is unreasonable to make the main emphasis on mine rockets. That is what I wanted to say. But, this is just my opinion, not imposed on anyone.
          1. SPACE
            SPACE 5 May 2013 19: 31 New
            +2
            Quote: Nitup
            Note that I did not write about the need for savings, nor about problems with operation.

            Yes, I added it, so to speak for the future, suddenly you will cite Solomonov that solid fuel is cheaper, including and in service. But do not take it personally.
            Quote: Nitup
            we must have such strategic forces that are guaranteed in response that will destroy any aggressor.

            Yes, with this, I completely agree with you, Poplar, Yars and Mace are excellent missiles for a retaliatory strike.
            Quote: Nitup
            But you must admit, destroying a rocket mine is much easier.

            Yes, and I agree with this, but only if it comes to the first blow from the enemy. BUT at least 50 missiles of the Satan type are necessary for our first strike, not only do they concentrate and pull off part of the enemy’s striking means, it’s nice to have an additional 100-150 of full-fledged missile silos where the missile really stands, then let them distract to all 150 mines.
            Quote: Nitup
            Therefore, focusing on mine rockets is unreasonable

            That's right, the main ones are mobile, I agree with all 100, but. Look back at history, in my opinion there are a lot of examples when the smartest people start, using their regalia and authority, to assert "something", and later it turns out that this is not so! After all, no one is immune from delusion. As a result, then a lot of problems arise, so maybe you don't have to cut the ends to the end? You know, your article is good and useful, but it is not "yours" in the sense that you follow the lead of generally accepted dogmas, just statistics and do not even try to turn aside. You know, if I see that a person is being pulled to the extreme side, in my judgments or beliefs, I automatically take the opposite side. My principle is "I am not for anyone, I am against those who have an ellipse orbit." My advice to you, try to look at the problem from different points of view, and not just look, but enter the role. In the end, any dispute should give birth to truth for opponents. Best regards, De-man.
            1. Nitup
              5 May 2013 20: 06 New
              +1
              Quote: SPACE
              BUT at least 50 Satan missiles are needed for our first strike

              That is the whole point, that Russia is not going to attack anyone first with the use of nuclear weapons. In my opinion, this is immoral. For us, nuclear weapons are deterrence weapons. But, for the first strike, they will well approach Poplar. But, for example, the United States is the only country ever to use nuclear weapons. And she used this weapon against a country that definitely could not answer. Therefore, having such means that are guaranteed to be able to destroy any aggressor, we can protect ourselves from large-scale aggression. Of course, this is all a matter of specialists, and you and I can only guess what will happen and how.
              1. SPACE
                SPACE 5 May 2013 20: 43 New
                0
                You know, it’s better for mine to overdo it than to miss it, the weapon is already immoral by its very existence, and there is nothing to say about its use in general and the first in particular, and even more so "such". Yes, I am sure that we will never be the first to apply it, our people still have such a concept as morality and conscience, unlike some ... But to have such an opportunity, mine is still necessary. And then I'm not completely sure that mines with a guarantee can be destroyed, including promising hypersonic ones, any rocket needs time to take off and accelerate, given the minimum distance from the borders to the mines, well, at least 5 minutes will be enough for automatic launch of missiles. In addition, there are and were tested poor means such as KAZ silos that do not even contradict the ABM Treaty.
                1. Nitup
                  5 May 2013 21: 03 New
                  +1
                  Quote: SPACE
                  And then I’m not sure until the end that mines with a guarantee can be destroyed, including promising hypersonic ones, any rocket needs time to take off and disperse, given the minimum distance from borders to mines, well, at least 5 minutes will be enough for this automatic launch of missiles. In addition, there are short-lived means such as KAZ ShPU that have been tested and not contradicting even the ABM agreement.

                  Yes, that’s all, perhaps so. But why create a new rocket. After all, Topoli-M and Yars are put in the mines? To just take something to the GRC or something? You can take it, for example, by developing some promising type of weapon.
                  1. SPACE
                    SPACE 5 May 2013 21: 30 New
                    +2
                    Quote: Nitup
                    Yes, that’s all, perhaps so. But why create a new rocket. After all, Topoli-M and Yars are put in the mines? To just take something to the GRC or something? You can take it, for example, by developing some promising type of weapon.

                    Firstly, I am against the NEW liquid rocket, it is expensive and time to develop again. Secondly, I would just copy the P-36М3, take as a basis the supporting structure, engines, etc. The control system can be taken from the same YRS, the only thing is to re-develop a new supporting platform for the payload. You can only imagine a missile that can pull out over 8 TONS !, you can imagine what kind of prospects it is, there you can cram planning hypersonic blocks with your own engines and heaps of false and weak other lotions, and a cassette warhead for tactical charges of fifty pieces, or you can install a bunch of conventional explosives or balls there, you can fill up any area of ​​the world. Yes, and the rocket itself can be used to launch satellites, there was even an American project to use the Dnieper rocket based on the P-36 to launch an object to the moon! And let all this be done and developed to Makeyev, I think I will not refuse to attract Yuzhmash, I need one rocket a year in exchange for the old one.
  9. VohaAhov
    VohaAhov 5 May 2013 09: 09 New
    13
    The Mace-30 is really good, especially if you look at its weight, it is about 37 tons. Pretty compact rocket. Project 955 boats accommodate 16 of them. Each has 6 warheads with a capacity of 150-250 kT. 96 warheads - 96 targets with a KVO - 150-200 m. For comparison, a 12-15 kT bomb was dropped on Hiroshima.
    I heard that the development of the Bulava-45 missile weighing up to 45 tons and 10 warheads is underway. Here is Kuz'kina's mother.
    As for mine-based missiles, I will rephrase a well-known poem: different missiles are needed, different missiles are important. Both mine and mobile-based (they write that mobile complexes are visible from the satellite. But you can’t attach a satellite to each complex. We have about 200 mobile complexes. Where will they get 200 satellites?). We also need railroad complexes and airborne missile carriers and strategic nuclear submarines. The larger the variety of means of using nuclear weapons, those Americans need to come up with more countermeasures, and this is always more expensive by tens or even hundreds of times.
    1. SEM
      SEM 5 May 2013 09: 30 New
      0
      Well this is logical !!!! Let them "scratch their turnips" But you can't relax ....
  10. aszzz888
    aszzz888 5 May 2013 09: 20 New
    +7
    As long as we have such troops, God forbid all the health personnel, only a madman will think about something to do against Russia.
    Christ is Risen!
  11. SEM
    SEM 5 May 2013 09: 27 New
    +2
    HOLIDAY !!! CHRIST IS RISEN!!!
  12. dc120mm
    dc120mm 5 May 2013 09: 39 New
    18
    Christ is risen! Truly risen.

    ქრისტე აღსდა! ჭეშმარიტად აღსდგა.

    Congratulations to all Orthodox.
    1. antidote
      antidote 5 May 2013 14: 42 New
      +3
      Thank you very much for your congratulations!
      It is especially joyful to hear from Orthodox Georgia!
  13. djon3volta
    djon3volta 5 May 2013 09: 44 New
    +5
    what’s interesting to me is, what warheads do they put new missile warheads on? After all, many forget about the uranium deal when they sold 500 tons of this substance to pennies!
    that's just inappropriately drag Putin here, the whole deal was concluded in 1993.

    This is what it is about. In February 1993, an agreement was signed between Russia and the United States of America to dismantle 20 Russian nuclear warheads and to supply 500 tons of highly enriched uranium to the United States of America. When in the summer of 1994 in the State Duma of the first convocation I named a figure, I said that the economic damage to Russia from this deal was equal to 5 trillion dollars, the Yabloko people sitting in that corner and representatives of Gaidar's Choice of Russia laughed for a long time, saying: " Probably, this military man does not know how to count. He does not understand how many zeros there are. " After that, when we in the State Duma of the second convocation created a commission of the State Duma, which visited the nuclear centers of Novosibirsk, Tomsk, etc., and also worked on this problem for a number of years, the figure was much more threatening - 8 trillion dollars ... That is, we were practically "thrown" by a hundred (!!!) annual state budgets!

    1. SEM
      SEM 5 May 2013 09: 59 New
      +4
      NOW ALREADY LATE, THIS WILL NOT RETURN, BUT CALL THESE "breeders" FOR ANSWER ...
    2. Andrey57
      Andrey57 5 May 2013 10: 33 New
      +5
      They were given not in the form of highly enriched uranium, which is why it lasted so long that it was necessary to dilute to the degree of enrichment of 20%, but in the form of fuel for nuclear power plants, but still a criminal deal - mattresses for the entire previous period before this transaction were able to enrich only 447tn uranium, and our new warheads are riveted from plutonium, they are more compact. Plutonium is isolated from spent fuel from nuclear power plants. The cycle however hi
      1. djon3volta
        djon3volta 5 May 2013 10: 53 New
        -1
        Quote: Andrey57
        and our new warheads are riveted from plutonium, they are more compact. Plutonium is isolated from spent fuel from nuclear power plants. The cycle however

        how do you know that this is exactly so? maybe they’ll just remove them from old missiles and put them on new ones. maybe old stocks of warheads.
        1. Nitup
          5 May 2013 11: 26 New
          0
          Deputy Fedorov said that they did just that. Relocate from old warheads to new ones. The benefit of the warheads was in abundance.
  14. koksalek
    koksalek 5 May 2013 10: 00 New
    +1
    [quote = djon3volta] I’m interested in what warheads for new missiles from which zagashnik they put? After all, many forget about the uranium deal when they sold 500 tons of this substance to pennies!
    that's just inappropriately drag Putin here, the whole deal was concluded in 1993.


    Happy holiday dear! It is a pity that these nouveau riche people still live and thrive, so that they would perish in the fiery hyenas with all the corrupt scum for selling the Motherland piece by piece! Even now they sharpen their teeth as if to bring again under disarmament all modern species from which amers have diarrhea and incontinence.
  15. 120352
    120352 5 May 2013 10: 18 New
    +2
    I think that the title of the article "Russia's nuclear sword" is not entirely correct, for it is hardly possible to use nuclear forces as a sword, but quite as a shield. Nuclear weapons are a deterrent factor, this is what allowed our state to survive to this day, since the potential enemy perfectly understood and understands that in a moment of despair, the Russians can commit an auto-da-fe, in which they themselves will die, but destroy the enemy. The ability of Russians to self-sacrifice, our collegiality, built on the multitude of "I", turning into "WE", is known to the whole world. Sacrificing themselves, they always won, although these victories more than once bore the character of "feasts". So it will be in the future as long as the Russian people live!
    Christ is Risen, Orthodox!
  16. PValery53
    PValery53 5 May 2013 10: 34 New
    +5
    Our logic for the West is clear and transparent: if you don’t want to respect, you will be afraid !! ..
    Happy Easter Sunday, Orthodox!
  17. Zomanus
    Zomanus 5 May 2013 10: 51 New
    -10
    Even your roll call "HV-BB" reminds the Muslim cries of "Allah Akbar" for any reason. Che scream a hundred times? And yes, we need rockets. And judging by the article, everything is wrong with us, and we are even developing something new. True, it's a shame that we won't get to Florida, but then I think something will come up with time.
    1. matross
      matross 5 May 2013 11: 20 New
      +9
      We do not have "for any reason". We have a holiday today. Don't celebrate - respect others anyway!
      Christ is Risen, Orthodox !!!
  18. fenix57
    fenix57 5 May 2013 11: 14 New
    +1
    Quote: v53993
    And BZHRK is generally scrap against which there is no admission.

    It would be good if they didn't delay the revival of "scrap against which there is no reception" .... [b]"To track the movement of these trains, the Americans had to almost constantly keep a group of 18 spy satellites over Russia. But the US intelligence services have never been able to identify the BZHRK on the patrol route."/browse.bqb https://www.iraq-war.ru/article/289470[/b]
    "Deputy Defense Minister Yuri Borisov, who oversees the rearmament of our army, said that work on the creation of the BZHRK is already underway at the Moscow Institute of Heat Engineering. It was there that the strategic Topol, the multi-headed Yars and the Naval Bulava were designed. Now the scientists and designers have a task : to revive the nuclear weapons that once thrilled Western generals. " soldier [b] see http://www.rg.ru/2013/04/23/arsenal-site.htm [/ b]
  19. Zeus
    Zeus 5 May 2013 11: 35 New
    0
    But what about nuclear weapons of strategic aviation? There is nothing about him in the article.
    1. Zomanus
      Zomanus 5 May 2013 11: 52 New
      0
      And strategic aviation is the most vulnerable part of the triad. Always in sight and knock them down whatever you want ...
  20. antidote
    antidote 5 May 2013 14: 13 New
    +1
    Christ is Risen, Orthodox!
    As for Yars, the phrase - "All this makes the interception of such ammunition today and in the future is hardly possible." very important.
    This makes us very attentive to our foreign policy actions and internal affairs. They will not press brazenly on us. This raises the authority of the country and all the talk of external and internal enemies about our backwardness is only an element of the information war.
  21. il grand casino
    il grand casino 5 May 2013 14: 40 New
    +2
    I talked like that with a German officer. We discussed weapons. In the end, he simply said: "I think we have much more advanced weapons systems. But if there was a war in Germany, it would not take a couple of hours. That's all."
  22. Odysseus
    Odysseus 5 May 2013 14: 49 New
    0
    The main difficulty of our rocket science industry is the narrowness of the production base. Actually, all production hangs at the Votkinsk Plant alone, and the pace of this production, frankly, is not amazing.
    But we don’t have as many missiles as many people think. If you remove the old Soviet Voivode, weave, Topol and P-29P and for the most part riveted to the airfields of DA from them, then it’s not enough.
    It would be ideal to build a couple more rocket plants and increase the production of rockets by 2-3 times.
  23. Vtel
    Vtel 5 May 2013 14: 50 New
    +5
    Happy Easter!

    Poplar fluff, heat and start up,
    The wind blows to the sky.
    Only you do not believe anyone.
    Wait for the inversion trace ...
  24. Prishtina
    Prishtina 5 May 2013 16: 08 New
    +1
    The latest French M-51 ballistic missile exploded today during a test launch from a nuclear submarine. According to RIA Novosti, tests of a rocket capable of carrying a nuclear charge took place off the Atlantic coast of France in the Finister department.

    Shortly after the launch of an atomic submarine, the rocket exploded spontaneously. Fortunately, the M-51 carried neither conventional nor nuclear warheads.

    The reasons for the incident are still unknown, French experts are working to establish all the circumstances of the unsuccessful launch.

    The M-51 missile incident was the first such failure in the past 17 years.

    The French authorities emphasize that the unsuccessful launch of the rocket could not lead to serious consequences, since the test area was closed to the movement of sea and air civilian ships in advance.

    Help

    Since 51, the M-2010 intercontinental missile with a multiple warhead has been in service with the new generation of submarine nuclear missile carriers that are part of the Strategic Naval Forces of France.
  25. Gecko
    Gecko 5 May 2013 17: 53 New
    0
    Theoretically, the modified Bulava missile could be placed in a standard cargo container of 45 feet. And this makes it difficult to track it from satellites and makes it possible to transport it by standard road, rail, sea transport.
  26. Boa kaa
    Boa kaa 5 May 2013 18: 19 New
    +4
    The report of the spontaneous undermining of the French sea-based M-51 ICBMs caused me mixed feelings. Again, the paddling trees pierced, as it was with the Exocet MM-39, when, when they hit the target, they did not explode. And here is the explosion of a rocket adopted by the 3 a year ago, in the 2010 year. I recalled an unprecedented salvo with a full ammunition of ICBMs of the RPK SN Novomoskovsk
    “On August 6 of 1991 with K-407, in the framework of Operation Hippo-2, a successful salvo was launched with all sixteen missiles from underwater position. According to eyewitnesses, the boat shot like an assault rifle. The experience of such launches is unique and has not been repeated by anyone in the world. ”(Before that, the Americans from the Ohio SSB launched the 4 Trident 2 ICBM). It is also unique in that the launches were made by ICBMs, which ended with a warranty storage period of 10 years. This launch showed the high reliability of our rocket technology, allowed us to reasonably extend the life of the more “younger” R-29RM.

    Launch of the ICBM M-51 was implemented in 09: 30 local time from the nuclear submarine Vigilant S618. In the event of a successful launch, the rocket was supposed to fall in the waters of the North Atlantic a few hundred kilometers from the coast. But apparently not fate. And the French did not have the collapse of the dashing 90's, but how it turns out.
  27. k220150
    k220150 5 May 2013 18: 26 New
    0
    We did not say: "A herd of donkeys headed by a lion will defeat a herd of lions headed by a donkey." The question is, what about us?
    1. apiarian1
      apiarian1 6 May 2013 07: 23 New
      0
      Here Sharapov, you hit me with this question. When the states realized that in open confrontation they could not defeat the Union, they successfully destroyed it. Where is the guarantee that they simply won’t surrender all at the top, as they say, without a fight? We need a political system in which it would be impossible.
  28. Naval
    Naval 5 May 2013 19: 28 New
    +2
    All with the holiday of the Orthodox, with the bright holiday of Easter! Christ is risen!
    And with God's help we will overcome the adversaries!
  29. vinni
    vinni 5 May 2013 19: 51 New
    +2
    The restoration of the power of the "strategists" is certainly good ... Only for us, tactical nuclear weapons are no less important (and possibly more). The main thing here is not to succumb to the liberal calls for negotiations with the United States to reduce it - this will be CRASH for us!
  30. 1goose3
    1goose3 5 May 2013 21: 29 New
    +1
    Quote: self-propelled
    destroy BZHRK - it was a crime!


    I can’t argue with you, I have nothing to do with military affairs. But I'm a professional railwayman. And I can say for sure, two or three days before the passage of the BZHRK such control measures were taken as extraordinary rounds, inspections, cancellation of scheduled work, a special duty regime, although the same measures were taken when passing trains with especially dangerous cargo. But to calculate the BZHRK, in my opinion, is elementary, in the presence of the cheapest agents.
    This, so to speak, is information for consideration. what
  31. kanarias
    kanarias 5 May 2013 21: 53 New
    +1
    Had RUSSIA had no nuclear weapons, the world would have been different. The United States would have waved this club right and left. The presence of nuclear weapons in RUSSIA is a guarantee of peace.
  32. The comment was deleted.
  33. user
    user 5 May 2013 22: 08 New
    +1
    The main difficulty of our rocket industry is the narrowness of the production base. Actually, all production hangs at one Votkinsk Plant,

    And Krasmash in Krasnoyarsk, or for YOU beyond the Urals Terro inkognito
    1. Odysseus
      Odysseus 5 May 2013 23: 13 New
      0
      Quote: user
      And Krasmash in Krasnoyarsk, or for YOU beyond the Urals Terro inkognito

      No, of course. But I had in mind missiles for the Strategic Missile Forces. Although you are right about the Krasmash-producing Sineva, it was necessary to mention.
      Thank you for reminding ! But the production base still needs to be expanded!
  34. user
    user 5 May 2013 22: 10 New
    0
    The main difficulty of our rocket industry is the narrowness of the production base. Actually, all production hangs at one Votkinsk Plant,

    And Krasmash in Krasnoyarsk, or for YOU beyond the Urals Terro inkognito
  35. yur
    yur 5 May 2013 22: 20 New
    0
    And not only in response, but also in PREVENTIVE.
  36. yur
    yur 5 May 2013 22: 53 New
    0
    And not only in response, but also in PREVENTIVE.
  37. navy33
    navy33 5 May 2013 23: 37 New
    +2
    All Orthodox with the Holy Resurrection of Christ! But still, we have a powerful nuclear shield, whatever one may say. And grace is in my heart !!! laughing
  38. Seraph
    Seraph 6 May 2013 00: 15 New
    0
    Christ is Risen! Truly Risen!
    May God grant health to our scientists, engineers and workers forging the shield of Russian Orthodox civilization. No matter how liberals yell, our strategic nuclear forces protect it (civilization), even if in potency. The best argument for those who do not respect the Law of God is an armada of warheads, tanks, combat aircraft and ships. God is with us!
    1. MG42
      MG42 6 May 2013 02: 12 New
      +3
      The last phrase "God is with us" ("Gott mit uns") >>> ask who was on the buckles.
  39. MG42
    MG42 6 May 2013 01: 49 New
    +2
    Strategic Missile Forces strategic missile launches


    Demolition of the roof of amers by Russian rockets to German music