Military Review

"Sarmat" instead of "Governor"

38
Exactly a quarter of a century ago, in August 1988 of the year, the P-36М2 “Voevoda” missile system with an intercontinental ballistic missile (ICBM) 15А18М was adopted by the Soviet strategic missile forces. Despite its solid age, the Voyevoda missiles are still one of the most massive strategic weapons in our country. Nevertheless, even such powerful and perfect systems become obsolete with time and exhaust their resources. It should be noted that the resource of missiles of the P-36M family has been extended several times in recent years, and this has a corresponding effect on the average age of strategic armaments and the state of the strategic missile forces as a whole. Therefore, for several years now scientific and design work has been going on, the purpose of which is to create a new ICBM capable of fully replacing old missiles of this class.


The discussion of the creation of a new heavy intercontinental ballistic missile began shortly after the collapse of the Soviet Union, but at that time, due to the difficult economic and political situation in the country, the promising project remained at the level of the first conversations. Subsequently, the topic was raised again at various levels, but only in the middle of the past decade did the discussion turn into the first real actions. The project called “Sarmat” started no later than the first half of 2009 of the year. At that time, the first information about the purpose of the new project appeared. According to representatives of the command of the strategic missile forces, the Sarmat ICB will replace the weapons of the R-36M family, the service life of which is coming to an end.


ICBM 15А18М complex Р-36М2 "Voyevoda" (Orenburg)


As it became known in the past 2012 year, the head enterprise for the development of a new ICBM is the State Rocket Center. V.P. Makeeva (GRTs). In addition, the project involves the Reutov NPO Mashinostroeniya and several other specialized organizations. Some sources contain information about the involvement in the work of the Ukrainian Design Bureau "Yuzhnoye", but this information is still an assumption and has not been officially confirmed.

Earlier it was claimed that by the beginning of 2011, the creation of a draft project for a promising missile complex was to be completed. Further supposed to consider it and take appropriate decisions. As it became known later, the draft version of the Sarmat project went through all the necessary procedures shortly after that, in the same 2011 year, the technical requirements for the prospective ICBM were approved. At the same time, the elaboration of the main project components, such as the work plan, economic aspects, etc. As of the second half of last year, a number of works in the framework of the Sarmat project reached the stage of creating mock-ups for some of the onboard electronics of the rocket.

In September 2012, Commander-in-Chief of the Strategic Missile Forces, Colonel-General S. Karakayev, spoke about the plans of the Ministry of Defense regarding the creation of new heavy ICBMs. According to him, the promising rocket will have a starting weight of one hundred tons and will appear by the 2018 year. In mid-October, the media reported that the Ministry of Defense reviewed the conceptual design of a promising missile and generally approved it, making some corrections and expressing wishes. Customer's comments will be taken into account when creating a finished project, in accordance with which the construction of mass-produced missiles will begin.

Unfortunately, there is still very little information about the Sarmat ICBM project. In fact, now only the approximate launch weight of the rocket and the planned period for the construction of the first mass ammunition are known. In this regard, more detailed information about the design and characteristics of the rocket over the coming years will be solely evaluative. Nevertheless, taking into account the peculiarities of previous projects of ICBMs and their characteristics, one can make appropriate assumptions about the Sarmat rocket. In addition, over the past years, information has appeared several times that may be relevant to a new project.

Already there is information about the type of the power unit of the ICBM complex "Sarmat" - a new ballistic missile will receive liquid rocket engines. The remaining nuances of the project are currently classified. In this case, there is information about the research work "Argumentation", conducted several years ago, the SRC them. Makeeva and NPO Mashinostroeniya. In the course of this program, the possibilities of creating a promising land-based intercontinental ballistic missile were considered, taking into account available technologies and experience. The overall results of the study were as follows. During the 7-8 years, having spent about 8-8,5 billion rubles, the defense industry of our country is able to develop and start mass production of ICBMs with a range of up to 10 thousand kilometers and with a drop weight of about 4350 kg.

Based on the starting weight of the promising missile, we can draw the appropriate conclusions about the launcher. Most likely, the ICBM complex "Sarmat" will use mine launchers, similar to those used in existing missile systems, including the family R-36M. It is also impossible to exclude the possibility that the launch shafts of the Voyevod and Sarmat missiles will have a high degree of unification. This assumption is supported by the information provided by the portal MilitaryRussia.ru with reference to sources close to the rocket industry. So, back in 2009, it was decided to retool several launchers of the Baikonur test site. There are no details on this conversion.

Perhaps the most interesting issue in the context of creating a new intercontinental ballistic missile is its combat load. The Topol and Topol-M missiles carry monoblock warheads, while the latest Yars delivers several warheads with individual guidance to the targets. Precise data on the payload of Sarmat ICBM, for obvious reasons, are not yet available. At the same time, the use of a split head with blocks of individual guidance looks most likely. As an argument confirming this assumption, we can cite the starting mass of the rocket and the approximate throw-weight (based on information on the topic “Argumentation”). In addition, the Sarmat rocket is intended to replace the Voevoda ICBM, and for a full replacement, it is likely to require the head part of the same class.

It is worth recalling once again that almost all of the above information is estimates and assumptions. Currently, the Sarmat project is in its early stages and because of this, most of the information about it remains closed to the public. In the coming years, such data will rarely appear and in extremely small volumes. Main stream Newsconcerning prospective ICBMs will begin only in 2016-18, i.e. by the promised completion date of the project. By this time, the Voivode R-36M2 missile will be 30 years old and the question of its replacement will be even more acute than now.


On the materials of the sites:
http://lenta.ru/
http://rian.ru/
http://vpk.name/
http://interfax.ru/
http://militaryrussia.ru/blog/topic-435.html
Author:
38 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must to register.

I have an account? Sign in

  1. Ivan79
    Ivan79 12 August 2013 08: 39 New
    15
    Very good news! The details are really scarce, but still - They do it! Let the amers continue to make bricks at the mere mention of our heavy ICBMs!
    1. Tarpon
      Tarpon 12 August 2013 10: 49 New
      +7
      Good news! And it will be very good when Sarmat enters combat duty!
  2. sashka
    sashka 12 August 2013 08: 39 New
    -22
    The main thing is to come up with a sonorous name. And then start scaring everyone. The fact that there is no production already does not bother anyone .. Loudly shout .. All the steam goes to the hoot and villas on the coast ..
    1. Ivan79
      Ivan79 12 August 2013 08: 43 New
      +4
      What do you think Russia is not able to create a heavy ICBM? And why did they then take up this? So, drank - rollback? It is necessary to do something, once Southern remains in Ukraine.
      1. Witch
        Witch 12 August 2013 11: 15 New
        +2
        There is not much left of Yuzhmash. When we renewed the contract for extending the term of the Voivode in 2006, Alekseev (if he did not misinterpret the name of the head of the NSAU at that time) sadly stated that the enterprise was quietly dying and intergovernmental agreement would only slightly prolong the agony. The uncle who also worked at the Arsenal and adjusted the aiming system during the extension process also told me.
      2. Rosomaha67
        Rosomaha67 12 August 2013 16: 18 New
        +4
        .........
        Quote: Ivan79
        What do you think Russia is not able to create a heavy ICBM? And why did they then take up this? So, drank - rollback? It is necessary to do something, once Southern remains in Ukraine.


        ...... but there remained KrasMash having just a specialization in the manufacture of ICBMs with liquid propellant rocket engines, although it is underwater based, but who said that it is simpler, the plant is in good condition, and can handle it well with a budget order ......
      3. sashka
        sashka 12 August 2013 16: 30 New
        -2
        I think yes .. And now you can turn and twist .. Three volt John and "esaula" grab ..
    2. a52333
      a52333 12 August 2013 08: 57 New
      +3
      Satan -2, Satan (SS-18 and 20 they were afraid before diarrhea)
      Quote: Sasha
      The main thing is to come up with a sonorous name. And then start scaring everyone.
    3. silver_roman
      silver_roman 12 August 2013 11: 28 New
      +2
      here it is. you just need to come up with a certain expression, such as what was said N.S. Khrushchev:
      "We will show you Kuzkik mother!"

      ps By the way, a little off topic, I advise the book "face to face with America."
      a book about Khrushchev’s trip to the states. very interesting.
      1. The comment was deleted.
  3. sasha.28blaga
    sasha.28blaga 12 August 2013 09: 11 New
    +3
    Give each yard a missile system!
    1. il grand casino
      il grand casino 12 August 2013 10: 13 New
      0
      Haha! Haha! I do not want to sleep next to such a miracle)))
    2. theadenter
      theadenter 12 August 2013 10: 58 New
      +2
      In the yards is not necessary. Our electric stove will not warm, the entire substation will feed the mine. wassat
      But heating at the time of launch. laughing
  4. avt
    avt 12 August 2013 09: 13 New
    +6
    Quote: Sasha
    The main thing is to come up with a sonorous name. And then start scaring everyone. The fact that there is no production already does not bother anyone .. Loudly shout .. All the steam goes to the hoot and villas on the coast ..

    Excuse me in Makeas for working in Mias or just pulling it like that - spoil the air? It may well be mine liquid on the basis of ,, Sineva "bungle.
    1. sashka
      sashka 12 August 2013 09: 35 New
      -14
      I’m arguing .. My production of IL-76 and Ruslan were destroyed, it remains only to make fun of it.
      1. El13
        El13 12 August 2013 18: 45 New
        +2
        So it seems that they resumed production of the IL-76 and they are talking about Ruslan ...
  5. 1c-inform-city
    1c-inform-city 12 August 2013 09: 24 New
    +9
    Quote: Sasha
    The main thing is to come up with a sonorous name. And then start scaring everyone. The fact that there is no production already does not bother anyone .. Loudly shout .. All the steam goes to the hoot and villas on the coast ..

    There is a Krasnoyarsk plant. Which, in view of the lack of demand for Sineva, is not loaded. And it is this plant that is closely connected with Makeevsky KB.
  6. niksup
    niksup 12 August 2013 09: 39 New
    +1
    I hope the work on creating a new ICBM will be successful!
  7. pensioner
    pensioner 12 August 2013 09: 55 New
    +7
    Unfortunately, there is still very little information about the Sarmat ICBM project.
    Thank God that is not enough. And even then they just did not pour over the hill.
  8. VohaAhov
    VohaAhov 12 August 2013 11: 10 New
    +8
    I wonder why Sarmat is associated with Satan. In my opinion, it would be more logical to compare with the "Stiletto" and "Scalpel". All three complexes have one weight category. "Satan" weighs 211 tons, and is in a different weight category.
    1. studentmati
      studentmati 12 August 2013 22: 50 New
      +1
      Quote: VohaAhov
      “Satan” weighs 211 tons, and is in a different weight category.


      Correctly noticed!
  9. SANAY
    SANAY 12 August 2013 11: 19 New
    +4
    Friend! No info and Glory to God! It should be so. Let the potential adversary bite his elbows ...
  10. Nick_1972
    Nick_1972 12 August 2013 11: 34 New
    +2
    All this is of course cool. The sequence is a little embarrassing: first, a draft design, then the requirements for the product. I would not want to think that at first the military-industrial complex announces what it can do today, and the Moscow Region adjusts to it.
    1. studentmati
      studentmati 12 August 2013 22: 53 New
      0
      Quote: Nick_1972
      All this is of course cool. The sequence is a little embarrassing: first, a draft design, then the requirements for the product. I would not want to think that at first the military-industrial complex announces what it can do today, and the Moscow Region adjusts to it.


      I agree, first TTX, and then negotiations and requirements for the military-industrial complex.
  11. ivshubarin
    ivshubarin 12 August 2013 11: 39 New
    +3
    We also restored the railway missile system and we laid down on their missile defense.
    1. studentmati
      studentmati 12 August 2013 22: 57 New
      0
      Quote: ivshubarin
      We also restored the railway missile complex and we laid down on their missile defense


      BZHRK would be a very effective addition to mine products !!! In terms of vulnerability and security, both have their "+" and "-".
    2. rubin6286
      rubin6286 23 November 2013 11: 49 New
      +1
      Such a complex is not needed now. It requires a certain infrastructure, which is not there right now.
  12. Nitup
    Nitup 12 August 2013 12: 07 New
    -9
    In principle, there is no need to create a new mine rocket, because Yars, for example, are perfectly placed in the mines instead of the recoverable old liquid rockets. Probably this decision is connected with the need to load enterprises and design bureaus with work. It would be better if given the task of developing some promising type of weapon.
    1. avt
      avt 12 August 2013 14: 10 New
      +4
      Quote: Nitup
      In principle, there is no need to create a new mine rocket, because Yars, for example, are perfectly placed in the mines instead of the recoverable old liquid rockets. Probably this decision is connected with the need to load enterprises and design bureaus with work. It would be better if given the task of developing some promising type of weapon.

      Try to look at it from such a side - the Soviet backlog is ending, you can’t forever renew. The number of solid fuel pencils produced is apparently not enough to make up for the natural loss. Well, why not put a well-known liquid in the mine? Moving with it in a mobile version is a deadly thing, it is very expensive to make ampoules of such sizes, and it’s almost impossible And it’s just the time to mine, to the hospital, and their operation is usual for calculations.
      1. Nitup
        Nitup 12 August 2013 14: 21 New
        0
        Perhaps you are right if, in fact, the Votkinsk plant does not have time to make as many missiles as it needs to be replaced in exchange for decommissioned ones, and if a new liquid rocket is created in accordance with the requirements of the time (short active section, etc.), and not just copy the old specifications. And the Miass design bureau with KrasMash will be busy.
      2. rubin6286
        rubin6286 23 November 2013 11: 58 New
        0
        All of our rockets with rocket engines in silos are amputated.
        The last non-ampoule missiles were withdrawn from service in the late 70s of the last century.
    2. rubin6286
      rubin6286 23 November 2013 11: 54 New
      0
      How do you know how YaRSs are placed in silos of silos with rocket engines?
      This is not for you to change the rods in a ballpoint pen. The Russian Federation must maintain military parity with the United States and most of the missiles we have in silos. Their operational life is about to expire and it’s reasonable to change them so far, that again on rockets with LRE. Why? See my comment.
  13. Peaceful military
    Peaceful military 12 August 2013 14: 18 New
    +6
    This is all good, but do not forget the famous: "it was smooth on paper, but forgot about the ravines."
    Design and produce, it is not yet put on the database. Will we succeed? After all, the question is about survival as a state.
    It remains to rely on the Lord, God, as well as Field Marshal Khristofor Antonovich Minikh, who said: "The Russian state has the advantage over others that it seems to be controlled directly by the Lord God himself, otherwise it is impossible to understand how it exists at all."
  14. xomaNN
    xomaNN 12 August 2013 20: 39 New
    +2
    Plus, the big one is that Makeev’s design bureau was loaded with work. Their previous missiles for the Shark nuclear submarine left the arena, the order was intercepted by Muscovites-Solomatins. And the experienced team was interrupted by casual work.
  15. Earnest
    Earnest 12 August 2013 21: 51 New
    0
    Quote: VohaAhov
    I wonder why Sarmat is associated with Satan. In my opinion, it would be more logical to compare with the "Stiletto" and "Scalpel". All three complexes have one weight category. "Satan" weighs 211 tons, and is in a different weight category.

    I agree, and the declared weight of MS 4 tons with copecks is less than 8 tons at Voivode
  16. Conepatus
    Conepatus 12 August 2013 22: 21 New
    +4
    Armata, Sarmat, who comes up with these names? Don’t sew the mare’s names. Name at least something beautifully and in Russian.
    1. sashka
      sashka 24 August 2013 00: 18 New
      0
      Quote: Conepatus
      Call at least something beautiful and in Russian.

      Logically. I suggested giving the “name” of the pack fa. Does the airplane have a name or a nickname.? Everyone said nothing. It is interesting that this is not interesting to anyone .. The plane and the person should have a name ..
      Otherwise, everything is just crap.
  17. egsp
    egsp 12 August 2013 22: 52 New
    0
    I haven’t been in Orenburg for a long time, where was this rocket installed? in which park?
  18. velikoros-xnumx
    velikoros-xnumx 12 August 2013 23: 25 New
    +1
    Cyril thanks for the good news.
    As it became known last 2012, the head enterprise for the development of a new ICBM is the State Rocket Center named after V.P. Makeeva (GRC)

    I am glad that it is not MIT. Common sense finally woke up, everyone should do his own thing. I would like to convey this idea to Poghosyan, otherwise after the “super-successful” project the Superjet an even more “super-successful” PACDA awaits us (provided that the Sukhoi Design Bureau will work on it). I have nothing against Poghosyan and “Sukhoi”, rather on the contrary, I am proud and rejoice in their successes in fighter aviation, but ... as they say, "God is God, Caesar is Caesarean." Let specialized design bureaus, for example, Tupolev, do this. Unfortunately, I am far from aviation, who in the know tell me, is there anything left from Myasishchev Design Bureau?
    1. Tot-enot
      Tot-enot 18 August 2013 18: 22 New
      0
      I’m afraid that Design Bureau Tupolev simply won’t pull it already, Design Bureau Sukhoi is probably the most capable now, and they will work together anyway.
  19. bublic82009
    bublic82009 12 August 2013 23: 43 New
    -3
    you need to get away from ICBMs and switch to intercontinental cruise missiles.
    1. studentmati
      studentmati 12 August 2013 23: 44 New
      +1
      Quote: bublic82009
      you need to get away from ICBMs and switch to intercontinental cruise missiles.


      Why?
      1. I think so
        I think so 14 August 2013 00: 16 New
        +2
        Do not pay attention to him ... Farted and fell silent ...
    2. sashka
      sashka 25 August 2013 05: 25 New
      0
      Quote: bublic82009
      you need to get away from ICBMs and switch to intercontinental cruise missiles.

      What for ? Are you going to fight? The first launch will be the last.
    3. rubin6286
      rubin6286 23 November 2013 12: 02 New
      0
      It’s the same as moving from a bike to a bike. The wheels are the same, but the speed is not the same.
  20. qwer1
    qwer1 13 August 2013 12: 19 New
    0
    Nothing, the Soviet stock of ideas is still strong!
  21. rubin6286
    rubin6286 23 November 2013 11: 44 New
    0
    An intercontinental ballistic missile, like any other weapon, is created, developed and improved in conjunction with systems that ensure its combat use. It concentrates all the latest achievements of science, design and technical thought, which often only in the future will find application in other branches of technology. Therefore, if physical aging of ICBMs is an objective reality, then their moral aging is still very far away. It is logical to assume that ICBMs with LREs with an expired warranty period will be replaced by new models of such missiles, created at a domestic production base and not requiring fundamental changes in the equipment of the launch complex. It is possible that they may have slightly different geometric characteristics, key parameters of the control system, but everything else that was previously used to launch will remain unchanged, since it has been perfected and practically worked out.
    I don’t dare to judge how quickly the country will replace the ICBMs with a rocket engine, but I think that in order to maintain military parity, this issue will be resolved.