Military Review

Prospects of Bulava in the light of recent events

57
September 6 during the tests of the nuclear submarine "Alexander Nevsky" an incident involving the latest ballistic missile R-30 "Bulava". In the second minute of the flight, one of the rocket systems failed, as a result of which the product fell into the waters of the Arctic Ocean. To investigate the causes of the accident, a special commission was created, Admiral V. Chirkov, Commander-in-Chief of the Navy, was appointed as chairman. Currently, the commission continues to investigate why the rocket failed to fulfill its training task.


Prospects of Bulava in the light of recent events


Without waiting for the results of the investigation, Defense Minister S. Shoigu ordered an additional test of the new missile. In accordance with his order, several test launches of the P-30 rocket will be made in the coming months. Their goal will be to check the conformity of products with the declared characteristics. The exact dates of these launches have not yet been announced. Probably, new tests will begin only after the completion of the investigation. At the same time, state tests of the Alexander Nevsky and Vladimir Monomakh submarines were suspended. Pending the results of the commission’s work, a variety of versions appear concerning the causes and consequences of the emergency launch.

The fact that the fired Bulava missile was manufactured as part of the first production batch gives a specific view of the situation. Including this feature of the emergency launch has led to the fact that once again began to spread the view that the new missile was unnecessary and that it was mistaken to put into service. It should be recalled that such an opinion has been expressed over the past few years. One of the main reasons for criticizing the project was a certain number of test launches that ended in failure. This feature of the P-30 missile tests led to the appearance of a mass of statements, according to which the project is too raw and needs to be improved or abandoned.

A few days ago, the Minister of Defense S. Shoigu was again asked about the prospects of the newest missile for submarines. According to the minister, there are no serious steps in the plans of the military department. For example, the Ministry of Defense is not going to replace the Bulava with another rocket. According to the minister, you first need to find out the reasons for the recent accident and make an appropriate decision based on the results of the investigation.

It is noteworthy that any convenient conclusion can be made from the words of S. Shoigu. On the one hand, from the words of the minister, it follows that in the near future, the Bulava will remain in service with the naval part of the nuclear triad. On the other hand, the results of the investigation may be such that the Ministry of Defense will have to look for a replacement for the missile already adopted for service. It is too early to talk about how events will develop in the future. The only clear step in the future fate of the P-30 rocket is the completion of the investigation. It is his results that will determine further actions in relation to the armament of the newest nuclear submarines.

In the first days after the accident, it was noted that the work of the commission may take several weeks or several months. The main problem of the investigation is in some features of the launch. First, the fallen Bulava rocket was a serial product. Secondly, the main task of the launch was to check the onboard systems of the Alexander Nevsky underwater bomber. In this regard, the rocket was not installed telemetry equipment. As a result of such a confluence of circumstances, the emergency commission is devoid of a large amount of information about the course of a rocket flight.

During the investigation, the commission may check the entire first production batch of Bulava missiles, to which the emergency product belonged. If there was any structural defect and it cannot be called an isolated case, then appropriate measures will be taken. It is assumed that all available R-30 missiles will be rechecked and finalized. The result of this development of events will be the correction of existing shortcomings and the preservation of the Bulava missile in the arsenal of the Russian naval fleet.



However, one cannot rule out the possibility of more serious problems. If the commission determines that the cause of the accident was any technical shortcomings that cannot be corrected relatively quickly and simply, then this will have major consequences for both the fleet and the defense industry. The worst scenario for the Ministry of Defense, design bureaus and factories will be such a scenario, in which it will be necessary in the shortest time to create and put into service a new missile, devoid of the shortcomings of the existing Bulava.

Despite the fact that for the time being it is only possible to assess the likelihood of such an outcome of events, there are already proposals to replace the P-30 rocket, which is being criticized. For example, a few years ago it became known that the State Rocket Center. Makeeva (Miass) carried out the next modernization of liquid missiles of the P-29РМ family, as a result of which a new ammunition appeared. According to reports, the P-29RMU3 missile (sometimes the name “Sineva-3” is encountered) has characteristics at the P-29РUMEN2.1 “Liner” level, but can be used by the Borey 955 submarines. For compatibility with new submarines, the P-29РМУ 3 rocket is equipped with updated first and second stages of shorter length and larger diameter. At the moment, the new rocket exists only in the form of design documentation.

Completion of the project "Sineva-3" will require a significant investment of time and money. The rejection of the P-30 “Bulava” missile already in service in favor of the R-29RMU3 developed so far will have significant negative consequences for Russian nuclear forces. Fortunately, the available information on the course of testing and development work on the P-30 project, which ended last year, suggests that the cause of the recent accident was a certain technological defect.

The deadline for completing the investigation into the causes of the accident has not yet been announced. Currently, verification of already manufactured missiles and the study of information related to a failed launch are underway. The results of the commission will be the basis for further action by the Ministry of Defense. Therefore, the current investigation, given the priority of the weapons programs of the marine component of the nuclear triad, will have very big consequences for the armed forces and the country's defense capability.


On the materials of the sites:
http://ria.ru/
http://vz.ru/
http://interfax.ru/
http://warsonline.info/
Author:
57 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must to register.

I have an account? Sign in

  1. Evgeniy667b
    Evgeniy667b 25 September 2013 08: 21
    15
    The mace must be brought up, for the uncertainty is much worse. The fleet needs warships, not scarecrow gardeners.
    1. ben gun
      ben gun 25 September 2013 08: 31
      +5
      It is necessary to bring and bring think. Otherwise, so much dough, and labor and time will be thrown into the trash - nobody needs it. They will bring the mean, and subsequent developments will be a lesson and the benefits of these works.
      1. little man
        little man 25 September 2013 13: 53
        +7
        The lesson will be, only bitter. Over time, the jambs of course smooth out. And remember what debate here was about the Sineva Bulava? Or here are old interviews with an expert from the Central Research Institute of Mechanical Engineering ....
        “But suppose the Bulava is a success.” In this case, we would overtake the Americans in this type of weapons?
        - No, the Bulava, in terms of its performance characteristics, is inferior even to the Trident-1 American ballistic missile, developed 30 years ago. I am not talking about Trident 2. But the Russian R-29RMU2 (Sineva) is comparable with the Americans, which was put aside when the project was handed over to the Moscow Institute of Heat Engineering (MIT), which took up the Bulava. Even if Bulava succeeded and armed the Borey project, the grouping equivalent in terms of combat potential to the liquidated grouping of Project 941 submarines with a complex of the D-19U type, which I already mentioned, would not be created in the foreseeable future. Such is the price of erroneous and even market decisions adopted in 1998.
        1. Bagatur
          Bagatur 25 September 2013 18: 25
          -1
          . According to reports, the R-29RMU3 missile (sometimes called the “Sineva-3”) has characteristics at the level of the R-29RMU2.1 “Liner” rocket, but it can be used by submarines of project 955 Borey. For compatibility with new submarines, the R-29RMU3 missile is equipped with updated first and second stages of shorter length and larger diameter. At the moment, a new rocket exists only in the form of design documentation.


          How many Japanese ... "Bulava" solid fuel rocket and "Sineva" liquid fuel. The transition to Bulava with such an engine is a condition for reliability, in case of leakage of poisonous fuel will not be. It is safe for people and ships. Noi..something ds dvitatel doesn’t get ... Only a factory defect? I don’t think it’s too long time stuck like that ... Probably eating constructive flaws ... Vzvart to Sinev this-forgive me-yesterday’s day, you can but .. only before the development of the replacement Bulava. Sorry, they spent a lot of empty money ...
      2. vjhbc
        vjhbc 25 September 2013 20: 40
        +1
        that's what Americans say about the F-35
        Quote: ben gun
        It is necessary to bring and bring think. Otherwise, so much dough, and labor and time will be thrown into the trash - nobody needs it. They will bring the mean, and subsequent developments will be a lesson and the benefits of these works.
        1. AVV
          AVV 26 September 2013 16: 06
          0
          Makeevtsi let his rocket be brought to mind, it may still come in handy on the Boreas! But the Mace must be further developed, it needs to be found to be flawed and put into operation, not to be abandoned, so much money and effort has been spent !!!
    2. Airman
      Airman 25 September 2013 11: 06
      +2
      Quote: Evgeniy667b
      The mace must be brought up, for the uncertainty is much worse. The fleet needs warships, not scarecrow gardeners.

      How much time will be spent on debugging, and the three newest submarines are unarmed. First you need to create a rocket, bring it to mind, and then build boats, and not vice versa. Or make some kind of unified containers.
      1. Nitup
        Nitup 25 September 2013 12: 30
        0
        Quote: Povshnik
        Quote: Evgeniy667b
        The mace must be brought up, for the uncertainty is much worse. The fleet needs warships, not scarecrow gardeners.

        How much time will be spent on debugging, and the three newest submarines are unarmed. First you need to create a rocket, bring it to mind, and then build boats, and not vice versa. Or make some kind of unified containers.

        Well, and now what do you offer, dear?
        1. Geisenberg
          Geisenberg 25 September 2013 12: 43
          +1
          Quote: Nitup
          Well, and now what do you offer, dear?


          To world peace ... are there any other options?
          1. The comment was deleted.
      2. Geisenberg
        Geisenberg 25 September 2013 12: 42
        0
        Quote: Povshnik
        Quote: Evgeniy667b
        The mace must be brought up, for the uncertainty is much worse. The fleet needs warships, not scarecrow gardeners.

        How much time will be spent on debugging, and the three newest submarines are unarmed. First you need to create a rocket, bring it to mind, and then build boats, and not vice versa. Or make some kind of unified containers.


        Both are true. Only the boats are already standing and waiting, so they will have to finish.
      3. ben gun
        ben gun 25 September 2013 15: 14
        +4
        The rocket and the carrier are not separate components, but a single bundle of technical MEGA units. making one rocket separately from the carrier then will the carrier have to make the BIGGEST BOAT in the world, and it won’t even enter the hull and redo it again? it doesn’t happen that way.
      4. Egor.nic
        Egor.nic 25 September 2013 16: 57
        +3
        This is a dead end. Rocket without a platform - Money in the sand.
    3. vjhbc
      vjhbc 25 September 2013 20: 40
      0
      that's what Americans say about the F-35
      Quote: Evgeniy667b
      The mace must be brought up, for the uncertainty is much worse. The fleet needs warships, not scarecrow gardeners.
    4. 955535
      955535 25 September 2013 21: 18
      +7
      There is no need to finish the "Bulava". Proof of this is the 3 successful launches of four missiles from the Dolgoruky in 2011. It is necessary to bring the culture of production of the Votkinsk plant and quality control at each stage of the assembly of the product.
      1. Nitup
        Nitup 25 September 2013 22: 29
        +2
        Quote: 955535
        There is no need to finish the "Bulava". Proof of this is the 3 successful launches of four missiles from the Dolgoruky in 2011. It is necessary to bring the culture of production of the Votkinsk plant and quality control at each stage of the assembly of the product.

        What 12 rockets immediately launched?
        1. 955535
          955535 26 September 2013 15: 04
          +1
          There were two firing single products and one shooting two products.
  2. Ivan79
    Ivan79 25 September 2013 08: 21
    +2
    Is there a curse on this mace?
    1. smirnov
      smirnov 25 September 2013 12: 18
      +7
      "Solomon's" seal ...
    2. Geisenberg
      Geisenberg 25 September 2013 12: 45
      +5
      Quote: Ivan79
      Is there a curse on this mace?


      Yeah, the US State Department is called a curse. As soon as there is a problem with a separate element of strategic weapons, the same agents of bombing raise a howl to close the entire strategic deterrence program.
    3. Egor.nic
      Egor.nic 25 September 2013 16: 59
      -3
      No, the irresponsibility and incompetence of the designers.
  3. Heccrbq .2
    Heccrbq .2 25 September 2013 08: 32
    +5
    This is not a "Satan" produced by the USSR, which has been on the database for 30 years, although it did not immediately fly.
  4. vano1305
    vano1305 25 September 2013 09: 13
    +4
    The mace is our analogue of the American F-35, there is no alternative, they will bring it at all costs!
    1. Geisenberg
      Geisenberg 25 September 2013 12: 46
      +3
      Quote: vano1305
      The mace is our analogue of the American F-35, there is no alternative, they will bring it at all costs!


      Where did you get the mace? You have ginseng in prison and substandard armored personnel carriers ...
      1. vano1305
        vano1305 25 September 2013 14: 06
        11
        Geisenberg, you’d better go brew;) Unlike people like you and Bandera, I do not divide Ukraine and Russia into us and they, for me this is one country ...
  5. chunga-changa
    chunga-changa 25 September 2013 10: 40
    10
    Missiles do not do themselves. Since there were successful starts, the problem is obviously in people.
    1. Mareman Vasilich
      Mareman Vasilich 25 September 2013 11: 03
      +1
      The most accurate answer.
    2. Volkhov
      Volkhov 26 September 2013 06: 33
      0
      Quote: chunga-changa
      the problem is obvious in people.

      Some people launched a rocket in a tense period in the direction of other people, and they met a beam of ions, now the first let out fog and soar the brains of the third ...
    3. The comment was deleted.
    4. Witold
      Witold 28 September 2013 18: 46
      0
      And here with the S-300 also in people?
  6. Russ69
    Russ69 25 September 2013 11: 05
    +1
    the other day, who from the command of the Navy stated that the test launches this year already have missiles from the very party that last fell.
  7. Ascetic
    Ascetic 25 September 2013 11: 29
    +5
    It is not uncommon for Gazprom to find it profitable to buy out a certain volume of gas from a third-party supplier to "maintain" the market in accordance with its interests (for example, to maintain prices at the required level).


    Do not have to. Production defects will be eliminated. The question is whether it is a single malfunction of the mechanism for extending the nozzle nozzle of the second stage engine (it only partially came out, as a result of which the engine could not reach rated thrust) or a system that applies to the entire series. Moreover, the 5th generation ASBU system adopted for armament and passed The tests in this extreme unsuccessful launch were developed only by Borey and only by Mace. Now only the submarine Yuri Dolgoruky is equipped with it.
    With the new system, the boat is enough to swim up to the periscope depth and release the antennas, then everything will go automatically. Now, after the GS system is unlocked, then the senior assistant for combat use and the officer of the special department of the FSB enter special codes into the control system, and the calculation of the combat compartment is the new coordinates. in time much faster.
    1. Ascetic
      Ascetic 25 September 2013 13: 18
      +5
      The questions arose from NPO Iskra (Perm), which produces nozzles for all three rocket stages.

      because of dissatisfaction with the work of Iskra, the leadership of the department has already suggested several times to take disciplinary measures against the association’s general director Vladimir Shatrov: they even considered the option of dismissing him. However, the government commission that checked the enterprise on behalf of Deputy Prime Minister Dmitry Rogozin did not find a reason for such a radical solution. In addition to Iskra, the commission will have questions about military acceptance, which somehow missed the defective product for release.

      the entire batch of missiles fired along with the fallen Bulava is planned to be recalled to the manufacturer - the Votkinsk Machine-Building Plant, where they will be disassembled, rechecked for defects, if they are found, they will be repaired and only then returned to the military.
      link
    2. Volkhov
      Volkhov 26 September 2013 06: 51
      0
      The nozzle gives 5 ... 10% of thrust, without it, the maximum range will decrease, and not the engine will go out solid fuel. In addition, there was no telemetry, no rocket was found in the Arctic Ocean, what fish eye saw the nozzle in 2 steps?
      One feels the style of the same covert agency, which in Proton burned sensors found upside down.
      1. El13
        El13 27 September 2013 21: 45
        0
        If the nozzle turned out to be skewed as a result of incomplete extension, then there could very well be a bullet ...
  8. Veter
    Veter 25 September 2013 12: 01
    0
    At the VO there was / is such a comrade -Varnaga, who assured that MIT would cope with the problems in the near future, they say it is a serious organization (I do not argue) and it is powerful enough to make a "sea" rocket fly. Solomonov is an excellent designer, etc. The words were said more years ago. So what? Where are the landing of people and the takeoff of rockets?
  9. Algor73
    Algor73 25 September 2013 12: 03
    0
    Eh, "Bulava" you are "Bulava" ... And with a club over the heads of the statesmen who made these decisions, and who, by the way, are no longer statesmen ...
  10. slacker
    slacker 25 September 2013 12: 10
    +5
    I am sure that Russian engineers will solve this problem.
  11. VohaAhov
    VohaAhov 25 September 2013 12: 47
    +2
    Bulava has no alternative. 955 project is sharpened only for her. So they will bring the rocket to mind anyway.
  12. Nitup
    Nitup 25 September 2013 12: 50
    +2
    There can be no question of any replacement with another missile, especially a liquid one. Just bring to mind the Mace, let it take six months or even a year. And how much will it take to develop a new rocket, and how many various resources will it take?
  13. Ka-52
    Ka-52 25 September 2013 13: 07
    0
    Competitors are not asleep. At least there is an alternative, but I would not want to ... request

    a few years ago it became known that the State Rocket Center. Makeeva (Miass) conducted another modernization of liquid rockets of the R-29RM family, as a result of which a new ammunition appeared. According to reports, the R-29RMU3 missile (sometimes called the “Sineva-3”) has characteristics at the level of the R-29RMU2.1 “Liner” rocket, but it can be used by submarines of project 955 Borey. For compatibility with new submarines, the R-29RMU3 missile is equipped with updated first and second stages of shorter length and larger diameter. At the moment, a new rocket exists only in the form of design documentation.
  14. kapitan281271
    kapitan281271 25 September 2013 13: 32
    -1
    What are statesmen. Bulova was a synonym for dough. Makeevka Design Bureau was pulled into the ram for a single specialist on sea launches. Solomon did not call to himself, he thought he was a golden star hat. Now, of course, one way out is to complete the work. If only they had completed as it should, and not for the sake of advertising, they announced everything was fine, everything is fine.
    1. Nitup
      Nitup 25 September 2013 13: 42
      +2
      Quote: kapitan281271
      What are statesmen. Bulova was a synonym for dough. Makeevka Design Bureau was pulled into the ram for a single specialist on sea launches. Solomon did not call to himself, he thought he was a golden star hat. Now, of course, one way out is to complete the work. If only they had completed as it should, and not for the sake of advertising, they announced everything was fine, everything is fine.

      You should at least have studied the question before writing angry tirades. KB Makeeva also took an active part in the development of the Mace.
      1. explorer
        explorer 25 September 2013 15: 14
        -2
        Quote: Nitup
        KB Makeeva also took an active part in the development

        Well yes yes when all the money was cut, but the work was not done - Makeev’s design bureau was attracted for scanty financing.
        1. Nitup
          Nitup 25 September 2013 15: 44
          +1
          Well yes yes when all the money was cut, but the work was not done - Makeev’s design bureau was attracted for meager financing. [/ quote]
          I would be very grateful if, in addition to the words, you provide any evidence
          1. oldstaryi
            oldstaryi 1 February 2014 11: 45
            0
            [quote = Nitup] Well, yes yes when all the money was cut, but the work was not done - Makeev’s design bureau was attracted for meager financing. [/ quote]
            I would be very grateful if, in addition to the words, you provide any evidence [/ quote]
            How? Fin steal documents? As they say, it is. The mall made on-board equipment. And when the Mace did not fly, they attracted specialists from the State Customs Center, but they didn’t allow it to the rocket itself, and they already ate the money.
  15. rrrd
    rrrd 25 September 2013 13: 48
    +1
    Like in the photo, the Thor flew.
  16. WIN969
    WIN969 25 September 2013 15: 04
    0
    There is a saying, "measure seven times, cut once," but our military seems to be doing the opposite.
    And why doesn’t anyone say that it could be a sabotage, using the example of the fallen Proton. I think that the project will be finalized, but the fact that it was started by Serdyuk does not please me, the main thing is that this mace should be a real weapon, and not an occasion to cut the budget.
    1. Ascetic
      Ascetic 25 September 2013 15: 29
      +3
      Quote: WIN969
      but the fact that he was started by Serdyuk doesn’t make me happy,


      in November 1997 years, a letter signed by the Russian ministers Y. Urinson and I. Sergeev was sent to the Prime Minister of Russia V. Chernomyrdin, which suggested taking into account the realities of the international and domestic situation, the financial and production capabilities of Russia, to give the Moscow Institute of Heat Engineering the functions of a leading organization in creating promising strategic nuclear forces .
      An official proposal to stop further development of the 3M91 SLBM in favor of the development of a promising SLBM was put forward in 1998 by Admiral V. Kuroyedov, appointed to the post of Commander-in-Chief of the Russian Navy, after three consecutive unsuccessful test launches of the 73% completed Bark strategic weapon complex (lead missile carrier of Project 941 TK -208 by this time was converted into the Bark complex within the framework of the modernization project 941U with a degree of completion of 84%; project 955 SSBNs were also designed for the same complex). The proposal was submitted to the Security Council of the Russian Federation, taking into account the content of the 1997 letter. As a result, the Security Council of the Russian Federation refused to further develop the project of the Miass Design Bureau of Mechanical Engineering. V.P. Makeev (the developer of all Soviet SLBMs, with the exception of the R-11FM and R-31 that have not yet become massive). As a result, in September 1998, further development of the Bark missile system was stopped, and for the armament of Project 955 ships, a competition was announced to develop a promising solid-propellant missile system under the designation Bulava. As a result of this competition, in which the State Research and Development Center im. VP Makeev with the project of the BR "Bulava-45" (sometimes the designation "Bulava-47") of the chief designer Yu. Kaverin and the Moscow Institute of Heat Engineering with the missile "Bulava-30", the winner was MIT
      After approval of the decision of the 28th Scientific Research Institute of the Ministry of Defense of the Russian Federation, which had previously provided scientific and technical support for the development and development of sea-based strategic missile systems, he was suspended from work, and his functions were transferred to the 4th Central Research Institute of the Russian Ministry of Defense (Dvorkin), which had not previously been involved in this. The development of strategic missile systems for the Navy and Strategic Missile Forces was to some extent removed from the Roscosmos branch research institutes: TsNIImash, Research Institute of Thermal Processes, Research Institute of Engineering Technology, Central Research Institute of Materials.

      I wrote recently that in this case the lobbyist prevailed corporate approach carried out by Urinson, Solomonov, Dvorkin, Sergeyev and Kuroyedov who convinced the country's top leadership (in particular Chernomyrdin) of the need for such a decision. Serdyukov has nothing to do with it.
  17. Odysseus
    Odysseus 25 September 2013 15: 32
    +2
    And how many citizens there were screaming, Hooray! Hooray! and saying that all problems are resolved.
    And where are they now?
    However, there is no turning back. The mace needs to be brought up. Closing the entire program will be a disaster.
    I hope all the same, the problems are associated with production defects, and not with the systemic flaws in the rocket itself.
    1. Boa kaa
      Boa kaa 25 September 2013 23: 35
      +3
      Quote: Odyssey
      I hope all the same, the problems are associated with production defects, and not with the systemic flaws in the rocket itself.

      This was recently announced by Rogozin. The reason most likely lies in the defect of the extension system of the nozzle of the 2 foot, as Axakal said.
      "The initial stage of the flight passed normally, but on the second minute of the flight there was a failure in the operation of the onboard systems of the rocket. Consequently, the failure occurred during the operation of the second stage of the rocket (it operates from the 50th to 90th seconds of the flight). Later, the media reported that the command to turn off the rocket engines was issued by the missile control system, it is also reported that since the launch was carried out within the framework of the state tests program of the RPKSN "A. Nevsky ", the missile was not equipped with a telemetric system. Presumably the launch was not a test, but a combat training and was to be carried out at the command of a new automated control system for SLBM launches. As a result, on September 7, 2013, Russian Defense Minister Sergei Shoigu decided to conduct additional 5 launches of Bulava SLBMs. September 14 - the weekly Kommersant reported, with reference to a source in the military-industrial complex, about the reasons for the emergency launch on September 06.09.2013, 90 - “XNUMX% is sure that the reason lies in problems with the retractable nozzle second stage nozzle. Most likely, it came out only partially, as a result of which the engine could not reach the nominal thrust. "
      BUT if you think that such a reason for a failed launch occurred for the first time, then you are mistaken. 09 December 2009. "Dm. Donskoy" launches 12 Bulava from the White Sea: "launch from a submerged position, failure of the 2nd stage - failure to open the sliding nozzle of the engine due to a manufacturing defect", the rocket self-destructed. But then they did not get to the bottom of the reason. We have to clean up today.
      By the way, the sailors have no questions to "A. Nevsky" and its crew.
      1. Odysseus
        Odysseus 26 September 2013 00: 10
        0
        Quote: Boa constrictor KAA
        But then they did not get to the bottom of the reason. We have to clean today.
        By the way, the sailors have no questions to "A. Nevsky" and its crew.

        Well, as they say, God forbid. You understand the issue of the naval component of the strategic nuclear forces is of strategic importance. With the current state of the army, we can not keep NATO or the PRC with conventional weapons. Yes, I am silent, it’s tears. The Strategic Missile Forces and SLBMs remain.
  18. xtur
    xtur 25 September 2013 16: 07
    -1
    to stimulate Solomonov, the best option is to have the proven "Sineva-3". And the diversity of the submariners' missile fleet is an advantage, not a disadvantage.
  19. jandjella
    jandjella 25 September 2013 16: 13
    +1
    As far as I know, the P-29 is not suitable for borea. Since it is liquid and solid is solid. R-29 was created for 667 bdrm. The boat project is different. And the mass of R-29 gobarites is higher than the mace. Anyway, the boat will have to be redone fundamentally. And given that the Boreas have plowed into the series, this is a minimum of new costs and time for remaking the boat. If it can be altered at all under a new rocket? And useful? Let then 667 bdrm remain?
  20. Bagatur
    Bagatur 25 September 2013 18: 28
    -1
    Another option is a new missile with such dimensions near Borey but how much time is needed for this? What .. without an underwater component of the strategic nuclear forces will it be worth while the new missile is brought to mind?
  21. gyl
    gyl 25 September 2013 18: 34
    -3
    So, why does the BULAVA not fly - it is believed that the decision to unify the land and sea components of the strategic nuclear forces made in the mid-late 90s is erroneous. But why do TRIDENTS and BLUE fly? The answer may look like this = SINEVA and what replaces it there, LINER, were developed in the USSR, in the conditions of deficiency and priority of the military, therefore they piled a bunch of funds for bringing and adopting them. For BULUVA, for obvious reasons, this money is not gave, plus the developer - Solomon with his MOSCOW Institute of Heat Engineering, handed over the army a good solid fuel TOPOL, it remains to adapt the operating time for an underwater start, but, apparently, not fate. The “Underwater high-speed launch” complex, which was terribly expensive and costly, on which, under conditions close to real ones, the launch of intercontinental sea-based missiles was cut, effective managers cut, and like damned Americans, to calculate the probabilities at the “tip of the pixel”, without full-scale tests were not enough, so to speak, ,, computing power ,,. So this type of whistle continues = Yes, what can I say, jump on, with full-scale tests and fine-tuning missiles directly on submarines. And Shoigu was saddened, and the liquid workers offered to fit the old Sineva under the Bulava mines, they could not create a new, really new rocket without a ground test complex, the NATO team couldn’t learn how to simulate processes on megaterraflopp supercomputers, nor did that class of software I cannot buy or steal. Pichalka, however ...
    1. El13
      El13 27 September 2013 21: 55
      +1
      The pichalka for you should be that you do not understand what you are writing about ...
      1. gyl
        gyl 27 September 2013 23: 44
        -1
        this is a military forum, please, your version - we listen with interest.
        1. El13
          El13 28 September 2013 00: 20
          0
          Quote: gyl
          this is a military forum, please, your version - we listen with interest.

          Since the forum is military, then my version:
          If you are so smart, then why don't you build?
          1. gyl
            gyl 28 September 2013 04: 18
            0
            Thank you, sorry, I was waiting for a worthwhile fact. I think everyone in my company would have come.
  22. builder
    builder 25 September 2013 18: 57
    +1
    “... In 1938, according to order No. 22bss of the OVSNK and order of the NKVD No. 00641, groups of designers V. M. Petlyakov and V. M. Myasishchev were formed in Butyrskaya, Lefortovo and Taganskaya prisons, as well as a group of aerodynamics and calculations. All of them were placed in the village of Bolshevo, Moscow Region, in the barracks of the former colony for juvenile delinquents with a high fence around the perimeter. The institution was assigned the code STO (special technical department of the NKVD) ...
    For a month and a half, Petlyakov’s engineers turned the fighter into a dive bomber, which received the name Pe-2. Its mass production began on June 23, 1940.
    Lavrenty Pavlovich Beria kept his word, and on July 25, 1940 Petlyakov, together with all his entourage, was released ... "
    V. Simonenkov. “SHARASHKI STALIN INNOVATIVE PROJECT”
  23. gyl
    gyl 25 September 2013 21: 42
    -2
    Quote: stroitel
    “... In 1938, according to order No. 22bss of the OVSNK and order of the NKVD No. 00641, groups of designers V. M. Petlyakov and V. M. Myasishchev were formed in Butyrskaya, Lefortovo and Taganskaya prisons, as well as a group of aerodynamics and calculations. All of them were placed in the village of Bolshevo, Moscow Region, in the barracks of the former colony for juvenile delinquents with a high fence around the perimeter. The institution was assigned the code STO (special technical department of the NKVD) ...
    For a month and a half, Petlyakov’s engineers turned the fighter into a dive bomber, which received the name Pe-2. Its mass production began on June 23, 1940.
    Lavrenty Pavlovich Beria kept his word, and on July 25, 1940 Petlyakov, together with all his entourage, was released ... "
    V. Simonenkov. “SHARASHKI STALIN INNOVATIVE PROJECT”

    Are you aware of the limit on the height of bombing from a dive, and, accordingly, on the accuracy of hitting prison crafts of the PE-2, in comparison with, say, the Yu-87?
    1. builder
      builder 25 September 2013 22: 29
      -1
      Did you compare it yourself?
  24. APOCALIPTIC
    APOCALIPTIC 25 September 2013 21: 50
    0
    They did, they did, but it turned out like here one forum member said-
    The Bulava, in terms of its performance characteristics, is inferior even to the Trident-1 American ballistic missile, developed 30 years ago. not to mention Trident 2 good
    1. Nitup
      Nitup 25 September 2013 22: 30
      0
      Quote: APOCALIPTIC
      They did, they did, but it turned out like here one forum member said-
      The Bulava, in terms of its performance characteristics, is inferior even to the Trident-1 American ballistic missile, developed 30 years ago. not to mention Trident 2 good

      How do you know her performance characteristics?
  25. Garrym
    Garrym 25 September 2013 21: 52
    +2
    Sorry how it turns out: 
    "Give us the money, we will invent such a" Bulava "for you, you will download it !!!!"
    .... eleven years later:
    "Your" Bulava "does not fly !!!"
    "Oh .... And let us now invent some" Trident "for you. This one will definitely fly, full of happiness for you."

    I’m reading an article and don’t know whether to laugh or cry? V.V. it seems like the north wants to populate, here are the candidates for the settlement ...
  26. Bersaglieri
    Bersaglieri 25 September 2013 22: 26
    0
    Quote: Evgeniy667b
    The mace must be brought up, for the uncertainty is much worse. The fleet needs warships, not scarecrow gardeners.

    And thoroughly "screw up the watch" in terms of quality control at all stages of production. And that's a mess ... :(
  27. Bersaglieri
    Bersaglieri 25 September 2013 22: 28
    0
    Just did not understand, how is the picture with the launch of the Tomahawk from the submarine to the "Bulava" theme?
  28. Bersaglieri
    Bersaglieri 25 September 2013 22: 37
    +2
    Quote: Nitup
    Quote: APOCALIPTIC
    They did, they did, but it turned out like here one forum member said-
    The Bulava, in terms of its performance characteristics, is inferior even to the Trident-1 American ballistic missile, developed 30 years ago. not to mention Trident 2 good

    How do you know her performance characteristics?

    If the starting mass of the rocket and the number of steps are known, then it is very simple to estimate the thrown weight if you did not sleep in physics classes at school and institute.
    Moreover, it will be a TOP rating, real parameters - worse.
    Do not remember the Tsiolkovsky formula? :)
    1. sergey123
      sergey123 26 September 2013 02: 33
      +1
      Good nonsense to write and children fooled to drive
  29. gyl
    gyl 26 September 2013 19: 46
    -2
    Quote: stroitel
    Did you compare it yourself?
    Ah, you are an Israeli ....
  30. Technologist
    Technologist 29 September 2013 14: 54
    0
    The adopted missile flies 50/50 - originally.
  31. Avdy
    Avdy 29 September 2013 19: 15
    0
    Quote: vano1305
    I do not divide Ukraine and Russia into us and they, for me it is one country ...

    +1