I would like to share little-known readers with information about the unique features of our intercontinental ballistic missiles (P-36 and PC-22), created in 70 – 80-s of the last century. These most powerful missiles were named Satan and Scalpel in the USA due to their enormous deterrent potential. There are two reasons to remember them today. First, 17 October marks the 90 anniversary of the birth of their founder Academician Vladimir Fedorovich Utkin. And secondly, the Russian leadership expressed its intention to re-launch the production of such missiles.
THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE APPEARANCE OF MULTIPLAYED ROCKETS
Increasing the power of American ICBMs by the middle of 60-s required the abandonment of the ground-group method of deploying our missiles in favor of placing them in km of silo launchers dispersed to 10, with depths up to 40 m and combat railway missile complexes (BZhRK) capable patrol at distances up to 1500 km from permanent locations. The high readiness for the launch of the P-36 in high-strength silos and the suitability of the PC-22 for a quick change of location increased the combat capability of the Strategic Missile Forces, which concerned the United States.
The qualitative increase in the accuracy of the US ICBM and mutual agreements on reducing the number of forced the designers to increase the power and security of a limited number of P-36 missiles.
However, it was impossible to achieve this by further deepening the silo and thickening of their walls because of the large cargo space of the rocket (length is over 32 m, diameter is 3 m and starting weight is more than 180 tons). It was here that the talent of Vladimir Utkin, who for the first time in the world realized the idea of the so-called ICBM mortar launch with liquid-propellant rocket engines, manifested itself. Its essence is in taking the rocket out of the mine with the powder gases of external batteries.
This idea and the design solutions accompanying it allowed not only to use old silos, having increased their durability by 50 times due to thickening of the walls and decreasing the diameter (due to the failure of the channels diverting gases before the LRE worked there), but also to increase the payload of new R- 36Ms are almost up to 9 tons due to their greater starting weight and saving up to 10 tons of rocket fuel. This type of ICBMs were operated from 1974 to the end of the 80-x, and their last modification, P-36М2 “Voivode”, from the beginning of the 90-x to the present. P-36M missiles have formed the basis of our nuclear missile shield over the past almost 40 years.
Without a doubt, it can be argued that only the presence of more than 80 of our R-300M missiles at the end of the 36s led the United States to abandon its strategic defense initiative. Indeed, each of our missiles carried (except for 10 real nuclear warheads (YABZ) with a total capacity of up to 8 megatons of TNT) even before 10 heavy and 1000 false their simulators - metallized cellophane bags, shaped like YABZ, self-blowing in a vacuum and flying there along with combat in blocks. Therefore, in the case of simultaneous launch of even a dozen of such missiles, the American missile defense (PRO) then conceived would not be able to determine in advance and destroy the real YBZ.
Confidence in the imminent natural death of several dozen P-36M missiles made it possible for Americans in 2002 to return to the creation of a missile defense system. After all, by that time we have 120 pieces of them left, all the surviving P-36М2 (about 40 pieces) are made before 1992, the last 12 of them are on duty from 1992 of the year, and the rest are from 1991 and 1990. Their lifespan is periodically extended - from the initial 10 years to the currently established 24.
The PC-22 was rail-based with a slightly different fate. The first BZHRK with three ICBMs was put on alert in 1992 year. And the last three were removed from it in 2005. All missiles and BZHRK (except for one museum) are now destroyed. As for the true causes of the latter, then they will be discussed later.
UNIQUENESS OF UTKIN'S PRODUCTS
For the perception of the diversity and complexity of the problems that were first solved by Vladimir Utkin when creating P-36M missiles, imagine a situation. You need to ensure for a decade 50– a second readiness for release from a fairly deep shaft of 211-ton thin-walled (3 mm) and made from soft aluminum-magnesium alloy rocket. In addition, it contains not only 195 tons of self-igniting extremely aggressive and toxic components of liquid fuel, but also YABZ, the total capacity of 400 times more than a bomb exploded in Hiroshima. At the same time, all this should be in a transport-launch container (TLC), vertically suspended, like a pendulum, on a “cradle” that is damped relative to the walls of the silo silo.
It was also required that after receiving the start-up signal, it was first repeatedly re-checked by the missile control system, and then it was necessary to select and enter the flight task, taking into account the need for operational re-targeting of the YABZ due to the change of the combat mission or the UES turn on it . Then it was required to implement the received command: a) to carry out prelaunch pressurization of the fuel compartments of the rocket; b) jam the TPC depreciation system; c) open the "roof" (protective device) of the silo, having previously cleaned it from possible blockages of the ground; d) consistently launch three powder pressure accumulators, thus ensuring the smooth movement of the rocket inside the WPC and its powerful discharge from the mine by several tens of meters.
After that, the rocket soaring in free flight must “strip”, that is, get rid of the now unnecessary lateral shock absorbers (eight connected and falling half rings on both sides), which ensured easy sliding of the rocket inside the TPC. Then it was required to dump its pallet, which transmitted the impulse of powder gases to the rocket, and lead it to the side in order to avoid damage to the silo. In this case, the desired pressure drop in the fuel compartments should be created, if necessary, dropping part of their gas cushion into the atmosphere. And, finally, being in a state of weightlessness, it was necessary to simultaneously launch three liquid propellant rocket engines of its first stage, which is not easy for tanks with fluctuating liquid components of fuel.
If we keep in mind that after generating the fuel and dumping the first stage of the rocket, and then launching the second stage LRE and its department, the payload dilution unit entered the work for this reason, throwing out all the heavy and light false targets, and then suggesting (by repeatedly turning on and off a special rocket engine) each of the 10's own YABZs for the purpose prescribed only for him, then one can understand the scientific and engineering feat that Vladimir Utkin and his allied associates have accomplished in their time.
Indeed, for the first time, for example, they succeeded: a) to apply the so-called hot boost of rocket tanks, realized by injecting one self-igniting component into the fuel compartment of another; b) create shock absorbers that for decades have retained elasticity under almost 400-ton load; b) to develop a system for measuring fast and slow turnovers of silos caused by exposure to nuclear explosions; c) to ensure the many years of correct operation of gyroscopes with rapidly rotating rotors; d) to equip the rocket and the breeding unit with unique in terms of the effectiveness of the LRE.
Here are the names of general and chief designers co-authors Vladimir Utkin, whose merits are confirmed by several dozens of certificates for inventions: Stanislav Us - the creator of the rocket body design, Vladimir Stepanov - the creator of its silos, Vladimir Sergeyev - the creator of the ICBM control system, Viktor Kuznetsov - the creator of the hydro-stabilized command complex Devices, Valentin Glushkov and Vyacheslav Rakhmanin - the creators of the LRE.
In many ways, similar in originality to the design and technological solutions implemented in the creation of BZHRK. Vladimir Utkin created an ICBM weighing more than 100 tons, and together with TPK and devices for lifting it in a vertical position - up to 130 tons. The long length of the MBRs (around 23 m with the limit for 22 m refrigerators) required the creation of a special folding fairing for the 10 YABZ.
It was not easy for Alexey Utkin to design the train with three such missiles, which were able to be placed in three permanent sections comprising three cars each, the middle of which had eight axles, and the rest carried part of its weight (more than 150 tons). In addition, the BZHRK was to: a) reach a speed of up to 120 km / h, and after receiving the command, within as little as three minutes, stop as fast as possible; b) to jack up the wagon with a rocket, take the traction electrical network to the ground (if it was); c) open the roof of the car and throw out the rocket using a special powder accumulator; d) start the engines of an exploded MBR, having previously tilted it with another battery in order to avoid damage to the composition of the jet of combustion products coming from the engine.
For justice, I will also note a number of shortcomings inherent in this BZHRK.
Putting them into operation required reinforcement of more than 15 thousand km of railway tracks, for which they replaced wooden sleepers with reinforced concrete and laid the heaviest (75 kg / m) and strong rails on them, the reason being the increased specific load on the railway track.
The train was set in motion by three diesel-electric locomotives, one of which was at its end - to disperse three launchers to the 5 km and launch.
In the case of a railway train derailment, the consequences would be dire. Indeed, in the LRE of the unit for the breeding of JABZ missiles there were self-igniting fuel components, moreover, in tanks made of soft (aluminum-magnesium) alloy fixed on rigid titanium brackets. Nearby were cylinders with nitrogen and high-pressure air, batteries, and YABZ themselves, which then contained conventional explosives, capable of detonating in the event of a prolonged fire.
To sum up, I cannot fail to note here the merits of the General Staff of the USSR Armed Forces, which deployed P-36 and PC-22 missiles in the very center of the country. In addition to the improvement and improvement of the road network of underdeveloped territories, such a decision significantly increased the deterrent role of the Strategic Missile Forces due to the real possibility of launching missiles in a retaliatory nuclear strike.
HOW THE USA GET OFF SOVIET ROCKETS
Having understood the danger of retaliation, the Americans decided to neutralize ICBMs of the P-36 type with their operational-tactical Persings, gathering to place them in Afghanistan (closer to our silos). This forced the Soviet Union to enter there a limited contingent of troops. Realizing the impossibility of this undertaking, the United States organized a campaign to devalue these missiles. They claimed that the X-NUMX P-10 YABZ was allegedly guaranteed to be destroyed by one unit of American ICBMs (which is doubtful because of the difficulty of counting Coriolis forces - one of the inertia forces - and the lack of experience of launching missiles over the North Pole). And they also tried to discredit our country for the same reasons, as if intending to strike the United States first with such missiles.
Start rocket R-36М2 "Voyevoda".
Using such misinformation, widely propagated by lobbyists from some RAS institutes, the Americans began to eliminate all our P-36-type missiles under agreements on mutual limitation and reduction of strategic offensive arms - START-1 and START-2. In particular, with the help of the first treaty, Gorbachev was able to persuade the destruction of 50% of these missiles, and the second already Yeltsin, to eliminate not only the remaining 154 ICBMs of this type, but also all our other multi-charged mine rockets. The hatred of the Americans for the P-36 type missiles was also manifested in their demand (for START-2) to destroy all their silos - some had to be blown up, and others to be poured with concrete and to reduce the diameter.
As for the true reasons for the hasty deliverance of Russia from their BZHRK, they are not so much, as they usually say, US pressure or Yeltsin’s treachery, but the enormous risks of possible railroad derailments with them. I will clarify that when a fire occurred on a BZHRK, the operating personnel were instructed to immediately leave them and retire to 2 km. But it should have been extinguished by special (auxiliary) trains of the Ministry of Railways, whose readiness for leaving the wreck was eight hours.
It was this circumstance, known to the Americans, that allowed them to blackmail our political leadership, already frightened by Chernobyl and therefore quickly agreed to abandon the BZHRK patrols. The railway workers were also happy about the refusal, since the transportation schedules and those sections of the road where there were wooden sleepers stopped breaking down - after passing this train, the crutches jumped out under the rail junctions. This decision was on hand and the military leadership, although the risk of accidents during patrols was replaced by the risk of sabotage with trains standing in the open air near major cities and rivers of Russia.
The reference to the START-2 Treaty, which required the destruction of only all multiply charged mine rockets and did not formally enter into force, is untenable. However, its provisions were meekly fulfilled by Russia in the period from 1993 to 2000 year. At the beginning of the 90-s, our country was imposed a false course on the preservation and reproduction of Topol-type land-mobile ICBMs, as vulnerable as the former ground-group dislocation missiles, due to the ease of detection and destruction by any means. Additional evidence that these new missiles do not pose any threat to the United States is the ignoring of Topol-type missiles in all the mentioned START treaties.
HEAVY ROCKET HAS SUPPORTERS AND OPPONENTS IN RUSSIA
Even more strange are the speeches against the decision taken by the Russian government to create a new heavy mine missile with a liquid propellant rocket engine and a new BZhRK. The prerequisite for such a decision was the awareness of both the inevitability of the coming redistribution of the world in order to redistribute non-renewable natural resources in favor of the United States, and the inability of domestic strategic nuclear forces to prevent the associated external aggression. The evidence of the latter is the conclusions of two American professors that after the 2015 year, the United States can “destroy Russia and China with impunity with one blow,” since “Russian mobile ICBMs rarely maneuver,” “tests of new submarine missiles ended in failure” and “Russia will soon only the 150 MBR will remain. ”
The reason for the creation of heavy missiles was the new START Treaty, which was concluded in the 2010 year and which allows 800 carriers with 1550 YABZ. Despite the belated, but still correct decision on the need to create a new missile like the P-36M and PC-22, it was strongly criticized by the homegrown US lobbyists and their allies, the creators of the Topol ICBMs. In particular, the general designer Yuri Solomonov reproached the creators of the new heavy ICBM with LRE in "exposure to the conjuncture with its market connections" and called them "misanthropes, defiantly ignoring the danger and not supporting their compatriot." Further, he called the new ICBM a rocket “30-year-old, which does not provide the necessary survivability in a retaliatory strike and non-adaptive to modern missile defense systems with space-based elements.”
In reality, the situation is assessed as completely opposite. It was Yury Solomonov who has already spent tens of billions of rubles on the Bulava-30 rocket, which is inferior to the American Trident 1979 of the year, and there is no such thing anywhere in the world because of the absurdity of this project, and not because of supposedly foreign technological weakness.
"Mace-30" and "Topol" have a low flattened trajectory, convenient for their defeat by the American missile defense system "Aegis". She is able to shoot down even more high-speed artificial satellites. But the combat space tools suitable for the destruction of missiles such as P-36, the Americans do not.
Thanks to the colossal weight being thrown, the new Russian ICBM will be able to implement all known methods of breaking through any missile defense system - blinding it with a large number of false blocks, enveloping the NRA with a cloud of radio-absorbing plasma, delivering them not through the North, but through the South Pole of the Earth, putting planned equipment into orbit with an unpredictable trajectory flight. It is here that the question arises regarding the renewal of BZhRK: why are they so opposed to the decision to lay down a relatively small, lightweight and already created ICBM “Yars” not on the car, but on the railway chassis? After all, this decision will deprive the former train of almost all the flaws. Is it because that such a project does not suit the overseas partners?
Self-preservation of Russia - only in the speedy reconstruction of ICBMs of the P-36М2 type and a well-camouflaged BZHRK capable of continuous patrolling with a lightweight solid-fuel rocket. Moreover, all this is completely feasible: the design and technological documentation has been preserved, and the country has the necessary production capacity. After all, while these systems will be on combat duty, the United States will never decide on aggression.
So, is it not time for the living co-authors of Vladimir Utkin and their numerous students from Moscow, Voronezh, St. Petersburg, Samara to support and implement the appropriate, well-reasoned decision of the Russian government? And will this not be a sign of the biggest and sincere respect for the memory of the outstanding designer Vladimir Utkin?