Military Review

Test launch of the Liner rocket completed successfully

In Russia on Thursday, a successful test launch of the new strategic sea-based missile "Liner" from the nuclear submarine of the North fleet “Tula,” said Colonel Igor Konashenkov, spokesman for the Russian Defense Ministry.

“The launch of the Liner rocket was made from the nuclear submarine cruiser Tula from the Barents Sea at the Kura range in Kamchatka. The launch took place normally. At the appointed time, the head parts of the rocket reached a predetermined area,” said Konashenkov.

According to him, the Liner rocket has similar flight characteristics with the Sinev sea-based missile system, a significant flight range and has more sophisticated systems for overcoming the missile defense (ABM) lines.

"Successful rocket firing at the Kura test site in Kamchatka as part of testing the ballistic missile Liner was carried out by the crew of the captain of 1 rank Arkady Navarsky," said I. Konashenkov.

Earlier, the State Missile Center (GRTS, Miass city, Chelyabinsk region) named after Makeev said that a sea-based strategic rocket “Liner”, the flight tests of which began with a successful launch of 20 in May of this year, can carry from 9 to 12 low-power combat units military equipment missiles "Bulava".

The “Rocket Liner” can be equipped in 1,5 - 2 with a larger number of warheads of a small power class than the Bulava rocket.

The Bulava missile can be equipped with only six small-class combat units.

The report of the Makeev State Research Center also noted that the Liner rocket could be equipped with a mixed assembly of warheads of different power classes.

Rocket Liner "in terms of energy and mass perfection (the ratio of the mass of the missile’s combat load to its launch mass, reduced to one flight range - IF-AVN) surpasses all modern solid-fuel strategic missiles of Great Britain, China, Russia, USA and France. And in combat equipment (four blocks middle class power) - not inferior to chetyrehblochnomu (in terms of START-3) American "Trident-2", emphasized in a press release.

The report said that, thanks to the Sinev and Liner missile systems developed by Makeev GRTS, there was a real possibility of the existence of a north-western grouping of submarines of the 667BDRM project for 35-40 years, that is, up to 2025-2030.
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must to register.

I have an account? Sign in

  1. Roman Skomorokhov
    Roman Skomorokhov 30 September 2011 09: 39
    Even I don’t understand, is it now "Bulava" for scrap?

    They built, built, tested, dropped, and now the women - and it is better to eat?
    And how much dough have you spent on the Bulava?

    No, guys, I'm just quietly shizayu with you ...
    1. Sergh
      Sergh 30 September 2011 09: 57
      Well, yes, you will understand them. Well, if it’s better, then let the kids indulge. They are not for us, they are the brains of the merikos that are being twisted into a knot. Like, they’re doing something Russian, they don’t understand what. It is necessary to put the Pindos in a complete informational panic stupor so that they do not know, nor even guess where to run, what a jerk to board!
    2. olifus
      olifus 30 September 2011 11: 36
      "Bulava" for "Boreyev", and "Liner" for "BDRM".
    3. raf
      raf 30 September 2011 14: 04
      Why would Bulava be scrapped? Is it bad when there are different missiles? After all, not everyone drives the same cars! So here, gradually in the course of operation, it will become clear which is better, more reliable, cheaper. And the money on the Bulava was not wasted in vain, because in the process of design and testing, developments are being made to improve and build new missiles!
    4. Funker1981
      Funker1981 30 September 2011 16: 22
      These are different rockets and will be used in parallel. Here check out
    5. Rey_ka
      Rey_ka 6 July 2017 15: 12
      It seems that the mace is solid fuel. A liner like Sineva on a liquid
  2. Gur
    Gur 30 September 2011 09: 52
    This is such a Russian desa for amers wink built built ... "mace" and then processed with a file .. hop and we have a "liner" turned out)))) did not expect)))
  3. Vadivak
    Vadivak 30 September 2011 09: 56
    Does Roman surprise you? what is wrong? This is already a trend, for example, to hell with us T-90 if there is Armata, and as a result the modernization of T-72. none etc.
  4. Ion coaelung
    Ion coaelung 30 September 2011 09: 59
    Or is it a disorientation of a potential adversary? Everyone is watching the mace, and here you are! That worked for you :)
  5. Roman Skomorokhov
    Roman Skomorokhov 30 September 2011 10: 04
    That's just the point, that is not clear. It's like "Confuse your own and confuse everyone else."
    Rumbles all this, and where - it is not clear.
    No, well, if it worked.
    1. MichaelVl
      MichaelVl 30 September 2011 10: 42
      Yes, everything is fine! We catch the main thing - SUCCESSFULLY STARTING A NEW ROCKET! :) And the rest is all military developments, will they really be telling everything this way + the journalists are still catching up on the troubles (somewhere something blew, it was heard and the woven disin from all sources rushed). I think that everything is normal for our strategists there, they know what they are doing.

      So let us rejoice together for the successes of our Great Motherland! These are our real successes, despite the problems created and the constant nagging of pessimists and critics! Without problems, nothing in life ever happens neither among us, nor among the Americans, nor anyone else in this world :)

      Hurray Miassu, GRC them. Makeeva !!!
    2. cabin boy
      cabin boy 1 October 2011 03: 37
      Banshee in the article it is written "the real possibility of existence is provided Project 667BDRM Northwest Submarine Group over 35-40 years, that is, until 2025-2030. "
      A liner for BDRMs that are based in the north and will serve until 2030. A mace for the Boreans who will go to the Pacific Fleet.
  6. Varnaga
    Varnaga 30 September 2011 13: 21
    The GRC also continues to work for the public, all hoping to regain the lost financial flows.
    In fact, to be honest, I'm already tired of these talks about energy-mass perfection, although this is an important indicator. Meanwhile, the effectiveness of the RK is a complex property and is characterized by many indicators, one of which is the size of the zone of possible location of a group of targets. Let's evaluate it on the example of "Liner".
    On rockets of the R-29RM family, the third stage and the dilution stage are combined. The tanks at the DU-3 and at the DU dilution stages are common and it is possible to vary the flight range with respect to BB dilution parameters, i.e. with an increase in range, the BB breeding zone decreases, while it is worth noting that it is not necessary to breed 6 BB for, say, three large energy targets and it is not difficult to select suitable targets. Diluting 10 BBs to 5 targets is much more difficult, which again makes it difficult to formulate flight tasks flexibly taking into account the optimal BB consumption for the target (given that the range drops sharply). Also, please note that the possibility and speed of re-targeting missiles is one of the important components of the effectiveness of the Republic of Kazakhstan.
    But this is so, as an illustrative example. In terms of the backward components of efficiency, RK and Liner, and especially Sineva, are also significantly inferior to Bulava.
    1. cabin boy
      cabin boy 1 October 2011 03: 54
      I'm afraid to ask, but the tanks of DU-3 and DU dilution stages are not combined with the Bulava and this makes it possible to flexibly form a flight task? Do you think that it is more efficient to leave fuel in the DU-3 tanks without being able to spend the rest of it on dilution? My logic refuses to understand such efficiency.
      Are you by any chance not from MIT? And where is your favorite mantra about the harmfulness of liquid fuel? They didn’t mention so as not to get scared right away.
      1. Varnaga
        Varnaga 1 October 2011 14: 49
        You inattentively read what I wrote. Where did I write that fuel remains in the DU-3? We are talking about exchanging the range for the breeding parameters of the BB, although there are many points here. If we assume that the mass of the payload is unchanged, then with an increase in the number of BB, it is necessary to reduce the charge power, the size of the breeding zone, and weaken the ABM PCB. At the same time, in different conditions, the values ​​of these characteristics are different. It is also worth noting that most targets in the United States are quite "soft" (we also take into account the size of the country and the dispersion of targets relative to each other) and do not require more than one AP per target (again, many points, CEP, target type, charge power, missile defense etc., etc.). Now we read from the article "a significant flight range and has more advanced systems for overcoming the lines of antimissile defense (ABM)." Those. it is obvious that by increasing the range, the missile defense missile defense system is inferior in terms of dispersion parameters, which significantly reduces the range of "served" targets. Although I must admit that without complete data, all this reasoning is nothing more than fortune telling on the coffee grounds.
        It's about something else. The article indicates that "Liner" is opposed to "Bulava", while only a few parameters are taken into account and on their basis a hint is made, they say, something is much better here. This is the true rationale behind such claims.
        Further, I am not accidentally from MIT, I work as a design engineer at NPO Avtomatika named after Semikhatova. I also inform you that I am not engaged in missile issues (although the backbone of our department is made up of people from NPO Electromechanics), our department is working on the topic "development of promising wheeled combat platforms of the Ground Forces", which I have already mentioned on this resource.
        1. cabin boy
          cabin boy 1 October 2011 15: 40
          Your constant attacks on the GRC give the impression of an interested person. Since I am a living person, I don’t have the physical ability to read all articles and especially comments.
          Agree that it was not the SRC that started the war with MIT for financial flows, and it was not the SRC that used the dirty trick of personal connections to resolve the issue of the distribution of state orders, so you should not blame them for promoting their products, they simply accepted the rules of the game by which everyone plays ... You, for some reason, were not outraged by the statement filed as a sensation that Borey fired the Bulava on the move. All that was required from MIT was a "tail", and they got into issues that are sorted out like a pig in oranges, as a result, a delay in the adoption of new SSBNs.
          In my opinion, this resource and the Internet is not a place for discussing highly specialized issues and opening eyes to ordinary people, let's create a positive background from the achievements of our compatriots together, they will provide the negative without us.
          1. Varnaga
            Varnaga 3 October 2011 07: 07
            Let's figure it out. First, why the competition for "Bulava" was held already 2 times (please note that the results of the competition were summed up by the Research Institute of Industry and the Ministry of Defense)? Second, why, having such colossal "connections," MIT lost the competition for R&D on heavy-class ICBMs to the same SRC? Why is no one now accusing the GRC of "dirty reception of personal connections"? Don't you think that all these conversations relate to reality a little more than in any way and may be of interest only to the yellow press?
            Second, I can’t say anything about the SSBN, but there’s a lot to be remembered for the MRPLM GRZ ...
            And the third one, I completely agree, but the comments should contain some degree of information, especially since very often the materials published here and related to the strategic nuclear forces simply carry flows of the hardest ... yes.
  7. mitrich
    mitrich 30 September 2011 13: 32
    Well, I can’t understand if a man writes a comment about the things he understands, why he’s spread rot, as "unhelpful".
    Varanaga is more captain and more important than the users available here. Stop pushing stupid slogans, the site is called "Voennoye Obozreniye", not "Sit down on the heating main."
    1. Varnaga
      Varnaga 30 September 2011 16: 48
      Thank you for your support, mitrich, but if you meant the rating, then it is practically indifferent to me, although I will not hide, my presence here is largely due to the fact that I suddenly found +2000, which was incredibly surprised wink
      1. mitrich
        mitrich 30 September 2011 17: 00
        I like to read you not because I fell in love with you, but because I feel you are a specialist. I’m even embarrassed to write something about missile weapons now, so that I don’t freeze some
        1. Varnaga
          Varnaga 1 October 2011 14: 53
          Well, you, read my post a little higher and understand that it is completely in vain, especially since your sources of information are much more informative and authoritative than mine)
  8. fellow misha
    fellow misha 30 September 2011 14: 11
    The mace will fly on the liner, which means someone with a pickaxe smile
  9. Evil Tatar
    Evil Tatar 1 October 2011 15: 13
    All this is good ...
    But who will say what Putin was talking about when he announced that Russia had weapons based on new physical principles?