Military Review

The test launch of the Liner rocket was completed successfully.

23
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.
Originator:
http://www.rg.ru/2011/09/29/lainer-anons.html
23 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must to register.

I have an account? Sign in

  1. Banshee
    Banshee 30 September 2011 09: 39 New
    -3
    Even I did not understand, is it now "Bulava" in the scrap?

    They built, built, tested, dropped, and now the women - and it is better to eat?
    And how much dough has been exterminated on the "Mace"?

    No, guys, I'm just quietly shizayu with you ...
    1. Sergh
      Sergh 30 September 2011 09: 57 New
      +2
      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 New
      -1
      “Mace” for “Boreev”, and “Liner” for “BDRMs”.
    3. raf
      raf 30 September 2011 14: 04 New
      -1
      Why did the “Mace" go to waste? Is it really bad when there are different missiles? After all, they still do not drive the same cars! So here, gradually in the process of operation it will be found out which is better, more reliable, cheaper. And the money for the "Bulava" was not wasted in vain, because in the process of designing and testing developments are being made to improve and build new missiles!
    4. Funker1981
      Funker1981 30 September 2011 16: 22 New
      -1
      These are different rockets and will be used in parallel. Here check out http://www.sdelanounas.ru/blogs/6684
    5. Rey_ka
      Rey_ka 6 July 2017 15: 12 New
      0
      It seems that the mace is solid fuel. A liner like Sineva on a liquid
  2. Gur
    Gur 30 September 2011 09: 52 New
    -1
    This is such a Russian desa for amers wink built, built ... a "mace" and then processed with a file .. hop and we have a "liner" turned out)))) they themselves did not expect)))
  3. Vadivak
    Vadivak 30 September 2011 09: 56 New
    +1
    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 New
    -1
    Or is it a disorientation of a potential adversary? Everyone is watching the mace, and here you are! That worked for you :)
  5. Banshee
    Banshee 30 September 2011 10: 04 New
    -1
    That's the point is that it is not clear. It's like "Confusing your people and confusing everyone else."
    Rumbles all this, and where - it is not clear.
    No, well, if it worked.
    1. MichaelVl
      MichaelVl 30 September 2011 10: 42 New
      -1
      Banshee
      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 New
      -1
      Banshee in the article also says "a real possibility of existence Project 667BDRM Northwest Submarine Group for 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 New
    -1
    The GRC also continues to work for the public, all hoping to regain the lost financial flows.
    Essentially, frankly, these conversations about energy-mass excellence are tired of, even though this is an important indicator. Meanwhile, the effectiveness of the Republic of Kazakhstan is a complex property and is characterized by many indicators, one of which is the size of the zone of possible location of the target group. Let's evaluate it using the Liner as an example.
    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 the effectiveness of the Republic of Kazakhstan and Liner, and even more so, Sineva is also significantly inferior to Bulava.
    1. cabin boy
      cabin boy 1 October 2011 03: 54 New
      -1
      I’m afraid to ask, but for Bulava, the tanks DU-3 and DU of the breeding stage are not united and this makes it possible to flexibly formulate a flight mission? Do you think that it is more efficient to leave fuel in the DU-3 tanks without being able to spend its residues 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 New
        -2
        You inattentively read what I wrote. Where did I write that fuel remains in the DU-3? We are talking about exchanging ranges for BB breeding parameters, although there are many points. If we assume that the payload mass is unchanged, then with an increase in the number of BBs, it is necessary to reduce the charge power, the size of the dilution zone, and weaken the anti-missile defense. At the same time, under 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 goals relative to each other) and do not require more than one BB for the target (again, there are a lot of points, CVO, type of target, charge power, missile defense and so on). Now we read from the article "a significant flight range and has more advanced systems for overcoming the boundaries of missile defense (ABM)." Those. it is obvious that increasing the range, the PCB missile defense is losing in terms of dilution parameters, which significantly reduces the range of "served" targets. Although I must admit that without complete data, all these arguments are nothing more than fortunetelling on coffee grounds.
        We are talking about something else. The article indicates that the “Liner” is opposed to the “Mace”, while only a few parameters are taken into account and a hint is made on their basis, they say, it’s much better with us. Here is the true background of such statements.
        Further, I’m accidentally not from MIT, I work as a design engineer at NPO Avtomatika im. Semikhatova. I also inform you that I am not involved in missile-related issues (although the backbone of our department is immigrants from the Electromechanics NGO), our department is working on the theme “development of promising wheeled combat combat platforms of the Ground Forces,” which I already mentioned on this resource.
        1. cabin boy
          cabin boy 1 October 2011 15: 40 New
          -1
          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.
          You must admit that it was not the GRC that started the war with MIT for financial flows and the GRC didn’t use the dirty trick of personal connections to resolve the issue of distributing state orders, so you should not blame them for their PR products, they simply accepted the rules of the game, according to which everyone plays . You, for some reason, were not outraged, filed as a sensation, with a statement that the Borey shot the Bulava on the move. Only a tail was required of MIT, and they climbed into issues that are sorted like a pig in oranges, as a result of the delay in adopting 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 New
            -2
            Let's figure it out. First, why was the competition for the Bulava already 2 times (please note that the results of the competition were summed up by the research institutes of industry and Moscow oblast)? Second, why, having such colossal “ties”, did MIT lose the competition for research on heavy ICBMs of the same GRTs? Why now no one accuses the GRC of "dirty reception of personal connections"? Do not you think that all these conversations relate to reality a little more than in any way and can 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 New
    -1
    B..d, I can’t understand if a man writes a comment about those things that he understands why he is spread rot, as “unprofitable”.
    Varanaga is more captain and major than the users available here. Stop focusing on stupid slogans, the site is called "MILITARY Review", and not "Get-togethers on the heating main."
    1. Varnaga
      Varnaga 30 September 2011 16: 48 New
      -2
      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 New
        -1
        Varnaga,
        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 x..nu.
        1. Varnaga
          Varnaga 1 October 2011 14: 53 New
          -2
          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 New
    -1
    The mace will fly on the liner, which means someone with a pickaxe smile
  9. Evil Tatar
    Evil Tatar 1 October 2011 15: 13 New
    -2
    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?