Military Review

Makeev State Culture Center is developing a promising ballistic missile

64
In the media, there are materials that say that Russian developers are busy creating a promising ballistic missile. Newspaper "News" with reference to the representative of the State Rocket Center. V.P.Makeeva writes that the company has concluded a state contract for development works aimed at creating a new type of ballistic missile.


Makeev State Culture Center is developing a promising ballistic missile


Vladimir Degtyar, Director General and General Designer of the V. P. Makeyev Center of Education and Science, reports that development work “on a new promising machine” has already begun.

It is very likely that the promising ballistic missile is being built for the Husky submarines, which are also a promising link developed in the field of the military-industrial complex.

Earlier, the United Shipbuilding Corporation announced that the Husky project submarines would be a unified combat unit fleet. Submarines are planned to be used both as strategic and as multipurpose ones. This will allow to achieve the optimal ratio of parameters “price - functionality”. It is known that the boats of the promising series can appear in the Russian submarine fleet no earlier than 2030, with the development pace remaining.
Photos used:
MO RF
64 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must sign in.
  1. Ased
    Ased 14 July 2016 11: 07
    -1
    I wonder why the series was named "Husky"? Doesn't hurt anyone's ears?
    1. Muvka
      Muvka 14 July 2016 11: 10
      +11
      Quote: ASed
      I wonder why the series was named "Husky"? Doesn't hurt anyone's ears?

      Well, husky like northern dogs? If I do not confuse. And we have all the strategists, or mainly in the north. There is a connection.
      1. cniza
        cniza 14 July 2016 11: 13
        +9
        Very beautiful, blue-eyed dogs ... I like the name and all the names of our products - very original and symbolic.
      2. The comment was deleted.
      3. weksha50
        weksha50 14 July 2016 11: 21
        +4
        Quote: Muvka
        Well, husky like northern dogs?



        It seems that the breed comes from wolves and huskies ... retain affection and devotion, the hard work of huskies (for the owner) and the fighting qualities of a wolf when hunting-fighting a large beast ...

        And according to other sources - Siberian sled dogs, a very ancient breed ...

        And the Americans are neighbors, supposedly this is their breed, forgetting that the huskies were once brought to Alaska by the Russians ...

        By and large - hunter... Maybe this just speaks of the promising capabilities of future submarines "Husky", which will be better than the American Virginias ...

        Something like that...
      4. Blondy
        Blondy 16 July 2016 12: 38
        0
        Previously, these huskies were called huskies, and the name of the husky, from the Eskimo, was torn off the mattresses.
    2. Pavel1
      Pavel1 14 July 2016 11: 12
      -17%
      it’s strange to call an atomic missile carrier by the name of a dog, it’s good not to be a cat, for example, for Amers, submarines are called states, which gives solidity to the weapons you own.
      As for the news, guess this series themselves.
      1. armata37
        armata37 14 July 2016 11: 36
        +2
        Do not bother) Above, weksha50 wrote to us his thoughts on the name. Indeed, there is nothing wrong with the name.

        Regarding Amer’s names, this is not what gives solidity to weapons, in my opinion. Yes, and our country to the states, thank God, is not broken good
        1. DmitryK
          DmitryK 14 July 2016 13: 10
          0
          Regarding Amer’s names, this is not what gives solidity to weapons, in my opinion. Yes, and our country to the states, thank God, is not broken
          Well, duck and America is not broken. On the contrary, they have "united" states.
      2. i80186
        i80186 14 July 2016 11: 37
        +4
        Quote: Paul1
        strange to call an atomic missile carrier by the name of the dog

        Barracuda, shark, dolphin, halibut, catfish. There are many different fish. But there were no fish, leopard for example, or anchor. This tradition dates back to 1904. Husky, by the way, is not a name, it is a breed. And this is not the name of the boat, this is the name of the project.
        1. Ased
          Ased 14 July 2016 12: 17
          0
          Fish somehow more in the subject.
          And then a shark attacks, a dolphin and a husky somehow sounds differently ...
          Although okay - let it be on the conscience of the developers.
        2. The comment was deleted.
      3. Amurets
        Amurets 14 July 2016 13: 34
        0
        Quote: Paul1
        it is strange to call an atomic missile carrier by the name of a dog, well, at least not a cat.

        Not a specific ship is named, but a project. And cats please: large cats tiger, lion, jaguar. Small cats link
        http://zverki.3dn.ru/index/melkie_koshki/0-15
      4. LastLap
        LastLap 14 July 2016 14: 47
        0
        Lack of humor. No solidity. For example, a flower series of art or the same Pinocchio.))) Is remembered !!
    3. Ze Kot
      Ze Kot 14 July 2016 11: 12
      +2
      Quote: ASed
      I wonder why the series was named "Husky"? Doesn't hurt anyone's ears?


      "And we are going north" wink
      1. Ased
        Ased 14 July 2016 11: 17
        0
        It's clear about excellent northern dogs, but it's still the Submarine Fleet. Here "a matter of taste" is inappropriate. Maybe there are some other reasons?
    4. NordUral
      NordUral 14 July 2016 11: 28
      +1
      Good dogs, rockets will be good.
    5. vkl.47
      vkl.47 14 July 2016 11: 29
      0
      but the rumor doesn’t cut the set of numbers and letters? type 00012380BLU-1484. husky means husky. beautiful means krasukha. the main thing is not the name but the contents.
    6. Red_Hamer
      Red_Hamer 14 July 2016 12: 00
      +3
      I wonder why the series was named "Husky"? Doesn't hurt anyone's ears?
      Siberian Husky! Wonderful, hardy sled (for the Arctic zone) breed of dogs! Why should she cut her ears? Very to the point, the name!
    7. Ride78
      Ride78 14 July 2016 13: 38
      0
      I hope all this will be unified somehow. How much can you give offsuit? If there is a multi-purpose nuclear on this boat, let them at least make two calibers replace one nuclear. The scatter is complete. with a smaller budget, we have a variety that America does not allow itself.
      1. Skifotavr
        Skifotavr 14 July 2016 19: 44
        0
        Quote: Ride78
        I hope all this will be unified somehow. How much can you give offsuit? If there is a multi-purpose nuclear on this boat, let them at least make two calibers replace one nuclear. The scatter is complete. with a smaller budget, we have a variety that America does not allow itself.

        Unification is always useful in theory, but not always in practice. If you do unification for the sake of unification, then you can do big misfortunes, and you will not get unification as a result. A vivid example of this is the Bulava rocket: they put an end to the almost finished unique Bark rocket of the Makeev State Research Center under the pretext that it would be better to let the rocket be made by the Moscow Institute of Heat Engineering, which never created naval ICBMs, but it will be unified with Topol M ". In short, Solomon and Co. in Solomon's way they divorced Russia and did it a great disgust.
  2. Berber
    Berber 14 July 2016 11: 11
    0
    The trouble is this versatility. As a result, not a strategist or multipurpose. It would be better to have a good multi-purpose but with a large number of cruise missiles. And let them go somewhere off the west coast of the USA.
    1. Berkut24
      Berkut24 14 July 2016 11: 36
      +2
      I think that there will be a strategist, on which it is not necessary to put YABCH. After all, now the development of a "hypersonic body" is underway. The distance is important and the weight of the thrown load is important. And to which class of carriers the product should be ranked is the tenth thing.
      Now the Americans are asking to extend the START-3. And there we are talking about the classification of carriers. Ours are smiling back. The Pentagon is not in vain rummaged.
      1. berezin1987
        berezin1987 14 July 2016 11: 54
        +1
        Hypersonic precision weapons will never displace nuclear weapons. It is necessary to equip promising hypersonic missiles with a nuclear warhead. Compare the explosion of several hundred kilograms of explosives and 100 ct of thermonuclear head. All questions will disappear immediately. Only nuclear weapons can cause unacceptable damage to the enemy.
        1. Ze Kot
          Ze Kot 14 July 2016 18: 20
          -1
          Quote: berezin1987
          Compare the explosion of several hundred kilograms of explosives and 100 ct of thermonuclear head.


          Nuclear weapons are dirty. And in any case, it provokes a retaliatory strike.

          But an ordinary warhead, at hypersonic speed, adds explosive kinetic energy to explosives.
  3. The comment was deleted.
  4. Ze Kot
    Ze Kot 14 July 2016 11: 12
    0
    They wrote about the rocket. And yesterday's news about a strategic space bomber that will take off from the earth and deliver a nuclear strike in 2 hours anywhere in the world? wink
    1. Muvka
      Muvka 14 July 2016 11: 14
      +1
      Quote: The Cat
      They wrote about the rocket. And yesterday's news about a strategic space bomber that will take off from the earth and deliver a nuclear strike in 2 hours anywhere in the world? wink

      If I don’t confuse, this yesterday’s news about 3 days ago was laid out here) But for some reason, the news about dviglo for near space was not posted.
      1. Ze Kot
        Ze Kot 14 July 2016 18: 18
        0
        Quote: Muvka
        this yesterday’s news about 3 days ago laid out here)


        Today posted smile
  5. Comrade Glebov
    Comrade Glebov 14 July 2016 11: 16
    0
    It’s good that there will be new missiles. There are never too many weapons. And when will the domestic OS and domestic computers be washed down? I'm tired of Microsoft already robbing pirate Windows shaking. I want to steal from my own already.
  6. Verdun
    Verdun 14 July 2016 11: 20
    0
    It is very likely that the promising ballistic missile is being built for the Husky submarines, which are also a promising link developed in the field of the military-industrial complex.
    You need to understand that you have played enough with the Mace ... I hope that at least this time they will first make a normally flying rocket, and then they will start building boats under it.
    1. Muvka
      Muvka 14 July 2016 12: 03
      +1
      Quote: Verdun
      It is very likely that the promising ballistic missile is being built for the Husky submarines, which are also a promising link developed in the field of the military-industrial complex.
      You need to understand that you have played enough with the Mace ... I hope that at least this time they will first make a normally flying rocket, and then they will start building boats under it.

      Each boat has its own rocket. What have you got enough of it? Mace now copes with its functions.
      1. Verdun
        Verdun 14 July 2016 12: 12
        0
        Quote: Muvka
        Mace now copes with its functions.

        Something I do not remember that a nuclear war has already begun. belay And if you are about to cut the dough, then probably yes, they can. As for
        Each boat has its own rocket.
        , here I agree with you. only a completely different principle operates with Bulava - "there is a boat for each missile."
        1. Muvka
          Muvka 14 July 2016 12: 18
          0
          Quote: Verdun
          Quote: Muvka
          Mace now copes with its functions.

          Something I do not remember that a nuclear war has already begun. belay And if you are about to cut the dough, then probably yes, they can. As for
          Each boat has its own rocket.
          , here I agree with you. only a completely different principle operates with Bulava - "there is a boat for each missile."

          Why are you carrying crap?
          1. Verdun
            Verdun 14 July 2016 12: 39
            -1
            Quote: Muvka
            Why are you carrying crap?

            If you don’t understand something, it doesn’t mean that it’s crap. The small geometric dimensions of the Bulava missiles for which six, if I'm not mistaken, submarines have already been built, make it impossible to install other types of missiles into these submarines. Here on the submarine of project 941, to which Dmitry Donskoy belongs, originally armed with R-39 missiles, the R-30 Bulava missiles were placed without any problems. And Sineva could also be put there. Building ships for weapons systems that are still under development is a bad idea anyway.
  7. Andrey NM
    Andrey NM 14 July 2016 11: 21
    +10
    I would like to ask the question: "Oh, why not Solomon?" ...
    This suggests that the topic should be addressed by a specialist in the relevant field.
    I would like to remind you how MIT began to deal with Bulava. At the suggestion of Yakov Urinson and Defense Minister Sergeev, MIT was "appointed" as a supporting institute for the development of strategic missiles in all directions. Yakov Urinson maintained close relations with Yuri Semenovich Solomonov. At the same time, the topic of development was taken from the Institute of Armaments of the Navy and given to the land 4th Central Research Institute of the Ministry of Defense, commanded by Vladimir Zinovievich Dvorkin. Everything was decided at the level of personal contacts and preferences. When MIT got rid of the unsuccessful launches, the Makeev Design Bureau was called to rescue. Even on the Internet there is information on government contracts and purchases of the Makeev Design Bureau on the topic "Bulava" (I was even surprised that this is being published). It's just that MIT & Co dragged the cash flows onto themselves. And then who was in command of the government? Kasyanov. That's all it is lining up.
    Launching a marine rocket from a stationary mine will not be a big problem, which was done during the testing period of many complexes for launch development, but a land missile from a submarine mine is a problem.
    1. Tektor
      Tektor 14 July 2016 12: 27
      -2
      The news is extremely worthy. The Mace has problems starting from the container due to too small tolerances and possible damage from the oncoming water stream. Mace bends, which leads to damage to internal systems. KVM. Solving this problem on the Mace is extremely difficult: it’s the same as developing a new missile. Well, they’ll develop it. And the Mace must be fired at zero speed of submarine movement.
      1. Muvka
        Muvka 14 July 2016 12: 36
        +1
        Quote: Tektor
        The news is extremely worthy. The Mace has problems starting from the container due to too small tolerances and possible damage from the oncoming water stream. Mace bends, which leads to damage to internal systems. KVM. Solving this problem on the Mace is extremely difficult: it’s the same as developing a new missile. Well, they’ll develop it. And the Mace must be fired at zero speed of submarine movement.

        Oh dear, a man read that article and took it seriously ...
  8. LVMI1980
    LVMI1980 14 July 2016 11: 21
    0
    Quote: Muvka
    If I don’t confuse, this yesterday’s news about 3 days ago was laid out here) But for some reason, the news about dviglo for near space was not posted.

    And Americans with puppets are already raising the howl at the UN to protect the environment smile
  9. maks007
    maks007 14 July 2016 11: 28
    0
    If you take this table and the names are usually associated with something. "Husky" - the first model, then what will happen next.
    In Russia, a class of submarines "Husky" with hypersonic missiles is being developed.
  10. Mountain shooter
    Mountain shooter 14 July 2016 11: 31
    +3
    The dimensions of the warheads are constantly decreasing. It becomes possible to use smaller rockets, which take up less and less space in the boat. Cruise missiles are generally housed in standard torpedo tubes. Again - automation, crews are reduced, And the required displacement of boats - is reduced. Boats are unlikely to be "universal" - to perform both these tasks in one sitting. But this is a matter of equipment. If the boats can really be built the same - in size, power plant, instruments and mechanisms. Real savings will come out.
    1. berezin1987
      berezin1987 14 July 2016 11: 59
      0
      The dimensions of the warhead cannot be reduced indefinitely. The most effective charges had a specific power of 5.2 ct / kg. For ammunition of small and medium power, this figure is even lower and rarely exceeds 2 units.
      1. Muvka
        Muvka 14 July 2016 12: 05
        0
        Quote: berezin1987
        The dimensions of the warhead cannot be reduced indefinitely. The most effective charges had a specific power of 5.2 ct / kg. For ammunition of small and medium power, this figure is even lower and rarely exceeds 2 units.

        But you can reduce the weight of the rocket.
        1. berezin1987
          berezin1987 14 July 2016 13: 04
          +2
          It is possible to reduce the weight of a rocket only by reducing its flight range and the cast weight. In clubs, it is already so small (1150 kg) compared to the trident-2 (2800 kg). Less than 30 tons of good rocket can not be done using modern solid fuel.
          1. Muvka
            Muvka 14 July 2016 13: 45
            0
            Quote: berezin1987
            It is possible to reduce the weight of a rocket only by reducing its flight range and the cast weight. In clubs, it is already so small (1150 kg) compared to the trident-2 (2800 kg). Less than 30 tons of good rocket can not be done using modern solid fuel.

            Not only. The use of composite materials. This approach is being developed on the Rubezh missile, which, with the same performance characteristics, seems to be one third lighter than Yars. Correct me if I confuse something.
          2. ver_
            ver_ 14 July 2016 14: 45
            0
            When I read that solid fuel was made on the basis that the penguin laser on the march would not burn it ..
          3. Operator
            Operator 14 July 2016 15: 04
            0
            You can - ICBM MGM-134 Midgetman with a starting weight of 13,6 tons.
    2. Amurets
      Amurets 14 July 2016 13: 44
      0
      Quote: Mountain Shooter
      Boats are unlikely to be "universal" - they both perform these tasks in one go. But this is a matter of equipment. If the boats can really be built the same - in size, power plant, instruments and mechanisms. There will be real savings.

      I agree with you. Moreover, there was a similar experience. The first generation of nuclear submarines had similar equipment. These were projects 627a, 658,659,675. We can’t talk about complete unification, since the weapon control systems and the light body were different. But the unification between the projects was at least 60%.
  11. Kudrevkn
    Kudrevkn 14 July 2016 11: 34
    0
    Interestingly, but the Chinese, when creating their D "41", practically took the R-18 from "Yuzhmash" as a prototype? Maybe now we should also borrow something from the Chinese? In terms of the use of a hypersonic warhead for an aircraft carrier compound (AUG)? But I am only suggesting this, but before "cut once, measure seven"! If a rocket is made for the Husky nuclear submarine, then the Husky itself is being sharpened for what? Under what tasks? If multipurpose, then the "tool" (weapon) is appropriate! If the "strategist", then the rocket should become (be) "heavy" !? or am I confusing something? Enlighten, experts - missilemen!
    1. andj61
      andj61 14 July 2016 11: 41
      +1
      Quote: KudrevKN
      Maybe now we should borrow something from the Chinese? In terms of the use of hypersonic warhead on aircraft carrier connection (AUG)?

      The Chinese use medium-range ballistic missiles to combat the AUG, and Russia is limited in this regard by the INF Treaty. You can use strategists, but there are also restrictions on the START treaty both in terms of the number of launchers and the number of carriers and charges.
      Warhead ballistic missiles are always hypersonic, so in this regard we have nothing to borrow from the Chinese ...
      1. Kudrevkn
        Kudrevkn 14 July 2016 11: 55
        0
        But the Chinese "41" has a range of more than 13 km and a radius of destruction at the same time no more than 000 meters (according to them)? So what is the INF Treaty? As for the "hypersonic warhead", I probably did not put it right - I wanted to ask a question about the trajectory of movement in the final section to a mobile small-sized target, for example, an aircraft carrier? As for "we have nothing to borrow from the Chinese" (?) I do not agree with you - it is always easier to "peep" from a possible competitor (potential adversary) in order to make a better "poison" or an effective "antidote" ?!
        1. andj61
          andj61 14 July 2016 17: 23
          0
          Quote: KudrevKN
          But the Chinese "41" has a range of more than 13 km and a radius of destruction at the same time no more than 000 meters (according to them)? So what is the INF Treaty?

          13000 km? I somehow missed it ... what
          But why such a range to fight the American AUG? Are they going to drown them in the Atlantic Ocean? fellow
          Yes, and a KVO at 25 m is something extremely accurate, it just is not required for nuclear weapons, and it would seem that they still have not learned how to control a warhead after entering dense atmospheric layers (to ensure similar accuracy): warhead flies in a plasma layer and no signal will ever reach her.
          As for maneuvering, we, both the strategists and the "pseudo-ballistic" Iskander, have had the best practices for a long time. To destroy the AUG, you need not get into the ship, but simply deliver the warhead to the area of ​​its location - a nuclear explosion will do the rest.
          1. Kudrevkn
            Kudrevkn 14 July 2016 18: 55
            0
            Here I am in confusion about these "Chinese boxes" - "sets", but the comments from the Ukrainians are interesting (by the way, for some reason, they "picked up" my version, which was discussed in "VO" a few months ago - "to spoil" "Sarmat"? ). there were many expert disputes - is it possible or not to do this "miracle of ICBMs"? However, the "ukrop scouts" are putting forward just such a version of the new Makeevsky product! Well, wait and see: it won't be long, if the "throwing" ones have already started on "Sarmat"? As for D "41", there is also a very interesting infa - they are trying to "attach" it to the railway. platform, the mobile version of the Chinese have already shown GDP at the Victory Parade in Beijing a year ago! Now, soon there will be a "barguzin" in Chinese - I wonder what kind of beast they call it, really PANDA? How's the Husky analogy?
  12. excomandante
    excomandante 14 July 2016 11: 36
    +1
    Good news. I also rejoice selfishly, as a resident of Miass))) The result, apparently, will be faster and better than the endless, unsuccessful fuss with Bulava. PS Still in AZ Ural order for cars for the army, otherwise the plant is breathing in the cold.
    1. Muvka
      Muvka 14 July 2016 12: 07
      0
      Quote: excomandante
      Good news. I also rejoice selfishly, as a resident of Miass))) The result, apparently, will be faster and better than the endless, unsuccessful fuss with Bulava. PS Still in AZ Ural order for cars for the army, otherwise the plant is breathing in the cold.

      What does not suit you the Mace? Why is the fuss endless? And why is it unsuccessful? Justify your words?
  13. DenZ
    DenZ 14 July 2016 11: 43
    0
    Quote: excomandante
    Good news. I also rejoice selfishly, as a resident of Miass))) The result, apparently, will be faster and better than the endless, unsuccessful fuss with Bulava. PS Still in AZ Ural order for cars for the army, otherwise the plant is breathing in the cold.

    Greetings fellow countryman. Now in Eburg after 30 years of living in Mashgrad.
  14. chunga-changa
    chunga-changa 14 July 2016 11: 55
    0
    Submarines are planned to be used both as strategic and as multipurpose ones.

    The universal submarine is funny, no one has thought of this yet. I think the "girl from the press service" told the journalist everything to the best of her understanding, and the "humanitarian" then added "from herself."
  15. berezin1987
    berezin1987 14 July 2016 12: 06
    0
    I don’t understand how they will combine multipurpose and strategic submarines in one building. Strategic boats are much larger, have low noise, lower speed and depth. Multipurpose submarines have higher characteristics and carry cruise missiles. If you make a strategist out of multipurpose, then you will have to sacrifice ammunition. To place 16 missiles in the case of such a project, ash will not work, and husky will be smaller than ash.
    1. Operator
      Operator 14 July 2016 15: 07
      0
      It is planned to produce the Husky nuclear submarine in a unified body in two versions - a multipurpose submarine with torpedo tubes (capable of launching Zircon cruise missiles) and a strategic submarine with a central insert in the body for silo launchers of ballistic missiles of the Makeev Design Bureau.

      It is quite possible that a liquid-metal nuclear reactor will be installed on the Husky nuclear submarine (as a follow-up to the Lira project), which will provide three orders of magnitude less time for reaching maximum power than a pressurized water reactor.
  16. Aqr009
    Aqr009 14 July 2016 12: 20
    +1
    The beauty "Lyra" is revived good A boat of instant response! Apparently frozen projects 705A and 705B have been well rethought. It is assumed that the newest reactor with a liquid metal coolant will be installed, which is now possible to completely shut down and restart (but, just in case, a floating nuclear power plant is already being built, which can also be used as a mobile service berth). Hull cover, bow and stern rudders, stabilizers, deckhouse guard, propellers (or water cannon) and other elements - composite! "Zircon" is at the heart of the updated project 705A. The new "Makeevka" is at the heart of the updated project 705B. Both missiles have a vertical launch, which means the mine will be unified! And the main thing is the integration of the submarine into a single information space of the Ministry of Defense of the country in real time, i.e. the power of one boat can be increased without limit by other boats !!!
    Oh, how I love Russia !!! Class!
  17. kotuk_ha_oxote
    kotuk_ha_oxote 14 July 2016 13: 00
    0
    Quote: Aqr009
    The beauty "Lyra" is revived good A boat of instant response! Apparently frozen projects 705A and 705B have been well rethought. It is assumed that the newest reactor with a liquid metal coolant will be installed, which is now possible to completely shut down and restart (but, just in case, a floating nuclear power plant is already being built, which can also be used as a mobile service berth). Hull cover, bow and stern rudders, stabilizers, deckhouse guard, propellers (or water cannon) and other elements - composite! "Zircon" is at the heart of the updated project 705A. The new "Makeevka" is at the heart of the updated project 705B. Both missiles have a vertical launch, which means the mine will be unified! And the main thing is the integration of the submarine into a single information space of the Ministry of Defense of the country in real time, i.e. the power of one boat can be increased without limit by other boats !!!
    Oh, how I love Russia !!! Class!

    Launched in 2018?
    1. ver_
      ver_ 14 July 2016 15: 02
      0
      Duc noise is created by pumps cooling turbines ... and so on ...
  18. FID
    FID 14 July 2016 14: 13
    0
    Actually "Husky" is a multi-purpose boat (you can see it on Rubin's website) ... and they are going to arm it with "Zircon". Nonsense
  19. ver_
    ver_ 14 July 2016 14: 32
    0
    Quote: Verdun
    It is very likely that the promising ballistic missile is being built for the Husky submarines, which are also a promising link developed in the field of the military-industrial complex.
    You need to understand that you have played enough with the Mace ... I hope that at least this time they will first make a normally flying rocket, and then they will start building boats under it.

    Solid fuel rockets lose to liquid fuel, however- and the extra member in the rear is also not superfluous ...
    1. An60
      An60 14 July 2016 16: 18
      0
      Solid fuel is easier to operate.
  20. sinoptic
    sinoptic 14 July 2016 17: 12
    +2
    Quote: Stal
    "Bulava" has not yet been properly finalized, it is raw, but has already swung at the next generation


    I never cease to be surprised at our officials! Any defeat is presented as a success with perspective.
    Remember the saying, with a sharp drop in oil prices: "The structure of the Russian economy is changing! The share of oil in exports is decreasing."
    Of course, the share of money from oil will decrease, at such difficult times.

    So it is here. Overshot with the Mace, now thanks to this problem (with a big headache),
    start shouting about future developments, about the future.

    Mace is an unsuccessful project. It is not for nothing that the USA praises it.
    The article is walking on the net, missed with this rocket so that it is cheaper to re-make a rocket.
    It is impossible, with stable reliability, to launch this missile from the nuclear submarine mine.
    Moreover, in terms of technical characteristics, it is essentially American, Trident 1. Yes, with a shortened acceleration section, but this seems to be the only plus of Bulava, but in all other respects "Trident 1", from which the Americans and we (with our Sineva and Liner) left far ahead.

    It seems that a new chapter begins in the creation of a strategic missile for nuclear submarines.
    We can now presumably say what kind of rocket it will be.
    1. Shortened booster section.
    2. Same throw weight as Trident 2.
    3. The new missile will be without TPK.
    4. Under a new, enlarged rocket, it will be necessary to create a new boat. Boreas were made under the Mace. For a new rocket, there will probably be a Husky or whatever they come up with.

    It turns out that we will catch up with the United States with their Tradent 2, but with a lag of 30-40 years.
    It is unclear why it was to make an analogue of Trident 1, they would do Trident 2 right away ... but no, that would be too simple.
    Indeed, now it is possible to announce a new program and cut loot for the next 15-20 years. As was the case with the Mace and the Hangar.
    Under this business, a new boat to plow.

    No, I'm for technical innovations, for the power of the country. I love to read about something new and feel proud of the country. But I am categorically against stupidity and greed.
    Well, tell me, was it really impossible immediately to think through all the requirements in detail and do right away immediately ?!
    At least with an eye on the Americans, they didn’t just refuse Trident 1 for nothing.

    Comprehending all this in language, one simple expression revolves. Armory Mafia.
    And they keep the whole country for fools, including the president.

    In the country, the average pension is 10t.r., and in the second round we are developing the same missiles.
    Hangar 5 is an almost complete analog of Proton in terms of output weight. Heavier options seem to have been abandoned.
    The question is, what have they been doing there for 20 years ?! How much money was drunk from people, and the movement forward is minimal. It was easier in 5 years and a quarter of the cost to sort out the Proton, hovering sensors, computers, intellect everywhere and at the output would have a first-class heavy-class launch vehicle, which is not inferior in reliability to the Union.

    Once the defense industrial complex gobbled up a country called the USSR, maybe we will be more careful.
    Before you make rockets, you must first put your heads in order!