Military Review

The development of a promising ballistic missile has begun

45
In the domestic media, the first reports appeared on the development of a new project of a promising ballistic missile. The details of this project are still unknown, but some speculations have been made. Attempts are being made to predict the purpose of the new project, as well as to determine its prospects in the context of the overall development of strategic nuclear forces. However, the vast majority of information about the new project is still unknown.

Information about the new project was published in the July edition of Izvestia 14. Journalists of the publication talked with the Director General of the State Rocket Center. V.P. Makeev Vladimir Degtyarem, who spoke about the current work of his organization. According to the head, the SRC is currently engaged in the development of several new projects as part of the fulfillment of orders of the Ministry of Defense. The development of land-based and sea-based ballistic missiles is underway. For strategic rocket forces based on land, an intercontinental rocket “Sarmat” is created. In addition, a development rocket is being conducted on another promising topic.

V. Degtyar did not disclose any details of the two new projects. Thus, to date, some information has become known about the “land” missile of the Sarmat type, while information about the complex being developed in parallel is not yet available. It is known only about the existence of this project, and there is also information about its possible purpose.


The launch of the Bulava rocket. Photo Bastion-karpenko.ru


From the words of the head of the SRC them. V.P. Makeeva said that at present the specialists of this organization are busy with the implementation of the early stages of the new project, during which the most common features of the future system are determined. It can also be concluded that the development of the project, the name of which is not yet known, is carried out as part of the development of the naval component of the strategic nuclear forces. Thus, in the distant future, a new ballistic missile could become the main armament of promising submarines. In this case, it can be considered a replacement for the recently adopted into service weapons rocket P-30 "Bulava".

On the characteristics and capabilities of a promising rocket, for obvious reasons, it is too early to speak. The project is at its earliest stages, because of which the first tests can begin only after a few years, and the adoption of a rocket for service is completely a matter of the distant future. Nevertheless, various assumptions regarding the appearance of a promising submarine missile may arise even now.

Probably, according to the main flight characteristics, the rocket of the future will, at least, not be inferior to modern products. It should be expected that it will be able to fly at a distance of at least 9-10 thousand km and deliver warheads to several targets. One should expect the use of a divided warhead with combat units of individual guidance. In this case, in the composition of the combat equipment can be applied some new developments. Thus, in recent years, the special interest of specialists and the general public has been attracted by developments in the field of hypersonic technology. According to various estimates, promising intercontinental missiles of domestic development will be able to carry special hypersonic maneuvering warheads or other systems based on new technologies. Expected and fully justified is the use of developed anti-missile defenses to help offset future progress in remedies.

In the context of the creation of a new missile for submarines, it is impossible not to consider the question of creating carriers of such weapons. The newest strategic missile submarine cruisers of the 955 "Borey" project are equipped with P-30 ballistic missiles. Submarines of this type and missiles for them were adopted relatively recently. By the end of the decade, it is planned to build eight submarines that can carry 16 missiles. Operation Boreev will continue for the next few decades. The possibility of upgrading these submarines with new missiles in the future has not yet been announced.

There is reason to believe that the promising rocket will become the main weapons submarines of a new type. Since 2014 in the news the development of a promising nuclear submarine project is regularly mentioned, which is planned to be brought to the stage of construction of serial equipment by the end of the next decade. According to available data, work is currently underway to form the general appearance of a promising fifth-generation submarine, which will have to join fleet in the long run. It is mentioned that the new project received the Husky code.

In April, 2016, curious information about the Husky project was announced by the head of the United Shipbuilding Corporation Alexey Rakhmanov. Among other things, there is a proposal to create unified submarine projects. Thus, on the basis of a single platform, it will be possible to build both multi-purpose submarines and strategic missile carriers. The unification of key elements of the structure with differences in armament will provide the best price offer for the Ministry of Defense.

The exact timing of the Husky project has not yet been determined, but different assessments are being made. Thus, according to A. Rakhmanov, by the 2017-18 years, the USC plans to complete the development of projects of fourth-generation nuclear submarines. If at the same time to begin designing the fifth generation submarine, the lead ship can be built by the end of the twenties. Accordingly, delaying the start of the project will lead to corresponding shifts in other terms.

According to previous reports, the fifth generation submarine project is currently at the stage of forming a general look and conceptual design. Works on the Husky theme are conducted at the Malakhit SPMBM (St. Petersburg). All available data on the project were obtained thanks to the statements of industry representatives. Other information has not yet been officially published.

The prospective nuclear submarine of the “Husky” project is currently viewed as a carrier of various weapons, including those that imply its assignment to various classes. The possibility of using such boats as a multi-purpose or strategic. Thus, the Huskies may well become the carrier of a promising ballistic missile, the development of which recently launched in the GRTs them. V.P. Makeev. Alternative to ballistic missiles in a multi-purpose submarine configuration can be anti-ship and anti-submarine missile or torpedo complexes of existing or prospective types. Earlier it was reported that the Husky will become the carrier of a hypersonic anti-ship rocket Zircon.

Full operation of the newest submarines of the 955 "Borey" project, carrying the Bulava R-30 missile, launched relatively recently. Three submarines have now been accepted into the Navy and are ready to carry out their combat missions. In the foreseeable future, the fleet will receive five more strategic submarines of this type, which are being built according to the updated 955A project, which is distinguished by some improvements.

It is expected that the operation of "Boreev" will continue over the next few decades. According to recent reports, no earlier than the end of the next decade, the Russian Navy will be able to receive new Husky submarines, the development of which began only recently. For some time, obviously, they will be operated in parallel with the existing "Boreas", after which they will get a chance to assume the main role in the composition of the naval component of the strategic nuclear forces.

Similar processes will occur only in 15-20 years, but should be prepared for them now. According to recent reports, preliminary work is underway on promising nuclear submarines and on submarine ballistic missiles. Their results will be clear only in a few years, however, it is already clear that such projects are of particular importance for the country's security.


On the materials of the sites:
http://izvestia.ru/
http://ria.ru/
http://tass.ru/
http://bastion-karpenko.ru/
Author:
45 comments
Ad

Subscribe to our Telegram channel, daily additional materials that do not get on the site: https://t.me/topwar_ru

Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must sign in.
  1. Dmitry Potapov
    Dmitry Potapov 15 July 2016 06: 33
    +1
    And this is good! good good good
  2. D-Master
    D-Master 15 July 2016 06: 55
    +8
    Developing something new and promising is always good. But if Bulava has just been adopted and is already preparing a replacement for it in the form of developing a completely new rocket, and as far as I understand from the new developer, this suggests that Bulava has not gotten rid of the plume of childhood diseases and it is easier to develop a new product for based on existing solutions than to suffer with existing ones. IMHO naturally.
    1. Alex_Rarog
      Alex_Rarog 15 July 2016 07: 52
      0
      For some reason, the mace was crammed into the TPK !!! what nafig is unnecessary for a marine rocket! in this lies all of her illnesses and failures, why the Heat Engineering decided to do so only God knows!
      1. Engineer
        Engineer 15 July 2016 08: 58
        0
        Then, the fact that the Makeyevites are engaged in marine missiles, and not MIT, is why it turned out that way. And MIT with its Topoli can’t beat minutemans in terms of energy-mass characteristics, so where can they compete with tridents ?!
        1. berezin1987
          berezin1987 15 July 2016 13: 55
          0
          Poplars have a higher engine thrust than minitracks. At the poplar, a mortar start is used, and the minuteman starts the engine in the mine.
          1. Simple
            Simple 15 July 2016 19: 09
            -1
            Quote: berezin1987
            Poplars have a higher engine thrust than minitracks.

            ik ..... belay
            where did the firewood come from (about cravings)? wink

            About Topol-M flight data there is no information that is reliable. It is claimed that the range reaches 11 000 km and there is an estimate of the speed 7.3 km / s, which the warhead has when entering the ballistic section of the trajectory.
            As if yes, they "say" that the first stage of the RT-2PM2 has a thrust of 91 tf, a mass of 26 t, of which the mass of a stage is 3 t, a length of 8,5 m, an operating time of 60 s.

            Minuteman-III (LGM-30G) the first stage has a modified Thiokol TU-122 (M55 / TX-55 / Tu-122) with traction from 92 tf,
            Unmodified TU-122 792.00 kN (178,048 lbf) from 89 tf, weight: 23,077 kg (50,876 lb). canister dry weight: 2,292 kg (5,052 lb). Pulse (vacuum): 262 s. pulse (sea): 237 s. burning time: 60s. Height: 7.49 m (24.57 ft). Diameter: 1.67 m (5.47 ft).
            Thiokol TU-122 is a booster Saturn IB-C, Saturn INT-14, Saturn INT-15, Saturn INT-19 variants. and first stage of Minuteman I
            however, the masses are changing everything.
            the thrust-to-weight ratio of the Minutman-3 is in 1.3 times superior to the TV Topol-M


            basically on video launches:

            subjectively, RT-2PM2 does not look particularly frisky sprinter

            the relict Minuteman-I was no worse off even without a “kick” from the mortar launch


            Quote: berezin1987
            At poplar mortar launch is applied,

            to save PU and TPK
      2. The comment was deleted.
        1. Andrey NM
          Andrey NM 15 July 2016 10: 04
          +4
          Rudolph, it will be interesting if the new product turns out to be liquid amputated, with a short active section and a "mortar" start from a dry mine ...
          Or maybe they will come up with something new for the Boryusika mine, but for the existing landing ... Eh, where is youth? The work is interesting.
          1. The comment was deleted.
            1. Andrey NM
              Andrey NM 15 July 2016 10: 57
              +2
              Hello Rudolph! Yes, many things were invented ... It seems that the laboratory building is still alive, photos of the beginning of the year were slipping through. And then where to put the simulator and "visual aids"? Interestingly, products for KRASMASH will go? Well this is the question "to myself". The child is now "entering" the university. Do you know which one? Siberian Aerospace. All our production workers, warranties, and all sorts of rocketry are from these walls. The competition is big this year, a lot for technical specialties. As an example, where mine wants - 7 people per place. In general, something is scary. A large number of students in the specialties "rocket engine", "control systems", "space transport systems", production, etc., which pleases. I am not glad that there is no competition for the specialties "fundamental physics", "fundamental mathematics". There is nowhere to engage in scientific activity.
      3. Lyubopyatov
        Lyubopyatov 15 July 2016 14: 36
        0
        To God, of course. it is known, but it would not be a sin for us to find out - from the transcripts of the leading meetings. If they have not already been burned by the keepers of archives such as "academician Pivovarov", Pivorvaniy.
      4. Simple
        Simple 15 July 2016 19: 37
        0
        Quote: Alex_Rarog
        For some reason, the mace was crammed into the TPK !!! what nafig is unnecessary for a marine rocket!

        What did TPK not please you about?

        For the D-30 / R-30 / 3M30 Bulava - SS-N-32 MIT, the developments on the project of the ICBM 15Zh59 "Courier" were used, and she is in TPK
        "marine" Zur - in TPK

        Before it becomes "marine" and after it has been: how it must be transported / stored


        Including and for developing the most unified interspecific small-sized missile for the Strategic Missile Forces and the Navy + the cessation of fuel production for solid propellant rocket engines at the Pavlograd chemical plant in Ukraine:
        OPAL-MS-IIM with octogen instead of TTF-56 / 3 and here is the result
    2. Malkor
      Malkor 15 July 2016 08: 57
      +1
      At the General Staff, laughing about the mace, I asked one colonel - he just smiled. Therefore, now they are doing a replacement for her - another institution.
      1. guzik007
        guzik007 15 July 2016 09: 38
        +2
        Laugh at the General Staff about the mace
        ---------------------------------
        Yeah, a lot of time, a lot of state securities. A nicho. "Well, I didn't do it!" Well, the stone flower does not come out, well, danuegonah! We blind others. Maybe it will work.
        But in the end, someone will answer for squandering billions?
        1. Alex_59
          Alex_59 15 July 2016 10: 10
          +3
          Quote: guzik007
          But in the end, someone will answer for squandering billions?

          Exactly. And then all of these: where did the repression of the 37 year begin? And from there they started, if people don’t understand otherwise. Then moaning, oh innocently repressed ... But now is not the time of course.
          1. In100gram
            In100gram 15 July 2016 14: 08
            0
            Quote: Alex_59
            Exactly. And then all of these: where did the repressions of the 37th year come from

            I agree. And we must start again with the "case of doctors", and insurers there too
    3. Alexey RA
      Alexey RA 15 July 2016 10: 57
      +3
      Quote: D-Master
      But if Bulava has just been adopted and is already preparing a replacement for it in the form of developing a completely new rocket, and as far as I understand from the new developer, this suggests that Bulava has not gotten rid of the plume of childhood diseases and it is easier to develop a new product for based on existing solutions than to suffer with the existing one.

      This does not mean anything. It is normal practice to start developing a new product to replace the recently put into service. Taking into account the terms of research and development, testing and putting into series, this product will reach the Customer exactly when Bulava's deadlines begin to go out.
  3. soul
    soul 15 July 2016 07: 00
    +2
    "Husky" dragged for some reason ...
    1. Pavel1
      Pavel1 15 July 2016 07: 11
      -6
      Quote: alma
      "Husky" dragged for some reason ...

      Husky-Khakaski, now submariners will be dog lovers in huskies management ...
      1. NEXUS
        NEXUS 15 July 2016 09: 26
        +1
        Quote: Paul1
        Husky-Khakaski, now submariners will be dog lovers in huskies management ...

        MAPL Husky will go to replace Ashen-M, as the last roads and build them long enough. The Americans created the Sea Wolf, and after that they made an economy version of it in the form of the Virginia submarine, so I think our designers went the same way.
        As for the new sea-based ICBMs, unfortunately the Bulava turned out to be too crude and with many problems, so replacing it came almost from the start.
        1. Pavel1
          Pavel1 15 July 2016 09: 50
          +1
          Quote: NEXUS
          I think our designers went the same way.


          what do these types of "ours" do not in the traditions of our Russian people and why do we need American traditions? Whoever plays by someone else's rules always loses ...
        2. Alexey RA
          Alexey RA 15 July 2016 11: 03
          0
          Quote: NEXUS
          As for the new sea-based ICBMs, unfortunately the Bulava turned out to be too crude and with many problems, so replacing it came almost from the start.

          Ahem ... and we had at least one new model of SLBMs, which would not have problems at the initial stage and which would not have to be finalized? Not a modification, but the original base model, without a loop of letters and numbers behind the number?
          Remember the same R-39 - it was taken into service as it was, and they immediately began to refine it. As a result, it fit into the original TK only in the R-39UTTX version (which, alas, they could not put in the series).
    2. Jurkovs
      Jurkovs 15 July 2016 10: 55
      0
      And then they dragged that they varnished the situation of changing the Mace to another rocket. So that uncomfortable questions are not asked about the next hundreds of billions of rubles flying into the pipe.
    3. soul
      soul 15 July 2016 15: 24
      +1
      Gentlemen minisers apparently forgot that the Husky nuclear submarine was originally declared as a Multipurpose submarine, and strategic SLBMs have nothing to do with it. Unless, of course, Husky is not a new unified project for multipurpose and strategists ...
    4. Simple
      Simple 15 July 2016 19: 45
      0
      Quote: alma
      "Husky" dragged for some reason ...

      and don’t talk.
      The author foolishly, you see, will be stuffed into a multipurpose nuclear submarine with cruise missiles (SSBN) 5-th generation-SLBM.
      ICBM's Displacement - Less than 12000 T?
    5. little man
      little man 16 July 2016 00: 24
      0
      aha
      Vpk article
      "The head of the DPF called the development of a ballistic missile for the Husky nuclear submarine absurd."
      http://vpk.name/news/159501_glava_dpf_nazval_absurdom_razrabotku_ballisticheskoi
      _raketyi_dlya_apl_haski.html
  4. Engineer
    Engineer 15 July 2016 08: 59
    0
    I am very glad that the Makeyevites, and not MIT, are making a new rocket. Sineva is a masterpiece of our rocket science, Mace is a shame on our rocket science.
    1. Alexey RA
      Alexey RA 15 July 2016 11: 11
      0
      The shame of our rocketry is, rather, the R-39. 90 tons of mass just to get close to the Trident.
      She was accepted into service only because the naval head "shark" had been put into operation for a year and a half. Moreover, the range of SLBMs did not suit even the fleet (and after all, the Makeyevites wanted to offer the same missile for silos).
      1. The comment was deleted.
        1. Alexey RA
          Alexey RA 15 July 2016 19: 09
          0
          Quote: rudolff
          You are wrong, Alexey. The R-39 is not a shame for the Soviet rocket industry, but rather an achievement. Makeev was categorically against solid-propellant SLBMs, but the leadership insisted on "a la Trident" and Makeev coped with the task brilliantly.

          Excuse me, but "brilliant" is when 18750 SLBMs fit into a submarine of 24 tons of underwater displacement. And when the product fits into the technical specification, it is also "brilliant".
          And when under 20 missiles it is necessary to fence a five-hull "water carrier" with a capacity of 48000 tons of underwater, and for it - to create a base infrastructure from scratch, since the same old "gallows" do not pull a new missile - this is called "horror-horror-horror".

          As for the "insisting leadership" ... even ampulized UDMH and amyl are still extremely dangerous. The two-time sad experience of K-219 is an example of this. So the transition to TT SLBMs was only a matter of time.
          For to shove the components with which they work on land in OZK and IP-s, and go down into the mine only after triple ventilation, into the closed strong housing is not the best solution.
          Quote: rudolff
          Imagine how much the machine would weigh if in TTZ the requirement for casting weight was not three tons without a little, but like Bulava, a little more than a ton? Solomon would nervously smoke aside.

          EMNIP, with throwable weights at R-39 and Mace is not so simple. I met information that the difference of 2,5 times is due to the fact that these weights for two missiles are considered according to different methods.
          1. The comment was deleted.
            1. The comment was deleted.
          2. Simple
            Simple 16 July 2016 12: 18
            0
            Quote: Alexey RA
            in OZK and IP-s, and they go down to the mine only after triple ventilation - not the best solution.

            it was "in the beginning"
            Do you see people in the OZK? and airing 3?

            TPK with a rocket 15A18M / P-36M2 in the mine PU(The rocket has been in the TPK since the time of manufacture at the manufacturing plant throughout the entire operating cycle.)
            Warranty period on duty (according to the irregular scheme for PU) - 15 years


            Quote: Alexey RA
            weights for two missiles are calculated using different methods.

            belay
            WEIGHT is always considered using the same methods.
            So
            P = m * g
            or as
            P = m (ga)
            And the mass is almost an absolute concept, only a scalar, unlike weight
            Why write nonsense?
  5. azer
    azer 15 July 2016 09: 25
    0
    Finally good news
  6. Old26
    Old26 15 July 2016 10: 57
    0
    Quote: D-Master
    Developing something new and promising is always good. But if Bulava has just been adopted and is already preparing a replacement for it in the form of developing a completely new rocket, and as far as I understand from the new developer, this suggests that Bulava has not gotten rid of the plume of childhood diseases and it is easier to develop a new product for based on existing solutions than to suffer with existing ones. IMHO naturally.

    The funny thing is that in the interview that I read on the Internet, Degtyar did not say a word about the new SLBM. He said that work is underway in the interests of the Strategic Missile Forces and the Navy, that the Sarmat is doing, and that work is underway on new promising topics. In principle, nothing was said about the new development being a replacement for the Bulava. And what about the future - wait and see. And even about "Husky" now "rumors" have already begun to spread that it is so versatile, modular that it can carry both CD and SLBM. But Malachite has no experience in building boats with ballistic missiles. In short. Nothing is known. By the way, as an option, Degtyar could talk about a new version of the "Liner"
    1. The comment was deleted.
  7. JD1979
    JD1979 15 July 2016 11: 48
    0
    Well, at least a promising missile had the brains to give pros for marine missiles - Makeevtsy, and not MIT.
  8. avg-mgn
    avg-mgn 15 July 2016 11: 59
    +1
    The announcement is not bad, I would not like to smoke a pause in the implementation period
  9. DimerVladimer
    DimerVladimer 15 July 2016 12: 18
    +3
    Rumors rumors rumors ...
    The GRKC has been closely engaged in this topic for a couple of years, and the leak to the press is STARTED DEVELOPMENT, as if it had just begun :)
    In general, this process always goes on - without stopping, because from the moment of the start of design to putting it into service, 7-8 years pass. By the time the product is transferred to production, it is already outdated - new ideas, new technologies, new materials and developments appear. This process can be accelerated by injecting funds or slowing down - reducing funding.
    Now they have accelerated - well, someone big-headed returned the SLBM development to a specialized design bureau ...
  10. avg-mgn
    avg-mgn 15 July 2016 12: 18
    +2
    Quote: Alex_59
    Exactly. And then all of these: where did the repression of the 37 year begin? And from there they started, if people don’t understand otherwise. Then moaning, oh innocently repressed ... But now is not the time of course.

    If you think that there are only thieves in the RF military-industrial complex, then who has promoted a number of adequate systems in the RF Armed Forces in recent years. Not everything and not always from the drawing board (computer) just entered the troops, there were always problems with implementation (time and quality), there are and will be. Another thing is that the service life of the vehicle in real time has changed, the resistance is increasing, which means that the designer must lay the prospect for 5-10 years ahead (taking into account the entry into the troops - 10-15 years). Yesterday (a year or two ago), NATO squeaked from the Bulava announcement in fear, and today, even taking into account the nuances. There is no need to routinely scold (to put it mildly) the work of military-industrial complex enterprises, People try, work and, God forbid, they give products and pay wages. And thieves are everywhere, even in my gardening partnership.
    1. DimerVladimer
      DimerVladimer 15 July 2016 12: 26
      +2
      Quote: avg-mgn
      Yesterday (a year or two ago), NATO squeaked from the Bulava announcement in fear, and today, even taking into account the nuances. There is no need to routinely scold (to put it mildly) the work of military-industrial complex enterprises, People try, work and, God forbid, they give products and pay wages.


      It is your personal opinion that "NATO squeaked" from Bulava - this unit did not even come close to Trident-2 in terms of performance characteristics.

      The idea was to unify the land and sea complex, and as a result of this decision, an ICBM with solid propellant rocket launcher was received, inferior to the potential partner in service. And the means and time spent on unification are comparable to the development of a new product, which could have higher characteristics.
      A mace is generally an unsuccessful and costly experiment.
      1. Alexey RA
        Alexey RA 15 July 2016 19: 36
        0
        Quote: DimerVladimer

        The idea was to unify the land and sea complex, and as a result of this decision, an ICBM with solid propellant rocket launcher was received, inferior to the potential partner in service

        Heh heh heh ... actually unification of land and sea complex - This idea is not MIT, but Makeevtsev. The very idea that was embodied in the monster R-39.

        The MITs who succeeded had to constantly prove that they did not plan any unification - only the use of a number of previously worked out solutions in SLBMs (including to reduce risks and facilitate the launch of a missile into production). For the mere mention of a unified ICBM / SLBM caused a clear reaction from the customer - thank you, not interested - once we have stepped on this rake.
        So MIT did not have any unification.
  11. berezin1987
    berezin1987 15 July 2016 14: 03
    0
    I was always embarrassed that the mace has a starting mass in 1,5 less than that of the trident-2, although both missiles are solid fuel. I think that the military’s demands for combat load and firing range have increased. Judging by the size and displacement of the boreas, they were originally designed for heavier missiles.
  12. Old26
    Old26 15 July 2016 14: 20
    0
    Quote: DimerVladimer
    This is your personal opinion that "NATO squeaked" from Bulava

    "Squeaked", how not to squeak. If you have not paid attention yet, then such a reaction of the enemy is a kind of "highlight" of the "Military Review" resource. According to the majority of writers, as soon as Russia shows something, the West immediately begins to "squeak", "put in their pants", "they begin to vilify", "they change diapers" and further down the list.
    Even if it is something else very far from the series, anyway. The US and NATO are shaking with fear. And this is how it raises itself in its own eyes
  13. soul
    soul 15 July 2016 15: 30
    0
    There was an article on the site recently: an opinion was expressed about why Bulava flies every other time and the conclusion that it is necessary either to create a new nuclear submarine or a new missile. So the new rocket may be "correcting mistakes" Just an opinion ...
  14. VIT101
    VIT101 15 July 2016 18: 09
    +1
    What is the dispute, today there has already been a denial of information about the armament of Husky boats with ballistic missiles. The boat will be multipurpose.
  15. Resistance
    Resistance 6 October 2016 12: 13
    0
    Quote: Alexey RA
    Alexey RA


    The comrade somehow intersected with 941 in general, and in particular in the period 1976-1992, so directly stigmatized, Mayakovsky, Kovalev and Makeev - they are blushing ...