Russia tests new missiles

[Ares]

http://ca.today.reuters.com/news/newsArticle.aspx?type=topNews&storyID=2007-05-29T111924Z_01_L29614671_RTRIDST_0_NEWS-RUSSIA-MISSILE-COL.XML&archived=False

MOSCOW (Reuters) - Russia test-fired a new intercontinental ballistic missile on Tuesday featuring multiple warheads which can be independently targeted, Russian agencies reported.

A Defence Ministry spokesman said the missile was fired from a mobile launcher at 1420 Moscow time (1020 GMT) from the Plesetsk cosmodrome about 800 km (500 miles) north of Moscow, Interfax news agency reported.

The RS-24 missile can be armed with up to 10 different warheads, the Defence Ministry told Interfax.

It said the new missile would replace earlier generation intercontinental missiles such as the RS-18 and RS-20.

Missiles carrying multiple independently targeted warheads are more difficult to intercept and destroy completely once they have been fired.

Russia has previously said U.S. plans to build a system in Europe to intercept and shoot down hostile missiles are a threat to its own security. Washington says the system is intended to counter rogue states and does not threaten Russia.

Any information on the RS-24 ?

[ultrafankul]

changing flight path

and complex p-500

[Viktor]

Seems to me that RS-24 is new Russian heavy ICBM with the range of 12 000km , 10 nuclear warheads each 150-300kT and with all countermeasures and posibly MARV.

About P-500 huh have no idea, some cruise missile on ISKANDER TEL.

[ultrafankul]

"Искандер-М" (ISKANDER TEL)
P-500
action range is 280-300 km or more( by wish)
the velocity is 3000 km/h
rocket control is realised by satellite or dispiloting
is appropriated for suppression of the opponent ПВО))

sorry for my english;)

[Ares]

According to various sources and analysts the RS-24 is a heavily modified and upgraded Topol-M (SS-27). Yes the P-500 is the second newest missile tested by the Russians the first is the RS-24. The P-500 is a modernized Iskander-M hence notice the M means -Modernizoveney.

[Viktor]

I have read som bad translation from Russia...P-500 has odd trajectory as I understand... par balistic and part like cruise missile... its range i would not stick with the 300km.... perhaps it more...

[Chrom]

I have read som bad translation from Russia...P-500 has odd trajectory as I understand... par balistic and part like cruise missile... its range i would not stick with the 300km.... perhaps it more... It is more than 300 and most likely close to 500km but with somewhat reduced payload compared to Iskander-E. 300km was artificaly introduced to comply with export missile technology treaty.

[XaNDeR]

They spend so much on strategic forces , they should rather spend that on conventional forces

[Waylander]

Why should they?
Their strategic nuclear forces give them much more weight than they could ever hope to achieve with their conventional forces.

[XaNDeR]

Because conventional forces are the most important part of the military

Strategic forces are good in flexing muscles and all but come on , seriusly , nobody is stupid enough to nuke some country that has nuclear capability, and out of my awarenes russia has the biggest nuclear stockpile atm , bigger than usa i belive , its not much of a diference , anyway my point is beeing the biggest nuclear country , or 2nd biggest , why would you want more? nobody is gonna atk you just caus of that , i would concentrate my atention on conventinal forces if I was them , that was my sole point :P

[Waylander]

They are not trying to get back to cold war.
They pump money into their strategic forces to keepn them from rusting away.
It is an upgrade and conslidation of their strategic arsenal.
In the 90s their strategic forces were on the same way of disintegrating like their conventional forces.
So much that even a successfull first strike of the US might have been possible (As unthinkable as it is but you have to plan this way).

Their sat assets coming down without being replaced, many early warning systems not functioning anymore and standing in other GUS countries, their SSBNs not going onto regular patrols anymore...

It was time to react and with the new flush of oil&gas money they are doing right in consolidating their strategic forces and give them priority over their armed forces.
In the end it is not their conventional might which gives Russia and international weight which doesn't reflects its real economic and conventional military strength.

[XaNDeR]

Thats true but they should also give priority on increasing their projection capability of conventional forces

[eckherl]

Thats true but they should also give priority on increasing their projection capability of conventional forces

Why is it the outmost importance to build up their conventional forces, at the current threat level they have enough to make anybody think twice about starting any type of confrontation with them.

[Waylander]

You cannot give priority to both, the conventional and the strategic forces.
The word priority implies that one branche comes first. ;)

As Eckherl said it is not as if Russia is defenseless.
Their forces might have been suffered since the end of cold war (Even when you consider that it starts to look better recently).
But that only means that they are not able to perform the big offensive maneuvers once envisioned by the red army and not that they are defenseless.

[XaNDeR]

You cannot give priority to both, the conventional and the strategic forces.
The word priority implies that one branche comes first. ;)

As Eckherl said it is not as if Russia is defenseless.
Their forces might have been suffered since the end of cold war (Even when you consider that it starts to look better recently).
But that only means that they are not able to perform the big offensive maneuvers once envisioned by the red army and not that they are defenseless.

I agree but they invented so much tehnological advanced things , like Ka-50 , Su-37 , Su-34 , Black Eagle , yet they just dont build them , they have like 16 Ka-50's 20 Ka-52's , 1 Su-37 etc. They should modernize faster and also improve their capability , increase the power projection and decrease the chances for failure , deaths , etc.

[Waylander]

Prototypes.
Money is a key.
When you give your strategic forces priority (Which is defenitely the right decision from russias pow) you just don't have the money to get into full production with everyhing you develop. Be happy that your R&D departements still develop interesting stuff.

BTW, there are also many interesting prototypes of new weapons systems in the west which have never seen serial production.
It is not a purely eastern phenomenon.

[Aby The Liberal]

They spend so much on strategic forces , they should rather spend that on conventional forces

I don't think Russia considers a serious war scenario with US or any other country which is why they built up nuclear forces rather than conventional ones. Nuclear forces are also cheaper to build than conventional which give smaller security for much more the cost. :)

[Waylander]

When I look at France which needs roughly 3 billions a year just for keeping their relatively small nuclear forces running (Not including R&D and new procurements) I don't think that nuclear forces are really that much cheaper.

[XaNDeR]

I agree with waylander , do you have any idea how much balistic missiles cost and need for upkeep?

[Chrom]

I agree with waylander , do you have any idea how much balistic missiles cost and need for upkeep?

Cost: around 10mil USD for mobile version. For land based version somewhat more due to need for undeground placement.
Upkeep: Like any truck / bunker. Probably around several hundreds thousands $$ per year. Plus guards, etc - probably cost much more to upkeep but on other hand they are professional soldiers reserve in any conflict.

Of course, naval and aviation arms are much more expencive. Still new Russian SSBN with 16 missiles / 160 (96) warheads cost around 1 bil. Due to START threaty Russia cant have more than 10 such SSBN's. So, all in all not that much money when spread out on 15-20 years. Of course, support, infrastructure and ecscort for these SSBN cost much more - but this support fleet can be also used in conventional conflict - so it is dual-purpose. The very same could be said about aviation.

I always said - ICBM's are by far the cheapest of all means to reliably protect any country. They are cheap to produce, maintain, and do not require any expencive follow-up technologies like SSBN's or strategic bombers.

[10ringr]

According to various sources and analysts the RS-24 is a heavily modified and upgraded Topol-M (SS-27). Yes the P-500 is the second newest missile tested by the Russians the first is the RS-24. The P-500 is a modernized Iskander-M hence notice the M means -Modernizoveney.

Duz anyone see that we are downsizing our nuclear stockpile which already consist of relatively small yield nukes compared to the Russians and while we unilaterally hollow out our nuclear weapons, retiring the MX etc. Russia is building more with 10+ mirvs and we're just bending over for them and China. What do we need to do fight with 4 F/A 22's, 1 1/2 minuteman and a B52 bomber because the'y're retiring the F117. We are screwed! Hutch:lul

[Viktor]

US and Russia have signed few treates whitch regulate equal amount of nukes and delivery systems for each country.

[Universal]

But yet the US continues development of tactical nuclear weapons.

[Chrom]

But yet the US continues development of tactical nuclear weapons. And? Doesnt matter. Old missiles running its service life and require replacement...

[10ringr]

But yet the US continues development of tactical nuclear weapons.

Yes, it's what we do. We do the R & D for China and send over our tech. in a gift wrapped box. H

[Firehorse]

Yes, it's what we do. We do the R & D for China and send over our tech. in a gift wrapped box. H

They are paying for it anyway!:onfloorl:

Russia modernizes missiles in response to US plans
http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/n/a/2008/10/22/international/i081933D23.DTL

Modernization and life extension of their ICBMs (http://http://www.missilethreat.com/missilesoftheworld/id.138/missile_detail.asp)will go hand in hand for a long time.
That's their philosophy: don't discard anything that can still be useful.
I agree that overall ICBMs are not as costly as SLBMs, but the latter are the most survivable and act as an ultimate deterrant- that is enough to justify having them. BTW, the recent Sineva test proved that any spot of significance in Northern Hemishphere can be reached from the Arctic and/or the Russian home waters. Also, all 5 Pac.Fleet SSBNs will soon be reassigned to the Northern Fleet- I guess for both economic and military reasons.

[SkolZkiy]

START-1 treaty ends in the end of 2009 and there are no reasons for us to and re-enroll it. so in fact fact there no real limitations of building more sub-marines but the program is to build 8 sub-marines Borei type.
4 sub-marines Delta IV are now in docks on capital repair.
and 1 sub-marine Typhoon type is also been equiping with Bulava missiles and if everythin will be al right during testing then 2 more will be modernized and equiped with new missiles.
and we have reasons to do that because there three radars (Alaska, Norway, Israel), another will be built in Poland. mobile radar is near japan. and there are plans to built a stationary radar in Japan. and all of this around RF. Russia military budget is near 50-60 billions $ and can you tell me about US millitary budget??
modernizing our strategical forces is the question of survival of our country. Because there are US with "world sheriff mission" and we have 1.5 billion of chinese with their tries to occupy our FarEast territories(may be not right now but they look in future).

[Firehorse]

Agreed. I said as much on Georgia-Russia tread (please see my edited last post there).
Can those new Boreys be adopted to carry the Sineva SLBMs (http://http://russianforces.org/blog/2005/01/status_of_russias_slbm_program.shtml), in the event the Bulava missile isn't fixed?

[SkolZkiy]

lats too starts were successful so there is no need. plus Sineva missiles are too large for Borei.

[Feanor]

1 sub-marine Typhoon type is also been equiping with Bulava missiles and if everythin will be al right during testing then 2 more will be modernized and equiped with new missiles.

As far as I know the Donskoy is a test-bed platform. Whether it will remain in service is unclear. The other two are mothballed and iirc the plans for modernizing are rumors.

[SkolZkiy]

Yes Donskoi is a laboratory for Bulava but if it will be successfully equiped with them it will stay on service and other 2 sub-marines (which are now really out of fleet) woulbe be modernized instead of Delta III or Delta IV

[Feanor]

Do you have a source? (no offense but this is the third thread in which you make claims that don't match what I have found in open sources, so please provide us with sources)

[SkolZkiy]

Do you have a source? (no offense but this is the third thread in which you make claims that don't match what I have found in open sources, so please provide us with sources)

I'll repeat here also I'll save links. And about this I'll find it again and publish.

here they are but in russian =)
http://www.rg.ru/2008/08/28/donskoy.html
http://www.redstar.ru/2004/09/25_09/1_01.html

В 1996 г. из-за нехватки средств были выведены из боевого состава ТК-12 и ТК-202, в 1997 г. - ТК-13. В то же время дополнительное финансирование ВМФ в 1999 году позволило значительно ускорить затянувшийся капитальный ремонт головного ракетоносца 941-го проекта - К-208. За десять лет, в течение которых корабль находился в Государственном центре атомного подводного судостроения, проведена замена и модернизация (в соответствии с проектом 941 У) основных комплексов вооружения. Ожидается, что в третьем квартале 2000 г. работы будут полностью завершены, и после окончания заводских и ходовых приемно-сдаточных испытаний, в начале 2001 года, обновленный атомоход вновь вступит в строй.

В ноябре 1999 г. из акватории Баренцева моря с борта одной из ТАПКР 941-го проекта были выполнены стрельбы двумя ракетами РСМ-52. Интервал между пусками составил два часа. Головные части ракет с высокой точностью поразили цели на Камчатском полигоне.

По сообщениям отечественной печати, существующие планы развития стратегических ядерных сил России предусматривают проведение модернизации кораблей пр. 941 с заменой ракетного комплекса Д-19 на новый. Если это соответствует действительности, “Акулы” имеют все шансы сохраниться в строю и в 2010-х годах.

В дальнейшем возможно переоборудование части атомоходов 941-го проекта в транспортные атомные подводные лодки (ТАПЛ), предназначенные для перевозок грузов по трансполярным и кроссполярным подледным маршрутам, кратчайшим путем связывающим Европу, Северную Америку и страны АТР. Встроенный вместо ракетного отсека грузовой отсек будет способен принимать до 10.000 т груза.

[SkolZkiy]

В августе 2007 главком ВМС адмирал флота Владимир Масорин сообщил, что до 2015 года не предусматривается модернизация АПЛ «Акула» под ракетный комплекс «Булава-М»

http://gorod.tomsk.ru/index-1190709134.php

[Feanor]

This is not evidence of any concrete plans or programs. Simply someone's speculation that this is indeed possible. I'm sure it's possible (it was done to the Donskoy, why not the other two?) but I don't know that it will be done, or is cost-effective. So when you say it will be done I have to say that that's not necessarily the case. We'll have to wait and see. Until then it's speculation.

[SkolZkiy]

Feanor in russia it is very difficult to get real documents =))) in SU it was impossible and still it is very difficult. So don't ask to show links to official documents. rumours are often more real then real docs. That's the special feature of Russia =)))))
May be some military have info and access to it but not simple guys like me.
As for example. In russia coordinates with accuracy more then 30 meters (it was told by our teacher 2 years ago, he is developing GeoInformationalSystems) are qualified as "for service use"
For service use -> secret-> top secret =) so if FSB catch me with more accurate GPS using - they theoritically put into prison =) and as I know in US and EU there are no such strict limitations.

[Feanor]

I understand what you're talking about but the point remains that you stated speculation as fact. That was my objection. Please keep the distinction between the two very very clear. As for the example you cited, iirc they are trying to loosen up that particular restriction to allow GLONASS commercial usage. And it's not top secret, the military already uses GLONASS devices that are more accurate (presumably) then that. Not to mention the thousands of commercially available GPS systems from the west that are more accurate then 30 meters.

[Waylander]

I know it's OT but in Rusia it is not allowed to use GPS systems as a civilian which are more accurate than 30m?
Hell if I'm not wrong my mobile phone gives me more accurate GPS data than that.

And for what reason?
So that nobody is able to build an accurate GPS system into his selfmade PGM?

[SkolZkiy]

Feanor I know that military CAN and many others who have access "ДСП" (для служебного пользования) - For service use - they also can, but they are restricted for a commercial use (officially). And if look attintively to my post i said THEORITICALLY because this restriction is foolish and everybody knows it. and FSU is not SECRET type, it is a bit lower.
And about another sources - the main sources of the interviews of officials and high ranked NAVY and quotes from some docs what else do you surppose to see??

[Feanor]

I suppose to see a concrete announcement regarding intent to modernize those subs, rather then retirement. Until then I treat it as a questionable rumor. After intent has been stated, I treat it as an intent but not as reality, until I see concrete steps being taken towards it. For example the aircraft carrier plans. I originally ridiculed them. But when 1) Sevmash started buiding a new drydock specifically for the carriers and 2) more statements followed giving official intent to build either new aircraft carriers or aircraft carrying cruisers, I now give the program a measure of credibility.

Waylander in Russia there is a large discrepancy between laws and real life. ;)

[SkolZkiy]

about aircarrier I have posted something in it's thread.

[Firehorse]

I suppose to see a concrete announcement regarding intent to modernize those subs, rather then retirement. Until then I treat it as a questionable rumor. ..

Objectively speaking, given that Russia percieves her long-term shortages in nuclear deterrance, it would make sense to recomission them with new BMs.
Those officials speak publicly after they heard assurances in private discussions- why embarass themselves later? I remember V. Belenko's (the MiG-25 pilot who defected in 1975) interview to the Novoe Russkoe Slovo (US based emigre newspaper) in 1988- in it he said that "since they are openly talking about the need for carriers, all petty talk/rumours are over- there already is an official decision to build them". That was before Adm. Kuznetsov time. Granted, he was a PVO, not Navy officer, but nonetheless in the know how the system works.

[SkolZkiy]

and do not forget that Admiral kuznetsov is not a aircraft carrier in a classic meanning as US carrier - because it has very powerful weapons on board not only anti-air deffense but also anti-ship missiles and torpedos and topedo-missiles. It can fight even without aircrafts and any convoy.

[Feanor]

It can. But will it be effective? Unlikely.

[SkolZkiy]

but still he can defend himself =) and it is very questionable about effectiveness or uneffectiveness

[Feanor]

Well.... defend against what? A squadron of F-18E's? Unlikely.

[stigmata]

Thats purely hypothetical, because an aircraft carrier would never ever go in harms way without escort, nice with some offensive giant size shipwreck tho :)
And she has avery strong point defence with any standard

[nevidimka]

Well.... defend against what? A squadron of F-18E's? Unlikely.

Thats why it has Flankers on board.

[Feanor]

and do not forget that Admiral kuznetsov is not a aircraft carrier in a classic meanning as US carrier - because it has very powerful weapons on board not only anti-air deffense but also anti-ship missiles and torpedos and topedo-missiles. It can fight even without aircrafts and any convoy.


Thats why it has Flankers on board.

:rolleyes: ;)

[SkolZkiy]

Guys I meant that even if it lost all its aircraft this ship would not be a peace of metal =)

[nevidimka]

That is true, it can still fight even if it doesn't have its planes, but winning it is another matter.

[SkolZkiy]

I didn't say that it will win =))) I only said it can fight =) may be defeated but it also could make hard damage to it's enemies =) and there are chances of winning - very small but they are.

[SkolZkiy]

http://www.lenta.ru/news/2008/11/26/plesetsk/
http://www.lenta.ru/news/2008/11/27/bulava/
news =)
first is that there was a successful test launch of RS-24 and is that in the 28 of November =)

[Feanor]

Yep. Active depoyment of first units is planned for next year. And we have confirmation that the RS-24 will deployed both in silo and mobile variants. There is also another Bulava launch expected before the end of this year.

[Firehorse]

This is in English-
Russia test-fires intercontinental missile: military (http://news.yahoo.com/s/afp/20081126/wl_afp/russiamilitarymissiletest/print;_ylt=Aj3IMYXjnQmWwYA8s3cTBK.ROrgF)

I wonder, are their warheads maneuvarable, as they were talked about before?
IMO, probably not yet, but they could be retrofited later.

Finally a success: Bulava missile hits bullseye (http://www.russiatoday.com/scitech/news/33973)
http://www.vesti.ru/videos?cid=2&vid=166084

Russia test-fires ICBM from submarine (http://www.google.com/hostednews/ap/article/ALeqM5iXJ7Du9xyLuO-Kp8b9PpvuQWpQ8QD94O2R680)

[Feanor]

Yep. The first fully successful Bulava launch. Acceptance of the missile along with the Yuri Dolgorukiy, for active service, is planned for next year. Also the first unit of the RS-24 will allegedly be deployed next december to Teykovo.

At the same time we are looking at a fairly major planned reduction. By 2016 one of the three missile armies and 3 of the 12 missile divisions will be liquidated. They are also cutting the only rocket forces academy (it will probably be integrated with another higher military institution, as the need for rocket forces officers is much lower then it was), one of it's three nuclear arsenals and one of the four training centers.

[nevidimka]

The Bulava MIRV.

[Viktor]

The Bulava MIRV.

Not just MIRV-ed but MARV-ed to !

[Firehorse]

Russia launches serial production of Bulava missiles (http://english.pravda.ru/russia/politics/02-12-2008/106773-bulava-0)

Russia starts production of new ballistic missiles (http://www.reuters.com/article/worldNews/idUSTRE4B03QA20081201)

Russia Responds to US Shield With Bulava Missiles (http://www.findingdulcinea.com/news/international/2008/December/Russia-Responds-to-US-Shield-With-Bulava-Missiles.html)


This is a new generation of entirely new SLBM, thanks to the new type of warheads. Good luck to them- I hope they won't misfire during future tests & patrols!

[yasin_khan]

Russia will from December 2009 deploy its new RS-24 intercontinental missile, designed to counter defence systems like the controversial US missile shield, the military announced Friday. The announcement of the deployment of the RS-24, a multiple-warhead, nuclear-capable missile, came amid continued disagreement between Moscow and Washington over US missile defence plans.
"It is expected the new missile complex including the RS-24 intercontinental ballistic missile will be deployed with Russian forces from 2009," Nikolai Solovtsov, the commander of Russia's missile forces, told Russian news agencies.
"It is planned that the main regiment equipped with this missile... and one squadron will be put on combat duty in the Teikovo missile unit in December 2009," he said, referring to a base northeast of Moscow.
The military on Wednesday successfully test-fired the RS-24 for the third time, launching it from northern Russia and hitting targets 6,000 kilometres (4,000 miles) away on the Kamchatka Peninsula that juts into the Pacific Ocean.
The earlier tests took place in May and December 2007. Experts and Russian news agencies have said the missile is capable of carrying three nuclear warheads.
The military has said the RS-24 is designed to overcome air-defence systems such as the controversial US missile shield planned for deployment in eastern Europe.
Moscow has repeatedly expressed its fury over the plans of outgoing US President George W. Bush to place a missile defence radar system in the Czech Republic and linked interceptor missiles in Poland.
President Dmitry Medvedev and Prime Minister Vladimir Putin have urged Barack Obama to drop the plans when he takes over the White House in January but the US president-elect has yet to reveal his intentions.
The RS-24 is a new missile which builds on the technologies of Russia's Topol-M missile but has the novelty of multiple independently targetable warheads, according to the Russian military.



http://www.spacewar.com/reports/Russia_to_deploy_new_missile_from_2009_military_99 9.html

[yasin_khan]

RS-24 / SS-X-29?

The RS-24 is a new-generation intercontinental ballistic missile, which is equipped with a multiple independently targetable reentry vehicle (MIRV) warhead. The RS-24 ICBM, which will replace the older SS-18 and SS-19 missiles by 2050, is expected to greatly strengthen the Strategic Missile Forces (SMF) strike capability, as well as that of its allies until the mid-21st century. The RS-24 missile will be deployed both in silos and on mobile platforms and together with the Topol-M single-warhead ICBM will constitute the core of Russia's SMF in the future.
On 22 October 2008 Col. Gen. Nikolai Solovtsov, Russia's Strategic Missile Forces (SMF) commander, said the new-generation RS-24 multiple-warhead missile system will enter service with the SMF in 2009n said on Wednesday. "We have carried out a series of successful ground and flight tests of the RS-24 missile. The new ICBM system will be put in service in 2009," he said. Solovtsov said the new system would "strengthen Russia's nuclear deterrence," including its capability to penetrate missile defense shields, and will serve to counter elements of a U.S. missile defense system deployed in Central Europe.
The RS-24 was first tested on May 29, 2007 after a secret military R&D project, and then again on December 25, 2007. On 26 November 2008 Russia successfully test launched a new-generation intercontinental ballistic missile bearing multiple independently targetable reentry vehicle (MIRV) warheads. "All the warheads hit the designated areas at the Kura testing grounds on the Kamchatka peninsula. All the tasks in the test have been accomplished," a spokesman for the Strategic Missile Forces (SMF) press service said. The RS-24 missile was launched at 4:20 p.m. Moscow time (13:20 GMT) from the Plesetsk space center in northwest Russia. The new test was aimed at obtaining data confirming the missile's technical characteristics and its readiness to enter service with the SMF.

[macman]

Is there any projects to upgrade P-700 Granit missiles?

This is one of the most powerful missiles in Russian stocks, in use by the Kirov's & Oscar's - around 600km range, mach 4, 750kg warhead, sophisticated attack - but were introduced in the 80's.

There's been a lot of advancements in guidance, ECM countermeasures, etc. since then, as well as in reducing radar signatures.


Has there been work already done on them, or is there a program planned/in operation?

[yasin_khan]

Russia's Topol-M ballistic missiles will be put on combat duty on schedule despite the current global financial crisis, the commander of the Strategic Missile.

http://en.rian.ru/russia/20081212/118827517.html

[yasin_khan]

Russia's armed forces will be equipped with new nuclear-capable missiles by 2020 that can overcome defensive measures like the controversial U.S. missile shield.By 2015-2020 the Russian strategic rocket forces will have new complete missile systems with improved combat characteristics.

[yasin_khan]

They will be capable of carrying out any tasks, including in conditions where an enemy uses anti-missile defense measures.
Russia is working to upgrade its Soviet-era forces and has repeatedly tested new missiles in recent months amid the controversy over the missile shield.
It is introducing new missiles into its existing arsenal like the Stiletto, the Voevoda and the Topol.

[Feanor]

Don't double and triple post. Use the edit button. And don't repost snippets of news articles without your own commentary. You've been warned about this before.

[yasin_khan]

I have two of my comments after the news report.

[Feanor]

I have two of my comments after the news report.

I read Russian news frequently (daily) and I've read multiple articles dealing exactly with what you're talking about. Your two comments that followed are almost word for word quotes from various articles on the matter. Possibly even from the same article (I don't remember off the top of my head).

[SkolZkiy]

I've read on Lenta.ru that SS-18 lifetime will be increased to 30 years and Russia will create a new rocket of the same class - HEAVY missile. If this is true than it's great.I think that right now SS-18 is one of the arguments for US not to do foolish things.

[yasin_khan]

I've read on Lenta.ru that SS-18 lifetime will be increased to 30 years and Russia will create a new rocket of the same class - HEAVY missile. If this is true than it's great.I think that right now SS-18 is one of the arguments for US not to do foolish things.
SS-18 is very old missile and was inducted 1967.SS-18I,II and III are rolled out and now only SS-18IV is in service.SS-18 is not very accurate missile thats way only the forth missile is in inventry and Russians will role out these missiles in two or three years completly with Topol series.

[Feanor]

SS-18 is very old missile and was inducted 1967.SS-18I,II and III are rolled out and now only SS-18IV is in service.SS-18 is not very accurate missile thats way only the forth missile is in inventry and Russians will role out these missiles in two or three years completly with Topol series.

Skolzkiy is actually correct. RS-20 (NATO SS-20 Satan) has indeed been prolonged to a maximum life of 30 years, and it has been announced that a new missile of comparable throw weight is being designed to enter service around 2020.

[SkolZkiy]

This ICBM carry MIRV with 10 500kt nukes. 500 meters i think it is enough for such nukes - these ICBM are developed to detroy BIG INDUSTRIAL centers so they don't need to attack ICBM starting points. And more than this if there is a monoblock nuke on such ICBM it has 24 Mt power. It is a good weapon. And I think we need ICBMs of this class.

[yasin_khan]

Skolzkiy is actually correct. RS-20 (NATO SS-20 Satan) has indeed been prolonged to a maximum life of 30 years, and it has been announced that a new missile of comparable throw weight is being designed to enter service around 2020.
He was talking about SS-18 and SS-20 is totally different one first tested in 80s.

[yasin_khan]

Russian missile regiment to go on duty with Topol M Dec.24



A regular missile regiment, armed with the Topol-M (SS-27 Stalin) ICBMs, will go on combat duty in the Ivanovo Region on December 24, the Russian Strategic Missile Forces said Friday.
"A regular missile regiment, armed with the latest Topol-M mobile missile systems, having no analogs in the world, will enter combat duty with the Teikovo missile formation," a SMF press release said.
The first two Topol-M mobile missile battalions, equipped with six mobile launch systems, have already been put on combat duty with the 54th Strategic Missile Division near the town of Teikovo, about 150 miles (240 km) northeast of Moscow.
At present, Russia deploys Topol-M ballistic missiles as the mainstay of its land-based component of the nuclear triad. As of 2008, Russia's SMF operated 48 silo-based and six mobile Topol-M missile systems.
The missile, with a range of about 7,000 miles (11,000 km), is said to be immune to any current and future U.S. missile defenses. It is capable of making evasive maneuvers to avoid a kill using terminal phase interceptors, and carries targeting countermeasures and decoys.
It is also shielded against radiation, electromagnetic pulse, nuclear blasts, and is designed to survive a hit from any known form of laser technology.




http://en.rian.ru/russia/20081219/118957217.html

[SkolZkiy]

in Russian it is RS-20 (РС-20) Voevoda and by NATO it is called SS-18 Satan

[Feanor]

in Russian it is RS-20 (РС-20) Voevoda and by NATO it is called SS-18 Satan

My apologies. I made a mistake. I called the RS-20, the SS-20. It's actually the SS-18. And yes it's life has been extended to a total of 30 years. Now as for the SS-20, it's a road-mobile missile that has been taken out of service.

[Wall83]

Skolzkiy is actually correct. RS-20 (NATO SS-20 Satan) has indeed been prolonged to a maximum life of 30 years, and it has been announced that a new missile of comparable throw weight is being designed to enter service around 2020.

As I understand the new RS-24 missile is supose to replace both the SS-18 ( R-36M2) and SS-19 (UR-100N) as russias heavy ICBMs. The first of these missiles could be deployed in 2009.
http://russianforces.org/blog/2008/06/deployment_of_rs24_may_begin_i.shtml
http://russianforces.org/blog/2008/06/first_rs-24_will_be_deployed_i.shtml

[Feanor]

I'm guessing the RS-24 will replace the UR-100N, and the new missile will eventually replace the RS-20.

[SkolZkiy]

RS-24 I think replace old types of topols and SS-19. SS-18 will stay in service till new ICBM put in service.

[Feanor]

The Bulava just failed a test launch. http://newsru.com/russia/23dec2008/bulavacrash.html

The first and second stages worked fine, but the third stage malfunctioned, and the missile self-liquidated. 3-4 more launches are planned next year, and final acceptance is planned for next year.

Well this makes for a total of 5 completely failed launches, 4 sort-of succesful, and 1 successful launch. Even if the remaineder of the launches (3-4) are succesful, the missile obviously isn't ready for service. They're either going to accept a poorly tested missile into service, or have to readjust the schedule again.

[SkolZkiy]

there will at least 5 more launches in 2009 before putting it in service. That was decided after this failure

[Wall83]

The Bulava just failed a test launch. http://newsru.com/russia/23dec2008/bulavacrash.html

The first and second stages worked fine, but the third stage malfunctioned, and the missile self-liquidated. 3-4 more launches are planned next year, and final acceptance is planned for next year.

Well this makes for a total of 5 completely failed launches, 4 sort-of succesful, and 1 successful launch. Even if the remaineder of the launches (3-4) are succesful, the missile obviously isn't ready for service. They're either going to accept a poorly tested missile into service, or have to readjust the schedule again.

As I said before, why the heck start serial production of a missile that clearly dont work. If it was my choice il would arm the Boreis with the New R-29RMU Sineva SLBM. It can carry 10 warheads insted of only 6 with the Bulava. It also have better range.

[SkolZkiy]

Sineva is heavier and larger than Bulava.
As for example there is a serial produce started of F-35 but it is still in progress. Every system requires some tests - and this is first time for the MIH to design NAVY ICBM so I think everything will be ok

[Wall83]

Here is some text about making the Sineva fit the pr955 Borie submarines. Could be operational by 2010 if they would start the work now.

http://en.rian.ru/analysis/20081114/118312605.html

[Feanor]

Here is some text about making the Sineva fit the pr955 Borie submarines. Could be operational by 2010 if they would start the work now.

http://en.rian.ru/analysis/20081114/118312605.html

Ilya Kramnik regularly writes articles to the tune of ditch Bulava, put in Sineva. Whether or not he is right, I don't know. However I seriously doubt it will happen. All indications so far seem to point to the continuation of the Bulava program.

[Wall83]

Ilya Kramnik regularly writes articles to the tune of ditch Bulava, put in Sineva. Whether or not he is right, I don't know. However I seriously doubt it will happen. All indications so far seem to point to the continuation of the Bulava program.

Probably true. However think about all the money and time they would have saved if they gone with the Sineva after the Bark missile failed back in the 90s. It would surley been ready by 2002/2003.

[Feanor]

The Sineva isn't a new missile, it's the R-29R modernized to the R-29RM. So yes it would have probably been finished. The subs for it are still not finished today, so it would not have made a very big difference.

[Wall83]

The Sineva isn't a new missile, it's the R-29R modernized to the R-29RM. So yes it would have probably been finished. The subs for it are still not finished today, so it would not have made a very big difference.

Yeah....but the only reason the Borei was delaid was becouse of the redesign of the missile complex in the late 1990s, to make it fit the new Bulava missiles. If they insted would have taken the complex for the already working R-29R missile it would have saved them many years and the submarine would have been launched much sooner. And the missile would also have been ready.

*Then the submarine missile complex would ofcourse look just as ugly as on the Delta-IV subs but hey, you cant have everything now can you ;)

[SkolZkiy]

The Sub isn't a produce of Carlo Lagerfeld it is a war machine. About Sineva - it is old missile and that's enough to retire them. the problem is that we all have no exact info about what's new in BULAVA comparing to SINEVA. This info is top-secret and I doubt we even know much about SINEVA except it's characteristicks.

[Feanor]

Yeah....but the only reason the Borei was delaid was becouse of the redesign of the missile complex in the late 1990s, to make it fit the new Bulava missiles. If they insted would have taken the complex for the already working R-29R missile it would have saved them many years and the submarine would have been launched much sooner. And the missile would also have been ready.

*Then the submarine missile complex would ofcourse look just as ugly as on the Delta-IV subs but hey, you cant have everything now can you ;)

I think the Borei was redesigned in the 90's because of the failure of the Bark, not because it was originally meant for the R-29R. The R-29R was never intended for the Boreis.

[SkolZkiy]

Feanor Bark wasn't a mistake - the problem was only that most of parts of Bark and testing systems were placed in Ukraine and that's the main reason of aborting this program.

[Feanor]

Yes the point I was making was that it seemed to me like Wall83 was under the impression that the Borei's were designed for the Sineva originally, and then have to be modified for the Bulava, when they were really designed for the Bark originally, and had to be modified for the Bulava.

[Wall83]

Yes the point I was making was that it seemed to me like Wall83 was under the impression that the Borei's were designed for the Sineva originally, and then have to be modified for the Bulava, when they were really designed for the Bark originally, and had to be modified for the Bulava.

That wasnt what I said. Borei was delayed becouse of the bark missile failing and a redesign of the Bories missile complex was nessesary to make the new Bulava missile fit the sub. I now very well that the R-29 missile was made for the Delta submarines. However if they would have picked the Sineva missile insted of the Bulava directley after the Bark failure the missile would have been ready much sooner.
I am sure that the Bulava is more advanced then the Sineva, but atleast it works.

[Feanor]

Again the limiting factor in terms of time would have been the readyness of the submarines, the first of which has yet to enter service. If they can manage to squeeze in a few additional tests, get maybe 6-7 in next year, and iron out the problems, we can very well expect the submarine and the missile to enter service at the same time.

[SkolZkiy]

I think Bulava will fly normally. just constructors need some experience and I think next missile will be much more successful.

[yasin_khan]

Russia Orders 70 Nuclear Missiles by 2011

The Russian military will commission more than 70 strategic nuclear missiles in the next three years, Interfax news agency quoted the deputy head of the military-industrial committee as saying Monday.
"More than 70 strategic missiles will be bought and delivered to troops in the next three years, more than 30 short-range Iskander missiles and a large number of booster rockets and aircraft," said Vladislav Putilin, whose department is in charge of weapons industries.
He added that the military will also acquire 48 combat jets, six spy drones, more than 60 military helicopters, 14 navy vessels and nearly 300 tanks.
The arms-procurement order for 2009-2011 will cost nearly four trillion rubles (100 billion euros, $140 billion), he said.
The announcement comes after last week's announcement that Russia's weapons arsenal is set to be bolstered by the arrival of new missiles with a range of 10,000 kilometers (6,200 miles) on December 24.
Russia's military is seeking to phase in newer weapons to replace Soviet-era war horses like the Stiletto and shake up the country's armed forces to make them more dynamic.
Meanwhile last week a Russian general said Moscow is ready to abandon plans for a wholesale renewal of its nuclear missile arsenal if the United States stops deployment of a controversial missile shield.
Moscow describes U.S. plans - spearheaded by outgoing U.S. President George W.
Bush - to deploy an anti-missile radar facility in the Czech Republic and interceptor missiles in Poland as a threat to its national security.
However the United States insists its missile shield is not directed against Russia and is instead meant to protect against "rogue states" like Iran.



http://www.defensenews.com/story.php?i=3874814&c=EUR&s=TOP

[Feanor]

Yasin khan you're once again posting news articles without any of your own commentary. You have been told repeatedly that this is against the rules.

[Wall83]

To reach the goal with 70 new strategic missiles by 2011 they would have to increase the production with about 100%, 23 missiles per year.
In 2008 11 new topol-m missiles will be activated.
http://russianforces.org/blog/2008/12/new_topol-m_regiment_in_teykov.shtml

[Feanor]

Topols aren't the only thing being produced. In 2007 Sineva's actually made up the majority of the missiles produced that year. With RS-24 production starting up, if Sineva production is kept at the 11 a year, that was done in 2007, it won't take much to reach the goal. However to put it in perspective, they are not increasing the size of the Russian arsenal. They are simply replacing older missiles. The Russian strategic arsenal is actually set to shrink slightly over this time period.

[Wall83]

Topols aren't the only thing being produced. In 2007 Sineva's actually made up the majority of the missiles produced that year. With RS-24 production starting up, if Sineva production is kept at the 11 a year, that was done in 2007, it won't take much to reach the goal. However to put it in perspective, they are not increasing the size of the Russian arsenal. They are simply replacing older missiles. The Russian strategic arsenal is actually set to shrink slightly over this time period.

Hm didnt think about the SLBM. And if they ever get the Bulava ready it will add some numbers. But then again, if they will commissed 3 Boreis by 2011 theirs missiles alone will add up to about 45. If you then add the new Sinevas it wont leave much room for any more landbased ICBM.