This is a discussion on Russia tests new missiles within the Missiles & WMDs forum, part of the Global Defense & Military category; Originally Posted by SkolZkiy
in Russian it is RS-20 (РС-20) Voevoda and by NATO it is called SS-18 Satan
My ...
Location: Under your bed. No seriously, take a look.
Posts: 11,138
Threads:
Quote:
Originally Posted by SkolZkiy
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.
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.
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.
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.
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
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.
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.
Location: Under your bed. No seriously, take a look.
Posts: 11,138
Threads:
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.
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
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.
Location: Under your bed. No seriously, take a look.
Posts: 11,138
Threads:
Quote:
Originally Posted by Wall83
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.
