Warning

 

Close

Confirm Action

Are you sure you wish to do this?

Confirm Cancel
Member Login
Site Notices
10/20/2017 1:01:18 AM
9/22/2017 12:11:25 AM
Arrow Left Previous Page
Page / 2
Posted: 10/4/2005 5:49:02 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 10/4/2005 5:51:33 PM EDT by KA3B]
Russia tests new ICBM

Russia successfully test-launched a newly developed intercontinental ballistic missile Sept. 27, a Russian navy official said.


Ракетный крейсер "Дмитрий Донской". Фото с сайта предприятия "Севмаш"

The Bulava, a solid-fuel missile, blasted off from the nuclear submarine Dmitry Donskoy in the White Sea and hit its designated target in the far eastern Kamchatka Peninsula, chief naval spokesman Capt. Igor Dygalo said in a statement.



Russia’s navy is to get two newly equipped nuclear submarines in 2006, armed with the new Bulava intercontinental ballistic missiles, the navy commander said in April. The missiles have a range of 5,000 miles and are in the midst of a three-year testing program.

Each submarine will be equipped with 12 missiles, Interfax said.


MOSCOW, Sept. 27 (Xinhuanet) -- Russia successfully test-launched a new sea-based intercontinental ballistic missile on Tuesday, navy officials said.

The new-generation Bulava missile was launched from the Northern Fleet's strategic nuclear submarine Dmitry Donskoi in theWhite Sea to the Kura firing range on the Kamchatka Peninsula, a spokesman for Navy Commander Igor Dygalo told the Interfax news agency.

The missile's warhead hit the target on the range at a pre-calculated time in its first test-launch, the spokesman said.

The solid-fuel Bulava missile can carry up to ten individually guided nuclear warheads and has a range of up to 8,000 km. It is based on the Topol-M land-based intercontinental ballistic missile. The missile is to be fine-tuned in 2006.

"The successful launch confirmed the high readiness of the marine strategic missile forces and the reliability of the navy's combat command system," Dygalo said, according to Interfax.

The launch came in the same day as President Vladimir Putin used a live call-in show on television to tout Russia's new strategic missile systems.

"We are developing and will provide the army with new high-precision strategic missile systems that are unique and unlikely to appear earlier in any other country," Putin said during the nationally televised phone-in.

Putin described the new missile systems as "hypersonic and capable of changing course and height during flight," saying the missiles will be invulnerable to the missile defense systems being developed in some of Russia's partner countries.


New Russian Ballistic Missiles Are 'Unrivaled,' Putin Says
By Sergei Blagov
CNSNews.com Correspondent
September 29, 2005

Moscow (CNSNews.com) - The Kremlin hopes new weapons systems, including a sea-launched intercontinental ballistic missile successfully tested this week, will help restore Russia's geopolitical prominence.

The new-generation Bulava missile was launched Tuesday from a Northern Fleet strategic nuclear submarine in the White Sea, flying to a firing range on the Kamchatka peninsula, 12 time zones to the east.

The solid-fuel missile can carry up to ten individually guided nuclear warheads and has a range of up to 8,000 kilometers (5,000 miles).

Defense Minister Sergei Ivanov Wednesday hailed the successful test, saying the armed forces would deploy the new weapon by the end of 2007.

Bulava missiles have been designed for Russia's new Borey-class nuclear submarines, two of which are being built and will be commissioned in 2006 and 2007.

The test-launch came on the same day as President Vladimir Putin used a live call-in television show to tout Russia's new strategic missile systems.

"We are developing and will provide the army with new high-precision strategic missile systems that are unique and unlikely to appear earlier in any other country," he said.

Putin described the new missiles as "hypersonic and capable of changing course and height during flight." They would have "no rivals" and be "practically invulnerable," he added.

Moscow has long stressed that it has the capability to overwhelm a U.S. missile defense umbrella due to the size of its ballistic missile arsenal.

After President Bush pulled out of the 1972 Antiballistic Missile Treaty in order to pursue the missile defense program, Russia announced it was no longer bound by previous agreements that prohibited missiles with multiple warheads.

Having multiple warheads would reduce a weapon's vulnerability to missile defense systems which are designed to intercept and destroy one warhead at a time.

The missile developments are the latest indication of Putin's efforts to stress Russia's continuing military capabilities, 14 years after the Soviet Union disintegrated.

Last fall, Russia said it planned to develop nuclear weapons which other nuclear powers did not yet have and were unlikely to develop.

In February 2004, Russia said it successfully tested a new strategic supersonic system allowing altitude and course maneuvering of long-range missiles, to avoid U.S. defenses.

In October 2003, Putin said Russia retained the right to deliver preemptive military strikes.

19:02 | 28/ 09/ 2005

MOSCOW, September 28 (RIA Novosti) - Russian Defense Minister Sergei Ivanov Wednesday praised tests of the new Bulava missile system, which the Armed Forces will get by the end of 2007.

"We focused financial and administrative resources on designing the fourth-generation Bulava system," Ivanov told a conference on the 60th anniversary of the Russian nuclear industry. "The Armed Forces will get these weapons by the end of 2007."

"A new RS-30 missile, a part of the Bulava missile system, was successfully launched by the Dmitry Donskoi nuclear submarine from an underwater position Tuesday," he said.

Bulava may also be combined with the Topol-M surface-based missile complex, the minister added.

Ivanov said the ministry would help nuclear power companies.

"We understand that sometimes the Russian nuclear shield needs protection in the new market economy conditions," he said. "The Defense Ministry will give you [the nuclear industry] its protection."

SS-NX-30

Country: Russian Federation
Alternate Name: Bulava
Class: SLBM
Basing: Submarine launched
Propulsion: 3-stage solid
Range: 10,000 km
Status: Development

Details

Russian Designation: Bulava

The Russian SS-NX-30, or Bulava, is an intercontinental-range, submarine launched, solid propellant ballistic missile. It is a submarine launched version of the SS-27, which represents the pinnacle of ballistic missile technology and is currently under development. The SS-27 was developed shortly after the fall of the Soviet Union and is the first completely Russian missile design. Current Russian accounts claim it (and therefore the SS-NX-30) is invulnerable to any modern anti-ballistic missile (ABM) defenses. Yuriy Solomonov, director of the Moscow Institute of Heat Technology and designer-general of the Topol family of missiles, has stated that the SS-27 will be the foundation of the Russian strategic nuclear arsenal by 2015. In the same way, the SS-NX-30 will doubtlessly be the foundation of the submarine-launched ballistic missile force.

The SS-27 is currently portrayed as being immune to any ABM defense the United States can put into being. The missile is capable of making evasive maneuvers as it approaches the target, enabling it to evade any terminal phase interceptors. It almost certainly also carries countermeasures and decoys to increase the chances of its success. The warhead is shielded against radiation, electromagnetic interference and physical disturbance; previous missiles could be disabled by detonating a nuclear warhead within ten kilometers (6 miles). This vulnerability is the basis behind the use of nuclear ground-based interceptors, to detonate or damage the missile before it reaches its target. However, the SS-27 is designed to be able to withstand nuclear blasts closer than 500 m, a difficult interception when combined with the terminal phase speed and maneuverability. While the boost phase is the most vulnerable time for the SS-27, it remains protected. Hidden safely within missile silos and mobile launchers, a successful boost-phase interceptor would have to be fired from near or within Russian borders or from space. The SS-27 is also designed to survive a strike from any laser technology available, rendering any current space-based laser useless. The missile highlights the need for considerably more research into missile defenses, as the United States is currently defenseless while Russia is protected by a functional defense system.

The SS-27 can currently strike any target within the continental United States and the placement of SS-NX-30 missiles would enable worldwide deployment. The placement of such advanced missiles on modern submarines would make it nearly impossible to successfully prevent a missile launch, while current ABM technology is insufficient to prevent its successful impact. As a solid propellant design, it can be maintained on alert for prolonged periods of time and can launch within minutes of being given the order. Its confirmed single 550 kT warhead is sufficient for the depopulation of cities, which combined with its survivability, makes it an ideal retaliatory weapon. The SS-27 and the SS-NX-30 enables Russia to guarantee a successful nuclear response.

The SS-27 and the SS-NX-30 also have considerable utility as a first strike weapon. A successful first strike hinges upon the destruction of the enemy nuclear force, and these missiles should be capable of this task. Though the reported accuracy is insufficient for this, current guidance technology could easily be used to develop this capacity. The accuracy of 350 m CEP reported is strangely low given previous US and Russian missile designs with considerably higher accuracy. With a higher accuracy, the single warhead load would be easily sufficient to destroy a missile silo, but the placement of Multiple Independent Reentry Vehicles (MIRVs) would allow for the destruction of entire missile groups. The SS-27 design is easily compatible for MIRVs, though it likely must sacrifice some of its ability to penetrate ABM defense systems. Solomonov has stated openly that the TEL launched SS-27 will carry four to six warheads along with decoys, which implies the same capability for the submarine-launched version.

The SS-NX-30 is identical to the SS-27 except for a slight decrease in range resulting from the conversion for submarine launch. It has a range of 10,000 km (6,214 miles) and is reported to be equipped with a 550 kT yield nuclear warheads. It is reported that up to six MIRVs can be placed at the cost of removing warhead shielding and decoys, reducing its ability to penetrate ABM defenses. It uses a Post-Boost Vehicle (PBV) system to deploy its warhead(s) using a digital inertial navigation system with a GLOSNASS (equivalent to Global Position Satellite) receiver. This achieves a reported accuracy of 350 m CEP, but this accuracy is lower than is reasonable to believe, given modern guidance systems and previous US and Russian missiles. The SS-27 has a launch weight of 47,200 kg with a length of 21.9 m and a maximum width of 1.9 m. It uses a three-stage solid propellant engine.

The development of the SS-27 began in the late 1980s, though it was redesigned in 1992 as the first totally Russian designed and built missile. The development of the SS-NX-30, almost identical to the SS-27, was first reported in 2001. The SS-NX-30 is currently under development and is expected to enter test launches upon a converted type 941 Akula (‘Typhoon’) class nuclear submarine. The Bulava will be fitted aboard the ‘Borey’ class nuclear submarines, the first of which is expected to be commissioned in 2006. The first test launch is planned to take place by the end of 2004.

There is little risk of proliferation of SS-NX-30 technology by the Russians. Despite possible issues with the SS-27, few nations have missile submarines capable to deploying SS-NX-30 missiles. In addition, the spread of the technology would undermine the effectiveness of Russian ABM defenses and leave Russia vulnerable. However, there is the possibility for the technology to be stolen by China, the only other nation that might have the capability and need to integrate it.(1)

Footnotes

Duncan Lennox, Jane’s Strategic Weapons Systems 42 (Surrey: Jane’s Information Group, January 2005), 188-190.
Link Posted: 10/4/2005 5:51:10 PM EDT
Can't wait for them to start selling these to China.
Link Posted: 10/4/2005 5:54:26 PM EDT

Originally Posted By motown_steve:
Can't wait for them to start selling these to China.



I'd immagine they intend to AIM THEM at China, more likely...
Link Posted: 10/4/2005 6:08:51 PM EDT
That's a big sucker.


</red october mode>
Link Posted: 10/4/2005 6:15:16 PM EDT
... That monster is just, flat amazing
Link Posted: 10/4/2005 6:23:12 PM EDT

Originally Posted By Dave_A:

Originally Posted By motown_steve:
Can't wait for them to start selling these to China.



I'd immagine they intend to AIM THEM at China, more likely...



I'm thinking they will probably sell them to China and point them at them. Russia and China will be something we have to deal with in the future. People seem to think they just because Wal-Mart has huge contracts with China, that we won't have to deal with them.. And that's just ignorant. Makes me laugh everytime I read it.
Link Posted: 10/4/2005 6:28:41 PM EDT
Wait...let me see if I get this straight. The United States pays Russia billions of dollars every year to help them safely decommission their fleet of aging nuclear-powered rustbucket submarines. Then at the same time, Russia is building new boomers and new missiles to go along with them. Good job, Congress! Just keep pissing our money away! It seems to be the only thing they're good at....
Link Posted: 10/4/2005 6:32:03 PM EDT

Originally Posted By libertyforall:
Wait...let me see if I get this straight. The United States pays Russia billions of dollars every year to help them safely decommission their fleet of aging nuclear-powered rustbucket submarines. Then at the same time, Russia is building new boomers and new missiles to go along with them. Good job, Congress! Just keep pissing our money away! It seems to be the only thing they're good at....



Their subs are mostly pier queens, as the Russian Navy has little money to operate except for a exercise or two.
Link Posted: 10/4/2005 6:32:13 PM EDT
Tag for ANdy's reply...
Link Posted: 10/4/2005 6:33:27 PM EDT
More Russian junk!
Link Posted: 10/4/2005 6:38:29 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 10/4/2005 6:39:04 PM EDT by PAEBR332]
.
Link Posted: 10/4/2005 6:47:03 PM EDT
I hope they have tried them from a disabled sub, stranded on the bottom of the ocean. That would be a more realistic Russian sub test.
Link Posted: 10/4/2005 6:49:34 PM EDT
The Russians sure like that Topol system. Has a very fast boost rate.
Link Posted: 10/4/2005 6:53:46 PM EDT

Originally Posted By motown_steve:
Can't wait for them to start selling these to China.



Ya beat me to it.
Link Posted: 10/4/2005 6:57:14 PM EDT

Originally Posted By Pangea:
I hope they have tried them from a disabled sub, stranded on the bottom of the ocean. That would be a more realistic Russian sub test.



roflol.
Link Posted: 10/4/2005 6:58:47 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 10/4/2005 6:59:16 PM EDT by JaredB]
OK First is it a SLBM not a ICBM. A submarine is not a continent therefore it cannot be a ICBM. The press is ignorant. But that is nothing new. Submarine Launched Ballistic Missile.
Link Posted: 10/4/2005 6:58:50 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 10/4/2005 8:05:10 PM EDT by warlord]

Originally Posted By libertyforall:
Wait...let me see if I get this straight. The United States pays Russia billions of dollars every year to help them safely decommission their fleet of aging nuclear-powered rustbucket submarines. Then at the same time, Russia is building new boomers and new missiles to go along with them. Good job, Congress! Just keep pissing our money away! It seems to be the only thing they're good at....


That's right, the USA govt/ taxpayer is subsidizing the Ruskie's nuclear sub-launched missle development. If the USA hadn't contributed the to decommisiion the subs, the Ruskies probably would take a lot longer to develop the new missles. Just curious, whose rein of presidency was this under anyways?
Link Posted: 10/4/2005 7:29:49 PM EDT
I din't know Russia could still afford to operate subs??
Link Posted: 10/5/2005 2:24:38 AM EDT

Originally Posted By JaredB:
OK First is it a SLBM not a ICBM. A submarine is not a continent therefore it cannot be a ICBM. The press is ignorant. But that is nothing new. Submarine Launched Ballistic Missile.



Ahem.

InterContinental Ballistic Missile refers to the missile's capability of traveling across entire continents or from one continent to another, not where it is launched from. YOU are ignorant.
Link Posted: 10/5/2005 2:43:47 AM EDT

Originally Posted By Swindle1984:

Originally Posted By JaredB:
OK First is it a SLBM not a ICBM. A submarine is not a continent therefore it cannot be a ICBM. The press is ignorant. But that is nothing new. Submarine Launched Ballistic Missile.



Ahem.

InterContinental Ballistic Missile refers to the missile's capability of traveling across entire continents or from one continent to another, not where it is launched from. YOU are ignorant.



Actually, he's right. It IS an SLBM, if you want to be technically accurate. I believe the classes of missles are:

TBM = Theater Ballistic Missiles (FROG, SCUD, Kytusha(sp?))
MRBM = Medium Range Ballistic Missle, I think some of the Korean missles fit here but no specific example. I could be wrong, but I think this category is given to truck and rail transportable weapon systems.
ICBM = Everyone knows this one.
SLBM = Submarine Launched Ballistic Missle (Polaris, Trident, and whatever the Russians and Brits have).

Each category also has a range and speed that classifies them in a given category (TBM v. MRBM or MRBM v. ICBM, etc), and it's been too many years now and I don't remember what the specific numbers are for each category. The SLBM is pretty easy to categorize, however.
Link Posted: 10/5/2005 2:54:57 AM EDT

Originally Posted By Swindle1984:

Originally Posted By JaredB:
OK First is it a SLBM not a ICBM. A submarine is not a continent therefore it cannot be a ICBM. The press is ignorant. But that is nothing new. Submarine Launched Ballistic Missile.



Ahem.

InterContinental Ballistic Missile refers to the missile's capability of traveling across entire continents or from one continent to another, not where it is launched from. YOU are ignorant.



The shit some people will bicker about. If it's launched from a submarine, it's an FBM or an SLBM. That would be Fleet Ballistic Missile, or Sumarine Launched Ballistic Missile. This is the OFFICIAL classification of the Trident II D5 (UGM-133A). You should maybe look that up before you start calling Jared ignorant.

That being said, who cares if Russia launched one? A single Trident Nuclear Submarine can carry 144 nuclear warheads (6 on each of the 24 UMG-133As), or alternately 14 in each missile trading up to maximum payload while sacrificing range, for a total of 336 warheads . Last I checked, that was enough to knock Russia back into the stone age.
Link Posted: 10/5/2005 3:38:24 AM EDT
Russia's subfleet:


Link Posted: 10/5/2005 4:06:29 AM EDT
Russia's mad l33t uber sub fl33t will pwn us w/ teh seekrit weppin o' mass destruction/pwnage.

Actually, I would be more afraid of the Russian fleet killing me with Tetanus, and I just updated that shit a year ago.
Link Posted: 10/5/2005 4:10:09 AM EDT

Originally Posted By RyanAR15:

Originally Posted By Swindle1984:

Originally Posted By JaredB:
OK First is it a SLBM not a ICBM. A submarine is not a continent therefore it cannot be a ICBM. The press is ignorant. But that is nothing new. Submarine Launched Ballistic Missile.



Ahem.

InterContinental Ballistic Missile refers to the missile's capability of traveling across entire continents or from one continent to another, not where it is launched from. YOU are ignorant.



Actually, he's right. It IS an SLBM, if you want to be technically accurate. I believe the classes of missles are:

TBM = Theater Ballistic Missiles (FROG, SCUD, Kytusha(sp?))
MRBM = Medium Range Ballistic Missle, I think some of the Korean missles fit here but no specific example. I could be wrong, but I think this category is given to truck and rail transportable weapon systems.
ICBM = Everyone knows this one.
SLBM = Submarine Launched Ballistic Missle (Polaris, Trident, and whatever the Russians and Brits have).

Each category also has a range and speed that classifies them in a given category (TBM v. MRBM or MRBM v. ICBM, etc), and it's been too many years now and I don't remember what the specific numbers are for each category. The SLBM is pretty easy to categorize, however.


haha you guys are all ignorant
Link Posted: 10/5/2005 6:02:15 AM EDT

Originally Posted By 2tired2run:
I din't know Russia could still afford to operate subs??

They don't. Russia's idea of sub-based nuclear deterrance is to run a phone cable from Red Square to their nucular subs tied up at the dock. If the SHTF, they launch from their own berths and hope there isn't a malfunction.
Link Posted: 10/5/2005 7:37:40 AM EDT

Originally Posted By KlubMarcus:

Originally Posted By 2tired2run:
I din't know Russia could still afford to operate subs??

They don't. Russia's idea of sub-based nuclear deterrance is to run a phone cable from Red Square to their nucular subs tied up at the dock. If the SHTF, they launch from their own berths and hope there isn't a malfunction.




LoL, now that sounds like the Russia we know and love
Link Posted: 10/5/2005 7:53:47 AM EDT

Originally Posted By Swindle1984:

Originally Posted By JaredB:
OK First is it a SLBM not a ICBM. A submarine is not a continent therefore it cannot be a ICBM. The press is ignorant. But that is nothing new. Submarine Launched Ballistic Missile.



Ahem.

InterContinental Ballistic Missile refers to the missile's capability of traveling across entire continents or from one continent to another, not where it is launched from. YOU are ignorant.


Ahem.
First before you call me ignorant you should know I am in the United States Navy, and was assigned to a Trident submarine (SSBN 731B) for 4 years. I received my dolpins on that boat. I qualified Chief of the Watch on that boat. so STFU you misinformed idiot
Link Posted: 10/5/2005 8:33:18 AM EDT
The articles are mostly propaganda crap. I love this line:


The missile highlights the need for considerably more research into missile defenses, as the United States is currently defenseless while Russia is protected by a functional defense system.


Hahahaha.
Link Posted: 10/5/2005 8:50:35 AM EDT
tag
Link Posted: 10/5/2005 8:51:37 AM EDT
taggage...
Link Posted: 10/5/2005 8:57:34 AM EDT

Originally Posted By eodtech2000:

Originally Posted By libertyforall:
Wait...let me see if I get this straight. The United States pays Russia billions of dollars every year to help them safely decommission their fleet of aging nuclear-powered rustbucket submarines. Then at the same time, Russia is building new boomers and new missiles to go along with them. Good job, Congress! Just keep pissing our money away! It seems to be the only thing they're good at....



Their subs are mostly pier queens, as the Russian Navy has little money to operate except for a exercise or two.



So what? Do you think they cannot launch from alongside the pier? Any good targets within 5000 miles of the pier?

BZ to libertyforall!

Link Posted: 10/5/2005 9:15:02 AM EDT

Originally Posted By Submariner:

Originally Posted By eodtech2000:

Originally Posted By libertyforall:
Wait...let me see if I get this straight. The United States pays Russia billions of dollars every year to help them safely decommission their fleet of aging nuclear-powered rustbucket submarines. Then at the same time, Russia is building new boomers and new missiles to go along with them. Good job, Congress! Just keep pissing our money away! It seems to be the only thing they're good at....



Their subs are mostly pier queens, as the Russian Navy has little money to operate except for a exercise or two.



So what? Do you think they cannot launch from alongside the pier? Any good targets within 5000 miles of the pier?

BZ to libertyforall!




Sure they can launch from the pier but they are so much easier to keep watch over just sitting there. Just a tad more difficult when one is under way out in the ocean or under the ice caps. Also who knows just how well they are maintained due to lack of money and do the Russians keep them armed sitting out in the pier all year.
Link Posted: 10/5/2005 9:22:34 AM EDT

Originally Posted By Dave_A:

Originally Posted By motown_steve:
Can't wait for them to start selling these to China.



I'd immagine they intend to AIM THEM at China, more likely...



+1

China's new diesel electric toys are no match.

FWIW Japan has a larger surface fleet than Russia.
Link Posted: 10/5/2005 9:30:42 AM EDT
If they aren't lying, then they did manage to fire a missle from near Murmansk, which is close to Finland, all the way over to near Japan, without it falling into the middle of Siberia and landing in that stolen lake.

Link Posted: 10/5/2005 9:32:48 AM EDT
Anyone else still think the fact that the US is the only nuclear power that can't produce new warheads is a good thing.

We need to build a replacement to Rocky Flats, and we need to have built it 5 years ago.
Link Posted: 10/5/2005 9:40:00 AM EDT
And how will this help them against the chechens? They continue to crumble from within and boast of a new missle.
Link Posted: 10/5/2005 11:15:51 AM EDT

Originally Posted By Submariner:

So what? Do you think they cannot launch from alongside the pier? Any good targets within 5000 miles of the pier?




I'll bet you dollars to donughts if they try it would prove amusing.

You should watch how a SLBM is launched sometime, it is NOT done while they are sitting out of the water.
Link Posted: 10/5/2005 11:19:07 AM EDT
Aren't they a little late?

Someone tell them the cold war is over?
Link Posted: 10/5/2005 11:24:16 AM EDT

Originally Posted By CitySlicker:
Tag for ANdy's reply...



And dport and LWilde and the other squids.
Link Posted: 10/5/2005 11:27:55 AM EDT

Originally Posted By Forest:

Originally Posted By Submariner:

So what? Do you think they cannot launch from alongside the pier? Any good targets within 5000 miles of the pier?




I'll bet you dollars to donughts if they try it would prove amusing.

You should watch how a SLBM is launched sometime, it is NOT done while they are sitting out of the water.



Hmm, is there any particular reason they couldn't launch while surfaced?
Link Posted: 10/5/2005 11:53:12 AM EDT

Originally Posted By mmx1:

Originally Posted By Forest:

Originally Posted By Submariner:

So what? Do you think they cannot launch from alongside the pier? Any good targets within 5000 miles of the pier?




I'll bet you dollars to donughts if they try it would prove amusing.

You should watch how a SLBM is launched sometime, it is NOT done while they are sitting out of the water.



Hmm, is there any particular reason they couldn't launch while surfaced?



Not that it's impossible, but it's risky (the US has tried it).

Normally when you launch you generate enough pressure to push the missle out of the tube and through the water (bouyancy helps here). The missle will just clear the water than start to fall. It's on that fall when the engine's ignite.

Doing it out of the water means you better pray your generator had enough oomph to get the missle to clear the sub w/o using boyancy and still have enough room to drop before the engines ignite. (you don't want the nozzles crashing down on the hull).

It also means you have to keep the other tubes closed or risk damaging the other missles (no ripple fire). You're also going to have ballast issues which you'll have to adjust fore after each launch, as your sub is now 65 or so tons lighter as now water is filling up the now empty launch tube.

You're better off putting her at the bottom of the bay to launch.
Link Posted: 10/5/2005 12:05:02 PM EDT

Originally Posted By Armed_Scientist:
Anyone else still think the fact that the US is the only nuclear power that can't produce new warheads is a good thing.

We need to build a replacement to Rocky Flats, and we need to have built it 5 years ago.


Don't confuse payload and the delivery system.
Link Posted: 10/5/2005 12:06:22 PM EDT

Originally Posted By eodtech2000:

Originally Posted By Submariner:

Originally Posted By eodtech2000:

Originally Posted By libertyforall:
Wait...let me see if I get this straight. The United States pays Russia billions of dollars every year to help them safely decommission their fleet of aging nuclear-powered rustbucket submarines. Then at the same time, Russia is building new boomers and new missiles to go along with them. Good job, Congress! Just keep pissing our money away! It seems to be the only thing they're good at....



Their subs are mostly pier queens, as the Russian Navy has little money to operate except for a exercise or two.



So what? Do you think they cannot launch from alongside the pier? Any good targets within 5000 miles of the pier?

BZ to libertyforall!




Sure they can launch from the pier but they are so much easier to keep watch over just sitting there. Just a tad more difficult when one is under way out in the ocean or under the ice caps. Also who knows just how well they are maintained due to lack of money and do the Russians keep them armed sitting out in the pier all year.


SLBMs(FYI that IS the proper term) on subs that remain in port do not give you strategic deterrance, which is their primary mission.
Link Posted: 10/5/2005 12:07:52 PM EDT

Originally Posted By mmx1:

Originally Posted By CitySlicker:
Tag for ANdy's reply...



And dport and LWilde and the other squids.


I think Jared covered it well.
Link Posted: 10/5/2005 12:10:38 PM EDT

Originally Posted By Forest: You're better off putting her at the bottom of the bay to launch.
That's what we're counting on! A Typhoon is a BIG sub, when it launches one in relatively shallow water... bad things are bound to happen.
Link Posted: 10/5/2005 12:13:33 PM EDT

Originally Posted By JaredB:

Originally Posted By Swindle1984:

Originally Posted By JaredB:
OK First is it a SLBM not a ICBM. A submarine is not a continent therefore it cannot be a ICBM. The press is ignorant. But that is nothing new. Submarine Launched Ballistic Missile.



Ahem.

InterContinental Ballistic Missile refers to the missile's capability of traveling across entire continents or from one continent to another, not where it is launched from. YOU are ignorant.


Ahem.
First before you call me ignorant you should know I am in the United States Navy, and was assigned to a Trident submarine (SSBN 731B) for 4 years. I received my dolpins on that boat. I qualified Chief of the Watch on that boat. so STFU you misinformed idiot



So what? I flew F-22's in 'nam for the USMC SEAL team for eight years and then was a space shuttle door gunner for three years before retiring and becoming a mercenary for hire.
Link Posted: 10/5/2005 12:14:08 PM EDT

Originally Posted By dport:

Originally Posted By mmx1:

Originally Posted By CitySlicker:
Tag for ANdy's reply...



And dport and LWilde and the other squids.


I think Jared covered it well.



Better then I could have, my boat (SSN 611) carried caribbean rum in our missile tubes ;p
Link Posted: 10/5/2005 12:15:39 PM EDT
Only worried about it when it goes up for sale to China, N.Korea, and elsewhere.
Link Posted: 10/6/2005 6:08:15 AM EDT
[Last Edit: 10/6/2005 6:09:03 AM EDT by 2tired2run]

Originally Posted By Mattl:
Only worried about it when it goes up for sale to China, N.Korea, and elsewhere.




China would be my bet: Chinese wealth + out of work Russina scientist and military industry = US Problem
Link Posted: 10/6/2005 6:12:55 AM EDT
Bought and paid for by US! We fund deactivation of the old shit so they can build new ones. Meanwhile our Peacekeepers went 100% inactive last month.
Link Posted: 10/6/2005 6:15:08 AM EDT
Looks like the Cold War never really ended, we just quit playing.
Arrow Left Previous Page
Page / 2
Top Top