Register here

Author Topic: A peek on future american SLBMs and ICBMs  (Read 157574 times)

Offline Vahe Demirjian

  • CLEARANCE: Confidential
  • *
  • Posts: 87
  • I really should change my personal text
Re: A peek on future american SLBMs and ICBMs
« Reply #450 on: May 20, 2013, 06:05:08 pm »
It is interesting to speculate that due to an expanded target set if you include countries like N Korea, China and Iran the MMIII replacement might have to be larger than the MMIII. The first post on this thread says a range up to 26,000km is needed for truly global reach. Combined with the 'desire' to have D5 replacement commonality are we going to get an 83" diameter ICBM?

There are targets in the current portfolio that can only be held at risk by nuclear weapons - and many of those targets are not worth crossing that threshold. This is one of the (many) reasons that DoD wants alternatives like conventional prompt global strike. Given the current political climate that alone may push the US to develop new ballistic missiles, with conventional warheads as well as high precision unconventional warheads. As it is now, a conventional strike capability could be had in the near term by tail kit upgrades to Trident and Minuteman, but politics is not letting that happen.

So instead we may get a conventional strike missile, and *possibly* a new ICBM. If the SSBN-X gets enough momentum, a new SLBM is also possible.

Do we really need to speculate on a future SLBM? The UGM-133 has been in service for 23 years and the current engineering analysis suggests that the UGM-133 could stay in service until 2045. Regardless of whether or not the US will ever replace the entire Minuteman fleet with a new ICBM armed with conventional warheads, I can guarantee you that the US will retire its Minuteman fleet and give up its ICBM capability only if Korean reunification happens and  we see pacifist leaders in France, the UK, and Russia who advocate the abolition of nuclear weapons on ethical and moral grounds (contamination of the environment with radiation).

Offline bobbymike

  • CLEARANCE: Top Secret
  • ***
  • Posts: 8346
Re: A peek on future american SLBMs and ICBMs
« Reply #451 on: May 20, 2013, 06:24:04 pm »
It is interesting to speculate that due to an expanded target set if you include countries like N Korea, China and Iran the MMIII replacement might have to be larger than the MMIII. The first post on this thread says a range up to 26,000km is needed for truly global reach. Combined with the 'desire' to have D5 replacement commonality are we going to get an 83" diameter ICBM?

There are targets in the current portfolio that can only be held at risk by nuclear weapons - and many of those targets are not worth crossing that threshold. This is one of the (many) reasons that DoD wants alternatives like conventional prompt global strike. Given the current political climate that alone may push the US to develop new ballistic missiles, with conventional warheads as well as high precision unconventional warheads. As it is now, a conventional strike capability could be had in the near term by tail kit upgrades to Trident and Minuteman, but politics is not letting that happen.

So instead we may get a conventional strike missile, and *possibly* a new ICBM. If the SSBN-X gets enough momentum, a new SLBM is also possible.

Do we really need to speculate on a future SLBM? The UGM-133 has been in service for 23 years and the current engineering analysis suggests that the UGM-133 could stay in service until 2045. Regardless of whether or not the US will ever replace the entire Minuteman fleet with a new ICBM armed with conventional warheads, I can guarantee you that the US will retire its Minuteman fleet and give up its ICBM capability only if Korean reunification happens and  we see pacifist leaders in France, the UK, and Russia who advocate the abolition of nuclear weapons on ethical and moral grounds (contamination of the environment with radiation).

Please don't tell me what I 'need' do or not do thank you! I need and want to speculate on the future of ALL nuclear Triad and warhead programs don't post if you don't feel it is necessary. If you haven't noticed there are threads on Next Generation Bombers and 6th generation fighters that may not be deployed until mid-century as well. One of the great things about this sight is that you have many experts who can offer informed speculation based on their knowledge and experience.
 
Lower Ohio-Class Replacement Cost Tied To VA-Class Multiyear Deal
The Navy must have a multiyear contracting arrangement involving both the Virginia-class submarine and Ohio-class replacement submarine programs in order to achieve significant cost savings across both ship classes, particularly if the service expects to hit a $4.9-billion target for the Ohio replacement effort, a service official told Inside the Navy last week.
 
Books are the quietest and most constant of friends; they are the most accessible and wisest of counselors, and the most patient of teachers.

Charles W. Eliot

Offline sferrin

  • Senior Member
  • CLEARANCE: Top Secret
  • **
  • Posts: 10624
Re: A peek on future american SLBMs and ICBMs
« Reply #452 on: May 20, 2013, 07:05:19 pm »
It is interesting to speculate that due to an expanded target set if you include countries like N Korea, China and Iran the MMIII replacement might have to be larger than the MMIII. The first post on this thread says a range up to 26,000km is needed for truly global reach. Combined with the 'desire' to have D5 replacement commonality are we going to get an 83" diameter ICBM?

There are targets in the current portfolio that can only be held at risk by nuclear weapons - and many of those targets are not worth crossing that threshold. This is one of the (many) reasons that DoD wants alternatives like conventional prompt global strike. Given the current political climate that alone may push the US to develop new ballistic missiles, with conventional warheads as well as high precision unconventional warheads. As it is now, a conventional strike capability could be had in the near term by tail kit upgrades to Trident and Minuteman, but politics is not letting that happen.

So instead we may get a conventional strike missile, and *possibly* a new ICBM. If the SSBN-X gets enough momentum, a new SLBM is also possible.

Do we really need to speculate on a future SLBM?

If you don't like it nobody is forcing you to read it are they?   ::)
"DARPA Hard"  It ain't what it use to be.

Offline quellish

  • Top Contributor
  • CLEARANCE: Top Secret
  • ***
  • Posts: 2031
  • I am not actually here.
Re: A peek on future american SLBMs and ICBMs
« Reply #453 on: May 20, 2013, 10:03:11 pm »
Regardless of whether or not the US will ever replace the entire Minuteman fleet with a new ICBM armed with conventional warheads,

I do not believe anyone is suggesting that all of the Minutemen be replaced with conventional strike missiles. Again, because of political reasons the conventional strike missile will be very different than an ICBM. The legislature *wants* it that way.

However, as a side effect of conventional strike development some Minuteman could be retired. Accuracy upgrades developed for conventional strike may be applied to the Minuteman force and allow the overall number of missiles to shrink.

I can guarantee you that the US will retire its Minuteman fleet and give up its ICBM capability only if Korean reunification happens and  we see pacifist leaders in France, the UK, and Russia who advocate the abolition of nuclear weapons on ethical and moral grounds (contamination of the environment with radiation).

Even if those things did happen it is very unlikely that the US would retire it's land based ICBM force.

Offline KJ_Lesnick

  • CLEARANCE: Top Secret
  • ***
  • Posts: 1010
Re: A peek on future american SLBMs and ICBMs
« Reply #454 on: June 20, 2013, 07:23:35 pm »

Well all I can say is the world will get interesting once we create an unmanned sub with full autonomy that can launch cruise missiles and ICBM's...

Offline bobbymike

  • CLEARANCE: Top Secret
  • ***
  • Posts: 8346
Re: A peek on future american SLBMs and ICBMs
« Reply #455 on: July 18, 2013, 09:43:43 am »
RAND study working title - Future ICBM Finding Stability With A New Land Based Deterrent Force has a publication number MG1210 meaning it will be published soon.  ;D
Books are the quietest and most constant of friends; they are the most accessible and wisest of counselors, and the most patient of teachers.

Charles W. Eliot

Offline Grey Havoc

  • Senior Member
  • CLEARANCE: Top Secret
  • **
  • Posts: 7575
  • _ \\ //
Re: A peek on future american SLBMs and ICBMs
« Reply #456 on: July 18, 2013, 12:42:08 pm »

Well all I can say is the world will get interesting once we create an unmanned sub with full autonomy that can launch cruise missiles and ICBM's...


There may well be a downside to that....
To the Stars

Offline bobbymike

  • CLEARANCE: Top Secret
  • ***
  • Posts: 8346
Re: A peek on future american SLBMs and ICBMs
« Reply #457 on: May 09, 2018, 06:59:56 am »
https://www.forbes.com/sites/lorenthompson/2018/05/08/rocket-motors-on-nuclear-missiles-become-a-test-case-for-trump-industrial-policy/#557148fc2cf4

Quote
The Minuteman III replacement, officially known as the Ground Based Strategic Deterrent, will require hundreds of large SRMs and thus drive domestic demand for such systems through 2030. It is the last opportunity for Aerojet Rocketdyne, one of two surviving U.S. manufacturers of large solid rocket motors, to stay in the business. Orbital ATK, the other source, has gradually won the right to supply all other domestic users, meaning that if Aerojet doesn't get a piece of the action on the new Air Force missiles, it is done with large SRMs.
Books are the quietest and most constant of friends; they are the most accessible and wisest of counselors, and the most patient of teachers.

Charles W. Eliot

Offline flateric

  • Deputy Administrator
  • CLEARANCE: Top Secret
  • ****
  • Posts: 8426
Re: A peek on future american SLBMs and ICBMs
« Reply #458 on: May 09, 2018, 07:11:19 am »
"There are many disbelievers in
stealth, more than a few of them truly technically ignorant and proud of it." Sherm Mullin, Skunk Works

Offline sferrin

  • Senior Member
  • CLEARANCE: Top Secret
  • **
  • Posts: 10624
Re: A peek on future american SLBMs and ICBMs
« Reply #459 on: May 09, 2018, 07:39:22 am »
https://www.forbes.com/sites/lorenthompson/2018/05/08/rocket-motors-on-nuclear-missiles-become-a-test-case-for-trump-industrial-policy/#557148fc2cf4

Quote
The Minuteman III replacement, officially known as the Ground Based Strategic Deterrent, will require hundreds of large SRMs and thus drive domestic demand for such systems through 2030. It is the last opportunity for Aerojet Rocketdyne, one of two surviving U.S. manufacturers of large solid rocket motors, to stay in the business. Orbital ATK, the other source, has gradually won the right to supply all other domestic users, meaning that if Aerojet doesn't get a piece of the action on the new Air Force missiles, it is done with large SRMs.

The DoD needs several other systems that might create a demand.  GBI follow on, IRBM, ALBM, etc. are all possibilities.  The key is to move forward BEFORE Aerojet goes out of the business.  Aerojet should look at the commercial market too.  Why aren't they offering alternatives to ATKs motors? 
« Last Edit: May 09, 2018, 08:59:30 am by sferrin »
"DARPA Hard"  It ain't what it use to be.

Offline marauder2048

  • CLEARANCE: Top Secret
  • ***
  • Posts: 2012
  • "I should really just relax"
Re: A peek on future american SLBMs and ICBMs
« Reply #460 on: May 09, 2018, 11:21:26 am »
All of the above is why I argued for the government to block the acquisition.

Is there really that big of a commercial market for large SRMs?
Another issue is that it's the large motors that tend to subsidize the small ones.