Oreshnik MRBM - Technical News Only

Status
Not open for further replies.

Tactical Picture of Employment:​

1. Engagement Process:
  • The missile follows a quasi-ballistic trajectory.
  • During the descent phase, the post-boost vehicle ("bus") sequentially deploys 6 guided reentry vehicles.
  • Each vehicle, using its own guidance system (INS + GLONASS/stellar correction, possibly with optical terminal guidance), maneuvers towards its designated target.
  • At an altitude of 20-30 km, the vehicle releases a cluster of 6 kinetic rods, which proceed to the target ballistically, stabilized aerodynamically.
2. Damage Effect:
  • A single target (e.g., a silo, command post) is hit by six rods almost simultaneously from different approach angles (due to cluster dispersion).
  • Circular Error Probable (CEP): For the guided vehicle — 5-10 m. For the unguided rods — 20-30 m from the aim point.
  • Effect: Guaranteed destruction of a hardened point target.
    • Penetration of protective overhead cover (up to 1 m of steel or 2-3 m of reinforced concrete).
    • Massive blast and shock effects inside the structure.
    • High probability of neutralizing a runway (several craters 3-5 m in diameter rendering it inoperable).
    • Anti-ship capability (penetration of the deck and several internal bulkheads, potentially causing magazine detonation or fires).
3. Strategic Significance:
  • Conventional (Non-Nuclear) Deterrence: The capability to deliver a high-precision strike against hardened targets anywhere within range in 10-15 minutes without escalating to nuclear conflict.
  • Preemptive/Decapitation Strike: Destruction of command centers, communication nodes, launch facilities, leadership bunkers.
  • Counter-PRO Measures: 36 separate objects in flight (6 platforms + 36 rods) create a complex targeting picture for missile defense systems.

Summary Table of Characteristics:​



ComponentParameterEstimated Value
Missile "Rubezh"Launch Mass~28.5 t
Payload (total)~2050 kg
Reentry Vehicle (Guided)Quantity6 units
Mass per unit (with systems)~130 kg
CEP5-10 m
Kinetic Penetrator RodTotal Quantity36 units (6x6)
Mass per unit (total)~35 kg
Core mass (tungsten)~17 kg
Impact Velocity1500-2000 m/s
Kinetic Energy~27.5 MJ
TNT Equivalent~6.6 kg
Steel Penetrationup to 0.9 m
Reinforced Concrete Penetrationup to 2-3 m (due to spalling)
Combat EffectivenessTargets Engaged per LaunchUp to 6 hardened point targets (one per vehicle) or 1-2 area targets (airfield, base)
Time of Flight (for 6000 km)12-18 minutes
Summary: The configuration with six guided reentry vehicles, each carrying six kinetic penetrator rods, transforms the "Rubezh" into an extremely effective high-readiness global conventional strike weapon. It is capable of solving strategic tasks in a non-nuclear conflict that were previously only achievable with tactical nuclear weapons. This represents a "first-strike" or "decapitation" weapon with minimal collateral damage but guaranteed lethality against hardened targets.
Click to expand...
 

Attachments

  • tungsten.jpg
    tungsten.jpg
    179.8 KB · Views: 93
Last edited:
Paralay , It would be interest to know if Oreshnik can target a slow moving ship at Sea or CBG as it deploys 6 guided reentry vehicles ?

If the same thing is implemented in a ICBM they can get a higher impact velocity of above 4 km/sec
 
So do the rods get released pre-impact then? And where is the guidance system located in that diagram, and where is the steering system also for that matter @paralay?

(6 platforms + 30 rods)
Click to expand...
So is that actually 5 rods per unit not 6?
 
There is one combat unit in the picture, and there are six of them, the control system on the bus
 
paralay said:
There is one combat unit in the picture, and there are six of them, the control system on the bus
Click to expand...
The bus of the 6 combat units or the main missile bus they came off?

So 6 x [130kg combat bus + (6x35kg rods)] = 6 x 340kg = 2,040kg (~2,050kg)? Correct?

Guidance in the nose of combat unit? Radar, GPS? Steering actuators, can't see them in diagram?
 
Last edited:
The breeding system (bus) is borrowed from the Bulava ballistic missile, along with the guidance system
 

Attachments

  • 54832547889_a6aa92aa5a_c.jpg
    54832547889_a6aa92aa5a_c.jpg
    194.2 KB · Views: 79
  • c89aaca31bb03bbbc5860b487093f2d1.jpeg
    c89aaca31bb03bbbc5860b487093f2d1.jpeg
    223.1 KB · Views: 67
  • 54832562183_3bd12eb6fb_c.jpg
    54832562183_3bd12eb6fb_c.jpg
    71.6 KB · Views: 76
 
Last edited:
Last edited:
Dilandu said:
Plain old kinetic energy of solid slugs, moving at several kilometers per second.
Click to expand...
https://www.scmp.com/news/china/sci...t-challenges-us-rods-god-space-weapon-concepthttps://interestingengineering.com/science/chinese-study-rods-from-god
“There is a maximum penetration depth of about 80 times that of the projectile diameter at the speed of 1.2km per second [about 3.5 times the speed of sound],” Fu’s team said. Increasing the speed to hypersonic levels, beyond Mach 5, would not result in the tungsten rod penetrating any further into the concrete. “The penetration depth under ultra-high speed conditions has no advantages over medium and low-speed penetration,” the team said.
Click to expand...
 
Last edited by a moderator:
EmoBirb said:
I'm unsure if I'd want to cite the south china morning post, good thing Deino isn't active in this thread, it's his personal trigger.
Click to expand...
The point is based on research and merely confirms the same conclusions that a study of the US's own Rods from Gods research reached some time ago.

EmoBirb said:
You are aware of the hypocrisy, right? I'll tell Dimitri Medvedev to post a picture with a big red X over it, given as that's the standard of "proof" accepted by the gullible masses.
Click to expand...
Actually not at all, even when the evidence is clear and damning it is still questioned:

#588
https://www.secretprojects.co.uk/th...iumph-sa-21-growler-tabm-sam.2985/post-862068
Then the converse:

#94
https://www.secretprojects.co.uk/threads/oreshnik-mrbm.44854/post-868635#1,048
https://www.secretprojects.co.uk/th...ead-pictures-and-discussion.32631/post-866163
EmoBirb said:
As for the strike, there has been no footage of anything within immediate vicinity of the impact, as per usual. Footage is quick to emerge when it's impossible to hide, like when targets in urban regions are destroyed, or when it's too embarrassing to show and has to be hidden at all costs. They'll wait again a couple weeks to release grainy satellite footage, say nothing happened although all the heating and in parts electricity went out and yet the next time another missile is launched they bitch and moan on social media again.

Schrödingers missile - doesn't cause any damage but leaves thousands of households without gas and causes a meltdown everytime it's used.

This phenomenon needs to be studied.
Click to expand...
It is indeed Schrodinger's missile because all evidence of it remains hidden in a box.
 
Last edited:
Forest Green said:
The point is based on research and merely confirms the same conclusions that a study of the US's own Rods from Gods research reached some time ago.
Click to expand...
The point is that the research is cited by a Chinese tabloid, presented in a way meant to present US research into high velocity penetrators as futile and a vanity project.

Context is important.
 
Forest Green said:
https://www.scmp.com/news/china/sci...t-challenges-us-rods-god-space-weapon-concepthttps://interestingengineering.com/science/chinese-study-rods-from-god


Amazing how burdens of proof change thread to thread. E.g. Video of S-400 being blown up in HD - person complains because it's not in UHD, poor evidence. Tweet with a random picture of an Su-35 claiming Su-27 shootdown (unconfirmed) - concrete proof. Tweet claiming UGS blown up despite no fireballs or confirmations by official Russian or Ukrainian sources - concrete proof yet again.
Click to expand...
And? What are you trying to prove? That penetration of kinetic elements would not be enough to reach underground gas storage? Kinda obvious. What are you missing is a shockwave from hypersonic strikes travelling down. Underground gas storages aren't exactly concrete bunkers; being badly shaken could rupture the access pipes, cause deformation of overlaying layers. Which would made gas storage unusable for some time.

You seems to think that projectile need to directly enter some kind of "underground gas tank" to deal damage. Not so; and there are often no "gas tank" at all. The gas is usually stored in porous rocks layers, squeezed between layers of dense rock. It's not some "deeply buried concrete chambers" or something.
 
I've seen some minor speculation about the target being the Lvov State Aircraft Repair Plant, as always I will further wait for confirmation.

EDIT 2: The Lvov State Aircraft Repair Plant was indeed targeted
 
Last edited:
Last edited by a moderator:
Based on the Ru MoD reports, they said they targeted energy infrastructure supplying the Ukrainian Military-Industrial Complex. Hence the confusion about the USG. It's more likely that Gerans target the energy infrastructure, while (Oreshnik) targeted the MIC directly
 
ComradeVortex said:
I've seen some minor speculation about the target being the Lvov State Aircraft Repair Plant, as always I will further wait for confirmation.

EDIT 2: The Lvov State Aircraft Repair Plant was indeed targeted
Click to expand...
I've seen the rumor too, if true a very interesting choice of target. Possibly where the Mirage and F-16s and their munitions are stored? But I haven't seen anything yet that points either way (aviation facility or gas storage) in a concrete manner. So for now lots of question marks, little answers.
 

To quote:
The Lviv State Aviation Repair Plant (Львівський Державний авіаційно-ремонтний завод, abbreviated as LDARZ) is an aircraft repair plant of the Ukrainian Defense Industry. It was founded on October 15, 1939, in the city of Lviv. The factory specializes in the repair of the Mikoyan MiG-29 jet fighter.
Click to expand...
If the actual target, it's a military facility. Although these days probably diversified away from MiGs, of which only a few still exist, and possibly more so used as a hub for aviation equipment in general. The relative proximity to Poland would suggest as such. And this can still be seen as a target that validates the usage of the Oreshnik missile system.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Are there any chemical explosives that can withstand those kinds of temperatures, but are pressure sensitive, and would react fast enough to increase the energy released on impact? Some composite detonated by the force of impact itself. Is it possible at those scales (density, impact speed)?
 
Avimimus said:
Are there any chemical explosives that can withstand those kinds of temperatures, but are pressure sensitive, and would react fast enough to increase the energy released on impact? Some composite detonated by the force of impact itself. Is it possible at those scales (density, impact speed)?
Click to expand...
It's pointless - at over 3 km/s, the energy released from kinetic impact would be greater than releazed from the same mass of explosives. And since explosives are usually less dense than chunks of solid metal, for hypervelocity projectiles there are no real need to carry any (unless you want a hypervelocity shrapnel, and so need some bursting charge inside).
 
Avimimus said:
Are there any chemical explosives that can withstand those kinds of temperatures, but are pressure sensitive, and would react fast enough to increase the energy released on impact? Some composite detonated by the force of impact itself. Is it possible at those scales (density, impact speed)?
Click to expand...
Like @Dilandu said, once you get to 3km/s you are packing your own weight in TNT. And the best option would be something dense, like Tungsten or even Osmium. Maximum weight in minimum package.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

Back
Top Bottom