New Futuristic "Science Fiction" Nuclear Warhead for Russia

[bobbymike]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wwlXllNkjtY

-----------------------------------------------------------------
Scary or hyperbole? Any one else at SP have additional information about this program/development. By all appearances Russia continues to aggressively modernize its nuclear forces, didn't we just sign a new arms treaty that was to set us on the path to zero?

Another interesting development was that the New Start Treaty was going to "pave the way" for a potential tactical nuclear weapons treaty. Russia has recently said, "Ya that's not happening."

Add this to a story I read (sorry cannot find it at the moment) that discussed how Russia's demographic trends and move towards a volunteer military will lead to a massive downsizing of conventional forces.

Is the trend a future with a very limited mostly defensive conventional military backed by modern robust nuclear strike forces?

 

[Orionblamblam]

Scary or hyperbole?

Without more info it's hard to say. However, mention was made of thermal technology, so I'd imagine that the warheads are designed for IR stealth. While exoatmospheric, this could be achieved a few ways, but one of the more obvious would be via a cooling system. Wrap the warheads in thermal blankets and actively cool the outermost layer with, say, liquid nitrogen, liquid hydrogen, liquid helium. To get *real* stealth, the missiles exterior would need to be cooled to about 3 degrees kelvin, which matches the cosmic backgound temp and could theoretically be attained with a whole lot of liquid helium. A dark black radar-absorbing bag at say 4 or 5 K would be a pain in the ass to spot against the black of space.

 

[Michel Van]

if even one else at SP have additional information about this program/development.
he death of radioactive contamination or make jail time in deep Siberia for the rest of his life...

before we guess Wat they use, let's Wat they use until now:
Mostly ICBM Warhead were accompanied by inflatable Decoy launch by carrierbus
or discarded Chaff (a cloud of small, thin pieces of aluminium, metallised glass fibre or plastic)
to distract Radarsystem
but not Infrared, a ICBM warhead during after reentry is a Red hot sign with "HERE I AM" on it

So Wat Russia R&D a system Wat makes ICBM Warhead Sci-Fi ?
Radar/Infrared Stealth by a MHD Headshield?
thermal cooled with licquid Helium to 3° K?

i think is more simpler
the Warhead is not a cones shape, but a lifting Body type
it just makes a roll maneuver after reentry
and put it hot part towards the sky away from IR sensors.
with lifting Body we can "zig zag" to Target, making it impossible to hit it

but on the Russians claims,
the new Warhead is Not secured against nuclear ABM system
were a interceptor rocket has a Neutron Bomb !
Not the atomic blast, but Neutron radiation trigger the enemy warhead to explode
if the interceptor get close enough...

 

[Orionblamblam]

but not Infrared, a ICBM warhead during after reentry is a Red hot sign with "HERE I AM" on it

The re-entry phase of the attack could be on the order of a minute or less, especially if it's coming in high (rather than skimming the upper atmosphere). Most interceptors operate long before then, leaving only "Sprint" style interceptors. And realistically, making a re-entering warhead invisible to radar and IR realy would require sci-fi technologies.

it just makes a roll maneuver after reentry
and put it hot part towards the sky away from IR sensors.

Wouldn't work. The nose would remain the hottest part; and even the upper surface would be blisteringly hot.

with lifting Body we can "zig zag" to Target, making it impossible to hit it

Not impossible, just really, really hard.

Neutron radiation trigger the enemy warhead to explode
if the interceptor get close enough...

Not exactly. A really close detonation by a neutron bomb can cause a warhead to melt down, but not detonate. A further burst can trash the electronics in the warhead. And the neutron flux will cause the warhead to light up like a christmas tree to any thermal or neutron sensors looking in that direction... that weren't blinded by the neutron bomb.

 

[lastdingo]

My guess

Whole thing gets cooled a bit before launch, using outboard liquid coolants.

Launch. Separation of MIRV from rocket (MIRV was insulated against the friction heat of the rocket nose).

MIRV:
A thin outer layer of thin radar camouflage material, shortly flushed with an extremely cold agent (liquid helium or whatever, dunno how cold liquid nitrogen is).
Spacing.
A second outer layer of highly IR-reflective material that's actively being cooled with a thermal pump.
Spacing.
Actual warhead with heat shield for re-entry.
On the other side (facing away from earth) an IR emitter to dispose the heat.

Some unfolding decoys with similar external properties.

One or few radar jamming decoys.

 

[bobbymike]

So to sum up "nuke" news over the last little while concerning Russian modernization efforts:

1) Bulava (up to 10 warheads)
2) RS-24 (up to 10 warheads)
3) SS-18 heavy ICBM replacement (if same throw weight as SS-18 then at least 10 warheads)
4) Blackjack modernization
5) PAK-DA (new strategic bomber timeline?)
6) Borei class new SSBN
7) New maneuvering(?) RV

Anything I missed?

 

[cluttonfred]

Hmmm, there might be an even simpler explantion--load the decoys with pyrotechnics and design them to stand up to them long enough to make the decoys indistinguishable from the read warhead to IR sensors.

 

[Avimimus]

Well, I for one (probably like everyone else here), am glad the cold war is over (even if weapons development isn't).

 

[Colonial-Marine]

When it comes to nukes it seems the Russians disagree that the Cold War is over.

 

[Firefly 2]

When it comes to nukes it seems the Russians disagree that the Cold War is over.

When the Russian armed forces collapsed after 1991 I get the feeling that Russian decision makers betted heavily on nuclear arms as their only deterrent. Clearly, that train of thought has become institutional.

 

[JFC Fuller]

Bobbymike,

RS-24 carries 3-4 warheads not 10.

Also, dont forget about the refitting of the Delta IV boats to carry the Sineva, the construction of new early warning radars and the new command and control systems.

 

[bobbymike]

Bobbymike,

RS-24 carries 3-4 warheads not 10.

Also, don't forget about the refitting of the Delta IV boats to carry the Sineva, the construction of new early warning radars and the new command and control systems.

It is capable of carrying ten warheads, from Reuters "Russian generals say the RS-24 can pierce any anti-missile system. It can be armed with up to 10 warheads and is intended to replace Russia's earlier generation intercontinental missiles such as the RS-18 and RS-20." Other sources are available that confirm this information.

I am more concerned, within the New Start limitation of 700 deployed launchers, that the "upload capability" of Russian missiles can be very dangerous in a crisis.

 

[JFC Fuller]

Check Pavel Podvigs's blog- 3-4 is far more realistic.

http://russianforces.org/blog/2010/07/le_rs-24_est_arriv.shtml

Jane's also states 3-4.

 

[bobbymike]

Not to belabor the point I'm talking about "potential" warhead loading. My car can go 120 mph but I will probable drive the speed limit but in a crisis I can drive much faster.

The Trident II missile can carry more than the 4 warheads it will probably carry under New Start and in fact the ability to "upload" the missile back to 8 or 10 warheads is being touted as an important feature if the future strategic environment changes.

 

[sferrin]

Not to belabor the point I'm talking about "potential" warhead loading. My car can go 120 mph but I will probable drive the speed limit but in a crisis I can drive much faster.

The Trident II missile can carry more than the 4 warheads it will probably carry under New Start and in fact the ability to "upload" the missile back to 8 or 10 warheads is being touted as an important feature if the future strategic environment changes.

The D-5 can carry up to 14 warheads.

 

[JFC Fuller]

Not to belabor the point I'm talking about "potential" warhead loading. My car can go 120 mph but I will probable drive the speed limit but in a crisis I can drive much faster.

The Trident II missile can carry more than the 4 warheads it will probably carry under New Start and in fact the ability to "upload" the missile back to 8 or 10 warheads is being touted as an important feature if the future strategic environment changes.

The RS-24 potential is now widely accepted to be 3-4 depending on yield, not 10, which came from very early reports that have never been verified. Bulava does have a potential for 10, although how it would carry at that many is unclear as it would require even lighter warheads than the 6 it now carries that must already be the lightest Russia has developed to date.

And frankly even that is pretty meaningless as there is also the question as to the yield of each warhead see:

http://russianforces.org/blog/2007/05/how_many_warheads.shtml

 

[bobbymike]

Not to belabor the point I'm talking about "potential" warhead loading. My car can go 120 mph but I will probable drive the speed limit but in a crisis I can drive much faster.

The Trident II missile can carry more than the 4 warheads it will probably carry under New Start and in fact the ability to "upload" the missile back to 8 or 10 warheads is being touted as an important feature if the future strategic environment changes.

The D-5 can carry up to 14 warheads.

Sferrin - yes you are right if I was to stay with potential warhead loads the D5 can carry 14, I was quoting an article talking about the possibility of uploading Trident to historic deployed warhead numbers.

Not to belabor the point I'm talking about "potential" warhead loading. My car can go 120 mph but I will probable drive the speed limit but in a crisis I can drive much faster.

The Trident II missile can carry more than the 4 warheads it will probably carry under New Start and in fact the ability to "upload" the missile back to 8 or 10 warheads is being touted as an important feature if the future strategic environment changes.

The RS-24 potential is now widely accepted to be 3-4 depending on yield, not 10, which came from very early reports that have never been verified. Bulava does have a potential for 10, although how it would carry at that many is unclear as it would require even lighter warheads than the 6 it now carries that must already be the lightest Russia has developed to date.

And frankly even that is pretty meaningless as there is also the question as to the yield of each warhead see:

http://russianforces.org/blog/2007/05/how_many_warheads.shtml

Thanks for the information, however, none of this really eases my original concern that Russia is modernizing its entire nuclear strike force while US forces slowly atrophy.

Now in fact I am more worried because as the article you reference seems to indicate that Russia definitely has a more robust nuclear weapons R&D and production capability than I first thought. Maybe they are developing very light and highly accurate warheads with greater yields than possible during the Cold War. The US has all but stopped advanced warhead development with the cancellation of ACI. These are the possible types of technology or systems "breakouts" the US should be guarding against with its own R&D programs.

 

[bobbymike]

From Nuclear Weapons Databook Volume I - The Reagan Strategic Program launched in 1981 called eventually for 480 deployed D5 missiles on 20 Trident submarines.

This is the only reference I can find to date.

 

[Arjen]

Jane's Fighting Ships, editions 1984-1985 and 1986-1987: both state SSBN-726 through SSBN-749 were assigned for Ohio-class submarines. That would have made 24 ships.

 

[JFC Fuller]

24 Ohio's would make for over 6,900 SSBN based warheads (dependent on treaty limitations) in addition to the 1,500 the Air Force was going to have on land based missiles.

 

[sferrin]

24 Ohio's would make for over 6,900 SSBN based warheads (dependent on treaty limitations) in addition to the 1,500 the Air Force was going to have on land based missiles.

There were originally going to be thousands of W88s produce (~4000 IIRC) but the FBI raided the facility and that ended those plans leaving us with mere hundreds.

 

[bobbymike]

24 Ohio's would make for over 6,900 SSBN based warheads (dependent on treaty limitations) in addition to the 1,500 the Air Force was going to have on land based missiles.

There were originally going to be thousands of W88s produce (~4000 IIRC) but the FBI raided the facility and that ended those plans leaving us with mere hundreds.

sferrin - can you tell us more of the story? Also does anyone know what our weapons production capabilities are? I was listening to a speech a couple of years ago by Douglas Feith (SORT negotiator under Bush) that basically said that the US had no active nuclear weapon production lines and a decaying delivery system industrial base.

 

[sferrin]

24 Ohio's would make for over 6,900 SSBN based warheads (dependent on treaty limitations) in addition to the 1,500 the Air Force was going to have on land based missiles.

There were originally going to be thousands of W88s produce (~4000 IIRC) but the FBI raided the facility and that ended those plans leaving us with mere hundreds.

sferrin - can you tell us more of the story? Also does anyone know what our weapons production capabilities are? I was listening to a speech a couple of years ago by Douglas Feith (SORT negotiator under Bush) that basically said that the US had no active nuclear weapon production lines and a decaying delivery system industrial base.

From the Nuclear Weapons Archive:

"Designed and developed by Los Alamos National Laboratory (LANL). The design is based on work done before March 1976 Threshold Test Ban Treaty. Full yield tests of candidate designs were completed by that date.

The Mk-5 RV is basically identical to the Mk-21 used with the W87

4000-5000 originally planned, production was prematurely terminated by FBI raid on Rocky Flats in November 1989. Although the possibility of resuming W-88 production using recycled pits from other weapons was examined, on 29 January 1992 Admiral Watkins, Sec. of Energy, directed that production be halted permanently.

W88 Development Schedule March 1984 Development engineering begun at LANL
March 1986 Production engineering begun
September 1988 First production units completed
April 1989 Quantity production begun
November 1989 FBI raid on Rocky Flats shuts down production

Deployment
Initial manufacture September 1988
Initial operating capability achieved June 1989
Total production: 400

The W-88 will remain in the active stockpile under START II, equipping Trident II (D-5) SLBMs."

To your other questions there are no active production lines in the US producing warheads. Frankly I'd be surprised if we even had the design capability anymore. Many more years and we'll have nothing more than a legion of priests attending the warheads who haven't the slightest f--king idea how they work.

 

[Sea Skimmer]

Actually the US is currently allocating billions of dollars to updating its nuclear weapon production complexes, including an entirely new facility to produce warhead electronics at Kansas city for something like 1.3 billion dollars on its own. The design capability never went away; the US has two very lavish national laboratories for that.

 

[sferrin]

Actually the US is currently allocating billions of dollars to updating its nuclear weapon production complexes, including an entirely new facility to produce warhead electronics at Kansas city for something like 1.3 billion dollars on its own. The design capability never went away; the US has two very lavish national laboratories for that.

Warhead electronics are just that.

 

[bobbymike]

The US should have some type of rapid prototyping program to build various warheads of variable yield that can be easily put into production if required. From sub-kiloton micro-nukes to multi-megaton prototypes (heck say they are for planetary defense). We must continue to exercise our design "from scratch" talent so no important techniques or technologies are lost.

The best candidates from above should then begin to replace, as needed, the current warheads in the arsenal. I can live with New Start (I would not have cut as deep, SORT warhead levels were sufficient) but we need to be very clear to the rest of the world; if you are an aggressor and seek military superiority to challenge our interests we have a very robust capability to build new weapons.

 

[sferrin]

^--- what he said. It's a perishable skill.

 

[Sea Skimmer]

Warhead electronics are just that.

So? Kind of an important piece don't you think, given that the rest of the nuke is trash if they don't function. The US government has also funded a refurbished pit facility and several other things, the electronics plant just happens to be the largest single segment to come to mind. Total funding for overhauling the US nuclear production complex is something like 11 billion dollars over eight years and more and more money keeps being added on. Obama just promised quiet a few billion dollars more for this effort as part of getting New Start ratified and its not clear what all that money is even going to be spent on, it may be money for the much rumored 'new cruise missile'.

 

[sferrin]

Warhead electronics are just that.

So? Kind of an important piece don't you think, given that the rest of the nuke is trash if they don't function.

And completely irrelevant to the subject. Kinda like saying we're going to maintain our expertise in fighter design by giving Goodyear a bunch of money because, you know, airplanes can't fly without tires.

 

[Sea Skimmer]

And completely irrelevant to the subject. Kinda like saying we're going to maintain our expertise in fighter design by giving Goodyear a bunch of money because, you know, airplanes can't fly without tires.

No, I'm sorry but in fact what I'm saying is exactly like saying you can't maintain your expertise in fighter design without being able to design and produce electronics to make the damn thing fly. But I guess you think a modern fighters electronics are the easy part too? Never mind that this is only one of many aspects being dealt with at the moment. Its not like the US military or congress have been acting like blind idiots on this subject.

 

[bobbymike]

And completely irrelevant to the subject. Kinda like saying we're going to maintain our expertise in fighter design by giving Goodyear a bunch of money because, you know, airplanes can't fly without tires.

No, I'm sorry but in fact what I'm saying is exactly like saying you can't maintain your expertise in fighter design without being able to design and produce electronics to make the damn thing fly. But I guess you think a modern fighters electronics are the easy part too? Never mind that this is only one of many aspects being dealt with at the moment. Its not like the US military or congress have been acting like blind idiots on this subject.

Yes because when someone says to me, "quick list the most competent, far thinking and rational profession", I immediately respond, "politicians".

I have zero confidence in the vast majority of politicians. In fact this can be traced all the way back to Bush 41 who at the height of the "New World Order/End of the Cold War" mania canceled every strategic modernization program with no though to the future. It was the "End of History" according to Francis Fukuyama didn't ya know.

That gave Clinton cover to neglect the arsenal for his eight year presidency, "cause if pro-defense Republicans say its a new world order then who are we to argue." Finally during the Bush 43 presidency someone started to notice the arsenal and the infrastructure was rapidly decaying and said here is about $50 million dollars for something called the RRW and RNEP and a little money for a program called ACI to help us retain weapons expertise. Then some Republicans voted with Democrats to shoot down those modest proposals.

The end result is twenty years without a new weapon built or tested and advanced weapons research and development stopped by congress. Like I said I have little or no confidence that politicians have the foresight to reverse the very dangerous "die on the vine" policy that our entire nuclear enterprise in undergoing at the moment.

 

[sferrin]

And completely irrelevant to the subject. Kinda like saying we're going to maintain our expertise in fighter design by giving Goodyear a bunch of money because, you know, airplanes can't fly without tires.

No, I'm sorry but in fact what I'm saying is exactly like saying you can't maintain your expertise in fighter design without being able to design and produce electronics to make the damn thing fly. But I guess you think a modern fighters electronics are the easy part too?

I guess you think that pile of electronics is just going to levitate itself into the air? :

 

[bobbymike]

From the Air Force Association:

A Post-START Nuclear Enterprise: Now that national attention is focused on nuclear affairs thanks to the ratification debate on the New START agreement with Russia, it's up to advocates of the US military's strategic deterrence mission to ensure the touted nuclear investment and modernization plans come to fruition, said Gen. Robert Kehler, head of US Strategic Command, Thursday. STRATCOM officials are now engaged with the Joint Staff and Office of the Secretary of Defense on how to achieve the new limits in the strategic arsenal imposed by New START as well as the new verification processes, he told attendees at AFA's Air Warfare Symposium and Technology Exposition in Orlando, Fla. Kehler, STRATCOM chief since late January, said he has requested that his staff arrange visits to all the locations in the nation's nuclear weapons complex. "I am interested in knowing the health of that part of the complex," he said. He continued, "My number one concern is that the stockpile is safe and effective and able to support what we need to do." In an era where live nuclear testing is no longer permitted, the health of this complex is equally important if not more important than the nuclear weapons themselves, he added.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
While all this is good, the politicians still need to fund any upkeep/modernization needed.

 

[KJ_Lesnick]

You'd think there's some kind of nuclear tipped missile that could be dusted off, and kluged into some kind of anti-ballistic role.