Russian Strategic Weapon Modernization Plans

Josh_TN said:
Perhaps, but your target set is only coastal. You might hit DC with a radio active tidal wave but outside that C2 site you're limited to counter value and sub bases. The US nuclear force is still basically completely intact.
Click to expand...
Unless you use a river, which many major cities have.

Keeping the nuclear force intact is only part of the problem, you have to keep some semblance of a chain of command intact too. If you wipe that out (or a fair portion of it), then the ICBM and SLBM warheads can land whilst people are playing pass the parcel with the nuclear football, assuming that wasn't also destroyed. Do they have a replacement if it is?
 
HI Sutton's take:
www.navalnews.com

Russia Reveals Radical New Stealth Missile Submarine - Naval News

Nuclear weapons are Russia's ultimate insurance policy against NATO intervention in Ukraine. As their importance is emphasised, an ambitious new ballistic missile submarine has been revealed. The design, with hints of the latest Western thinking, represents the next generation after the Borei class.
www.navalnews.com www.navalnews.com

1660647304866.png
 
Seems unlikely, though this item is almost certainly not to see the light of day, at least in its current form. I consider it more an exercise in seeing where the Russians think submarine technology is going, and two things definitely jump out: they think active searches are going to be a lot more relevant in the future and that UUVs will be necessary even defensively for the relatively passive role of an SSBN.
 
Josh_TN said:
Seems unlikely, though this item is almost certainly not to see the light of day, at least in its current form. I consider it more an exercise in seeing where the Russians think submarine technology is going, and two things definitely jump out: they think active searches are going to be a lot more relevant in the future and that UUVs will be necessary even defensively for the relatively passive role of an SSBN.
Click to expand...
Seems logical because UUVs can conduct active searches without giving away the position of the mother ship.
 
Does anyone know what the little bobbles that stick out from the side of Russian missile nose cones are? They are present on the R-29R/RM/RMU/RMU2 and RT-23.
 
The warheads look like they're mounted backwards, is there a purpose to that? Space saving?
 
Last edited:
Sirena-M?


vpk.name

The first test launch of the Osina-RV or Sirena-M intercontinental ballistic missile ?

As the TASS news agency reported on June 28, 2021, the successful launch of the latest intercontinental ballistic missile (ICBM) developed by the Moscow Institute of Thermal Engineering (MIT, part of the Roscosmos State Corporation) took place from the 1st State Test Cosmodrome (Plesetsk) of the...
vpk.name vpk.name
 
Forest Green said:
Sirena-M?


vpk.name

The first test launch of the Osina-RV or Sirena-M intercontinental ballistic missile ?

As the TASS news agency reported on June 28, 2021, the successful launch of the latest intercontinental ballistic missile (ICBM) developed by the Moscow Institute of Thermal Engineering (MIT, part of the Roscosmos State Corporation) took place from the 1st State Test Cosmodrome (Plesetsk) of the...
vpk.name vpk.name
Click to expand...
Communications missile for Perimetr based on the RS-24 I assume.

There was the earlier 15A11 based on the MR-UR-100/SS-17 Spanker, to be replaced by the 15P656 Horn based on the RSD-10/SS-20 Saber, and when the INF Treaty made an SS-20-derived communications missile impossible, it was replaced by the 15P175 Sirena based on the RT2-PM Topol/SS-25 Sickle.

If it's made by the Moscow Institute of Thermal Technology, then it's almost certainly a solid-fueled missile based upon their earlier work.

MIT_RAKETU_01.jpg
 
Last edited:
A Tentative Fleet Plan said:
Communications missile for Perimetr based on the RS-24 I assume.

There was the earlier 15A11 based on the MR-UR-100/SS-17 Spanker, to be replaced by the 15P656 Horn based on the RSD-10/SS-20 Saber, and when the INF Treaty made an SS-20-derived communications missile impossible, it was replaced by the 15P175 Sirena based on the RT2-PM Topol/SS-25 Sickle.

If it's made by the Moscow Institute of Thermal Technology, then it's almost certainly a solid-fueled missile based upon their earlier work.

View attachment 716899
Click to expand...
Perimetr?
 
Forest Green said:
That sounds slightly dangerous.
Click to expand...
If anything the opposite, given Russian policymakers are much less likely to launch under the false belief that they're being attacked during a crisis, safe in the knowledge that their command and control system is survivable enough to ensure retaliation even if the entire chain of command is killed.

Pavel Podvig's Russian Strategic Nuclear Forces points out that the system as built is not fully automatic, the communication missiles are launched by human order from one of the super-hardened command posts.
 
A Tentative Fleet Plan said:
If anything the opposite, given Russian policymakers are much less likely to launch under the false belief that they're being attacked during a crisis, safe in the knowledge that their command and control system is survivable enough to ensure retaliation even if the entire chain of command is killed.

Pavel Podvig's Russian Strategic Nuclear Forces points out that the system as built is not fully automatic, the communication missiles are launched by human order from one of the super-hardened command posts.
Click to expand...
And what if the person in charge of the launcher had an argument with his wife and killed her because she hid the vodka, then remembers he hid it from her, arrives at work drunk and decides to start WWIII by launching a command missile?
 
Forest Green said:
And what if the person in charge of the launcher had an argument with his wife and killed her because she hid the vodka, then remembers he hid it from her, arrives at work drunk and decides to start WWIII by launching a command missile?
Click to expand...

Presumably Russia has similar procedures to the U.S. for authentication and confirmation. Their submarine service adopted a two man rule just like US boomers.
 
Forest Green said:
And what if the person in charge of the launcher had an argument with his wife and killed her because she hid the vodka, then remembers he hid it from her, arrives at work drunk and decides to start WWIII by launching a command missile?
Click to expand...
Nothing. He have no authorisation to do it, no codes to launch. Without "Perimeter" sending him codes - i.e. in the situation, when machine would detect the indication of nuclear warfare and fail to establish communication with anyone with nuclear authority - men in bunker could not launch the command missile.
 
If I remember correctly, launch authority is not delegated to the crew in charge of Perimetr on a day-to-day basis, the National Command Authority (i.e. the Russian government), can activate the system in the event of a crisis, with the crew of specially-selected officials (deputy defence minister level or equivalent) moving to a hardened command post. In the event of nuclear detonations being detected on Russian territory, and contact has been lost with the Russian government, the crew can then launch the communication missiles.

Perimetr is often portrayed as a fully-automated system, with a computer making the final decision, but as far as I can tell, in reality it is a semi-automatic system, with human control over the final launch order.
 
Wonder what that is. Also amusing the tweet jokes about le ebil ruskies killing innocent civilians. Has never rolled my eyes as much as in this conflict. Maybe I'm just starting to get old.
 
Have not seen that fire pop up outside social media yet…might be faked or old footage of some other event.
 

Similar threads

Back
Top Bottom