Russia tests new 10 warhead ICBM? What?

[Vympel]

Link

MOSCOW (Reuters) - Russia test-fired a new intercontinental ballistic missile on Tuesday featuring multiple warheads which can be independently targeted, Russian agencies reported.

A Defence Ministry spokesman said the missile was fired from a mobile launcher at 1420 Moscow time (1020 GMT) from the Plesetsk cosmodrome about 800 km (500 miles) north of Moscow, Interfax news agency reported.

The RS-24 missile can be armed with up to 10 different warheads, the Defence Ministry told Interfax.

It said the new missile would replace earlier generation intercontinental missiles such as the RS-18 and RS-20.

Missiles carrying multiple independently targeted warheads are more difficult to intercept and destroy completely once they have been fired.

Russia has previously said U.S. plans to build a system in Europe to intercept and shoot down hostile missiles are a threat to its own security. Washington says the system is intended to counter rogue states and does not threaten Russia.

I have heard absolutely nothing about this supposed new RS-24 ICBM that will replace the RS-18 (SS-19 STILLETO) and RS-20 (SS-20 SATAN) until now.

The Topol-M can be fired from a mobile launcher- but it can't fit 10 warheads. Nor do you test a new missile from a mobile launcher from the start.

Most puzzling.

[K. A. Pital]

http://rian.ru/defense_safety/weapons/2 ... 56886.html


The Russian Space forces team made a test launch of the new ICBM RS-24 (РС-24) from the Plesetsk launch site, reported the press-man of the Space Forces Alexei Zolotukhin.

"The launch of the new ICBM RS-24, equipped with MIRVs, was done on 14.20 Moscow time" - he said.

The launch was done from a special launchpad refit specifically for testing the RS-24.

The RS-24 is developed by the Moscow institute of heat-technology under the lead of academic of the Russian Academy of Sciences Yuri Solomonov. "This missile is created with the technical and scientific solutions used in the "Topol-M" missile, which is reducing the costs and terms of creation of this new missile" - explained the pressman of the RVSN col. Vadim Koval.

...

According to his statements, the RS-24 will replace the RS-18 and RS-20 ICBMs. In the future it will constitute the main body of RVSN weapons along with the single-warhead RS-12M2 "Topol-M". [italics mine]

[K. A. Pital]

duh! someone needs to merge the threads

[Vympel]

This came out of absolute nowhere. I mean, a few years ago I heard about a new ICBM in the class of the SS-24 / Peacekeeper MX - and now all of a sudden it's shooting off into orbit.

Obviously not fired from a mobile launcher, though.

May well be that it's an uber-modernized SS-24 like the Topol-M is a uber-modernized SS-25, though I'm speculating.

[CJvR]

Wasn't MIRVs banned in some treaty?
Wasn't that why the MX & SS18 were scrapped?

[K. A. Pital]

This is a "Voevoda"/Satan class heavy missile according to the articles.

And it was indeed launched from a mobile launcher but as they say, it's a single-issue, refit machine.

[K. A. Pital]

Wasn't MIRVs banned in some treaty?

Not MIRVs par se, the older missile types fitted with MIRVs were IIRC.

[Vympel]

This is a "Voevoda"/Satan class heavy missile according to the articles.

And it was indeed launched from a mobile launcher but as they say, it's a single-issue, refit machine.

Huh? They're intending to produce a new modification of the SS-18 SATAN? Or do you just mean the weight class?

[metavac]

The Topol-M can be fired from a mobile launcher- but it can't fit 10 warheads. Nor do you test a new missile from a mobile launcher from the start.

Most puzzling.

As late as last year they were talking about modifying the Topol-M to carry MIRVs, and Stuart was talking a couple weeks ago about how Russia's pursuit of MIRV launch vehicles was in fact a signal to the West by making a concrete decision not to invest in the single warhead vehicles necessary to overwhelm a fully deployed and workable missile defense.

[K. A. Pital]

Or do you just mean the weight class?

Weight class I guess. From what is given to the press, this is a 10-MIRV missile of a heavy class intended as the replacement for the SATAN and to be deployed alongside the 1-warhead "Topol-M".

This is either a modified "Topol" (most likely not, since launches of the Topol with MIRVs have been already carried out), or a new missile which incorporates some Topol elements.

[Ma Deuce]

Wasn't MIRVs banned in some treaty?
Wasn't that why the MX & SS18 were scrapped?

That was START II, which is now defunct, replaced by SORT (Strategic Offensive Reductions treaty), which places no limitations on MIRVS, only the total number of warheads possessed by each signatory.

[Fingolfin_Noldor]

Wasn't MIRVs banned in some treaty?
Wasn't that why the MX & SS18 were scrapped?

That was START II, which is now defunct, replaced by SORT (Strategic Offensive Reductions treaty), which places no limitations on MIRVS, only the total number of warheads possessed by each signatory.

Given the move to anti-missile defence systems, I don't think the Russians want to have a treaty that limits MIRVs anyway.

[Fingolfin_Noldor]

Edit: Stas, was the launch successful?

[K. A. Pital]

Stas, was the launch successful?

Yes. Otherwise they'd report a failure. And there'd be great fuck-up battles between military officials again like that last time with the Bulava

[Einhander Sn0m4n]

MIRVs? What the hell's the point unless they're meant for a country with no ABM system (i.e. not America)? Hmm, maybe that's the entire idea. Does China have any ABM to speak of?

[Shinova]

My thought is that it's a credit to Russia that they were able to keep everyone in the dark (except for real government intelligence agencies) about this new missile they were developing.

[K. A. Pital]

You can keep real intelligence agencies in the dark too. It's not as if everybody's intelligence was so uber and knew everything about everybody. In fact, that's bullshit. Intelligence has badly fucked up in the past and in the present. It doesn't know everything, everytime about the weapon systems developed by a rival nation.

[Sea Skimmer]

MIRVs? What the hell's the point unless they're meant for a country with no ABM system (i.e. not America)? Hmm, maybe that's the entire idea. Does China have any ABM to speak of?

The S-300 missiles they bought from Russia, and the FT-2000 version of that system they produce themselves both have a limited ABM capability against short range missiles. They don’t have any defense against ICBMs, but you can be sure they are working on it.

[Cao Cao]

MIRVs? What the hell's the point unless they're meant for a country with no ABM system (i.e. not America)? Hmm, maybe that's the entire idea. Does China have any ABM to speak of?

Wouldn't MIRVs be best used against missile defence due to presenting many more targets?

[Turin]

MIRVs? What the hell's the point unless they're meant for a country with no ABM system (i.e. not America)? Hmm, maybe that's the entire idea. Does China have any ABM to speak of?

Wouldn't MIRVs be best used against missile defence due to presenting many more targets?

Apparently not. Check out the recent thread in SLAM called Space Weaponization, wherein Stuart pretty much schools me on the whole technical argument behind ABM (but where he unfortunately decides to abandon the larger political argument).

[Medic]

MIRVs? What the hell's the point unless they're meant for a country with no ABM system (i.e. not America)? Hmm, maybe that's the entire idea. Does China have any ABM to speak of?

Wouldn't MIRVs be best used against missile defense due to presenting many more targets?

Depends on the performance of the ABM. If it can catch the ICBM before the MIRV bus separates from the missile and before the warheads separate from the MIRV carrier then you obviously kill it all before it's an object. (to be honest, I find it difficult to find out when exactly everything happens using online sources. Specifically, if an ABM tends to intercept ICBM's at, before or after the apex of the target's ballistic arc and when exactly all the MIRV stuff happens)

Even if MIRV released successfully there's still the Miniature Kill Vehicle program which is sort of like MIRV for ABM's, it releases a cluster of projectiles that can destroy everything within a certain footprint, just to be safe. Even if this wasn't technically necessary, it's still handy because you can assign multiple interceptors to everything you see that looks like a weapon. Redundancy is a good thing, no?

And ideally, ABM isn't solely the job of exoatmospheric interceptors, but a layered defense that starts at the boost phase with stuff like the ABL (there's even an AMRAAM variant being developed that could nip smaller ballistic missiles in the boost phase by virtue of being shot from an already-fast-moving launcher like an F-15) and goes all the way down to regional point-defense with stuff like Patriot.
Sadly though, some House Democrats want to take a big chunk out of that layered defense. (though this is dated 2 weeks now and is only one proposal)

[Golan III]

I hope we start putting 3 MIRVs back in our Minutemen, then.

[Medic]

I hope we start putting 3 MIRVs back in our Minutemen, then.

They'd be better put to use as new ABM silo's. Besides, ours isn't the only ABM system coming online as is so often noted recently; our own Minutemen may yet be defeated by technology.

I'd rather get a decent penetration bomber and retain SLBM's as long as they're viable to maintain a nuclear deterrent.

[Sea Skimmer]

I hope we start putting 3 MIRVs back in our Minutemen, then.

The warhead limitations of the latest treaty would allow that, but at the expense of having very few warheads on our far more survivable Ohio class SSBNs and only a small stockpile of gravity bombs for our bombers and tactical aircraft. It’s the gravity bombs that are most likely to use too, as nuclear war these days will most likely occur on a limited scale, when filling the skies with US ballistic missiles is undesirable.

[Golan III]

It’s the gravity bombs that are most likely to use too, as nuclear war these days will most likely occur on a limited scale, when filling the skies with US ballistic missiles is undesirable.

Exactly, even retrofitting some with conventional warheads and using one or two at a time as gigantic, unstoppable cruise missiles against whomever we come in conflict with (ie, not Russia), would undoubtedly set the Russians off and cause them to launch their nukes at us. It's been studied numerous times, and been passed over each time for those reasons.

Do the SLBMs have MIRVs? Given the age of the Minuteman design, it seemed a shame to retire the Peacekeeper; however the MIRV capability guaranteed it would be one of the weapons outlawed by the arms treaties. I just find it ironic that Russia is still allowed to make new MIRV-capable designs, which are aimed squarely at us, and we have to retire our counterpart.