US Detects Unique Russian warhead capable of changing course

U.S. defense officials say Russia has successfully tested a ballistic missile capable of changing course at high speeds.

Unlike current ballistic warheads that do not alter their flight paths sharply once they reach space, the new warhead can change course and range while traveling at speeds estimated at about 3 miles per second, officials told the Washington Times.

The test was conducted Nov. 1, and was tracked by satellites after launch from the Kapustin Yar launch complex in southern Russia near Volgograd.

Maneuvering warheads represents a difficult challenge because changing course at such high speeds normally would usually cause a warhead to disintegrate.

Kremlin officials were quoted in Russian press reports as saying the new warhead was designed to thwart the new U.S. missile-defense system of interceptors stationed in Alaska and California.

Link:
feeds.bignewsnetwork.com...

makes you wonder if the cold war has really stopped if this was only designed to thwart the americans missle defence

Finally they got it working after a good few failures.

Originally posted by ryan25
makes you wonder if the cold war has really stopped if this was only designed to thwart the americans missle defence

The Cold War is over, but imagine if a country in the world built a defence against a US weapon, even if that country was a friendly? To make sure you billions aren't down the tube, you need to counter thier counter, so to speak, as that friendly could turn into an enemy, or another, hostile country could get their hands on the technology.

It might be designed to thwart the Shield, but Russia needs to ensure it's own security, as you never now what will happen in the future. The US could turn into some war-mongering country, invading random places, launching air-strikes and.....oh......right.....

[edit on 22/11/05 by stumason]

I really find this a strange one.... supposedly the amount of interceptors the National Missile Defence is to get is under 50.Are the Russians worried that much about the current state of their land based ICBMs that they might not get that many off the ground in the event of an attack ?

This is not new technology - the Russians have been working on it for over 20 years, and the west has been aware of their progress for most of that time.

Any western ABM system currently being developed will undoubtedly be designed to deal with MaRVs. Besides, the ability for a RV to "maneuver" is still strictly limited in its usefullness, unless they can pull multi-G turns during re-entry, which they cannot. Still, any ability to alter your course during re-entry to either evade local defenses or to implement new targeting coordinates would certainly be a plus.

Originally posted by Pyros
This is not new technology - the Russians have been working on it for over 20 years, and the west has been aware of their progress for most of that time.

can you please give a link that supports your claim?

washingtontimes.com...

The interesting facts are:


" The warhead was flight tested on a Russian Topol-M missile, designated by the Pentagon the SS-27, that flew from the Kapustin Yar launch complex in southern Russia near Volgograd. "'

" The missile booster fired for a shorter-than-usual duration in placing the dummy warhead and re-entry vehicle into space. The warhead then dropped down to a lower trajectory and was able to maneuver. "

" Maneuverability would let a warhead thwart missile defenses, because such countermeasures rely on sensors to project a warhead's flight path and impact point so that an interceptor missile can be guided to the right spot to knock out a warhead. "


"Rick Lehner, a spokesman for the Pentagon's Missile Defense Agency (MDA), declined to comment on U.S. intelligence assessments of the latest Russian warhead test because data is classified. "


"But Mr. Lehner would say that U.S. missile defenses aim to counter a limited number of warheads from a small nuclear power such as North Korea, not a major strike from a nation with hundreds of missiles, such as Russia.
However, Moscow believes future U.S. defenses, including plans to deploy anti-missile interceptors in Europe or the East Coast of the United States, could be used against Russian strategic missiles. ""


" Russian President Vladimir Putin said a year ago that the new strategic-missile system "will have no analogues," a reference to the hypersonic warhead."


"Meanwhile, the Pentagon announced yesterday the Navy's Aegis missile-defense system conducted the sixth successful test of an anti-missile interceptor hitting a target warhead.
It was the first time that a ship-based SM-3 interceptor missile hit a warhead that had been separated from its booster, the MDA said in a statement. The test was carried out near Hawaii from the Aegis-equipped cruiser USS Lake Erie. "


other Links
1 this one is with a pic
hammeroftruth.com...

2 www.upi.com...

Sure manouvarability is great, but I doubt the warhead would be that accurate.

As for MARV's the US studied them during the cold war for deployment on the Trident D-5 and Peacekeeper missiles. They had a propsed warhead to be deployed called the Mk 500 Evader.

I guess I'd rather have the Russians waste a decent % of their defense budget on ballistic missile technology then on their crumbling military.

[edit on 22-11-2005 by NWguy83]

Originally posted by rogue1
Sure manouvarability is great, but I doubt the warhead would be that accurate.

........

Seriously. When the pure destructive power of modern day Thermal nuclear weapons, they can afford to be inaccurate.

Originally posted by Humster

Originally posted by rogue1
Sure manouvarability is great, but I doubt the warhead would be that accurate.

........

Seriously. When the pure destructive power of modern day Thermal nuclear weapons, they can afford to be inaccurate.

maybe against cities, but they couldn't perform counterdtrike, they just aren't accurate enough.

BTW, missile warheads have far smaller yields than they used to have.

Originally posted by rogue1
maybe against cities, but they couldn't perform counterdtrike, they just aren't accurate enough.

BTW, missile warheads have far smaller yields than they used to have.

When nuclear tech first came out they weren't very accurate....now they are extremely precise.

I think this is a great development for Russia.

Although I don't get...how the heck are the US, or ANYONE meant to shoot down 1000 nukes getting fired at them at the same time??

Originally posted by prelude

Originally posted by Pyros
This is not new technology - the Russians have been working on it for over 20 years, and the west has been aware of their progress for most of that time.

can you please give a link that supports your claim?

No - not all truths are available as a "link" on the Internet. Do a search on COBRA EYE, COBRA JUDY, and COBRA DANE, and you can get an idea of the source(s) of my data. However, it is just a claim on my part. Take it for what it's worth.

Originally posted by Manincloak

Originally posted by rogue1
maybe against cities, but they couldn't perform counterdtrike, they just aren't accurate enough.

BTW, missile warheads have far smaller yields than they used to have.

When nuclear tech first came out they weren't very accurate....now they are extremely precise.

I think this is a great development for Russia.

Although I don't get...how the heck are the US, or ANYONE meant to shoot down 1000 nukes getting fired at them at the same time??

You've missed my point If a warhead is manouvering at 3 km/s it would be very hard to make it accurate, especially as it would have to be manouvering up until about 100km before it's target.
I just don't see how it could be accurate especially as it wouldn't have access to the US GPS system and GLONASS deosn't have accurate coverage of the US.

Originally posted by rogue1
Sure manouvarability is great, but I doubt the warhead would be that accurate.

As for MARV's the US studied them during the cold war for deployment on the Trident D-5 and Peacekeeper missiles. They had a propsed warhead to be deployed called the Mk 500 Evader.

Why is it americans can never appreciate new advances in technoologies by other nations, they always resort to bitching about it, saying things they have no idea whatsoever just to make there tiny brains feel that bit more happier... Give it a rest its not always a competition you dam yanks.

As for the technology it looks pretty good, travelling at multiple miles per second and being able to change course would surely make it a headache for any missile defence system, how would the US even have time to react im guessin from launch to strike this thing would only be airborne a few minutes to any target in the world?

Originally posted by HiddenReality
Why is it americans can never appreciate new advances in technoologies by other nations, they always resort to bitching about it, saying things they have no idea whatsoever just to make there tiny brains feel that bit more happier... Give it a rest its not always a competition you dam yanks.

Sigh - As I've said before I'm not american You really don't like americans do you.

As for the technology it looks pretty good, travelling at multiple miles per second and being able to change course would surely make it a headache for any missile defence system, how would the US even have time to react im guessin from launch to strike this thing would only be airborne a few minutes to any target in the world?

Your informed opinion is it Do some reading on the subject before you make a fool of yourself.

As far as i can see it travels at the same speed as most ICBMs so the US or Western Europe would have the same amount of time as before in responding....
As for the changing course i am assuming that there will only be a limited envelope for making course change....
However rogue1 has come up with the best point so far...the accuracy of the warhead....unless their planning on chucking them at non-military targets ie cities.

These missiles are nice and all, but I have to agree with the statements on accuracy. How accurate can these things be if they zig-zag around. There's only a limited amount of fuel these things can carry and only a few course corrections can be made.

The best weapon is still the one like the MX Peacekeeper that separates into 10 separate war heads before re-entry No zig-zagging is needed because you're going to have your hands full stopping the individual warheads. Also there's no question as to the deadly accuracy of each warhead.

Originally posted by rogue1


maybe against cities, but they couldn't perform counterdtrike, they just aren't accurate enough.

BTW, missile warheads have far smaller yields than they used to have.

If a nuclear warfare really breaks out, its going to be all mass genocide.

No one will border about civilian or other targets, its about, returning the favor to your enemy. Last man standing style. If theres anyone still left standing.