US Detects Unique Russian warhead capable of changing course, page 2

posted on Nov, 23 2005 @ 09:40 AM

link

dbates

this IS a mirv`d warhead

so , now with that info , image 4 or more of them doing this.

posted on Nov, 23 2005 @ 09:57 AM

link

Originally posted by Harlequin
dbates

this IS a mirv`d warhead

so , now with that info , image 4 or more of them doing this.

As far as I know, this new Russian warhead isn't capable of being MIRVed. For it to have manouvering capabilites it would have to be much larger than the standed Reentry Vehicle shape.
Also on a depressed trajectory the RV of a MIRVed warhead ( if it were possible ) would have a much smaller footprint, meaing that MIRDed missiles wouldn't be as versatile in target selection.

bmdefiant

posted on Nov, 23 2005 @ 10:14 AM

link

Exactly Rogue1 the MARVed warhead would need to carry propellant for these manoevers so i dont see many of them being carried.Dont think they would be much use as silo busters either accuracy wise..wonder what warhead size these will be ?

Harlequin

posted on Nov, 23 2005 @ 11:14 AM

link

something around 600kt , means 3 could be carried with 50m CET

rogue1

posted on Nov, 23 2005 @ 11:26 AM

link

Originally posted by Harlequin
something around 600kt , means 3 could be carried with 50m CET

Ahem, where did you get this information from ? You have the specs for the warhead and SS-27 missile somewhere ?
50m CET ? ( isn't it CEP - Circular Area Probable ), would make it by far the most accurate missile in the world, which is doubtful

The SS-27 also has considerable utility as a first strike weapon. A successful first strike hinges upon the destruction of the enemy nuclear force, and the SS-27 should be capable of that task. Though its reported accuracy is insufficient for this, current guidance technology could easily be used to develop this capacity. The accuracy of 350 m CEP reported is strangely low given previous US and Russian missile designs with considerably higher accuracy.

The SS-27 has a range of 10,500 km (6,524 miles) and is reported to typically be equipped with a 550 kT yield nuclear warhead. Unconfirmed reports suggest a yield of 1 MT has been achieved, as well as the placement of up to six MIRV warheads. These enhancements likely come at the cost of reducing the shielding around the warhead and removing the decoys, rendering the missile vulnerable to ABM defenses. It uses a Post-Boost Vehicle (PBV) system to deploy its warhead(s) using a digital inertial navigation system with a GLOSNASS (equivalent to Global Position Satellite) receiver. This achieves a reported accuracy of 350 m CEP

missilethreat.com...

[edit on 23-11-2005 by rogue1]

bmdefiant

posted on Nov, 23 2005 @ 11:35 AM
link

Jeez with friends like that who needs enemies.... What are the capabilities of this re silo busting ? Is the CEP close enough for taking out Minuteman silos or would they need to double up to increase the Probability of Kill percentage... No wonder arms control negotiations need teams of analysts to work out things like these.
According to sources the Minuteman III has a CEP of 100m so your telling us this warhead is more accurate despite manuveuring post-boost phase ?
The Topol has an alleged CEP of 350m so this must be GPS guided...

[edit on 23-11-2005 by bmdefiant]

Harlequin

posted on Nov, 23 2005 @ 12:19 PM
link

yeah . CEP (lil typo on my part)

but 350m isn`t enough to hard kill a silo , as a minuteman can survive as close as 300m , and the russian CEP is better than that

edit:

by that i mean: the SS-24 has a CEP of around 150m , and that is a heavy MIRV`d missile , so why would the russians back track to a much worse CEP?? they would , and they would keep it at 150 or get tighter (yes maybe 50 is a little optimistic - but then again maybe not as russian missiles are better than the us ones IMO)

[edit on 23-11-2005 by Harlequin]

rogue1

posted on Nov, 23 2005 @ 12:31 PM
link

Originally posted by Harlequin

but 350m isn`t enough to hard kill a silo , as a minuteman can survive as close as 300m , and the russian CEP is better than that

Well that was with a standard MIRVed warhead not this new manouvering one.

by that i mean: the SS-24 has a CEP of around 150m , and that is a heavy MIRV`d missile , so why would the russians back track to a much worse CEP?? they would , and they would keep it at 150 or get tighter (yes maybe 50 is a little optimistic - but then again maybe not as russian missiles are better than the us ones IMO)

Whose to say the original CEP of 150m is accurate. The US Peacekeeper had a CEP of under 100m and that was built in the 80's. US missile accuracy IMO is better, they just haven't bothered to build a new missile for 15 years.

[edit on 23-11-2005 by Harlequin]

Harlequin

posted on Nov, 23 2005 @ 12:47 PM
link

The 150m CEP is from western sources - the russians themselves quote a CEP of 600m+

prelude

posted on Nov, 24 2005 @ 07:12 AM
link

Originally posted by NWguy83
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]

Such comments prove your ignorance ....In Russia funds for Ballastic Missiles and Projectile war heads dont come from the defense budget it comes from the space budget ......when you dont have the capacity of appreciation others achievements ..ple liWhy dont you waste your time crating a sperate forum for people like you (many in this forum) for their junk comments about Russia? instead of polluting an informative thread ?

[edit on 24-11-2005 by prelude]