Military Forum for Russian and Global Defence Issues


    Russian Nuclear Weapons Industry

    Share

    Austin
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 5666
    Points : 6072
    Join date : 2010-05-08
    Age : 40
    Location : India

    Re: Russian Nuclear Weapons Industry

    Post  Austin on Wed Jan 02, 2013 1:39 pm

    From recent statement of SRF chief who has mentioned that Avangrad is a Medium Missile , I am fairly certain Avangrad program will have minimum commonality with RS-24 and Topol-M as media makes out to be , the media was equally mistaken when they said Bulava was mostly similar to Topol-M Laughing

    Although the only thing similar between Bulava and Topol-M is the MIRV from RS-24 they share the same stuff.

    Avangrad is most certainly will have a throw up weight of 2-2.5 T to be classified as medium.

    And the test time from 2010 for the RV first getting tested till 2015 which is the deployment time also suggest its a new ICBM.

    It also seems certain that Russian Top Leadership is very certain that US and Europe will go the full way with ABM system developing newer interceptor and will deploy them in numbers over the next 2 decade contrary to the promise that US keeps making that its to deal with rouge state Razz

    Which is why two new ICBM Avangrade and Heavy one has been given the go ahead.

    Austin
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 5666
    Points : 6072
    Join date : 2010-05-08
    Age : 40
    Location : India

    Re: Russian Nuclear Weapons Industry

    Post  Austin on Thu Jan 03, 2013 11:52 am

    In 2011 an official source mentioned “modern low-yield nuclear ammunition being developed for use with future missiles and for replacing the existing low-yield warheads currently deployed on naval missile systems”. The source in question is “Naval Strategic Missile Systems”, a large volume edited by the head of the Federal Space Agency, Vladimir Popovkin. It says that the new ammunition was developed by VNIITF “using a compact thermonuclear device with improved yield and new automatics designed by VNIIEF”, and that it is “the first nuclear device to use an inertial adaptive detonation system”.

    Any idea what the bolded part means ?

    GarryB
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 15465
    Points : 16172
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    Re: Russian Nuclear Weapons Industry

    Post  GarryB on Fri Jan 04, 2013 8:37 am

    Thermonuclear device means it has a fission bomb that sets off a fusion reaction.

    Such devices can often have a dial up capacity, so you can change the yield of the explosion right up to the time of the explosion.

    “the first nuclear device to use an inertial adaptive detonation system”.

    I rather suspect they mean that the device can be programmed to detonate to a specific yield before launch.


    _________________
    “The West won the world not by the superiority of its ideas or values or religion […] but rather by its superiority in applying organized violence. Westerners often forget this fact; non-Westerners never do.”

    ― Samuel P. Huntington, The Clash of Civilizations and the Remaking of World Order

    Austin
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 5666
    Points : 6072
    Join date : 2010-05-08
    Age : 40
    Location : India

    Re: Russian Nuclear Weapons Industry

    Post  Austin on Fri Jan 04, 2013 8:45 am

    ^^ Oh you are talking about variable yeald TN weapons , I think they already had that so does US.

    This is something else I think and I did try to ask people who might be in the know and they are really no answers. It seems people in the trade and do the designing of weapons will know it.

    Quite a few people I spoke to are really impressed by Russias ability to design a TN weapon of various types without the need to proof test it , Seems like these people are Gods of High Energy Physics.

    Another possibility i was tolds is this could be a new generation TN device of single stage that does not need a fission device to trigger but can just use some other non-nuclear means to trigger.

    flamming_python
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 3182
    Points : 3310
    Join date : 2012-01-30

    Re: Russian Nuclear Weapons Industry

    Post  flamming_python on Fri Jan 04, 2013 1:43 pm

    Adding to the arguements against AShBM; it should be noted that a normal anti-ship cruise missile will be far more versatile in terms of how its employed; not just launched from land-mobile vehicles or launch sites but also from multi-role fighters, long-range strategic bombers, stealth aircraft, ships of various designations, submarines, even from covert sites such as container ships and trucks (as popularized by the Klub cruise missile ads).

    Obviously a ballistic missile will be far more limited in options. A cruise missile on the other hand can just be readily fired from where-ever you can fit one of its launchers; all the more so if it uses a standardized VLS compatible with other cruise missiles.

    I'll also imagine that a cruise missile will be cheaper and definitely more compact; it can fit into a launch tube or otherwise be completely concealed more easily - the enemy may never know their locations until they are fired.

    With something like the Brahmos-2 - it will be able to attain somewhat BM-style hypersonic speeds at least during the phases of flight when speed is the most critical factor.

    Overall I think that anti-ship ballistic missiles are something of a dead end.

    Austin
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 5666
    Points : 6072
    Join date : 2010-05-08
    Age : 40
    Location : India

    Re: Russian Nuclear Weapons Industry

    Post  Austin on Sat Jan 05, 2013 12:52 pm

    An interview with head of the 12th Main Directorate of the Defense Ministry, Colonel Yuri owl

    http://www.redstar.ru/index.php/2011-07-25-15-55-32/item/4428-garantyi-yadernogo-schita

    How are nuclear weapons for the newest missile systems from those that are gradually removed from service?

    - Development of modern technologies in the field of construction materials, microelectronics, information creates the conditions to optimize the performance of existing nuclear weapons, and the newly created.

    The ones that are removed from service, are able to perform combat tasks, but due to technical and physical aging are less effective than modern counterparts. They fall short in important characteristics, such as life and, just as importantly, the safety of operation.

    New types of nuclear weapons (nuclear warheads) have smaller size and weight, high reliability. The use of the latest generation of microelectronic control systems greatly increased accuracy and, as a result, the effectiveness of the combat mission. Using sophisticated algorithms, the exchange of information ensures the safety of guarantees of protection from enemy electronic warfare.

    To improve the safe operation of the modern nuclear weapons introduced devices and systems, excluding their involvement and unauthorized use, but ensure their full-time job for combat use. Design of modern nuclear weapons provide protection against accidents of natural and man-made, while maintaining a safe condition after exposure to ammunition damaging factors such as fire, shock or drop. In the newly developed nuclear warheads based on innovative materials and technical solutions that can significantly reduce the time for their service and training for combat.

    TR1
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 5840
    Points : 5892
    Join date : 2011-12-06

    Re: Russian Nuclear Weapons Industry

    Post  TR1 on Thu Jan 17, 2013 7:51 am

    Any way to modernize Topol-M to the RS-24 warhead capacity?
    Only the warhead bus is different AFAIK, and it would turn 18 mobile launchers from 18 warheads to over 100.

    Austin
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 5666
    Points : 6072
    Join date : 2010-05-08
    Age : 40
    Location : India

    Re: Russian Nuclear Weapons Industry

    Post  Austin on Thu Jan 17, 2013 7:54 am

    TR1 wrote:Any way to modernize Topol-M to the RS-24 warhead capacity?
    Only the warhead bus is different AFAIK, and it would turn 18 mobile launchers from 18 warheads to over 100.

    Why would you want to do that ? Replacing the third stage and bus wont be an easy task it better to build new ones.

    A single 800 Kt warhead has its own value to take out Deep Superhardened C&C centers like say NORAD

    TR1
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 5840
    Points : 5892
    Join date : 2011-12-06

    Re: Russian Nuclear Weapons Industry

    Post  TR1 on Thu Jan 17, 2013 7:55 am

    That expensive to replace it?

    I was thinking in terms of reducing cost to meet warhead requirements- lots of Topol-Ms, but less total warheads than the 18 Yars deployed so far.

    Austin
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 5666
    Points : 6072
    Join date : 2010-05-08
    Age : 40
    Location : India

    Re: Russian Nuclear Weapons Industry

    Post  Austin on Thu Jan 17, 2013 8:08 am

    Its more of military need to keep single high yeald warhead they have their own utility to deal with specialised targets with large pen aids , you are not very sure the amount of yeald needed to take it out so you go for highest yeald possible for a given design

    Also when Topol-M was deployed there was START treaty in force that made deploying multiple warhead for Topol-M not possible when the treaty expired they could use the platform to deploy 3 warhead.

    George1
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 9432
    Points : 9924
    Join date : 2011-12-22
    Location : Greece

    Re: Russian Nuclear Weapons Industry

    Post  George1 on Thu Feb 07, 2013 11:08 pm


    Object 370, Project 4202 and construction in Dombarovskiy

    In April 2010, Rosnadzor, the regulatory body of the Russian government, issued a directive that ordered an environmental assessment of a very interesting project - "construction of facilities of the A35-71 launcher with a space head section at the Object 307 site ("создание комплекса ракеты-носителя А35-71 с космической головной частью на объекте 370"). This very brief phrase in a routine bureaucratic document raises quite a few questions - what are exactly the "A35-71 launcher", its "space head section", and "Object 370"? The short answer is that we don't really know. But we could guess (with a lot of help from my readers and some combing through the internet).

    Object 307 is apparently a large construction project at a site 7 km away from Yasnyy. There are two R-36M silos of the Dombarovskiy missile division that are located at that distance from Yasnyy. One, to the north of the town, has been converted to the Yasnyy space launch site that supports launches of the Dnepr system, so it is already in use. The other one, to the east, is just a regular silo, which looks more suitable for a new project. The construction at the Object 370 site appears to be quite intensive - the site includes an "experimental testing base" as well as a number of buildings and extensive support infrastructure, including a new railroad link to Yasnyy.

    The most interesting part of the construction activity appears to involve conversion of the old R-36M silo - SKTB-16, a design bureau with a long history of work on ICBM silos, mentions "conversion of P718 facility to P771 facility" as one of its projects. Now, P718 is apparently the 15P718, a standard R-36M silo; the missile itself has an index 15A18. So, P771 most likely refers to a silo that would house the A35-71 launcher, whatever it is (we'll get to the A35-71 in a moment). I couldn't find a direct connection between the SKTB-16 work and the Object 370, but there are not very many R-36M silos that could be converted. The Rocket Forces has kept some of these silos - there may be some in Uzhur and there are definitely a few in Dombarovskiy. Given the level of activity in Dombarovskiy, it is likely that the Object 370 is indeed the place where the silo conversion takes place.

    The index A35-71 probably refers to some modification of the 15A35 missile system, otherwise known as UR-100NUTTH or SS-19. The index seems to suggest that the missile itself has not changed very much and the most important modification is the new "space head section" (космическая головная часть). I must admit it is really no more than a guess, but it seems to be reasonably consistent with other bits and pieces of information. So, what is this new "head section" and why the missile that carries it could not be deployed in old UR-100NUTTH/SS-19 silos?

    The SKTB-16 report mentions that the conversion is done as part of the Project 4202 (в интересах темы "4202"). This is something new we could work with. As it turns out, Project 4202 is "one of the most important projects" of NPO Mashinostroyeniya - the old Chelomey design bureau that designed the UR-100NUTTH missile. A search through the NPOMash site reveals that this work involves manufacturing of something that has several sections of a fairly complex shape and uses some non-metallic and anti-radar materials - not a bad candidate for the new "head section" of the "A35-71 launcher."

    A few more dots to connect - in 2004, NPOMash demonstrated what was described as a "hypersonic maneuverable warhead" that was flown on a UR-100NUTTH missile. Could that be the new "space head section"? I would say it's quite possible. It is a bit strange that it would be described as a "space" warhead, but it does seem to travel through space for a significant part of its flight, so it won't be much of a stretch. If this is indeed what the Project 4202 is about, it explains why its deployment requires modification of a silo - as I understand, this warhead is rather big, so it won't fit into a standard UR-100NUTTH silo. The R-36M silos are much deeper - the missile is about 9 meters longer than UR-100NUTTH - so it could probably accommodate the bigger "head section" as well. But the silos may need some modification - unlike R-36M family, UR-100NUTTH is a "hot launch" missile. I'm not sure this would be the main reason why the conversion is necessary, though - there might be others.

    The "hypersonic warhead" is not the only possible explanation for the activity at the Object 370. The description of the A35-71 as a "launcher" (ракета-носитель) seems to imply that it would be used to deliver payload into space. I thought that the Naryad-V ASAT system is a reasonably good candidate as well - it was supposed to be deployed on UR-100NUTTH missiles. But a colleague who spent some serious time researching Project 4202 assured me that it's not Naryad-V. Another argument against Naryad is that an ASAT kill vehicle is unlikely to need anti-radar coating or a complex shape. Also, there is a possibility that Object 370 has nothing to do with the Project 4202.

    Another question about this whole enterprise is whether it makes sense to develop a new payload for the UR-100NUTTH missile, which will turn 40 years old in a few years. One possible answer to that is that Russia may be planning to resume production of UR-100NUTTH or build a derivative of this missile - there are signs that something like this is under consideration. It's also possible that the new payload could bde deployed on Topol-M, although this does not seem to be part of the current plan.

    If all this activity is indeed about deployment of a new system that would carry some kind of a "space head section" it could raise a few questions about whether this new system should be covered by the New START treaty. The treaty defines a ballistic missile as a "a missile that is a weapon-delivery vehicle that has a ballistic trajectory over most of its flight path." This definition would probably exempt some of the systems that the United States wants to deploy as part of its Prompt Global Strike program. The U.S., of course, would argue that these systems should not be considered "new kinds of strategic offensive arms" as they do not meet the definition of the treaty - they are not ballistic missiles, for example. Russia might be happy to agree with that position, since that would leave its own systems outside of the treaty as well. But unlike the U.S., Russia might want to deploy them with nuclear warheads - this would probably give the United States a pause.

    I should say I remain quite skeptical about all these fancy systems - it is unlikely that in terms of delivered payload or the ability to penetrate missile defenses (probably a big selling point in Russia) they would outperform ICBMs. But that's never been the point of these kind of projects anyway.

    In the end, I think the long answer to the questions about Object 370, A35-71, and Project 4202 is very much similar to the short one - we don't really know. But there is something interesting (if not quite reasonable) going on at Dombarovskiy. My guess is that we'll soon hear more about it.

    Viktor
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 5629
    Points : 6282
    Join date : 2009-08-25
    Age : 36
    Location : Croatia

    Re: Russian Nuclear Weapons Industry

    Post  Viktor on Thu Feb 07, 2013 11:41 pm

    Interesting, this might be Russian response to US secretive small shuttle launch.

    Austin
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 5666
    Points : 6072
    Join date : 2010-05-08
    Age : 40
    Location : India

    Re: Russian Nuclear Weapons Industry

    Post  Austin on Sun Sep 15, 2013 3:23 pm

    FAS: Status of World Nuclear Forces


    link

    Austin
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 5666
    Points : 6072
    Join date : 2010-05-08
    Age : 40
    Location : India

    Re: Russian Nuclear Weapons Industry

    Post  Austin on Fri Nov 08, 2013 7:15 pm

    Russia Develops Multiple Nuclear SystemsBill Sweetman

    coolieno99
    Junior Sergeant
    Junior Sergeant

    Posts : 136
    Points : 159
    Join date : 2010-08-25

    Re: Russian Nuclear Weapons Industry

    Post  coolieno99 on Tue Nov 26, 2013 2:49 am

    Austin wrote:
    TR1 wrote:Any way to modernize Topol-M to the RS-24 warhead capacity?
    Only the warhead bus is different AFAIK, and it would turn 18 mobile launchers from 18 warheads to over 100.
    Why would you want to do that ? Replacing the third stage and bus wont be an easy task it better to build new ones.

    A single 800 Kt warhead has its own value to take out Deep Superhardened C&C centers like say NORAD
    800 Kt warhead is too small to take out NORAD. However, a  R-36M (SS-18 Satan) armed with a 20 Mt warhead would do.

    coolieno99
    Junior Sergeant
    Junior Sergeant

    Posts : 136
    Points : 159
    Join date : 2010-08-25

    Re: Russian Nuclear Weapons Industry

    Post  coolieno99 on Sat Dec 14, 2013 2:42 am

    How large is Russia's enriched uranium stockpile? Apparently it's big enough to make 30,000 nuclear warheads.

    During 1949-1963, the Soviet Union built four large industrial uranium-enrichment plants. All initially used gaseous diffusion for isotope separation. Starting in 1964, however, the Soviet Union began introducing gas centrifuges and this transition was completed in the early 1990s.
    In 1989, the Soviet government announced that "it is ceasing the production of highly enriched uranium". In fact, all production of HEU had already stopped in 1987-1988 and, because of the huge excess quantities of HEU that have become available as a result of the down-sizing of the Soviet Cold War nuclear stockpile, it has apparently not resumed since.
    We estimate that by the time the production of HEU was ended, the Soviet Union had produced about 1250  +/- 120  tons of 90% - enriched uranium. This number does not include the  enriched uranium that was used to manufactured naval fuel, fuel for research reactors, most of which was produced as less than 90%-enriched HEU (220 tons of 90%-enriched equivalent). Of the 1250 tons of HEU, 500 tons have been committed to be blended down to low-enriched (LEU) to be sold to the United States, with about 400 tons already blended down as of September 2010. A total of 90 tons of HEU were consumed in separate blend-down programs for fuel for tritium-production reactors and research-reactors, in "spike-fuel" for the plutonium-production reactors, in nuclear weapon tests, and lost to processing waste.
    It is estimated that Russia had 770 tons of HEU remaining as of September 2010 and that its total holdings will have been reduced to about 665 tons by the end of the HEU blend-down program in 2013. This includes material in and available for weapons and reserved for fueling naval, research and civilian reactors. At 20 kg per warhead, this would be sufficient for more than 30,000 warheads.

    http://russianforces.org/podvig/2010/12/russia_highly_enriched_uranium.shtml

    http://www.princeton.edu/sgs/faculty-staff/pavel-podvig/

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Megatons_to_Megawatts_Program

    Austin
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 5666
    Points : 6072
    Join date : 2010-05-08
    Age : 40
    Location : India

    Re: Russian Nuclear Weapons Industry

    Post  Austin on Thu Jan 23, 2014 1:54 pm

    Finally even Pavel Podvig admits that Russians are developing new Nuclear Warhead and not using old design , check comment section

    http://russianforces.org/blog/2014/01/russian_strategic_forces_in_20.shtml


    This makes Russia the only country that using Warhead Design based on computer simulation and not actual testing

    Viktor
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 5629
    Points : 6282
    Join date : 2009-08-25
    Age : 36
    Location : Croatia

    Re: Russian Nuclear Weapons Industry

    Post  Viktor on Wed Mar 05, 2014 3:01 am

    And testing it now Austin (for the third time)

    Another new warhead test in a Topol launch from Kapustin Yar

    Werewolf
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 5390
    Points : 5639
    Join date : 2012-10-24

    Re: Russian Nuclear Weapons Industry

    Post  Werewolf on Wed Mar 05, 2014 3:12 am

    Austin wrote:FAS: Status of World Nuclear Forces


    link

    Funny numbers, not even close to reality.

    collegeboy16
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 1207
    Points : 1234
    Join date : 2012-10-05
    Age : 20
    Location : Roanapur

    Re: Russian Nuclear Weapons Industry

    Post  collegeboy16 on Wed Mar 05, 2014 10:11 am

    afaik the russky nuke stockpile has decreased dramatically- a lot of it is tac nukes that are being replaced by PGMs.

    GarryB
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 15465
    Points : 16172
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    Re: Russian Nuclear Weapons Industry

    Post  GarryB on Wed Mar 05, 2014 10:48 am

    afaik the russky nuke stockpile has decreased dramatically- a lot of it is tac nukes that are being replaced by PGMs.

    That chart shows strategic nukes only.


    _________________
    “The West won the world not by the superiority of its ideas or values or religion […] but rather by its superiority in applying organized violence. Westerners often forget this fact; non-Westerners never do.”

    ― Samuel P. Huntington, The Clash of Civilizations and the Remaking of World Order

    collegeboy16
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 1207
    Points : 1234
    Join date : 2012-10-05
    Age : 20
    Location : Roanapur

    Re: Russian Nuclear Weapons Industry

    Post  collegeboy16 on Wed Mar 05, 2014 11:00 am

    In that case thats a lot of reloads-  Twisted Evil 

    Viktor
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 5629
    Points : 6282
    Join date : 2009-08-25
    Age : 36
    Location : Croatia

    Re: Russian Nuclear Weapons Industry

    Post  Viktor on Thu Mar 06, 2014 3:08 am

    It was about time .... nice  thumbsup 

    United Rocket and Space Corporation registered in Russia

    magnumcromagnon
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 4468
    Points : 4659
    Join date : 2013-12-05
    Location : Pindos ave., Pindosville, Pindosylvania, Pindostan

    Re: Russian Nuclear Weapons Industry

    Post  magnumcromagnon on Sun Mar 16, 2014 12:12 am

    Russian Military to Deploy Security Bots at Missile Bases

    MOSCOW, March 12 (RIA Novosti) – Russia is planning to deploy mobile security robots in 2014 to protect its strategic missile facilities, the Defense Ministry said Wednesday.
    “In March, the Russian Strategic Missile Forces [RVSN] began testing mobile robotic systems being developed to protect key RVSN installations,” spokesman Maj. Dmitry Andreyev said.
    Andreyev said the security bots will be deployed at five ballistic missile launch sites around Russia as part of an upgrade to the existing automated security systems.
    The official said the robots will carry out reconnaissance and patrol missions, detect and destroy stationary or moving targets and provide fire support for security personnel at the guarded facilities.
    Mobile robotic platforms play an increasingly important role in military and security applications, helping personnel to meet challenges posed by the growing threat of terrorist attacks or “guerilla warfare.”

    http://en.ria.ru/russia/20140313/188363867/Russian-Military-to-Deploy-Security-Bots-at-Missile-Bases.html


    Viktor
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 5629
    Points : 6282
    Join date : 2009-08-25
    Age : 36
    Location : Croatia

    Re: Russian Nuclear Weapons Industry

    Post  Viktor on Wed Apr 02, 2014 3:12 pm

    New SLBM in service !

    Russian Navy has adopted a missile system with IDB "Liner"

    Sponsored content

    Re: Russian Nuclear Weapons Industry

    Post  Sponsored content Today at 9:40 pm


      Current date/time is Mon Dec 05, 2016 9:40 pm