Oreshnik missile system (IRBM)

I do not see how this IRBM is just some evolution of existing Soviet designs.   It's a missile system?  That is not a valid argument.   This system has hypersonic MARVed stages
and is unlike any other missile system in existence.   Here I agree with Postol's assessment. It is somewhat like the Avangard hypersonic glider warhead system, but I am sure
those are not powered vehicles and use the ICBM kinetic energy to reach their target by very high velocity gliding through altitudes above 50 km.   There is a relation between
the air density and the speed of gliding you want to achieve.  The higher the speed, the less density needed (*) and there is the bonus of less friction dissipation of the vehicle
energy.    The Oreshnik hypersonic vehicles are powered and glide through the stratosphere below 50 km.  

Sure, the technology rests on existing achievements but this is neither here nor there.

(*) Obviously as the density goes to zero there is no more lift effect and there is no value in trying to glide in space.   The transition point is somewhere around the
"turbopause" at close to 80 km.  The density is not exactly zero but too low for continuum regime dynamics.

Not everything was a Soviet invention. Hohols wouldn't know - the Soviets uplifted them from the primordial Ukr soup.

From MoA. I've followed the poster for 10+ years, as you might assume from his name he knows his stuff.

Re: Ritter's take on Oreshnik config

This seems to be common view among the missile guys as far as I can tell, but the general thought is that the IPBVs of an Oreshnik are not multiple rocket-powered vehicles with or w/o submunitions (as they are in the YARS-M ICBM), but are true maneuverable atmospheric hypersonic vehicles with or w/o submunitions.

That's the best guess (of some) based on the overall hypersonic speed, but there's still even no solid confirmation of launch point, trajectory or altitude. US knows from SBIRS data, but is unusually secretive about what they know. Pentagon press briefing statements on Oreshnik sounds more like Reddit experts logic than actual fact. Imagine that! Now for my far superior Twitter expert's logic, lol:

During a typical ICBM or IRBM mid-course, the earlier booster stages are spent, detached and the reentry bus (RV) continues on by itself still loaded with a warhead or MIRVs. It's traveling outside the atmosphere at hypersonic speeds, but is still vulnerable to mid-course interceptors (THAAD, S-500). The loaded RV can't maneuver enough to evade ABM interceptors, although some have deployable decoys for defense (questionable effectiveness). The warhead or warheads/MIRVs are not released to fly independently until just before reentering the atmosphere (end of mid course phase). From that point on, they're vulnerable to any anti-ballistic SAMS and typically don't have evasive maneuvering capability, there's just more of them to hit after release than the single loaded RV bus.

The Oreshnik IRBM boost phase doesn't look like a traditional ICBM ballistic boost phase. The intent seems to be to get the payload up to 80 - 100 km (edge of atmosphere or just above) a few hundred km downrange above Mach 12 or so, then release the IPBVs, except they're not rockets but hypersonic vehicles capable of gliding another 1500 km or so to their targets. High-atmospheric hypersonic flight allows intense maneuvering for evasion and targeting of widely-disbursed, off-axis targets (vs. MIRVs generally lobbed on-axis of missile path). ICBMs could do this, but you need a massive quantity of propellant to power maneuverable (evasive) hypersonic flight for 1000's of km, there's heat issues and the payload is limited (yet Avangard does this).

The other twist in Oreshnik's six HVs is that they apparently carry six submunitions that travel at hypersonic terminal *speeds* but (as far as anyone knows) are not truly hypersonic flight vehicles - they were not seen doing energetic maneuvering for evasion after release and may not be capable of guidance/maneuver/fine targeting at all. Or they are capable, but it wasn't used or we couldn't see it.

Scott's characterization of 'solid metal slug' (tungsten alloy rods or whatever) is reasonable speculation for submunitions, but not necessary (and nobody really knows at this point). The Russians don't need a solid metal slug to survive the heat from 15 seconds or so of submunition flight from the HV to the target after release. They seem to have the metallurgical know-how to use an ablative hypersonic cap/nosecone and body insulation for guidance/explosive payloads that would serve just fine. Solid tungsten or heavy alloys do maximize the kinetic strike effect, but hauling six of them in six HVs would take a ton of booster propellant and is going to kill the maneuverability and glide characteristics of the HV carrying them. Trading off a hundred kg of a monolithic metal slug for a lighter rod and maneuvering/fine terminal guidance might be worth it. Or maybe not.

No idea what shape the mid-course HVs would have, but the Avangard's manta ray shape doesn't look practical if you need to stuff six of them in the upper stage of an Oreshnik. Avangard's shape is fine for a unitary warhead, but probably not ideal for six long, cylindrical submunitions. Now they may well be using a mini-Avangard shape for the six HVs - it's just that nobody has any idea yet and the Russian MoD isn't likely to post the blueprints on Telegram. (I've asked and they have not responded!)

Oreshnik may also be the ideal first wave weapon for attacking heavily-defended targets. You don't need a massive 2000 lb. JDAM-class explosion to take out multiple, disbursed components of an AD complex or SAM sites. If the submunitions were precise enough, you could easily wipe them all out, paving the way for successive waves of powerful ballistic or cruise missiles. See what I did there? [cringe]. As Karlof1 pointed out, perfect for airfields (or naval ports too).

Posted by: PavewayIV | Nov 25 2024 0:41 utc | 133

The Kinzhal has a range of 2000 km and uses the Mig-31 to give it an initial kinetic boost. Using an IRBM to give hypersonic vehicles a lot of initial energy allows the amount
of fuel they carry to be greatly reduced. The main issue is how much air friction dissipation there is. So gliding at higher altitudes would make more sense. But it is possible
that the vehicles lobbed by Oreshnik do not have a 1500+ km range. They may have a 500 km range which is sufficient to achieve the objective. If they are lobbed by
a missile, the release point may as well be closer to the target to get there faster.

We probably won't have to wait too long before pictures of our "dear one" the Oreshnik will be released. I still stick with rods as the type of warhead that was used and not glide vehicles as such. For the type of target those multiple rods makes perfect sense.

That is not to say that it doesn't have any glide vehicle(s) in it's armament config. I'm sure it could be fitted with a single Avangarde (or even smaller versions). This missile system may just have several more aces up it's sleeve.

IT was all just an optical illusion

Yes, we all went nuts.

are not truly hypersonic flight vehicles - they were not seen doing energetic maneuvering for evasion after release and may not be capable of guidance/maneuver/fine targeting at all.

We only witnessed the last few kilometers of their descent. We don´t know if there were evasive maneuvers.
Can you see if some bomb hitting a building is guided or not? Nope.

S-500 should be able to intercept Oreshnik. THAAD might be able to do that too.

Oreshnik is within the intercept envelope of SM-3 and SM-6, but given how poorly SM-3 fared in Israel it is unlikely to be successful.

'Oreshnik can stop NATO threat to Russia'
 
Russia can prevent the threat from NATO, which plans to deploy troops near the borders of Russia and Belarus, if it hits the transport infrastructure and others of the alliance with Oreshnik (https://t.me/geopolitics_live/38042), a member of the Scientific Council at the Russian Security Council, Alexander Yakovenko, said.
 
"Oreshnik provides an opportunity to do this bloodlessly and without using nuclear weapons. We can send information about our launches to the American side in advance, indicating that these will hit targets east of the prime meridian; that is, they will not threaten the territory of the United States," he wrote in his article.

There is no way that five countries on this planet can produce such high temperature material. Maybe 3 at most. But I think Russia is a clear leader at present so there
is actually only one such country. Maybe in 10 years there will be three.

I think the Chinese have demonstrated some hypersonic glide vehicles a few years ago, in a test launch. Per Mercouris's reports anyway.

So the Chinese probably have such material technology as well

Actually, the real breakthrough behind Russian hypersonics is not the platforms themselves - its the perfected shock and thermal hardening of nuclear warheads that enable their function despite the rigors of hypersonic impact. Let me explain.

The improved bunker busting capability is obvious enough, a hypersonic penetrator will pierce many times more than supersonic penetrators.

But did you know that even just a modest penetration (say 3m) into the earth will tamp enough of the destructive force of a nuclear device to produce a ground shock equivalent to a nuke at least 20 times more powerful detonated on the surface?

The implications are insane. For ICBMs, even hardened Soviet nuclear silos can only handle surface detonations - nobody designed against an earth penetrating weapon that will produce most of its damage through a ground shock from below the ground - look how thin the side walls are in this SS-18 silo:



Against submarines the effect is even more pronounced. Underwater explosions will significantly multiply the effect of the shock wave against submarines and of course, hunkering down at the maximum crush depth is no longer a viable option for subs to ride out nuclear strikes when the nuke can dive deeper than they could.

This is why the Russian hypersonics are very dangerous. Each and every one of them is a very capable counter-force weapon. In an age with unthinkable precision and remote sensing capabilities, its only a matter of will, not capability, for Russia to annihilate anyone on the planet, even nuclear superpowers.

And no, America doesn't have the technology to replicate this. Nobody else does. The closest they got is the W86 warhead which is roughly impacting at Mach 5, but since then they've transitioned to subsonic bunker busters so the technology was definitely not perfected.

because interestingly it is China, Iran and North Korea who are the only ones that have demonstrated such capacities.

Add Yemen to the list and we got five.