| Submit your comments on this article |
| Caucasus/Russia/Central Asia |
| The "New Form" of Russian Nuclear Missile |
| 2004-11-17 |
| From AP, efl President Vladimir Putin said Wednesday that Russia is developing a new form of nuclear missile unlike those held by other countries, news agencies reported... No details were immediately available, but Defence Minister Sergei Ivanov said earlier this month that Russia expected to test-fire a mobile version of its Topol-M ballistic missile this year and that production of the new weapon could be commissioned in 2005. News reports have also said Russia is believed to be developing a next-generation heavy nuclear missile that could carry up to 10 nuclear warheads weighing a total of four tonnes, compared with the Topol-M's 1.2-tonne combat payload. Topol-Ms have been deployed in silos since 1998. The missiles have a range of about 10,000 kilometres and reportedly can manoeuvre in ways that are difficult to detect. Earlier this year, a senior Defence Ministry official was quoted as telling news agencies that Russia had developed a weapon that could make the United States' proposed missile-defence system useless. Details were not given, but military analysts said the claimed new weapon could be a hypersonic cruise missile or manoeuvrable ballistic missile warheads. |
| Posted by:PlanetDan |
| #23 To quote the Reporter character in the end-scene from the 50's sci-fi classic THE THING - "WATCH THE SKIES", and the horizon and the ocean! Those seeming light streaks/flashes streaking across the darkness of space or rising from the sea is GLOBAL MISSLE DEFENSE, not meteors, comets, or St. Elmo's fire, etc., AND THE COMMIES KNOW IT. With reports of JAPAN, TAIWAN, and Singapore, etc. asking to be part of GMD, and being surrounded by mostly pro-US/Wes/Democracy states in CENASIA, the Commies know the clock is ticking against them. |
| Posted by: JosephMendiola 2004-11-17 11:26:34 PM |
| #22 *rimshot* I was waiting to see if you'd take it, TGA, lol! And Howard, baby, if you weren't dead I'd suggest you need to get out more, heh. BTW, they imploded the Desert Inn - looking for some new digs? [Digs - get it? *little rimshot*] |
| Posted by: .com 2004-11-17 8:24:55 PM |
| #21 But YOUR Germans were better than THEIR Germans :-) |
| Posted by: True German Ally 2004-11-17 8:01:39 PM |
| #20 No it's their launch vehicles, designed by their Germans, as opposed to our launch vehicles, designed by our German, using a camera invented by their Germans, stolen by us. Clear? |
| Posted by: H Hughes 2004-11-17 7:54:12 PM |
| #19 We're actually talking about their German launch vehicles, aren't we? |
| Posted by: .com 2004-11-17 6:44:35 PM |
| #18 Ah the famous Topol M. The one that, so it is reported, didn't make Gorby lose sleep over Reagan's SDI program... Ask Condi... Я понимаю. Ничего, ничего, пожалуйста. Ничего страшного |
| Posted by: True German Ally 2004-11-17 6:37:53 PM |
| #17 They still can't make a good toaster-oven. Maybe but they do make very reliable, albeit low-tech, launch vehicles. |
| Posted by: AzCat 2004-11-17 6:17:41 PM |
| #16 it's good PR aka dezinformatsiya |
| Posted by: lex 2004-11-17 5:59:40 PM |
| #15 Bet it's just an follow on to old Soviet cold launch technology, which makes perfect sense if you think you can reload.... Jeezbus, you still get an indication of launch at about 100 ft above the silo... but it's good PR. |
| Posted by: Shipman 2004-11-17 5:48:50 PM |
| #14 ...and there's always the Matthias Rust Stealth Cessna if all else fails. |
| Posted by: Dar 2004-11-17 1:06:09 PM |
| #13 Oh, yeah? Well the US still has missles that can easily penetrate the Russian missile-defence system.....uh, nevermind. |
| Posted by: 98zulu 2004-11-17 12:38:54 PM |
| #12 Anything that can propel four tonnes of warhead is going to use enough energy that some of it will be readily detectable. We may new new instruments, but that's not a daunting proposition. However, characterizing that energy signature will take time and, depending on the boost mode and its maneuvering options, may not be a trivial sensor/software exercise, even if theoretically quite possible. The Devil is in the details on these things .... |
| Posted by: rkb 2004-11-17 12:37:06 PM |
| #11 This is just more of Putin's Rodney Dangerfield policy. Bullying Ukraine. Putting more troops in Central Asia. Big talk about missiles. Yawn. Come back and talk to us when you've figured out how to put down a ragtag insurrection within your own borders, one that should have been suppressed ten years ago. Or talk to us when your third-world resource economy has figured out how to create a rudimentary banking system instead of forcing your citizens to stuff all their cash under mattresses. Or maybe when you've managed to keep your far eastern governors from becoming independent dictators who are falling into the Chinese orbit. |
| Posted by: lex 2004-11-17 12:12:56 PM |
| #10 They still can't make a good toaster-oven. |
| Posted by: Dreadnought 2004-11-17 12:07:14 PM |
| #9 The Russians have turned to making grand claims rather than doing. I'm waiting with baited breath for the Mars landings they're planning sometime in the next year or two. Unless they forgot of course. Fact is if the thing goes suborbital it's the same as every other missile and can be shot down. If it hugs the ground it's gonna use up a ton, ton, ton of fuel to get to target. |
| Posted by: rjschwarz 2004-11-17 10:55:57 AM |
| #8 2b - Because they are fierce and mighty and want some RESPECT. We never call them anymore, or threaten then with Capitalist Aggressive War, or show up for long lunches at the SALT XXIII meetings. They are lonely. |
| Posted by: Laurence of the Rats 2004-11-17 10:41:27 AM |
| #7 and they are telling us this because.....??? |
| Posted by: 2b 2004-11-17 10:34:16 AM |
| #6 Looks like we'll need to tweak the Zionist Death Ray, again. |
| Posted by: Seafarious 2004-11-17 10:15:58 AM |
| #5 Anything that can propel four tonnes of warhead is going to use enough energy that some of it will be readily detectable. We may new new instruments, but that's not a daunting proposition. |
| Posted by: Tom 2004-11-17 10:15:52 AM |
| #4 How about a little SCRAMJet-powered interceptor, scarecrow? |
| Posted by: BH 2004-11-17 10:11:48 AM |
| #3 The issue isn't how fast light travels from a laser, it's the time needed to identify and lock onto the missile as a target. Identifying could be hard if the propulsion system is significantly different from existing missiles. Locking on could be hard if the missile were able to maneuver while in flight (i.e. isn't simply ballistic). |
| Posted by: rkb 2004-11-17 10:00:54 AM |
| #2 Can it fly faster than a laser? |
| Posted by: Anonymoose 2004-11-17 9:57:49 AM |
| #1 "unlike those held by other countries" It's coal powered. |
| Posted by: Chuck Simmins 2004-11-17 9:43:23 AM |