Commentary on Russian Claims
February 15, 2006 :: RIA-Novosti :: Analysis
RIA Novosti political commentator Andrei Kislyakov writes that the U.S. ballistic missile defense system will become operational within years, thus providing a “credible capability,” but adds that “Russia has missiles that don’t care.” He continues with a description of the anti-BMD capabilities of the road-mobile Topol-M (SS-27) intercontinental ballistic missile:
While the U.S. is stepping up its effort to deploy early warning radars and interceptors as close to Russia’s borders as possible to detect missile launches and kill missiles at the boost stage of flight when they are the most vulnerable—and as long as the body and the warhead are still in one piece—the Topol-M, powered by three solid-propellant boosters, accelerates faster than earlier ICBMs and is accordingly less vulnerable to that kind of attack. The missile also has scores of auxiliary jets and a state-of-the-art flight control system that enables a 3D avoidance maneuver capability from the first seconds of flight.
And on top of everything else—in every sense—is the nuclear re-entry vehicle, in fact a ramjet-boosted supersonic cruise missile whose additional sustainer engine accelerates it to between Mach 4 and Mach 5 (Mach is the speed equal to the speed of sound in the air).
Such maneuverability renders a missile system a crucial surprise advantage, as the adversary cannot launch a fire-and-forget interceptor weapon because no anticipated point of contact is known or can be reliably calculated. Normally, the Topol-M carries one warhead but, unlike other strategic ICBMs, it can be easily upgraded with an advanced warhead carrying up to three independently targetable re-entry vehicles. The warhead fires off the vehicles in midcourse, changing direction twice a minute to fool warning radars as to where the charges are heading. Each vehicle is assigned an individual target at up to 100km (60 miles) from the separation point.
(Article, Link)
» More stories on: Analysis, Maneuverable Warheads, Russia
» Missile details: SS-N-6
RIA-Novosti Column on Putin Boasts
February 6, 2006 :: RIA-Novosti :: News
Viktor Litovkin, military commentator for RIA Novosti, argues that Russia’s newest missiles are “indeed unrivalled” and that President Vladimir Putin was correct in his recent boast that these weapons can penetrate any existing missile defense system. Litovkin contends that the SS-27 (Topol-M) ICBM and the SS-NX-30 (Bulava) SLBM pick up speed so fast upon launch that early warning systems monitoring the Earth’s surface from space do not have enough time to take appropriate countermeasures. He adds that these weapons are not “strictly ballistic” in their trajectories. They begin the midcourse phase ballistically, but can dive unexpectedly or maneuver to avoid destruction. In the terminal phase, both accelerate to hypersonic speeds that are beyond the limits of all operational and most future anti-missile defenses.
Litovkin vigorously defends Putin’s decision to boast about Russia’s missile capabilities: “A man who governs a state with such a deterrent capability has reasons to be proud of it.” He takes issue with “the perception of this praise as muscle-flexing or saber-rattling, let alone drum-banging.” According to Litovkin, the Topol-M and the Bulava “have no particular targets and pose no threat to anyone.” Moreover, “Russia has never drawn its nuclear sword—and most likely never will—in a power game.” He adds that the continuous development and upgrade effort of the Strategic Missile Troops “in no way amounts to an arms race,” as Russia’s overall ballistic missile capability is being reduced. (Article, Link)
» More stories on: Maneuverable Warheads, Russia
» Missile details: SS-N-6, SS-26
Putin Again Boasts Missiles Can Pierce Defenses
February 1, 2006 :: News
Russian President Vladimir Putin boasted on Tuesday January 31 that Russia has ballistic missiles capable of penetrating any missile defense system. At a news conference, Putin said,
Russia last year tested missile systems that no one in the world has and won’t have for a long time. These missile systems don’t represent a response to a missile defense system, but they are immune to that. They are hypersonic and capable of changing their flight path.
Putin recently discussed the same “hypersonic” systems at a similar format of a press conference in September 2005, noting their ability to maneuver in course and altitude and evade ballistic missile defense such as those being developed by “partner countries,” a probable reference to the ground-based mid-course defenses being deployed by the United States. (Article, Link)
» Sep. 27, 2005: Putin on Hypersonic Maneuverable Warheads
» More stories on: Maneuverable Warheads, Russia
» Missile details: SS-N-6, SS-26
Hackett on Topol-M Tests, Space Defenses
November 14, 2005 :: Analysis
James Hackett writes in the Washington Times of the numerous reports of Russia’s Topol-M test of a maneuvering warhead on November 1, which he labels both “breathless” and perhaps even to some degree “hype.” Hackett adds a few details about the Russian test which have not previously reported, including that the test included three independently targetable warheads, that the missile is equipped with faster burning engines designed to shorten the boost phase, that 46 single-warhead missiles have been fielded to date, and that 350 more armed with multiple warheads are eventually to replace the SS-25 missiles being phased out.
Hackett notes the irony behind Russia’s “Cold War”-like attempt to overcome U.S. missile defenses which are not even designed or capable of defending against Russian missiles in type or number: “you would think the Cold War never ended. …[the Russians are] ignoring the inconvenient fact that the U.S. does not intend to attack Russia.”
Hackett emphasizes too the significance such Russian developments have for U.S. missile defense efforts, namely, that they reinforce the arguments for going to space. The proliferation of the technologies to evade interceptors in midcourse and terminal phase make all the more necessary space-based interceptors. An excerpt:
A Nov. 2 report in Moscow Gazeta boasted that Russia’s new weapons will be able to overcome America’s missile defenses, noting these new weapons could only be stopped by a layer of space-based interceptors that could strike them before their final phase of flight. That is why, the article says, Moscow keeps pushing a U.N. resolution to ban weapons in space.
The Russians are right in recognizing the importance of weapons in space. The best way to stop a missile launched from an unknown location deep inland—and off-road mobile launchers can go anywhere—is from overhead. When technologies such as rapid ascent rockets and multiple maneuvering warheads spread to China, North Korea and Iran, defenses in space will be urgently needed.
It is not wise to wait until the offense gains too much advantage over the defense. The Pentagon should put more resources at an earlier date into the initial step of designing an architecture for space-based missile defenses, and get on with the developing a weapon that can perform that mission.
The full text is well worth reading: (More »»»)
» More stories on: Analysis, Maneuverable Warheads, Space-Based Systems
» Missile details: SS-N-6
Jane’s Notes Trends of Maneuverable, Ship-Launched Missiles
November 9, 2005 :: Jane's Information Group :: News
In part of the executive overview to the new edition of Jane’s Strategic Weapons Systems publication, Duncan Lennox summarizes two features receiving relatively new attention in the missile defense community: ship-launched missiles and maneuverable reentry vehicles which are a sort of hybrid between ballistic and cruise missile technologies, two issues frequently referenced on Missilethreat.com.
The ship-launched threat is relevant for rogue states or even terrorists who might acquire a SCUD or other primitive missile, equip it with a WMD payload, and deliver it from a short distance off the coast of a major U.S. city. The 1998 Rumsfeld Report warned of such a threat. As Secretary of Defense, Rumsfeld has repeatedly noted that rogue states have tested missiles in this configuration and that the near term threat remains, as have other administration officials. Missilethreat.com maintains an archive of related stories. “The ship-launched threat is one that needs to be taken seriously,” Lennox notes.
As for the development of maneuverable reentry vehicles, this applies especially to Russia’s continued announcements over the last two years that its new ballistic missiles, the Topol-M and the Bulava, are armed with some sort of hypersonic payload which would be capable of maneuvering in its midcourse and terminal phase, and thereby evading the sort of ground-based, midcourse ballistic missile defenses currently being fielded in Alaska and California. On this point, Lennox observes, “the sum conclusion is that in the future, the ballistic missile and nuclear warhead threat situation is going to become more complex and international in nature, with whole regions likely to be involved rather than just two individual countries.” Less unclear, however, is the extent to which long-range ICBMs would be able to maneuver significantly in their boost phase, when the missile is working to obtain altitude and speed necessary to travel long distances. (More »»»)
» More stories on: Maneuverable Warheads, Ship-Launched Threat
Russia Tests New Maneuvering Warhead on Topol-M; Trajectory Chosen to Avoid Alaskan Radar
November 2, 2005 :: Kommersant :: News
On November 1 Russia conducted a major test of its new maneuverable warhead system and of its Topol-M (RS-12M1) ballistic missile system. The missile was launched from the Kapustin Yar facility in Russia, and traveled a relatively short distance to the Balkhash testing range in Kazakhstan.
An excerpt from Kommersant notes that the launch trajectory was somewhat unique:
A RS-12M1 Topol-M intercontinental missile with the new warhead was tested in Kazakhstan yesterday. The launch from a mobile launcher was the sixth test of the system intended to overcome American antiballistic defenses. This was the first launch to take place not at the Kura testing ground at Plesetsk [sic] in Kamchatka, but at the Kapustin Yar ground, part of the Balkhash complex in Priozersk, Kazakhstan. The change was made began the radar system at Kura is in such poor condition that it would not be able to [monitor] maneuvers the warheads carry out after separating from the intercontinental missiles, while American facilities in Alaska would be able to. In Kazakhstan, the Russians were able to control everything themselves.
Strange Reporting
The reports on this test by major media outlets have, however, been remarkably contradictory. Some sources reported that the test was of the SS-25 Topol rather than the SS-27 Topol-M. Most said the missile was launched from Kapustin Yar; but Interfax quoted Strategic Missile Forces spokesman Colonel Alexander Vovk as saying that the missile was launched from the Plesetsk facility in northern Russia. Others still had initially reported it was launched from Kamchatka. (The Kommersant report quoted above oddly says that Plesetsk is on the far eastern Kamchatka peninsula, rather than in northern Russia.) (More »»»)
» Xinhua on test
» RIA Novosti on Topol-M test
» Pravda on missile test
» Interfax on Topol-M test, warhead capabilities
» More stories on: Maneuverable Warheads, Russia, Testing - Foreign
» Missile details: SS-N-6
» Missile system details for: Kapustin Yar Missile Test Complex
Interfax on Topol-M Capabilities, Deployment Schedule
October 25, 2005 :: Interfax :: News
Interfax carries a story about the Russian Topol-M ballistic missile. The news service quotes the head of the Strategic Missile Troops, Colonel General Nikolai Solovtsov, as saying that the switchover to Topol-M land-based mobile missile complexes will begin in early in 2006.
This particular Interfax report is significant, however, not for confirming readiness of certain facilities for further deployment, but for repeating the claims of electromagnetic shielding and adding details about the maneuverability of the Topol-M which previously have not been reported:
Topol-M is a unique missile complex adapted to advanced missile defense systems. It is more mobile than other missile systems and is better protected from the enemy’s reconnaissance.
It weights 47.2 tonnes and is capable of carrying a combat payload of 1,200 kilograms. Its range exceeds 10,000 kilometers. Three engines allow it to develop speed much faster than the previous types of missiles. Several dozen additional engines and control gear make its flight unpredictable for the enemy. Topol-M’s designers claim the system is absolutely immune to electromagnetic impulses.
(Article, Link)
» More stories on: Maneuverable Warheads, Russia
» Missile details: SS-N-6
Bulava Footage Shown on Russian Television; Exotic Claims Again Touted
October 13, 2005 :: BBC Worldwide Monitoring :: News
Russian state television has aired footage from the first test flight of the new Bulava ballistic missile, which test took place on September 27. The footage was apparently displayed on weekly current affairs program “Vesti Nedeli” on October 9.
“Here are declassified pictures of the first real firing of the brand new Bulava missile,” the presenter announced. He went on to explain how three rocket stages take the missile to a certain point where individually targeted warheads separate along with dozens of decoy warheads. Viewers were told that the Bulava is “virtually impossible to intercept, and is faster than all other equivalent missiles.”
The edition of Vesti Nedeli on the 2 October had quoted a senior naval commander, Adm Mikhail Zakharenko, the man in charge of the Bulava project, as saying that footage of the firing was being kept secret because of the missile’s uniqueness.
A word should be said here about the steady stream of reports—coming from President Putin to Sergey Ivanov all the way down—that Russia has supposedly devised new and “invulnerable” strategic systems which have been said to be deployed on the new Topol-M and Bulava missiles. One should take these reports seriously, and if new strategic weapons have been devised, we should consider what sort of strategic defenses are necessary to counter them.
At the same time, the Russian government may be exaggerating the capabilities of the new missiles and the payloads they deliver, especially by claiming that they are invulnerable to every conceivable missile defense. One purpose for such exaggeration would be to impair public or political support for missile defense programs here in the United States. If we may be made to think that missile defense is a technical implausibility, or at least that offensive systems have an inherent technological superiority to defensive ones, we may not pursue necessary defenses as aggressively or ambitiously as we should.
It is important to note, however, that all of the admittedly limited descriptions given of the Bulava and Topol-M capabilities suggest only midcourse or terminal phase maneuvering. Both missiles are still in their essence ballistic missiles, rather than cruise missiles, and as such remain quite vulnerable in what has always been the most vulnerable phase for ballistic missiles, the boost phase. During the boost phase, no release of countermeasures or exotic maneuvering (hypersonic or otherwise) is physically possible.
It is plausible that the new Russian ballistic missiles—and indeed, even older Russian missiles—are capable of evading the sort of ground-based midcourse defenses such as those being deployed in Alaska and California. In this sense, the Russian claims may be true—insofar as they are applied to the systems currently being pursued. But it remains quite doubtful that any ballistic missile could avoid boost phase defenses, were the United States to again pursue these seriously. The relative ease with which midcourse and terminal phase defenses can be overcome points to the importance of destroying missiles in their boost phase. Loose claims by Russia must not be interpreted as an excuse to abandon the pursuit of robust defenses. (Article, Link)
» More stories on: Maneuverable Warheads, Russia
» Missile details: SS-26
Putin Reaffirms Plans for Hypersonic Maneuverable Warheads
September 27, 2005 :: RIA-Novosti :: Writings
In a question-and-answer session with members of the Russian public broadcast live by Russian RTR television, President Putin spoke of Russia’s plans to rearm its military forces with advanced new weapons, including strategic missiles capable of penetrating foreign defenses. Putin discussed in particular hypersonic strategic systems capable of maneuvering both in course and altitude which are capable of evading ballistic missile defenses such as those being developed by “partner countries”—a probable reference to the midcourse defenses gradually being fielded by the United States. Putin has spoken of these maneuverable systems on several occasions. Defense Minister Sergei Ivanov referred to them as well in a recent television interview.
Excerpt of Putin response from Russian television and print media:
There is a lot going on from the point of view of re-equipping our army. This goes for state-of-the-art tanks. For the first time, large batches of new tanks for the army will be procured. We are moving towards the trials of upgraded new missiles that will be employed both on sea and on land. We are beginning to procure new ballistic missiles, including mobile systems.
We are continuing to develop precision-guided weapons in the testing of which I recently took part, as you probably have seen. It was a long-range, precision-guided weapon [possible reference to SS-N-23 launch on August 16, or to the test of a new cruise missile]. We shall be developing—indeed we are developing and will be bringing into service—new precision-guided strategic systems. I have already spoken about it. They are the kind that no-one in the world has obtained or is likely to obtain before we do. They are systems that will operate at hypersonic speeds and will be able to change direction in terms of heading and altitude. They are virtually unassailable systems, unassailable for anything including the missile defenses that are being developed in some of our partner countries.
Whereas only a few years ago Russia bought very little for the army, Putin said, “A great deal has been done in the past few years to restore the defense industry’s financial health. Xinhua cited Putin as saying that some 5 billion US dollars worth of Russian arms were exported in 2004. Putin said that expansion to foreign markets was a way to support Russia’s defense sector financially. “If our specialists make it to foreign markets and uphold our interests there, it will be a very good job,” the president said.
In a curious follow-up story published by RIA Novosti, however, an anonymous “air defense expert” is cited as saying that Putin, “must have meant state-of-the-art air defense systems when he said that Russia would deploy new hypersonic missile systems, virtually invulnerable to enemy defenses.” The air defense expert quoted by RIA Novosti added that specialists and researchers had been working on these weapons for a long time, and that the new system would (allegedly) combine the functions of air defense, missile defense and space defense.
To suggest that these systems referenced are air defenses would seem to make little sense, however—air defenses (for example Russia’s S-300 and S-400 systems) have no need to penetrate American missile defenses. (Article, Link)
» RIA Novosti: Air defense expert says Putin really meant to say air defenses
» Translation of RTR television broadcast
» Xinhua on Putin comments
» Sep. 6, 2005: Ivanov interview on strategic weapons, Chinese relations
» More stories on: Maneuverable Warheads, Russia
Interview: Ivanov on Chinese Relations, New Strategic Weapons
September 6, 2005 :: BBC Worldwide Monitoring :: News
Russian Defense Minister Sergey Ivanov gave a rare television interview, for the “Vesti Podrobnosti” television program on the RTR network, discussing the recent joint military exercise with China, Russian military doctrine and policy, and long term plans for Russian strategic forces. Comments of particular interest included Ivanov’s discussion of the “geopolitical” significance of Russian military exercises with China: that the exercises represented a certain “certain qualitative shift” in relations, and that China is a “strategic partner.” Ivanov seemed to bristle at suggestions that Russia was out of line to engage in such exercises: “we are, excuse me, a sovereign state and did hold and will hold military exercises with whoever we like.”
But also of interest are his comments about Russia’s strategic nuclear forces. When asked by the interviewer about “new weapons” to be the “object of pride of the Russian armed forces,” Ivanov’s response seemed curious, and perhaps was directed less to the Russian television-watching public and more to the American defense community. Ivanov stressed in particular the importance of remarks made by President Putin “about a year ago” at the Russian launch facility at Plesetsk. The remarks referenced are likely those Putin made at Plesetsk in February 2004, in conjunction with Russia’s own, major, strategic wargames. Putin, Ivanov said, “was absolutely right when he said that every comma, every letter and every word in it had a particular significance. I still cannot expand on the matter but we are seriously working on the development of fundamentally different types of weapons, which will ensure for us reliable and guaranteed security after 60 years, after 70 years, easily.”
If it is this speech by Putin to which Ivanov referred, then he meant to underscore the revolutionary quality of the alleged maneuverable (perhaps hypersonic) warheads which could be launched by ballistic missiles, and which pose a major impediment to any American ballistic missile systems which are designed to intercept in the midcourse phase or later. Only a boost phase defense, which can destroy the launcher before it can release the maneuverable warhead or any decoys and countermeasures, could defend against such a threat. It is likely this ability in which Ivanov resides hope that Russia can maintain its offensive nuclear ability to strike the United States for the next 60 years, if the United States continues its decades-long delay of the deployment of strategic defenses.
Some excerpts from the Ivanov interview: (More »»»)
» February 8, 2005: Update on February 2004 test of maneuverable warhead
» More stories on: Maneuverable Warheads, Russia
» Missile details: SS-N-6, Taep'o-dong 2
 |
| Total Records: 14 |
[1]
2
»
|
