WOW! 97-98% operational readiness rate is outstanding on a fleet of aging ICBMs. I’m not sure I had a preconception but this percentage seems extraordinary. Is anyone else surprised by this? Doubtful?

Frank Shuler
USA

"Doubtful?"

Who knows... But in the Soviet Union, the operational readiness of ICBMs was at the same and ever higher level, near 98 - 99 %.

If RVSN was able to keep their traditions, spirit and enormous techical base through the years of "Perestroika" and "Demokratisation" (I mean since 1991), and if they using old- or newly-manufactured displacebles for ICBM's critical components, the statement of Gen. Solovtsov could be trustworthy.

Is there any remote technical possibility that the silo-based interceptors planned to be stationed in Poland could be used for boost-phase defence against Russian ICBMs? I guess most certainly not, but would like to have your expert opinion. Many thanks indeed.

Gerhard Mangott:

With the caveat of only having access to published, unclassified information, there no chance the existing American GBI system could be used in a boost-phase interception. The guidance system and kinetic warhead could only strike a near orbiting target and a target that is approaching. Could such a system be developed? Perhaps, but I can’t imagine if you were going to do such that you wouldn’t make the system mobile. (vs. silo) Like a very, very long range version of the US THAAD ballistic missile system. Just a thought.

Frank Shuler
USA

Frank Shuler:
Regarding boost-phase interception your assumptions are right on the money. I don't know if you're aware of this, but the US is working on such system. I believe I saw it on the Discovery channel Future Weapons program. It consists of a modified 747 armed with a laser. Has anyone else seen this?

'Is there any remote technical possibility that the silo-based interceptors planned to be stationed in Poland could be used for boost-phase defence against Russian ICBMs?'

US experts says that in the IDEAL conditions, all 10 interceptors launched from the Poland silos, can only intercept 2.5 'classical' ballistic missiles launched from Russia, IN DIRECTION TO THE WEST EUROPEAN territory.

Or 0 (ZERO) 'new' quasiballistic missiles (based on Topol-M technology), with a shortened boost-phase and manouvring warheads, launched from Russian territory, in direction to the West Europe.

The GBI-class interceptors, planned for deploying in Poland, can only intercept the ICBMs and their warheads, coming from the opposite, relative to GBI INITIAL course, direction.

This mean that the only effective case for GBI usage is a situation, when some ICBMs at boost phase comes in direction 'from outside to the' interceptor location.

So, the EUROPEAN GBI interceptors UNABLE to intercept ICBMs, launched in direction 'from interceptor location to the outside' (like missiles launched from Russia in direction of US through the North Pole): modern interceptors too slow for this task.

While on the subject of missiles, I would like to ask about K65M-R.
1-Has there been another flight since April 2006?
2-Is this a new manouvrable warhead or a second generation?
I ask the second question because allegedly Topol-M single warhead has 'evading' capabilities. Is this correct? Or are the evading capabilities alluded to the Topol-M strictly related to the fact that it carries decoys?
Thanks in advance to any who'd answer.

As far as I understand, the April 2006 flight of K65M-R was a test of new penetration aids and probably a new warhead for Bulava. No signs of anything "maneuverable hypersonic" there.

'Regarding boost-phase interception your assumptions are right on the money. I don't know if you're aware of this, but the US is working on such system. I believe I saw it on the Discovery channel Future Weapons program. It consists of a modified 747 armed with a laser'.

The system mentioned has a name ABL - AirBorne Laser (or Bo-747 ABL).

There's an assumption, that this experimental system, will be able to hit ICBMs, at the boost-phase, at distances of up to 600 km (374 miles).

A 'single shoot' of chemical laser, will be cost of 700 - 800 kilograms of fuel, from the tanks of Bo-747.

As any laser system, it will be quite useless in the case, when some smog will be in the atmosphere, between the ABL and target.

Also, some counter-measures could be used for diminishing of effectivity of ABL, like:

a) very short boost-phase;

b) geographical optimisation of the launching sites;

c) active manoeuvring of the missile at boost-phase;

d) a special coating of the missile with a 'high-albedo paint',

et cetera.

Russian:
Boris Buliak:

The American ABL – project has always captured the interest of the US Congress (also the American public) and continues to be funded regardless of results. Congress actually pulled the project from the US Air Force and gave it to the US Missile Defense Agency (MDA) to keep funding active and interest alive. The US Air Force has never been a fan of this technology. (at least if they had to pay for it!) So, this research & development project fell to the same organization that is charged with “national missile defense”. The Boeing YAL-1A Airborne Laser (ABL) weapons system is a megawatt-class chemical oxygen iodine laser (COIL) primarily designed to destroy Tactical ballistic missiles (TBMs), similar to the Scud, while in boost phase and the science is fraught with all the issues that “RUSSIAN” has stated. This “weapon” isn’t designed to target ICBMs but short-range missiles and, perhaps, cruise missiles. (Cruise missiles???)

Maybe one day this will be able to “dominate a local battlefield” but much will have to overcome for this project to even be a “weapon”.

Frank Shuler
USA

Pavel Podvig:
K65M-R is Bulava warhead. Got it. Is there a program for a maneuvering warhead in the works? On your link I read Anonymous mention ..."all the tests of the so-called hypersonic maneuverable warhead to date were done out of Plesetsk right?"

Last October NTI posted on the airborne laser system:
"U.S. Unveils Airborne Laser Plane"
The U.S. Missile Defense Agency is ready to begin preliminary flight testing of some systems on a new Airborne Laser aircraft, the Associated Press reported Friday (see GSN, June 28).

The agency unveiled the revamped Boeing 747-400F during a ceremony at the company’s Integrated Defense Systems facility in Wichita, Kan.

The airplane would carry a system for detecting, tracking and eliminating enemy missiles in their boost phase of flight.

“I believe we are building the forces of good to beat the forces of evil. … We are taking a major step in giving the American people their first light saber,” agency chief Lt. Gen. Henry Obering said during the ceremony, making clear reference to the Star Wars movies which provided a nickname for 1980s U.S. missile defense efforts.

While test firing of the Airborne Laser in flight is not expected until 2008, testing of select low-power systems could soon commence, AP reported (Roxana Hegeman, Associated Press/Seattle Post-Intelligencer, Oct. 27).
(NTI, Global Security Newswire, October 30, 2006)

Boris Buliak:
K65M-R is a test bed for all kind of warheads, not necessarily for Bulava. As for the "hypersonic warhead", the only (recent) test was conducted from Baykonur, not Plesetsk.

'K65M-R is a test bed for all kind of warheads, not necessarily for Bulava'.

Quite right.

Here's the article about ABL:

http://www.membrana.ru/articles/technic/2006/03/23/184900.html

In Russian, but with good pics.

If we see the service life of missiles then the entire Soviet made ground based ICBM will be decommissioned by 2015 but those 30 SS-19 ICBM. I am in doubt if Russia deploys those 30 missiles. Russia would have around 150 Topol ICBM by that time according to new defense plan. I don’t know how Russia protects itself with that small number of missiles. I think 100 mobile Topol-M by that time would be handy.

Pavel, what’s the service life of Topol-M?

Judging from the Topol experience, Topol-M should be okay for 15-20 years.

If the service of life of Topol-M is (say) 20 years then some of the missiles will be needed to be decommissioned by 2016/2017. That is interesting! And total number of ICBM will be decreased then!!

Pavel Podvig:
"Hypersonic warhead" Is there a name for this program? Any links?
Parimal Debnath:
I'm a little troubled by over dependance of Topol-M. Interestingly, same Gen. Solovtsov mentions on article in Rian that 'newer' ss-18 would stay in service until around 2016, and if a political desicion was made production could be re-started completely in Russian territory. This also applies to the ss-20, which Ivanov among others considered a mistake to get rid of. At a time when the Russian borders are becoming surrounded by nato on the West and by US air bases in central Asia and everywhere else ity is my humble opinion the ss-20 HAS to come back. Just my opinion. Ooh, and I would keep a few satans strictly for MIRV's, and leave all Topol-M with single warheads as they're supposed to.

Search this blog for "hypersonic" - there were a few posts. There was also a good article on it in Russian Newsweek some time ago (in Russian). The project seems to be a remnant of the Albatros system that NPO Mashinostoryeniya carried out in the late 1980s.

Dear Mr. Podvig:
I have your exellent book (however it woud be desireable a few more pictures about russian systems)
Is there any posibility to obtain pictures and information about the OKO and KRONA systems, plus information about the LEGENG System and US-A and US-P satellites, aside of the photos available on the net?
Sir, your work is first class.
Sincerely yours.
Horacio A. Galacho - República Argentina

I hate to admit it but I have not spoken Russian in over 30 years. My literacy level is of that of a starting first grader. No mater. I think I found what I was looking for, HFL-VK. As any new or developing program its often confused for something else.
www.russianspaceweb.com/buran.html
While on that site above mentioned HFL-VK also appears under Topol-M entry.

Horacio A. Galacho: Thank you. For information on specific systems you could try astronautix.com or russianspaceweb.com - if there are any pictures, they will probable have them. There is also the excellent site of the Novosti Kosmonavtiki journal, but it's in Russian. They have a very interesting photo section.

"There was also a good article on it in Russian Newsweek some time ago (in Russian). The project seems to be a remnant of the Albatros system that NPO Mashinostoryeniya carried out in the late 1980s".

I think that the article mentioned is mostly politically engaged.

The main mistake of the article is a assumption, that the new hypersonic manoeuvrable warhead MUST have the same form- and weight-factor, as 'flying lab' GLL-8 / Igla...

Why so? I mean - why the final R&D product (warhead) should have exactly THE SAME specs as, even not prototype, but REMOTE PREDECESSOR, i.e. flying lab GLL-8?

All the specs on the modern manoeuvrable warheads are still classified, so any conclusions, based on leakage of information about this class of warheads, just cannot be trustworthy.

That's right, the total payload of 50-tonn SS-27 Topol-M is (officially) near 1200 kg. Carrier of 100-tonn class, SS-19 Stilleto, has a payload near 4400 kg. And, the most heaviest carrier, 200-tonn class SS-18 Satan, has a payload near 8800 kg.

So why contend that the new, manoeuvrable warhead, has the same weight & other specs, like 'flying lab' GLL-8 / Igla - i.e. it weight should be near 2200 kg?

Why not 1000 kg? Why not 400 kg (100 - 150 kg nuke + other for guidance system & passive hypersonic rigs)?

There was a rumours about ability to install up to 3 hypersonic manoeuvrable warheads on a single SS-27 Topol-M... If this is trustworthy, the single warhead should have a weight near 350 - 400 kg...

'While on that site above mentioned HFL-VK also appears under Topol-M entry'.

I do belive - all the data that's not classified could represent only 'civil' (I mean publically experimental) hypersonic vehicles.

Real 'manoeuvrable', or 'hypersonic' warheads should have totally another design, significantly smaller sizes and weights.

And it's a good idea - don't confuse the term 'hypersonic' with the term 'manoeuvrable'.

In a common case, to be 'manoeuvrable', warhead need no a scramjet engine, but only a good thermal isolation and some passive (i.e. small aerodynamical) rigs.

Also, even group of simple jet (not scramjet!) engines could be useful for manoeuvring, together with small aerodynamical rigs.

I don't see how the rumors about a 350-400 kg warhead are better than estimates based on fairly solid evidence.

'I don't see how the rumors about a 350-400 kg warhead are better than estimates based on fairly solid evidence'.

What evidence, Pavel?

Evidence? The history of the Albatros program.

'Evidence? The history of the Albatros program.'

Fake, just a fake 'for common use'. Dead-end or little-promising brand of research, concerning to the task of creation of REAL, i.e. battle-effective, manoeuvrable warhead.

IMHO. ;-)

On delivery system Kh-101/02. When I google this on first page got only one hit that was relevant(from global security.org) when looking at the end of the page I read an entry in Russian which I believe is for computer furniture. The one article about Kh-101/02 only further confused me, it contradicts your link on subject. Of all the Russian delivery systems the Kh-101 seems like the most mysterious. Unless of course we're talking about "hypersonic" warhead again.

"Of all the Russian delivery systems the Kh-101 seems like the most mysterious".

I think the Kh-101/102 will be a hypersonic cruise missile, a "Russian answer" to US X-51 WaveRider Project.

Kh-101 andKh-102 are the follow on of Kh-55 (nuclear) and Kh-555 (conventional) respectively. They are subsonic cruise missiles with enlarged range (some sources claim up to 5500 km) and stealth features.
Respect to hypersonic cruise missiles, may be you refer to Kh-95 (NATO nickname “Koala”) that was based on GELA experimental hypersonic vehicle. Apparently the project was tested once and cancelled in early 90s.

Guys, thanks for the info., however what I need is updated info. if someone's got it. ie: according to strategic Airforce link on this here site, kh-55 was original followed by kh-555 which inturn would be replaced by kh-101/02. The first flight of kh-555 is put at 1999. Globalsecurity.org has a different story, according to them Russia test flew kh-101/02 in 2000 and apparently their deployment was cancelled in favour of kh-555. I believe they're wrong but lack the evidence to prove it.

Sorry for my repeating but does any one knows if the "Admiral Nakhimov" will be armed with land attack conversional missiles?