At his press-conference a few days ago Yuri Solomonov, the chief designer of the Moscow Institute of Thermal Technology, did not say anything really new - just his usual praise of Topol-M and Bulava missiles. But he made one interesting point, which may indicate that there is more to the story of new missile development in Russia than meets the eye.
Solomonov underscored that it does not make sense to develop new liquid-fuel ICBMs - solid-propellant ones can be adapted for mobile launchers, which makes them much less vulnerable and so on. All of this is true, but the question is, why did Solomonov feel he needs to spend time on this issue at all? One would think that this debate is long over - Topol-M has been already chosen the primary and the only missile of the Russian strategic forces (bar a few holdovers from the eighties).
But if we look at the brouhaha about the "hypersonic maneuverable warhead", we may notice that the only time this thing was tested it was launched on top of an SS-19/UR-100NUTTH missile. And we know that things capable of "hitting targets at an intercontinental depth, [...] with a hypersonic speed, high precision and the opportunity of deep manoeuvre in terms of height and course" are quite popular with President Putin (those were his words). So, I would not be surprised if the NPO Mashinostroyeniya (the Chelomey Design Bureau), which designed UR-100NUTTH (and most likely the "hypersonic warhead" as well), is lobbying in favor of development of a new version of the missile.
The book
Comments
So, the maneuverable warhead exists or it is just empty boasting like these old-funny words about "invincible an invincible" B2 and F-117 that crashed in Serbia?
Solid Fuel Missiles are more compact and easy to transport and have less of a maintainence issue ,definately a preffered choice for mobile ICBM .
Liquid Fuel has its advantage in terms of higher Isp translating to Large Throw Weight , and the engines can be throttled or turned on or off while in flight.
Russia certainly has a lot of experience with Liquid Fuel ICBM and they wouldnt like to loose it with time
Certainly there are reports of a new heavy Liquid Fuel ICBM under development with throw weight of 4.5 tons.
When there is two different competing design bureau , There is bound to be some exchange of words as too which is a better option.
Its wise to maintain capability in both domain , If it comes to Heavy Silo Based ICBM Liquid Fuel is a better option
So Austin, strategic forces will seems something like this:
- Liquid-fuel silo-based heavy missiles: extended-life SS-18, "Ukrainian" SS-19 and the follow-on missile (on design-board)
- Solid-fuel mobile Topol-m and Bulavas (these for intermediate range missions without withdrawing the INF treaty)
- MARV warheads can be deployed both in silo-based and/or mobile missiles
Right?
Here a detailed article about the shape of the Russian ICBM forces: http://cns.miis.edu/pubs/week/051109.htm
I'm afraid the article on Russian ICBMs got the maneuverable warhead (which it calls Igla) story completely wrong. Note that Solomonov has never said anything about this "hypersonic maneuverable warhead" (bar some derogatory comments).
Interestingly, Solomonov doesn't talk about heavy liquid-fueled missiles, ... so far. I think theses rockets "exists" just in design boards and will be considered after 2015-2020, after the "demise" of SS-18 and SS-19. Of course, I am guessing.
Why would anyone talk about heavy missiles? Why would anyone need them, now or after 2015-2020?
So, why you are claiming this?
"So, I would not be surprised if the NPO Mashinostroyeniya (the Chelomey Design Bureau), which designed UR-100NUTTH (and most likely the "hypersonic warhead" as well), is lobbying in favor of development of a new version of the missile."
UR-100NUTTH/SS-19 has never been a heavy missile. And, for that matter, no one would need them either. Well, no one, but NPOmash, of course.
OK then, seems that the factory is hunting for money or something like this?
Anyway the universal Topol-m & Bulava "family" seems as a robust and cheaper option.