The Russian press is slowly picking up the story about the failed flight test of the Bulava missile that took place on November 10th, 2007. I thought it would be useful to collect in one place what we know about the test program so far. Here is the table:
| Date | Comment | ||
| 1 | 12/11/03 | Success | Pop-up test of a mockup of the missile. |
| 2 | 09/23/04 | Success | Pop-up test. |
| 3 | 09/27/05 | Success(?) | First flight test. Launch from a surfaced submarine. Reports about failure of the third stage. |
| 4 | 12/21/05 | Success | First launch from a submerged submarine. |
| 5 | 09/07/06 | Failure | Launch from a submerged submarine. The first stage failed shortly after launch. |
| 6 | 10/25/06 | Failure | Launch from a submerged submarine. Failure of the first stage. |
| 7 | 12/24/06 | Failure | From a surfaced submarine. Problems with the third stage. |
| 8 | 06/28/07 | Success | Unconfirmed reports about problems with one of the warheads. |
| 9 | 11/10/07 | Failure | The first stage failed shortly after launch. |
There is some uncertainty about results of two tests. The one on 27 September 2005 was reported to be successful at the time, but in December 2006 Ivan Safronov reported that the third stage of the missile failed in that test. Also, there were some reports about problems in the July 28th, 2007, but it is not clear whether these were credible. By that time the information about tests was almost completely disappeared from the public domain.
The secrecy surrounding the tests is getting increasingly tighter. However, it is clear that it is counterproductive and will only increase suspicions that the program has something to hide. The test record, of course, does not look very good, but there is no reason why the designers could not overcome the problems.
UPDATE 11/22/07: It appears that the test took place on November 10th, 2007 after all. I corrected the dates in the message and in the table.
The book
Comments
"The Russian press is slowly picking up the story about the failed flight test of the Bulava missile that took place on November 12th, 2007."
Everyone refer to this site: http://russianforces.org
Not everyone. Kommersant doesn't.
It is sure that Lantratov under an informal source had in view of you.
http://maps.google.com/maps?ie=UTF8&ll=64.584251,39.814625&spn=0.002242,0.01075&t=h&z=17&om=1
Is this really first borei submarine?
Also I read some information on kommersant but I doubt in it.
http://www.kommersant.com/p827768/military_industrial_complex/
Sources say launch date of the Yury Dolgoruky has been pushed back to 2009 or 2010 because of difficulties with tests of the new Bulava rocket that the sub will carry.
Lets discard pup-up tests and ignore unofficial information. We have three success (tests 3, 4 and 8) and three failures (tests 5, 6 and 7). Off course there can be minor failures in some “successes” and some successes in the “failure” (i.e. test 8). Now it seems that is a recoverable project. No a shining test history like the one on Topol-m but, sooner or later the project will be successfully ended.
May be the politicians were too optimistic about Bulava and expected to mimic the Topol-m test history. Unfortunately the Bulava success seems harder to achieve but, it should be assumed that, with the proper money and time, we will have operational Bulava.
I don't think there is any doubt that Bulava will become operational eventually.
Kolokol:
Pavel:
Equally there is no doubt in my mind that both the Bulava will ultimately succeed or in its worth. We have to remember that Russia, outside of the Sineva Project, has never built a submarine launched ballistic missile (SLBM). And, the Sineva was really a re-manufacturing project in actuality. This is a complex business and the Russian Navy and its supporting industrial partners are building and learning from this experience. The Bulava Project may really be victim to the new “openness” in the Kremlin; while facts and details on such test launches are difficult to verify, the fact that such information is available at all is a big change from old Soviet days. How many R-29RM (SS-N-23) test failed before the Delta IVs went to sea? I suspect no one knows.
First priority is to get the Project 667BDRM (Delta IV) boats overhauled and back to sea with the Sineva. The second priority is to continue developing the Kasatka-class and its Bulava weapon. There is no rush; only the need to “get it right”. I have every confidence this will be done.
Frank Shuler
USA
"May be the politicians were too optimistic about Bulava and expected to mimic the Topol-m test history. Unfortunately the Bulava success seems harder to achieve but, it should be assumed that, with the proper money and time, we will have operational Bulava."
Thing I don't get is is there really a need for a new SLBM already? Are they trying to save money by having commonality between their land and sea based missiles? Just wondering what they're getting for their efforts when they already have several apparently relaible types in service.
The only reliable SLBM in service is the R-29. Great throw weight. But it's liquid-fuel. R-39M (development of Typhoon's R-39) was to be the new SLBM 10 years ago. Cancelled after only 3 launch failures in favour of the better, faster, cheaper, Topol-derived Bulava. It certainly hasn't been faster. Dunno about cheaper. Most like not better.
The Google map picture is of "Akson", a yankee class submarine used as a testbed for new sonar. See picture: http://pilot.strizhi.info/wp-content/uploads/2007/04/IMG_8733_sm.jpg
Scott. Yes, there is a need for an advanced solid fuel SLBM. It is a long term need but, nowadays it is a need. The deterrence game will not vanish in the foreseeable future and Russia badly need a potent deterrence tool. You can look the map: NATO all around the west and north. China, east, rising nuclear powers (Israel, Pakistan, China) in the south. An advances SLBM also will down operative costs respect to liquid fuel ones.
I don't doubt that with resources and patience the Russians will eventually "de-bug" Bulava. The more interesting thing to me now is how many warheads will it eventually carry. I've read reports of small warheads which would make it possible to carry ten(10)!!!?????? or is four(4) warheads more realistic? Anyone?
Boris Buliak:
I think the stated payload for Bulava was announced as six warheads.
Frank Shuler
USA
Boris, Officially six. Supposedly there will be some commonality with warheads for the RS-24.
Boris,
Bulava will carry 6 warheads.
Six 100 kiloton most likely.
Pavel, Russia has already made a decision to start serial production of the Bulava-M missile, as press reports suggest! The deadline is 2008! How that is possible? Bulava is not complete its flight test yet. It is not ready at all. It is still a raw product! We are hearing about failure after failure! Can MITT overcome? Will Bulava be operational at all?
I wouldn't make very much of the announcement about serial production. It is, in fact, a standard practice (at least it was during the Soviet times) - all preparations for serial production begin long before flight tests are completed.
I'm sure MITT will eventually figure out what's going on. But even if it will take them a few more years, I don't see any harm in the delay - it's not like Russia needs Bulava for its security.
Well Pavel, how many successful flight tests are needed to start serial production of a missile system? What is the usual practice?
Thanks to all for your answers, I guess I have one more. In reading the specs for both Topol-M 21.9 meter in length vs. 12.1 meters length for Bulava the difference of half a size is obvious.
1. Is this size difference correct? If so, that's more than just a slight reduction in Topol-M size.
2. Is there any indication that the range given will meet expectations? The range I read about is for 8300km, which is similar to Sinevas.
In other words, can Bulava be a MIRVed chopped up in half sea-lauched Topol-M and only loose 1700km from its one warhead range??????
Boris, the diameter of Bulava is enlarged respect to the Topol-M (see the specs, stages diameters and so on). Also Bulava has a 8000 km range for a 1.15 payload while Sineva has 8300 km range for 2.2 tn payload.
"In reading the specs for both Topol-M 21.9 meter in length vs. 12.1 meters length for Bulava the difference of half a size is obvious"
In reading the specs for both Taep'o-dong-2 32 meter in length vs. 12.1 meters length for Bulava the difference it is more obvious...
P.S. Try to compare weight :-)
According to high-lavel sources, last time SSBN TK-208 Dmitrii Donskoy left its berth on October 18-27 for torpedo attack trainings and self-noise measurements.
Bathory: It's very interesting, although it does not immediately contradict the reports about the test.
The diameter increase over Topol-m is .10 meters, but it is there. Thanks for pointing it out Kolokol. I am wondering(assuming the testing for Bulava was expedited for political reasons)now that the cat is out of the bag sorta of speak, why don't the Russians resume a more normal and slowly paced testing program?,including but not limited to: land launches. It seems rushing things at this point wont solve anything and might make things worse.
to Pavel Podvig
This information (in my first comment) quite the contrary contradicts the reports about Bulava unsuccessful test - because SSBN Yurii Dologorukiy is not yet able to serve as a launch platform. And,as far as we know,there is no any launch platform for Bulava SLBM except these two submarines.
I agree - the schedule would be very tight, but without knowing the details of both tests it's hard to tell whether they rule each other out.
Hi! I've been viewing your site for information and updates concerning the russian military and I can say that it has many valuable and accurate data in it. do you think its possible to include a forum on your website to expand overall discussion of the russian military and other related topics?
I thought about a forum, but at this point it's not in the plans - it would take serious effort to maintain it.
Can some please translate these from russian, I think it is something about missiles.
Руководитель отрасли сообщил, что за последние три года ракетно-космическая отрасль изготовила "63 межконтинентальные баллистические ракеты для запуска с подводных лодок, 85 РН и 82 КА". "Указ по созданию космодрома Восточный всеми воспринят очень хорошо", - подчеркнул Перминов.
http://arms-tass.su/?page=article&aid=48627&cid=25
It says that in the last three years the industry has produced 63 SLBMs, 85 space launchers and 82 spacecraft.
OK, Thank You very much,
But Do You know is all that SLBM sineva missiles, even if we take in account bulava only
8-9 were build and test.
This 62 "Sineva" SLBMs delivered this year seems to be a great joke!
Anyway if true, why unfinished "Bulava" project is still on table? Otherwise in 2007 Russia would field enough SLBMs for entire "Borey" fleet!
I can't understand such a mess in Russian strategic weapon programs...
How many warheads is "Sineva" fitted with?