RodolfoTopol-M
RodolfoThey wish to but they can’t. Off-course, denying such a long-term aim is part of the game. Anyway, given the state of the art of current ABM interceptors, “aggressive” maneuvers during the boost phase seems as overkill. Trying boost-phase interceptions against boosting Russian ICBM’s is worthless.
RodolfoKaliningrad radar
Space Forces commander said on Saturday that a new radar being built near the Baltic port of Kaliningrad would be tested by the end of the year.
“The westernmost radar Voronezh DM in the Kaliningrad Region may be tested by the end of this year,” Gen. Oleg Ostapenko told a military council of the Space Forces in Krasnoznamensk outside Moscow.
Ostapenko said three more radars would also soon be completed near the cities of Irkutsk in Siberia, St. Petersburg and Krasnodar in the south.
He said the first two Voronezh class radars were already being tested near St. Petersburg and near Krasnodar.
“The radar in Lekhtusi [outside St. Petersburg] is ready to be put on combat duty, which will happen by the end of 2011,” he said, adding that the Space Forces were working on further development of the early warning systems in Russia.
The Armavir radar near Krasnodar will be the second facility after the Lekhtusi complex to close a gap in radar coverage on Russia’s western borders after radar sites were closed in Skrunda (Latvia) in late 1998 and recently in Mukachevo and Sevastopol (Ukraine).
With an effective range of 4,000 kilometers (2,500 miles) the Voronezh class radar has capabilities similar to its predecessors, the Dnepr and Daryal, but uses less energy and is more environmentally friendly.
MOSCOW, May 14 (RIA Novosti)
RodolfoOff course it will not reach American numbers by 2020. Cause, lot of old garbage will be scrapped. Also R&D and production expertise matters a lot.
But, sooner or later, in terms of production capability it will catch the USA.
Rodolfothat would mean more than 500 J 20’s
AFAIK, 500 PAK-FA = 250 for Russia + 250 for India.
And yes, it’s quite possible there will be more than 500 J-20s.
Looking at 2020 projections, GDPs (on a PPP data at current US$ value), the things will look like that:
China: 20 trillions
USA: 18 trillions
Russia: 4 trillions
So, in terms of fighter numbers China will start to compete with USA. Anyway, and back to the thread, … there is a chance a navalized J-20 will follow the J-15? It will be great! ๐
Rodolfodeleted
Rodolfo200 number may only explain vanilla Su-27, Su-27UB and J-11. It does not include J-11B, J-11BS and Su-30MKs. So, China should have more active Su-27 derivatives (~400) than Russia has.
Sooner or later this will happen. May be it already happened. Cause, economic size: China ,US$ 9 trillions (PPP basis) vs Russia US$ 2.5 trillions (PPP basis).
Also in the long term there will be more J-20s than PAK-FAs.
There is no way Russian can compete in a quantitative basis and will be forced to have a sizable tech advantage as well as a strong nuclear arsenal.
RodolfoTR1; We want to see more Victory DaY Pictures! ๐
RodolfoSorry, I mean Turkmenistan! Uzbekistan has no Caspian shores. ๐ฎ
What I mean these “tans” are far from stable countries (exception Kazakhstan). In addition Iran is by no means a weak power and has its own strategic agenda. It’s geopolitical weight is growing. You can say Operation Iraqi Freedom was the responsible to give the Persians an extra geopolitical weight. That’s true, but in the end irrelevant. Persians seems happy flexing muscles and may become ambitious someday. Finally, Azeri are Western friendly. So they might lease a harbor to the “freedom exporting” forces and this will change the Caspian equilibrium.
In the end I don’t consider this vessel overkill and seems the Russian Navy has that point of view.
RodolfoIran, Uzbekistan.
Russia-Kazakhstan relationships are friendly, … so far.
RodolfoYes, it seems from a special operations point of view, that it would be useful to have a ‘stealth’ chopper. The question is whether both Russia and China feel the need to spend on the development of such a type. I think both may well see the benefit to justify such a programme.
Russia has Ka-52 for Special OPerations. Not stealth but a different model from the Mi-28 for the Army.
RodolfoNo. I don’t mean a SRAM atop a cruise missile. A mean a supersonic low flying dart no very different from the one of the 3M54E AShM.
I know, a weapon of this class will have some technical problems that will need to be solved but may be some of the technology developed for the 3M54E can be “extrapolated” to the two-stage ALCM. If the Kh-101 have a range around 5000 km, may be a two stage ALCM of the same size will have around 2000 km range (or jus may be I am mad, quite likely ๐ ).
Finally I concede you. 50-60 km of a super-sonic low-flying profile is too much. Reduce it to 30-40 km.
In the end such a weapon will be more interesting for Western powers than for Russia. Russian ALCM have not the need to confront complex and powerful combos like S-400s nested with Tunguskas and so on.
RodolfoNo, I mean intercepting ICBMs in the boost phase. If these RS-20 like missiles are launched from Tomsk, try to intercept them will be worthless.
RodolfoHis main argument is silo based missile are easier to track and destroy since its position is known in advance compared to mobile systems , he mentions that in that interview that inspite of sats survellence there are ways and means to lower the chance of detection of mobile system.
There are means to counter this. I.e. from your quote
Russia in 2018 will adopt a new heavy intercontinental ballistic missile high survivability
MOSCOW, April 12. (ะะ ะะก-ะขะะกะก). (ARMS-TASS). Russia in 2018 will adopt a new liquid heavy intercontinental ballistic missile (ICBM) silo-based megaton-class, which unlike its predecessor – the RS-20 “Leader” – will have increased survivability due to heavy fortification protecting the launcher and other measures of passive and active defense. This was announced today, Team Advisor Strategic Missile Forces (RVSN), a former Chief of Staff of the Strategic Missile Forces, Colonel-General Viktor Esin.“The adoption of these complex measures will boost the vitality of our new heavy missile silo-based and will force a potential adversary to spend significantly more of their nuclear warheads and means of precision weapons for their removal of their system. But even that would not serve him to guarantee the destruction of the entire group of new Russian heavy missiles , of which at least will be able to survive and strike back “, – said General Esin.
Another source, who held a senior position in the Strategic Rocket Forces, has led more specific information about a qualitatively new fortification protecting new heavy missiles and other means of defense of its silo launcher (MSE).
“Change positional areas missiles Voivod” under the new IDB does not make sense. Firstly, it would require enormous funds. Secondly, the main thing – to create a fundamentally new level of fortification protecting new ICBM silos, their technological and other renovations, operational, engineering and other camouflage, wide engagement of ECM with the creation of a continuous field of impenetrable noise, organize, together with passive defense and active defense silos through the deployment of ABM systems long-range S-400 systems and high-altitude C-500 capable of on a par with space and air assets to destroy warheads IDB and ammunition of the enemy precision weapons, including missiles and aircraft bombs and cruise missiles, “- he stressed.
“As a result of enemy action on one of our silos will be forced to spend not two, as he expects to do it now, but at least two to three times more units and other means. But it will not guarantee his destruction of our entire group of heavy missiles. Part of them will be still able to fly in his direction in a retaliatory strike, “- said the former commander of the RVSN.
As the general said Esin, the Defense Ministry must approve the tactical and technical specification (TTZ) in the creation of a new heavy ICBM before the end of this year.
“Development and production of such missiles are included in the state program of armament to 2020 due to financing part of the development of strategic nuclear forces of the country”, – has confirmed he is referring to the First Deputy Defense Minister Vladimir Popovkin.
“Already defined conceptual design of a new ICBM. Experience shows that development work on new missile last 6-8 years. Thus, we can expect after the test Adopt the Strategic Missile new heavy liquid rocket by the end of 2018 – said Esin . – Of course, the missile will be a deep modernization of the “Leader”, it will have less weight, but along with it all necessary means breaking existing and any prospective missile defense, including all the “gentlemen’s set of” heavy and other false warheads, etc. for ensure the delivery of real warheads to targets. combat equipment will be roughly the same – multiple warhead (MIRV) megaton-class individually guided warheads on target. “
Esin General also noted that in the works to build a new liquid ICBM will be attended by all domestic defense companies, previously successfully created a sea rocket “Blue”, entered service for all Russian submarines third-generation project 667BDRM.
I.e. ultra-hardened silos + point defense ABM systems + noise cancellating GPS signals for PGMs. I think, it is better to have both silo-based heavy ICBMs plus mobile solid fuel high acceleration ICBMs tahn just have mobile systems
A longer boost phase would be a missile is vulnerable for a longer period of time and for liquid fuel missile its really long.
That’s true but considering the enormous Russian land mass, this is a minor problem. I.e. placing the heavy ICBMs in silos located in central Asia (i.e. Tomsk) will render boost phase interceptors useless. The distances to travel to meet the missile are so huge that there are no solutions possible for an interception try. Simply the interceptor will not be quick enough to reach the launched rocket.
Rodolfo
Sign In
