dark light

Rodolfo

Forum Replies Created

Viewing 15 posts - 271 through 285 (of 1,190 total)
  • Author
    Posts
  • in reply to: Chinese J-XX/14/20 p.2 #2336452
    Rodolfo
    Participant

    It looks awesome! 😎

    in reply to: Russian Aviation News – Часть 3! #2337754
    Rodolfo
    Participant

    How many Su-34 do the Russian Air Force have now?

    in reply to: Russian Space & Missile[ News/Discussion] Part- 4 #1799424
    Rodolfo
    Participant

    New Russia LPAR

    http://russianforces.org/blog/2010/12/a_new_early-warning_radar_is_b.shtml

    Question: To replace the dismantled one in Krasnoyarsk during the mid-80s?

    in reply to: Russian Aviation News – Часть 3! #2338953
    Rodolfo
    Participant
    in reply to: Russian Space & Missile[ News/Discussion] Part- 4 #1799758
    Rodolfo
    Participant

    I don’t get it too.

    I also bet the new “heavy” missile will be in the SS-19 class.

    in reply to: Russian Space & Missile[ News/Discussion] Part- 4 #1799812
    Rodolfo
    Participant
    in reply to: Russian Space & Missile[ News/Discussion] Part- 4 #1799848
    Rodolfo
    Participant

    Two missiles! That’s an “impressive” re-armament rate! :(:mad:

    in reply to: Russian Space & Missile[ News/Discussion] Part- 4 #1799870
    Rodolfo
    Participant

    Western military district gets first Iskander tactical missile system

    The first Iskander tactical surface-to-surface ballistic missile system has entered service with the Russian Army’s Western Military District, regional commander Arkady Bakhin said on Tuesday.

    “We are at practically 98 percent permanent readiness. We are carrying out reequipment and delivery of new types of weapons,” Bakhin said.

    Iskander is designed for tactical strikes on small, high value land targets. The export variant has a range of 280 km but the variant in Russian service has a range of 500 km.
    Full Story

    According to the last media releases the range on Iskander-M is 450km-500km. That’s the INF treaty “minus an inch”. Now, is widely acknowledged, it flies a “flat” (depressed) trajectory. That’s mean, if launched in the optimal ballistic trajectory, Iskander-M is already “violating” the INF treaty. Right?

    in reply to: 53T6 “Gazelle” revisited #1799894
    Rodolfo
    Participant

    Rest of photos here.

    The radar doesn’t looks very healthy.

    in reply to: Russian Space & Missile[ News/Discussion] Part- 4 #1799932
    Rodolfo
    Participant

    Acording to Podvig’s blog…

    http://russianforces.org/blog/2010/12/topol_launch_from_kapustin_yar.shtml

    … something experimental was tested on a Topol.

    in reply to: Russian Space & Missile[ News/Discussion] Part- 4 #1800067
    Rodolfo
    Participant

    What is known about the weight and size of the typical MaRV? Public pix usually show a cone with flaps around the base. Should not add too much, a little longer maybe.

    Agreed, but this is just useful for atmospheric (i.e. terminal phase) maneuvers.

    If orbital maneuvering is desired things get more complicated. Segmented multi-part bus? Adds weight, increases at least one dimensions. Probably makes three, four warheads the max, only very large missiles could carry more.

    A few years ago something like that was tested on a SS-19 and also on a Topol. Different gadgets? We don’t know

    Apropos very large missile: Not too optimistic about another Russian liquid monster. The low strategic warhead count of the new START treaty does not favour multi-warhead monsters from the standpoint of survivability.

    Voevoda-like monsters are definitively gone. But there are recurrent reports on a new liquid fuel ICBM around 100 tn. That’s like an “up-to-date SS-19”. That’s a “monster” in face of i.e. a RS-24 but certainly a “midget” in face a Voevoda.

    in reply to: Argentina joining KC-390 program! #2352592
    Rodolfo
    Participant

    The best form of defence is offence, so a good defence would be to give the Argentinians something to really fear. The best, and easiest idea, is a blockade until they give the islands back. That doesn’t mean blocking all traffic, just declare all shipping to/from Argentina within a certain distance of Argentina as a target, and start sinking a couple, the insurance costs alone will do 90% of the job for us. Maybe mix in special forces raids on some of their most important infrastructure. Another idea could be to start taking out their power stations, once their population starts to suffer they’ll soon see the error of occupying our territory. Hydroelectric ones are an ideal target, and they have 12 for us to destroy. When the Argentine civilians start seeing consequences of their government actions against us, they will soon decide that the Islands aren’t worth it.

    They could be used for attacking the Falklands, reality is though, they’ll end up using them for peacekeeping and in natural disasters, both of which are really in our interests.

    Or a transport plane full of marines, paras or the like with heavy weapons and another with food and ammo. As is, the current base set up means the Argentines will pay a very big price in military lives in launching an attack on the Islands.

    I love statements like that. Those “brave heart” guys who wish to demolish civilian infrastructure and kill civilians will be the first to scream “terrorists!” just in case Iranian sabotage teams performing similar activities, as asymmetrical retaliatory strikes, in the country of the “brave heart” guys. That’s the good-old double-standard.

    Anyway, be careful. If the USA and satellite countries start to attack Iran you may be lucky and face likely sabotage operations like that in Europe.

    Cheers.:rolleyes:

    Sorry by the off-topic.

    in reply to: Russian Space & Missile[ News/Discussion] Part- 4 #1800179
    Rodolfo
    Participant

    Terminal maneuvers are useful to avoid systems like Sprint or Gazelle but not mid-course interceptors. Here where MARV warheads come. But they need fuel to “randomize” its ballistic path. And fuel means weight. Considering that RS-24 is an adapted Topol-M, its payload will no go much beyond 1.2 tn. And this payload is necessary to just ONE MARV. So, it is difficult to accept the idea that RS-24 can carry several MARV.
    Quite likely Russia will deploy multiple MARV in the future, but I assume this will be carried out in the new liquid fuel ICBM. RS-24 is too small for this. I bet it just carries conventional MIRV plus a sensible load of decoys and penaids.

    in reply to: Russian Space & Missile[ News/Discussion] Part- 4 #1800199
    Rodolfo
    Participant

    How do we know they are maneuverable?

    in reply to: Russian Space & Missile[ News/Discussion] Part- 4 #1800201
    Rodolfo
    Participant

    AFAIK, the liquid fuel heavy ICBM is so far a “paper rocket”. Its development should start in 2015. It will weight around 100 tn with a payload around 4 tn and should carry up to ten warheads.

    Now, it seems interesting the new about the Topol-M superseded by the RS-24. What about the much vaunted Topol-M MARV warhead? It seems the SRF choose the good old method named “saturation” to confront prospective ABM systems. By the way, how many warheads carry a RS-24? 3, 4 or 6?

Viewing 15 posts - 271 through 285 (of 1,190 total)