According the the russianspaceweb:

The stationary deployment site for the Topol-M missile was designed to include 10 isolated silos, known as OS, and originally designed for R-36M and UR-100N missiles. Official Russian sources stated that the most expensive elements of the silos, such as protective covers and control systems would be retained without significant changes. The Topol-M would also use existing launch control and communications infrastructure. (72)

Silos would protect launch containers with missiles and flight control antennas. Each site would also feature underground command and control bunker, security, power supply and nuclear blast detection systems. Apparently, provisions were made for deployment of antimissile systems around launch sites and flight control facilities. Along with high survivability in a nuclear war, the launch complex was also expected to withstand strikes by high-precision conventional weapons

This should also improve survability, perhaps by the deployment in the future of “Autocrats” or “Gazelles” around silos

Well, I see, we start to agree in some points.
1- First US and NATO are behaving in a growing aggressive way. It seems that dissuasion is the only language that they understand.
2- Russia have now money to increase its security spending without damaging its economy. On the contrary it can be a bit reactivating.
3- I think 15 Topol-m/year will be a compromise option for years stating from 2007: a mobile regiment (9 TEL with single MARV warhead) plus 6 silo-based Topol-m with 4 warheads. Total: 35 warheads year
4- Starting from 2009 or 2010 it should begin deploying 3-4 land-Bulavas with six warheads (declared as ICBM) but for intermediate range missions :diablo: : I.e to work as “Super-Pioneers” to target and deter NATO bases in the west and the south and perhaps China too.

It doesn’t seems very expensive and will suffice for a period. Opinions?