Duplicate post

😮

UCAV cannot replace manned bomber. UCAV neither has the engine power for radar/electronics nor the supersonic lunch speeds for missiles.

Not currently, but in the not so distant future, UCAV will have everything that manned aircrafts had and then some. Even B2/Tu95 is not supersonic but they launch missiles.

http://img-fotki.yandex.ru/get/6112/81237179.b3/0_75b60_b03bf67_XXL.jpg

http://img-fotki.yandex.ru/get/6213/81237179.b3/0_75b69_2b68f66b_XXL.jpg

Brilliant pics:eek:. Just come down from above and rain some rockets down below.

Thanks a lot, this is indeed fresh news… two days old.:eek:

Novaya Zemlya AB have been closed for quite some time now.
But according to this, it will be re-opened soon:
http://barentsobserver.com/en/security/russia-reopens-arctic-airbases

Interesting, Both Rogachevo and Graham Bell Islands AB will be reopened. I was just curious, did not know that they actually planned.:eek:

The energy news is quite new too. Anyway no problem for Statoil, they got the Rosneft deals. It was already known for sometime that Gazprom wanted to partner with ExxonMobil and Shell in a big way.

Now that they are going to reopen the Graham Bell Island AB, it would be really interesting to know what they plan to Station there. Bombers?:diablo:
Tu22M3 comes to mind for Maritime reconnaissance.

http://defense-update.com/20120502_beyond-visual-range-stealth-fighters-in-asia.html

Sukhoi favored another innovative approach – 85 percent of the surface of PAK FA is covered with unique coating made of nano-particle materials that decrease the visibility of the plane. (In addition, this coating is also said to offer extra benefit in drag reduction).

I am all ears … :diablo:

I don’t think Avangard is just the Bulava launched from a TEL. Bulava and Avangard will likely be like the SS-N-20 & SS-24 combo. So the first-midget stage of the SLBM will be exchanged by a much larger first stage better suited for ICBMs. In the end a 2 tn payload (10 warheads from the current 6 of the RS-24) should be expected.

I was thinking of the same thing too… A much larger first stage using the same propellants can easily take the throw weight to 2 mt, which would be very reasonable for a road mobile ICBM. Even then it should easily be less than the 22m length of the RT-2UTTKh.

The concept of a 16-18 m long road mobile ICBM sounds too good to be true. 😀
Do you have further specs about this new missile? I am really curious about the Bus less MIRV tech for the Bulava. Any sources?

What I find interesting, if this is true, is the length of the Missile. For quick reference …
RT-2UTTKh – ca 22m
RSM-56 – ca 12m

At two thirds the length of RT-2UTTKh, a Land Bulava should be easy to move around making the life of the driver easier and Putin can have his wish of having new ICBMs paraded in the Red Square. This would make it much more mobile than the already mobile RS 24.

On the down side, a Land Bulava would have low throw weight. An MIRVed Bulava would be restricted to a max of half a dozen 150kt warheads at best. Considering no Nuke test were done since the late 90s (barring sub critical tests) I don’t think there exists new Warhead designs in Russia (or USA) which have been validated to fit 10+ medium yield (~300 kt) in 1.2 mt throw weight (with Bus, penaids …). Improvement in CEP is one thing, but there is no substitute for throw weight. Even if the maneuvering RV is a marvel, the compromise on throw weight is too much.

RS-24 already have short burn time and high acceleration and now this is supposed to improve on that. 😮
Any idea on the length of the new missile, throw weight, propellants etc or it is just what it says, Land Bulava?:confused:

btw, IRST systems have a range that is much less than radar which is why it ts the preferred A2A sensor.

Against the backdrop of a pristine sky, I believe.

“The smarter you are trying to be more ridiculous you are sounding.”
Remarks like this can rebound on you – as the above demonstrates.

Fair Enough. 😮

Not just water dipoles. Any polarised molecules (though not all with equal efficiency). Which is why some ceramics are not microwave safe. Put all your ceramics plates, dishes, cups etc. in a microwave one at a time, & I bet you that some (unless you have an extremely unusual collection of pottery at home) will get hot.

I think the term ceramic is quite generic since ceramics covers a wide range of materials. I did not say that you take out all your fancy roman amphoras or fancy chinas with all that Ming glazing and put in the microwave. Depending upon the composition it may or may not heat. Plain ceramic dish like a porcelain dish will not heat up in the microwave, (it may eventually but the amount of energy required will be a lot more).
And for my food which solely revolves around something from the plant and animal kingdom the bulk of the heating done by microwave is due to water molecules because they are quite efficient with some contribution from fat, sugar etc. I don’t marinate my food in some fancy polar solvent so I would count out other dipoles.