© ITAR-TASS
TASS: Russia developing new ICBMs capable of overcoming US missile shield — commander
According to the official, threats from the US missile defense system in Europe do not critically reduce combat capabilities of the Russian Strategic Missile Forces
MOSCOW, May 10. /TASS/. Russia is developing new intercontinental ballistic missiles (ICBMs) with special attention paid to their ability to penetrate the US missile shield, Russia’s Strategic Missile Force (SMF) Commander Sergey Karakayev said on Tuesday.
Russia is currently carrying out active work on improving its means of overcoming the missile shield, he said.
"This is conditioned by the fact that the United States is not stopping after what it has achieved and continues improving its missile defense system, including the deployment of its elements in Europe. That is why, special attention in the development of new missile complexes is paid to the issue of overcoming the missile shield," Karakayev said.
Read more ....
More News On Russia Developing A New ICBM To Penetrate U.S. And NATO Missile Defense Systems
Russia's New ICBM Sarmat Can Penetrate Defense Shield, Wipe Out Texas -- Sputnik
Russia testing unstoppable new nuclear missile which can breach Nato's shield system and blow up an area the size of FRANCE -- Daily Mail
Russia to test unstoppable 'Satan 2' stealth nuke capable of wiping out an ENTIRE NATION -- Mirror
Russia poised to unleash 'Son of Satan' ICBM -- The Register
New Cold War? Russia Developing Intercontinental Ballistic Missiles To Pierce US Missile Shield -- IBTimes
6 comments:
This is not a problem. the missile defenses were deployed to prevent NORKs, Ayatollahs and other ne'er do wells form blackmailing us or killing us.
For the the Russians the old rules apply.
Liquid propelled missile...??? The old Minuteman-III is solid propelled. I don't understand the Russian choice.
I read that also Jac. It does not make sense.
Thanks W.N.U.E.!
The RS-20 Satan was liquid fueled, and the Infrastructure to service and deploy it, cost more than the missiles themselves. Sticking with liquid fuel allows the Russians to save billions in development and deployment.
While liquid fueled missiles take longer to stage for launch, and have much more complex engines than solid fuel missiles, they do have some advantages.
Unlike solid fueled missiles, liquid fueled missiles can sit there empty, while the solid fueled missile engines slowly degrade.
Liquid fueled missile engines can be stopped after starting, not solid fuel engines.
Liquid fueled engines can also have variable thrust, which can be utilized for maximizing range, or to vary speed, acceleration and ballistic trajectory, ( which of course, makes ABDS a case of careful real time tracking and makes predictive models of trajectory obsolete).
Thanks Jay for your response. There are pluses and minuses as you point out.
Post a Comment