Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Russia Beefing Up Missile Forces
NewsMax.com ^ | 12/13/04 | Phil Brennan

Posted on 12/13/2004 3:54:46 PM PST by Paul Ross

Reprinted from NewsMax.com

Russia Beefing Up Missile Forces

Phil Brennan, NewsMax.com
Monday, Dec. 13, 2004
Is there a new Cold War and arms race underway?

A new force of the Topol-M Intercontinental Ballistic Missiles (ICBM)- described by Russian Defense officials as a "21st-century weapon" unrivaled in the world and allegedly capable of defeating U.S. anti-missile defenses - is due to be created in 2005, posing a deadly threat to the U.S. According to Russian Missile Force Commander Nikolai Solovtsov a fifth missile regiment armed with Topol-M ICBMs will be added next year.

Today's RIA Novosti quoted Solovtsov as telling a Moscow news conference "Currently we are planning re-arming another regiment with the Topol-M missiles. In the last years, we have commissioned four missile regiments, a 40-launcher force," he added.

The Topol-M was described last year by Russian Defense Minister Sergei Ivanov as "... the most advanced, state-of-the-art missile in the world. Only such weapons can ensure and guarantee our sovereignty and security and make any attempts to put military pressure on Russia absolutely senseless."

Solovtsov revealed that the first regiments armed with mobile Topols would come into action within two to three years, the ultimate goal of the Topol program being to have several divisions deployed. He told reporters that in 2006 three to nine mobile Topol-M launchers will be commissioned.

"In 2005 the mobile launchers will not yet begin combat duty, but after 2006 we will deploy three to nine missiles per year," he said.

The Russian SS-27, or Topol-M, is an intercontinental-range, ground-based, solid propellant ballistic missile, according to the Claremont Institute's MISSILETHREAT.com. "It represents the pinnacle of ballistic missile technology, incorporating modern fuel and warhead designs, as well as being capable of being launched from both missile silos and transporter-Erector-Launcher (TEL) vehicles."

Russian Defense officials claim that the SS-27 is invulnerable to any modern anti-ballistic missile (ABM) defenses and will be the foundation of the Russian strategic nuclear arsenal by 2015.

They insist that the SS-27 is certainly immune to any ABM defense the United States can put into being.

Claremont says it is capable of making evasive maneuvers as it approaches its target, enabling it to evade any terminal phase interceptors. Moreover the SS-27 is also designed to survive a strike from any laser technology available, rendering any current space-based laser useless.

Adds Claremont "The SS-27 can currently strike any target within the continental United States. The deployment from hardened silos and hidden TEL vehicles makes it nearly impossible to successfully prevent launch, and current ABM technology is insufficient to prevent its successful impact.

"As a solid propellant design, it can be maintained on alert for prolonged periods of time and can launch within minutes of being given the order.

"Its confirmed, single 550 kT warhead is sufficient for the depopulation of cities, which combined with its survivability, makes it an ideal retaliatory weapon. The SS-27 enables Russia to guarantee a successful nuclear response."

The SS-27 has a range of 10,500 km (6524 miles) and is reported to typically be equipped with a 550 kT yield nuclear warhead. The first two SS-27 missiles entered service in 1997 in modified SS-19 silos.

The first silo-based missile regiment was declared operational in 1998, with a second in 1999, a third in 2000 and a fourth in 2003. The first TEL versions entered service in 2001. It was originally planned to build 350 missiles, but this has been amended to the construction of 50 missiles by 2005.

A sea-based version is under development under the name Bulava.


TOPICS: Extended News; Foreign Affairs; Government; Miscellaneous; Russia; Unclassified
KEYWORDS: armsbuildup; arsenal; bmd; coldwar2; countermeasures; icbm; nmd; russian; topolm
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-23 next last

1 posted on 12/13/2004 3:54:47 PM PST by Paul Ross
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: Paul Ross

Claremont Institute is finally beginning to be noticed!


2 posted on 12/13/2004 3:55:55 PM PST by Paul Ross (Proud Member Pajamahadeen: Outing traitors, fifth columnists and appeasers until the cows come home.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

Comment #3 Removed by Moderator

To: Paul Ross

My only question become with the Russian economy in such disarray and the military industrial complex being a shadow of its former self... where did the technology for this come from?

China....that is the most likely scenario....

You really begin wonder how much the dirty pool Clintons played with China is going to cost the US in the long run.


4 posted on 12/13/2004 4:06:02 PM PST by Americanwolf (Democratic Underground... Digital Crack for the the loony left.....Hey troll! Put the pipe down!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Paul Ross
I don't know if the Russian's new missile is really able to pierce any ABM defense we might deploy or not. If they are bluffing, we shouldn't call that bluff. They need to have something that makes them feel that they can effectively defend themselves from the US and allow them to project influence.

Russians need to have their national pride in order to stabilize their country and hope to get their economy under control.

I'm really not that worried about Russia having a missile that can defeat our ABM system.

I'm much more worried if they start selling the technology to nations like Korea, Syria, and Iran.

Russia is a country with too much to lose by starting a war with the US.

I'm not sure North Korea's government is so sure they have a lot to lose.
5 posted on 12/13/2004 4:06:18 PM PST by untrained skeptic
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Paul Ross

I wonder if we'll lend the money to pay for their new toys?


6 posted on 12/13/2004 4:07:24 PM PST by PeterFinn ("Tolerance" means WE have to tolerate THEM, they can hate us all they want.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: PeterFinn

We paid them to destroy their old missiles. Now they're building new missiles. Amazing !


7 posted on 12/13/2004 4:12:25 PM PST by Eric in the Ozarks
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: untrained skeptic

"I'm much more worried if they start selling the technology to nations like Korea, Syria, and Iran. Russia is a country with too much to lose by starting a war with the US."

Well, that's the point. They can sell or threaten to sell this technology to other countries in order to blackmail the U.S. They're hoping they can get a little leverage out of this.


8 posted on 12/13/2004 4:22:53 PM PST by Avenger
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: Eric in the Ozarks
The sea-based variant of this Topol-M is interesting...the Balava. This basically gives them the equivalent of an NMD-proof first-strike weapon. I hope Rumsfeld is paying attention. I have my doubts about the laser-proofing claims however. They can't know what properties of laser they will face...Infrared, X-Ray, with either thermal heating, or shock-kill. I think they are bluffing.

Armoring up the RV can be done. But not the missile itself, unless they can get the RV up to full speed, and drops the booster, before it exits the atmosphere for its arc to target.

9 posted on 12/13/2004 4:24:08 PM PST by Paul Ross (Proud Member Pajamahadeen: Outing traitors, fifth columnists and appeasers until the cows come home.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: Paul Ross; Old Kular; Americanwolf; untrained skeptic; PeterFinn; Eric in the Ozarks; Avenger

No Wonder Bush can See into Putin's Soul!


10 posted on 12/13/2004 4:34:47 PM PST by nanak (Tom Tancredo 2008:Last Hope to Save America)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Paul Ross

so much for stability.


11 posted on 12/13/2004 4:48:53 PM PST by sandviper
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: Paul Ross
Anybody know if these are solid fueled as the Soviet nuclear arsenal was liquid fueled? (with liquid fuel can't have them fully fueled because of corrosion plus more launch failures)

If not, I would be alot more scared of SS-18, as they have hundreds of them. Plus the 20-25 megaton warhead or 10X550kt load is very bad news.
12 posted on 12/13/2004 6:29:14 PM PST by demecleze
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: untrained skeptic
I don't know if the Russian's new missile is really able to pierce any ABM defense we might deploy or not. If they are bluffing, we shouldn't call that bluff. They need to have something that makes them feel that they can effectively defend themselves from the US and allow them to project influence.

The key to any evasion would be to avoid detection.

At one time in the 1980s it was claimed that the Russian subs could dive so deep that it was impossible to sink.

Except we had nuclear depth charges.

I would say if you can track something, you can take it out.

If it is going above Mach 5, reaction time is minimal. So I imagine that type of speed must be something the Russians have in the missle.

We recently tested SCAMJET technology that might be able to intercept such a beast, and it breathes air, not solid rocket propellant.

13 posted on 12/13/2004 7:01:29 PM PST by topher
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: Paul Ross

i don't understand why rasPutin is so paranoid.

the euros aren't going to attack russia, nor are we.


14 posted on 12/13/2004 7:04:40 PM PST by ken21 (against the democrat plantation)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Eric in the Ozarks
We paid them to destroy their old missiles.

I guess, on the bright side, they couldn't put the old missles on the auction block.

15 posted on 12/13/2004 7:09:02 PM PST by Calvin Locke
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: Calvin Locke

ebay'll be pi**ed !


16 posted on 12/13/2004 7:32:23 PM PST by Eric in the Ozarks
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: Paul Ross

17 posted on 12/13/2004 8:19:50 PM PST by klpt
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Eric in the Ozarks
ebay'll be pi**ed !

Now you got me remembering a '60s "Batman" scene with Batman chastising an admiral for selling a
used nuclear sub to someone (Penguin?) with a false address.

18 posted on 12/13/2004 8:36:18 PM PST by Calvin Locke
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: Avenger

Russia is a huge country with a history of making the world take notice.

If Putin can't show that Russia has the power to exert influence under his leadership, the people of Russia won't support him for long.

Russia's stability requires that they be able to exert some level of influence in the world. They aren't content to be a minor player in the world. It's better to have them able to have some power to influence the world, then to let them feel that they need to prove to the world that they are still a major power.


19 posted on 12/14/2004 5:21:09 AM PST by untrained skeptic
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: ken21

They aren't afraid of being attacked. They are afraid of losing influence in the world.


20 posted on 12/14/2004 5:30:27 AM PST by untrained skeptic
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-23 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson