TOPOL-M invincible? - Page 2

Sandman · 06-06-2006, 15:21 PM

Three full-scale flap-based vehicles were flown over the Pacific Ocean in 1973–1974, followed by three successful preprototype flight tests of the Advanced Maneuvering Reentry Vehicle in 1981. The vehicle was declared operational for the Minuteman III or the MX.

From the article, it implies MM3 and MX HAD it, doesn't it?

Thanks again, all good links and posts.

urmomma158 · 06-06-2006, 15:55 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sandman

Three full-scale flap-based vehicles were flown over the Pacific Ocean in 1973–1974, followed by three successful preprototype flight tests of the Advanced Maneuvering Reentry Vehicle in 1981. The vehicle was declared operational for the Minuteman III or the MX.

From the article, it implies MM3 and MX HAD it, doesn't it?

Thanks again, all good links and posts.

You're welcome Sandman. Probably never used and kept for storage.

http://www.astronautix.com/sites/vannberg.htm

If you look closely it's in that area the ABRES on the map, I don't think they made too many sorta like the ACM 129 or B-2. It hasb't been amss produced. At least we can produce the technology and put it into production to me that's what counts.

Anyways chec out the BLU bunkerbuster!!!

Quote:

Boeing's Phantom Works is leading the effort to demonstrate the Massive Ordnance Penetrator (MOP). The three-phase technology demonstration builds on design studies that Boeing had conducted for the laboratory. Flight testing is envisaged around 2006. The 6 m [20 feet] long MOP features short-span wings and trellis-type tails. The 13,600 kg [30,000 lb] weapon contains a 2,700 kg [6,000 lb] explosive charge. MOP is designed to go deeper than any nuclear bunker buster and take out 25 percent of the underground and deeply buried targets. It is expected to penetrate as much as 60 meters [200 feet] through 5,000 psi reinforced concrete. It will burrow 8 meters into the ground through 10,000 psi reinforced concrete. Northrop Grumman is working on with Boeing to develop this conventional bunker buster. They are under contract to Air Force Research Laboratory's Munitions Directorate at Eglin Air Force Base, Florida, and Defense Threat Reduction Agency.

http://www.globalsecurity.org/milita...ions/dshtw.htm

It says somehwre in the article it's more effective than a nuclear earth penetrator. Great for taking out Russian Silo's!!!!

Ina nuclear war all of Russias EW radars/battle management/ABM radars would be taekn out by JASSMS and ACM 129's launched by B 52's and B-2's. And their strategic bombers would fall prey to the Raptors and JSF's.So their ABM capability would be crippled. BLU'sand RNEP's would take out bomb shelters and silo's.But as always no one would win.

Off topic but.........http://users.rcn.com/sitzkrieg/war/_t72spanked.wmv

Great video always amaze's me!!!!

Dago · 06-06-2006, 18:31 PM

So, as a response to TPOL - will STRATCOM keep existing modified MIRV's on the Minuteman's? Or will they continue to scale down to conform with the SORT? Of 2,200 thershold? Allowing more Minuteman ICBM's that could be surged with MIRV's as opposed to strictly reduced amount of ICBM's with MIRV's.

Edit: Excerpt from Airforce Magazine

Brig Gen Robert L. Smolen, Air Force Director of Nuclear & Counterproliferation, and Adam Hebert, Air Force Magazine, July 14, 2003:

HEBERT: The Minuteman fleet itself is in a split configuration at the moment where the Warren missiles have one warhead and the other two wings have three warheads.

SMOLEN: If I could comment on the warhead piece, we cannot confirm or deny the amounts of warheads on the missiles. We could say a Minuteman missile can carry up to a certain amount, but when you say “up to,” that means it could be one or it could be more. So the blend of missiles warheads will largely be determined by the targeting requirements that were given by Strategic Command. The targets … where the targets are will have a factor on which missiles at what location might have one or more warhead. So I don’t think it’s … certainly it has one, but it could have three, it could have two, it could have one.

HEBERT: The way I understand the situation at Warren, though, is that because of START obligations those are now up to one warhead missiles.

SMOLEN: According to the way we’re looking at that, we’re looking at eventually of 500 missiles that could be uploaded to as many as 800 warheads. So somewhere in that mix of 500 is 800. And it could be one on some, two on another, three on another.

However from QDR

Reduce the number of deployed Minuteman III ballistic missiles from 500 to 450.

Garry · 06-13-2006, 04:23 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by highsea

Lots of hype, imo. I don't think Topol-M is even operational yet. The main reason it's less vulnerable is because it's mobile, and as such cannot be effectively pre-targeted.

As far as shooting one down, all missiles are vulnerable in boost phase to THAAD, SM-3, even PAC-3. ABL is also a boost phase defense. The trick is to have an ABM system within range at the right time. Hard to do in many cases.

All ICBM's are hypersonic by definition. How much manouverability can you really get in an RV? It has to be pre-programmed manouvers, since you are not going to have reliable communications during reentry, and you do not carry fuel/engines for manouvers (let alone detection capabilities to determine if the RV's even being targeted by another missile). And any manouvering will be very limited in scope if you still plan to hit the target- there's just not much room to dork around when you have an unpowered RV that is set on trajectory from orbit.

Lol. But if Putin says it, then it has to be true...

I am sure people in Pentagon know actual capabilities and have observed the test launches....

Here very little is known about Topol's warhead capabilities. I agree with you that it must be a pre-programmed manuevres....

urmomma158 · 06-24-2006, 20:37 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Dago

So, as a response to TPOL - will STRATCOM keep existing modified MIRV's on the Minuteman's? Or will they continue to scale down to conform with the SORT? Of 2,200 thershold? Allowing more Minuteman ICBM's that could be surged with MIRV's as opposed to strictly reduced amount of ICBM's with MIRV's.

Edit: Excerpt from Airforce Magazine

Brig Gen Robert L. Smolen, Air Force Director of Nuclear & Counterproliferation, and Adam Hebert, Air Force Magazine, July 14, 2003:

HEBERT: The Minuteman fleet itself is in a split configuration at the moment where the Warren missiles have one warhead and the other two wings have three warheads.

SMOLEN: If I could comment on the warhead piece, we cannot confirm or deny the amounts of warheads on the missiles. We could say a Minuteman missile can carry up to a certain amount, but when you say “up to,” that means it could be one or it could be more. So the blend of missiles warheads will largely be determined by the targeting requirements that were given by Strategic Command. The targets … where the targets are will have a factor on which missiles at what location might have one or more warhead. So I don’t think it’s … certainly it has one, but it could have three, it could have two, it could have one.

HEBERT: The way I understand the situation at Warren, though, is that because of START obligations those are now up to one warhead missiles.

SMOLEN: According to the way we’re looking at that, we’re looking at eventually of 500 missiles that could be uploaded to as many as 800 warheads. So somewhere in that mix of 500 is 800. And it could be one on some, two on another, three on another.

However from QDR

Reduce the number of deployed Minuteman III ballistic missiles from 500 to 450.

Can i have the link i might need it for some other forum please.

06-06-2006, 15:21 PM	#16 (permalink)
Sandman *Military Professional* Join Date: 07-05-05 Location: Northern Michigan Posts: 218 Country:	Three full-scale flap-based vehicles were flown over the Pacific Ocean in 1973–1974, followed by three successful preprototype flight tests of the Advanced Maneuvering Reentry Vehicle in 1981. The vehicle was declared operational for the Minuteman III or the MX. From the article, it implies MM3 and MX HAD it, doesn't it? Thanks again, all good links and posts. Last edited by Sandman : 06-06-2006 at 15:25 PM.

06-06-2006, 18:31 PM	#18 (permalink)
Dago Patron Join Date: 02-23-06 Posts: 239 Country:	So, as a response to TPOL - will STRATCOM keep existing modified MIRV's on the Minuteman's? Or will they continue to scale down to conform with the SORT? Of 2,200 thershold? Allowing more Minuteman ICBM's that could be surged with MIRV's as opposed to strictly reduced amount of ICBM's with MIRV's. Edit: Excerpt from Airforce Magazine Brig Gen Robert L. Smolen, Air Force Director of Nuclear & Counterproliferation, and Adam Hebert, Air Force Magazine, July 14, 2003: HEBERT: The Minuteman fleet itself is in a split configuration at the moment where the Warren missiles have one warhead and the other two wings have three warheads. SMOLEN: If I could comment on the warhead piece, we cannot confirm or deny the amounts of warheads on the missiles. We could say a Minuteman missile can carry up to a certain amount, but when you say “up to,” that means it could be one or it could be more. So the blend of missiles warheads will largely be determined by the targeting requirements that were given by Strategic Command. The targets … where the targets are will have a factor on which missiles at what location might have one or more warhead. So I don’t think it’s … certainly it has one, but it could have three, it could have two, it could have one. HEBERT: The way I understand the situation at Warren, though, is that because of START obligations those are now up to one warhead missiles. SMOLEN: According to the way we’re looking at that, we’re looking at eventually of 500 missiles that could be uploaded to as many as 800 warheads. So somewhere in that mix of 500 is 800. And it could be one on some, two on another, three on another. However from QDR Reduce the number of deployed Minuteman III ballistic missiles from 500 to 450. Last edited by Dago : 06-06-2006 at 18:40 PM.

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Email this Page
Display Modes
Linear Mode Switch to Hybrid Mode Switch to Threaded Mode

Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)