Russia plans rail-mounted missiles to counter US global strike program

So what do you do when you've invested trillions in developing Nukes you can't use... the answer is simple... you refit those long-range , hyper velocity missiles with conventional explosives in place of nuclear warheads... Then you give it a nifty cool sounding name like "Prompt Global Strike program" and now you can blow up a target anywhere in the world at the push of a button...

haven't we always been able to do that...?
Well yeah, but this is 'Way" cooler because it cost more and a missile launch at night is totally wicked!!!



Now what do you do if your Russian and want to counter this new threat?
Find yourself a bunch of old Soviet-era SS-24 Scalpel rail-launched missiles, rearm then with conventional explosives ...give that a new nifty sounding cool name ""TBA""...Their working on it... and just like that we get a new arms race....

So when is this all supposed to happen???
Right fricken now...

The "Prompt Global Strike program" is already underway and as for Russia

“A Defense Ministry report has been submitted to the president and the order has been given to develop a preliminary design of a rail-mounted missile system,” Lt. Gen. Sergei Karakaev said.

Story can be found here

Cold war-part 2.. i may get a coat

The Bear is awake and IMO there is more rumbling and diatribe than I have heard in at least 25 years. The usual sources I can live with but when China and the Bear start building up for war? That my friends, is something to be concerned about.

I posted the reasons behind all this quite a while ago. IMO the Russians will back China in a power play. China is close to such a play.

reply to post by HardCorps


That's was cutting edge mobility during the American Civil War. It's even easier to take out the rails now.

Mamatus
IMO the Russians will back China in a power play. China is close to such a play.

Silly american paranoia. China and Russia dislike each other as they dislike America.

reply to post by crazyewok


Well my friends at the Rand Corporation would disagree. Ten years ago I was told of what to expect by the Director of a Rand Think Tank. Gonna take more than a random comment to convince me otherwise.

I hate to reference pop culture but this is the best video I've found of the weapon lol

whats their answer for these?




they can keep their rail based missiles....

tamusan
reply to post by HardCorps

 

That's was cutting edge mobility during the American Civil War. It's even easier to take out the rails now.

That's missing the point. And if you take out the rails, unless you hit the rocket, the rocket still goes off. The missile's military mobility is provided by its rocket engine. They aren't using the rails to move logistics cargo to the front.

They're using the rails to make the missiles difficult to target in real time. It's a land-based version of survivable SLBM"s.

reply to post by mbkennel


It's still confined to the railways. Broken rails would limit mobility. Both sides already have mobile launchers which are not confined to the railways. Soon, game players will probably be announcing they are capable of bombing the world into oblivion from orbit.

Here is a Russian mobile launcher, which would prove much more useful for warfare. It has significantly greater mobility. The only advantage that their rail version has over the 9k720, is that trains are usually more energy efficient.

9k720 Iskander Mobile Launcher

I see this as the Russians recycling their expired rail launched nuclear warheads into rail launched conventional warheads. That's the main point I pulled from the article. All that happened is that the nuke material has passed its shelf life, and they came up with something to do with their already existing rail based delivery hardware. If the delivery system was really all that awesome, then they would have replaced the expired nuke material with fresh nuke material. Instead, they downgraded their system to conventional warheads.

Why indian missile photo ???

I believe this is just Russia's way of ensuring the balance in the M.A.D. equation. They know very well that if they launch any kind of ballistic missile, that the launch site and destination can be immediately determined and a counter attack immediately issued. If Russia or any other nuclear capable country launches a ballistic missile at another country carrying the same capability then M.A.D. is fulfilled.
What the Russians fear is that America's "Global strike" program can act as an undetectable first strike weapon and not give them time to launch an effective counter strike before they get hit.
This just goes to show that the cold war has only been on intermission for the last 29 years and the main global players will do what ever they can to ensure M.A.D. is always in effect.

reply to post by crazyewok


maybe..

but they're playing the game together, against the west!

Give it a few months -- Once Obama hears about it, the program will be terminated. So long, of course, as we've already sunk an enormous amount of funds into development already. Think F-22. Hell, I'm surprised he's allowed the F-35 to go on this long.

reply to post by vishantchaudhary


India bought the plans for a SS-24 from the Russians a long time ago..
Saved themselves tons of money in development and testing... far as I know this photo is the closest thing we get to an updated Russian SS-24

tamusan
reply to post by mbkennel

 

It's still confined to the railways. Broken rails would limit mobility. Both sides already have mobile launchers which are not confined to the railways. Soon, game players will probably be announcing they are capable of bombing the world into oblivion from orbit.

Here is a Russian mobile launcher, which would prove much more useful for warfare. It has significantly greater mobility. The only advantage that their rail version has over the 9k720, is that trains are usually more energy efficient.

9k720 Iskander Mobile Launcher

I see this as the Russians recycling their expired rail launched nuclear warheads into rail launched conventional warheads. That's the main point I pulled from the article. All that happened is that the nuke material has passed its shelf life, and they came up with something to do with their already existing rail based delivery hardware. If the delivery system was really all that awesome, then they would have replaced the expired nuke material with fresh nuke material. Instead, they downgraded their system to conventional warheads.

edit on 18-12-2013 by tamusan because: to fix link

Outside of SLBM, what mobile launchers does the US have?

Hi-res sat cams can watch and track, as our modern systems go, and this rail system os easy to track, no real threat as this is old tech. It may impress the limited info people, but our military is way past this, long way past...

reply to post by AtomicDew


trident subs, aegis destroyers, hawkeyes, we do not need 1800s tech or rail systems, our stuff is global, not limited to land mass, and even if launched, several systems come to play....this is show for the slow, no worries....

reply to post by teslahowitzer


Please do explain how you track a nuclear train which is a perfect copy of passenger train , constantly moving across a span of 86000 kilometers railways and can launch within a few minutes. While at the same time tracking every other mobile platform like Topol M, Submarines and Ship around the ocean.

This is recurring piece of old news.

The Soviet military deployed its first missile train in 1987, and had 12 of them by 1991. But by 2005 they had all been destroyed under the START II arms reduction treaty with the United States.

The original railway-based system involved SS-24 Scalpel missiles that weighed 104 tons, required three locomotives to move, and were so heavy that they damaged railroad tracks. It was thought that missiles launched from the moving trains were harder to track than stationary launches.

The new missiles will be half the weight of their decommissioned Soviet analogues, allowing them to fit into one railcar, the official added.

Link

This won't be conventional weapons, of course, it will be nuclear weapons based on a new rocket design. Probably you are mixing it up with the conventional Club-K, which is already being produced, and can also be mounted on railroad platforms.

reply to post by teslahowitzer


trident subs, aegis destroyers, hawkeyes, we do not need 1800s tech or rail systems, our stuff is global, not limited to land mass, and even if launched, several systems come to play....this is show f
or the slow, no worries....

I assume you're referring to Ohio Class SSBN/SSGN, Arleigh Burke Class DDG, and E-2 Hawkeye?

Ah, I'd say 1950's technology, 1800's seems a little much. In 60' we had planned to mount five LGM-30 to railcars to provide mobility and forward staging of our ground based nuclear forces, officially known as "Operation Big Star". However, due to cutbacks during the Kennedy-Mcnamera administration we had to settle for a minimal amount of hardened silo based systems.



See the Russian's have had a different thought process when it comes the nuclear conflict.

In the West, we believe it is impossible to survive a nuclear conflict, via MAD theory. We believe the death and destruction would be too great. This is mostly based on US Strategic Nuclear policy, we actually aim to destroy population centers and major industrial centers, as well as command and control infrastructure and major military facilities.

The Russians, who are still using the older Soviet Strategic Rocket Forces policy believe that nuclear conflict is a survivable event. (They're policy is to removed our ability to strike their major infrastructure and population centers by preemptively hitting our hardened facilities and strategic bomber bases, thus leaving us with our tactical capabilities and our Boomers in hopes we'll push away for the table in hopes of keeping those nuclear capabilities. The Russian's also don't have nearly the same sub fleet capabilities we do. This is yet another policy based from the Soviet-era.

These policy are also evident in both nations response programs. The US demobilized OCDM/OCD in 1961, after major protests occurred and completely defunct any remnants of OCD in 1977 with the creation of FEMA. FEMA maintained public shelters until 1992, but had halted all publications, documentation, survey equipment issue/calibration, and all other major public involvement previously preformed by OCD.

The Russians however have been regularly maintaining it's civil defense program, reinforcing it's public shelters within the Moscow metro, building mass shelters in smaller communities, stockpiling emergency water and goods for mobilization.

I'm not going to go into how we've been depleting our nuclear stockpiles and reducing response systems, all the while the Russian's have been bolstering and augmenting their forces.