As I said before, why the heck start serial production of a missile that clearly dont work. If it was my choice il would arm the Boreis with the New R-29RMU Sineva SLBM. It can carry 10 warheads insted of only 6 with the Bulava. It also have better range.The Bulava just failed a test launch. http://newsru.com/russia/23dec2008/bulavacrash.html
The first and second stages worked fine, but the third stage malfunctioned, and the missile self-liquidated. 3-4 more launches are planned next year, and final acceptance is planned for next year.
Well this makes for a total of 5 completely failed launches, 4 sort-of succesful, and 1 successful launch. Even if the remaineder of the launches (3-4) are succesful, the missile obviously isn't ready for service. They're either going to accept a poorly tested missile into service, or have to readjust the schedule again.
Ilya Kramnik regularly writes articles to the tune of ditch Bulava, put in Sineva. Whether or not he is right, I don't know. However I seriously doubt it will happen. All indications so far seem to point to the continuation of the Bulava program.Here is some text about making the Sineva fit the pr955 Borie submarines. Could be operational by 2010 if they would start the work now.
http://en.rian.ru/analysis/20081114/118312605.html
Probably true. However think about all the money and time they would have saved if they gone with the Sineva after the Bark missile failed back in the 90s. It would surley been ready by 2002/2003.Ilya Kramnik regularly writes articles to the tune of ditch Bulava, put in Sineva. Whether or not he is right, I don't know. However I seriously doubt it will happen. All indications so far seem to point to the continuation of the Bulava program.
Yeah....but the only reason the Borei was delaid was becouse of the redesign of the missile complex in the late 1990s, to make it fit the new Bulava missiles. If they insted would have taken the complex for the already working R-29R missile it would have saved them many years and the submarine would have been launched much sooner. And the missile would also have been ready.The Sineva isn't a new missile, it's the R-29R modernized to the R-29RM. So yes it would have probably been finished. The subs for it are still not finished today, so it would not have made a very big difference.
I think the Borei was redesigned in the 90's because of the failure of the Bark, not because it was originally meant for the R-29R. The R-29R was never intended for the Boreis.Yeah....but the only reason the Borei was delaid was becouse of the redesign of the missile complex in the late 1990s, to make it fit the new Bulava missiles. If they insted would have taken the complex for the already working R-29R missile it would have saved them many years and the submarine would have been launched much sooner. And the missile would also have been ready.
*Then the submarine missile complex would ofcourse look just as ugly as on the Delta-IV subs but hey, you cant have everything now can you
That wasnt what I said. Borei was delayed becouse of the bark missile failing and a redesign of the Bories missile complex was nessesary to make the new Bulava missile fit the sub. I now very well that the R-29 missile was made for the Delta submarines. However if they would have picked the Sineva missile insted of the Bulava directley after the Bark failure the missile would have been ready much sooner.Yes the point I was making was that it seemed to me like Wall83 was under the impression that the Borei's were designed for the Sineva originally, and then have to be modified for the Bulava, when they were really designed for the Bark originally, and had to be modified for the Bulava.
Hm didnt think about the SLBM. And if they ever get the Bulava ready it will add some numbers. But then again, if they will commissed 3 Boreis by 2011 theirs missiles alone will add up to about 45. If you then add the new Sinevas it wont leave much room for any more landbased ICBM.Topols aren't the only thing being produced. In 2007 Sineva's actually made up the majority of the missiles produced that year. With RS-24 production starting up, if Sineva production is kept at the 11 a year, that was done in 2007, it won't take much to reach the goal. However to put it in perspective, they are not increasing the size of the Russian arsenal. They are simply replacing older missiles. The Russian strategic arsenal is actually set to shrink slightly over this time period.