Oreshnik missile system (IRBM)

Putin: What we need now is not to improve the nuclear doctrine, but the "Nut", by Alexey Degtyarev for VZGLYAD. 12.10.2024.

The Russian leadership is not making the nuclear doctrine tougher, Russian President Vladimir Putin said at a meeting of the Council for Civil Society and Human Rights (HRC).

"We are not tightening the nuclear doctrine, we are improving it," RIA Novosti quotes Putin as saying . He noted that the doctrine itself no longer needs additional changes.

“By and large, what we need now is not to improve the nuclear doctrine, but the Oreshnik [missile system], because, if you look at it, a sufficient number of these modern weapons systems simply put us on the brink of virtually no need to use nuclear weapons,” the head of state emphasized.

Earlier, the president noted that so far no country has an analogue of the Oreshnik, and indicated that Russia has begun serial production of such ICBMs.

https://m.vz.ru/news/2024/12/10/1302702.html

He said no need to use nuclear weapons

He didn't say no need to have them

and capable to be carries by any carrier needed.

Sea-based Oreshnik.

Neither THAAD Nor Any Other Existing Air Defense System Can Stop Oreshnik – Expert, by Ekaterina Blinova for Sputnik. 12.11.2024.

Claims that the US-made THAAD can intercept the Russian Oreshnik missile is nothing but propaganda, Yuri Knutov, military expert and historian of the Air Defence Forces, told Sputnik.

"This is propaganda designed to reassure the American and European public that NATO countries are not lagging behind Russia technologically," Yuri Knutov, military expert and historian of the Air Defense Forces, told Sputnik.

He was responding to Western reports that the US-made Terminal High Altitude Area Defence (THAAD) system can intercept Russia's Oreshnik.

The expert explained why THAAD cannnot stop Oreshnik:

• THAAD can technically hit targets flying at speeds up to Mach 14, but that only applies to targets in near space. At an altitude of 40 to 70 km, THAAD's capabilities are sharply reduced

• The Oreshnik’s hypersonic warheads are surrounded by a bubble of plasma, which absorbs the signal from the interceptor's guidance radar – making them invisible to air defences

• THAAD is designed to intercept ballistic missiles during their terminal phase of flight – but is not fast enough to detect, track and destroy the Oreshnik that approaches the target at hypersonic speed

• Israel's Arrow 3 exoatmospheric hypersonic anti-ballistic missile system cannot intercept the Oreshnik either, given that it failed to shoot down Iran's Fatah-1 and Fatah-2 missiles – which are claimed to be hypersonic

• The air defence capabilities of other Washington allies and partners are even poorer than those of the US and Israel – so no existing air defense system can stop Oreshnik

https://sputnikglobe.com/20241211/neither-thaad-nor-any-other-existing-air-defense-system-can-stop-oreshnik--expert-1121150054.html

Not really. If Oreshnik weighs about 30 tons, then it is a smaller ICBM without one stage.

You are missing the point... if it is made up of stages from already in production missiles then it is already in serial production...

ICBMs and SLBMs are not made in huge numbers because their total numbers are limited by strategic arms treaties, but IRBMs are not limited or restricted by any current or planned treaty... but more importantly the fact that they have conventional warheads for these IRBMs means unlike nuclear weapons they can actually be used in combat... and they have.

In addition, it is on a fairly large TEL, which makes it quite expensive.

Quite expensive?

Compared to an SSBN or concrete silo?

They might just be located in buildings whose roofs open for launch and are not on trucks at all... just prefabricated buildings located around the place...

A rail based version would give excellent mobility and be a potent system.

16 pieces with a conventional or kinetic warhead is a bit too few for a medium-sized country. Rolling Eyes It is worth comparing how many cruise and ballistic missiles were launched at Ukraine.

If the target was say France, then 16 missiles, each able to hit 5 or 6 different targets each... lets say 5 to make the maths easier... that would be 80 targets that could be vapourised... the Eiffel tower, the government buildings, a few major airfields, 20 nuclear power stations... assuming they have that many... and how about the channel tunnel near shore where the water is shallow... and you would still have plenty of munitions left. Hitting the surface where their Paris underground is located... so many targets and no chance for them to stop you and that is from one sub.

Many countries would surrender knowing you are making more missiles every day that you can't stop.

If the warheads can attack independent targets is a question.
The other is, what would be the maximal coverage - for RSD-10 warheads were limited in the attack area, and increasing it was one of the modernization projects.

The number of Pioneers built can also be a hint. In production from 1976 to 1987, the peak number was 441 launchers deployed, later sliced down to 405 pcs with an additional 245 missiles in storage. So, in 11 years of production, they made a maximum of +/-650 missiles. That still makes 5 missiles per month - rather impressive.

The warheads certainly can, that's MIRV, a technology that has been around for some time.

Whether the warhead sub-munitions can is the real question
But until we get evidence that they can, it's prudent to assume that they can't, and that they simply land in a pattern around the area targeted, maybe with a size of spread that can be regulated by changing the height at which they are released. Whether you're targeting a bunker with penetrators, or an airfield with cluster munitions - that's pretty much what you would want anyway.

Western experts say that Russia is capable of producing 25 Oreshniks per year.


https://twitter.com/ArmsControlWonk/status/1867015762264854528

They keep guessing at how many Russia can produce a month or per year, but they don't say how long Russia has been producing them already for and therefore how large a stock it already has. Maybe they have no idea. And Russia is certainly not volunteering that information

In a video a few days after the strike Mercouris mentioned some dude (I guess inside Russia) he was in contact with who told him all the new Russian missiles would work like LEGO. Take a part from that missile and another part from that missile, put them together any you get a new system with new specifications. Would be nice if true. wrote:

Well if you think about it they are similar to aircraft engines that can be adapted to different airframes. Elon Musk is doing the similr concept with modular use of engines. Within a certain payload range you can use the same booster, you can use throttle to manage G-load and if the payload is lighter you go further or higher, and if it is greater less so. The only caveat is the booster needs to have enough max thrust (with decent margin) to achive positive vertical acceleration. If not you strap on boosters. We see this all the time in space launches.

if you look at it, a sufficient number of these modern weapons systems simply put us on the brink of virtually no need to use nuclear weapons,” the head of state emphasized. wrote:

I can't remember which analyst said it, if it was Ritter or Postal or other, but with 200 Oreshnik missiles Russia could cripple most of NATOs european air power in a single strike. Oreshnik then becomes Russias weapon of choice to pre-empt a first strike by NATO. If in tense times NATO is threatening and indications are they will attempt a decaptation with high probablity, the President of the Russia now has an option short of ending life on the planet. So I am sure Putin is relived. for example Russia can take out the ABM Aegis ashore in Poland and Romania, and then hold fast and offer negotiations. If the answer is no, and they see NATO airbase activity ramping, take out all the runways, at the same time informing NATO that there is no desire to use NUKEs yet. If there is a mass strike by NATO then its over and nukes will fly. The only problem is Oreshnik could also be carrying a nuclear warhead and there is no was of really assuring NATO that any given missile approaching at M10 is not carrying a nuke. I guess you leave the numbers low ? In any case it gives the Putin an option that is short of armageddon, which I am sure brings him great relief. He is also not the sort to use it recklessly.