
A Navigator for America's Deadliest Cold War ICBM - tolien
https://www.thedrive.com/the-war-zone/30254/this-isnt-a-sci-fi-prop-its-a-doomsday-navigator-for-americas-biggest-cold-war-icbm
======
Nokinside
There is similar recent technological development in missile accuracy that has
changed the balance between the US and Russia to favor the US. It's completely
missing the discussion when there is fret about Russian doomsday weapons.
Russia needs more doomsday weapons and movable missile launchers just to match
the US.

The Bulletin has great detailed article: How US nuclear force modernization is
undermining strategic stability: The burst-height compensating super-fuze
[https://thebulletin.org/2017/03/how-us-nuclear-force-
moderni...](https://thebulletin.org/2017/03/how-us-nuclear-force-
modernization-is-undermining-strategic-stability-the-burst-height-
compensating-super-fuze/)

>Our conclusions. Under the veil of an otherwise-legitimate warhead life-
extension program, the US military has quietly engaged in a vast expansion of
the killing power of the most numerous warhead in the US nuclear arsenal: the
W76, deployed on the Navy’s ballistic missile submarines. This improvement in
kill power means that all US sea-based warheads now have the capability to
destroy hardened targets such as Russian missile silos, a capability
previously reserved for only the highest-yield warheads in the US arsenal.

>The result is a nuclear arsenal that is being transformed into a force that
has the unambiguous characteristics of being optimized for surprise attacks
against Russia and for fighting and winning nuclear wars. While the lethality
and firepower of the US force has been greatly increased, the numbers of
weapons in both US and Russian forces have decreased, resulting in a dramatic
increase in the vulnerability of Russian nuclear forces to a US first strike.

~~~
arethuza
When (and indeed why) did people start referring to a new generation of
Russian weapons as "doomsday weapons"?

~~~
Nokinside
When and because Russian's started to develop doomsday weapons.

"Status-6 Oceanic Multipurpose System" seems to be huge salted nuclear bomb
similar to the the cobalt-salted doomsday bomb in the movie Dr. Strangelove.
The goal of is to contaminate wast areas for long time.

"9M730 Burevestnik" is experimental nuclear powered, nuclear armed cruise
missile. The US had similar crazy doomsday weapon development program (SLAM
and project Pluto in the 60's). Nuclear powered ramjet is insane compared to
ICBM. When you use it, you don't care abut contaminating the launch site or
anything between launch site and target.

These kinds of weapons can be used only as retaliation when all hope is lost
and you want to kill hundreds of millions of civilians and make wast areas
inhabitable. Russian early warning system has deteriorated as well, so they
need something like that.

~~~
arethuza
So the unintended consequence of ballistic missile defence (which could
probably do very little to stop an all out Russian attack) is that your
opponent creates even worse weapons that are impervious to ballistic missile
defence.

Typically for "logic" in such matter the arguments used by both sides make
complete sense but the result is insanity.

~~~
Nokinside
The goal of the US ballistic missile defense is defend against a limited ICBM
attack and regional missile threats. US ballistic missile defense program
can't defend against large scale Russian attack. Defending against large scale
attack has never been the goal of the program, nor is it a realistic goal.

Russians use the US BMDS it partly as an excuse. Russians can easily
compensate against any BMDS development by adding little steeper arch to their
ICBM's or adding more countermeasures.

~~~
vasac
Maybe they're worried about their capability to retaliate - US BMDS maybe can
not defend against full Russian arsenal but it may be successful against
limited retaliation (if most of Russian arsenal gets wiped out in first
strike).

------
DennisP
> Today, ring-laser gyro INS systems with embedded GPS come in tiny packages
> and can sustain massive G forces allowing them to be packed into everything
> from missiles to artillery shells...Before GPS was available to correct for
> drift, it's amazing the lengths engineers went through to make inertial
> navigation systems as accurate as possible.

Having your nuclear deterrence depend on GPS staying operational
seems...questionable.

------
arethuza
If anyone likes this kind of thing then there is more on the (remarkable) site
of Tatjana J. van Vark:

[http://www.tatjavanvark.nl/tvv5/platfrm.html](http://www.tatjavanvark.nl/tvv5/platfrm.html)

Edit: A different, simpler, INS!

~~~
johnr2
> the (remarkable) site of Tatjana J. van Vark

It is indeed remarkable. At first I though it was just a collection of
technology images, but then realised she made most of those devices herself.
Thanks for the link.

~~~
arethuza
She does seem to do restorations of some "interesting" items - such as a
V-bomber Navigation and Bombing system:

[http://www.tatjavanvark.nl/tvve/dduck0.html](http://www.tatjavanvark.nl/tvve/dduck0.html)

------
bigbluedots
It's amazing that they were able to call this thing 'Peacekeeper' eith a
straight face.

~~~
arethuza
It was aimed at Soviet missile silos - you don't need that kind of accuracy to
hit "countervalue" targets (i.e. cities) - so there was perhaps some logic to
it.

------
2rsf
What's the point of 40 meters CEP in a high yield nuclear missile ? what's
wrong with 400 meters ? 1 Km ?

[edit]

> Very little of the precision of this guidance system is even exploited
> during a ballistic missile flight, it is mostly used simply to maintain
> guidance system alignment on the ground during missile alert without needing
> an external reference through precision gyrocompassing. Most ICBMs require
> an external alignment system to keep the INS in synch with the outside world
> prior to launch

~~~
Nokinside
The point is attack against hardened counterforce targets. You need to hit
very close to get 10,0000 psi pressure that destroys and buries them.

------
ETHisso2017
Truly fascinating. I wonder if there would be other uses for one of these
systems, however, such as navigating deep underwater.

------
wallace_f
>during missile alert without needing an external reference through precision
gyrocompassing. Most ICBMs require an external alignment system to keep the
INS in synch with the outside world prior to launch.

I don't fully grasp this.

~~~
mikestew
Until someone with real knowledge comes along, here's my take. The INS doesn't
know where it is at in relation to the rest of the world/universe/whatever. So
you tell it. And the INS sits there in his missile silo, constantly asking,
"where am I? Have I moved since last time I asked this question? If I've
moved, where does that now place me in relationship to everything else?" Of
course, he's in a missile silo, he hasn't gone anywhere. But the INS drifts;
small imprecisions add up to the INS _thinking_ it moved when it didn't. So he
has to sync with an external system to figure out, "whoops, haven't moved.
Better rebaseline."

Where this fancy-schmancy system is so good, you tell it where it's at once,
and he can sit in his silo for years without drifting enough to need
correction. Again, somewhat educated SWAG. Do not stake your reputation on
this by repeating it.

~~~
tolien
That’s my understanding too. The key is that this process of baselining takes
time, which you don’t have either when there’s half a dozen 50MT Russian
warheads coming your way (TFA refers to the missile sites being a nuclear
“sponge”, i.e. forcing the Russians to launch on them and use warheads that
could be targeted against cities instead) or when you want to destroy them in
a preemptive first strike before they can be launched.

~~~
ghaff
Slightly OT but with submarine-based systems, the INS positioning is adjusted
in part by doing a star sight at the top of the trajectory.

[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/UGM-133_Trident_II](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/UGM-133_Trident_II)

------
fnord77
miniaturize it and make it a tourbillon in an extreme high end mechanical
wrist watch

------
baybal2
Nowadays you can buy a toy quadcopter, and get a single chip gyro with on-
package computer and performance of mid-cold war ICBM INS.

Microelectronics is a tough industry. Fear of communism can not match the fear
of loosing to a commercial competitor in a half trillion dollar industry.

~~~
dreamcompiler
Not even close. Single chip gyros and accelerometers are many orders of
magnitude less accurate. INAV with microelectronic gyros and accelerometers is
pointless except for very short distances with frequent GPS corrections.
Double integration is a cruel bitch.

~~~
baybal2
I may have stretched that, but proper mems INS can have less than 1 degree per
hour drift easily. That is solidly in the MRBM level accuracy.

And what is in the lab now, can go below 0.1

It was long believed that gyroscope precision is limited by its size, but as
what latest gyros show, it's not.

