9 ms·
A Navigator for America's Deadliest Cold War ICBM
- ETHisso2017 7y agoTruly fascinating. I wonder if there would be other uses for one of these systems, however, such as navigating deep underwater.
- bigbluedots 7y agoIt's amazing that they were able to call this thing 'Peacekeeper' eith a straight face.
- arethuza 7y agoIt 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.
- arethuza 7y agoIf 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 7y ago> 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 7y agoShe 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
- Nokinside 7y agoThere 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-modernization-is-undermining-strategic-stability-the-burst-height-compensating-super-fuze/ https://thebulletin.org/2017/03/how-us-nuclear-force-moderni... >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 7y agoWhen (and indeed why) did people start referring to a new generation of Russian weapons as "doomsday weapons"?
- tolien 7y agoThe article refers to this as a “Doomsday Navigator” too but that was the word I dropped to meet the character limit for submissions.
- Nokinside 7y agoWhen 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.
- baybal2 7y agoNowadays 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.
- dekhn 7y agochip gyros aren't as accurate as this in practical reality. they give up a lot of accuracy. you need good, hard mass and well-machined metal.
- dreamcompiler 7y agoNot 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 7y agoI 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.
- 2rsf 7y agoWhat'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 7y agoThe point is attack against hardened counterforce targets. You need to hit very close to get 10,0000 psi pressure that destroys and buries them.
- wallace_f 7y ago>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 7y agoUntil 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 7y agoThat’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 7y agoSlightly 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
- DennisP 7y ago> 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.
- fnord77 7y agominiaturize it and make it a tourbillon in an extreme high end mechanical wrist watch