# Russia to test its Satan 2 ballistic missile



## CAPSLOCKSTUCK (Oct 24, 2017)

Russia is preparing to carry out test launches of its 100-tonne 'Satan 2' ballistic missile, also known as RS-28 Sarmat. 

The next generation intercontinental ballistic missile  can 'beat any defences' and wipe out entire countries, according to Russia's military. 

The weapon has been in the pipeline since 2009 and is now ready after several setbacks, with initial trials to be carried out before the end of the year, sources claim.

Launches will be held at the Plesetsk testing ground in west Russia and, if successful, the weapon could by in use by 2019 - 2020



 RS-20






'The main aim is to check the rocket's systems at the moment of leaving the silo, the switching on of the Sarmat's first stage and the following five seconds [of flight],' a source told Kommersant newspaper.


The RS-28 Sarmat missile, dubbed Satan 2 by Nato, has a top speed of 4.3 miles (7km) per second and has been designed to outfox all anti-missile shield systems, writes The Times.

It is expected to have a range of 6,213 miles (10,000 km),










https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/RS-28_Sarmat


----------



## Fourstaff (Oct 24, 2017)

Satan 2 is the name given to this missile by NATO? What a bummer. I thought Russia has good taste in naming their weapon systems.


----------



## bug (Oct 24, 2017)

Ok, all nice and everything (well, not really), but how is it supposed to "outfox" missile defense systems?


----------



## FordGT90Concept (Oct 24, 2017)

Kind of a waste of money when Russia's economy is already hurting.  USA has discontinued it's Satan-like ICBMs, the Peacekeepers, in favor of stealth bombers that can deliver non-nuclear payloads.  A nuclear tipped ICBM has never been used in anger.


----------



## CAPSLOCKSTUCK (Oct 24, 2017)

Dont ask me what i was searching for but i found this yesterday......how nuclear devices were used in agriculture


----------



## bug (Oct 24, 2017)

FordGT90Concept said:


> Kind of a waste of money when Russia's economy is already hurting.  USA has discontinued it's Satan-like ICBMs, the Peacekeepers, in favor of stealth bombers that can deliver non-nuclear payloads.  A nuclear tipped ICBM has never been used in anger.


Russians are under the constant impression they're being assaulted by their neighbours (doesn't matter who those are). Siege mentality by the book.


----------



## Sasqui (Oct 24, 2017)

CAPSLOCKSTUCK said:


> Dont ask me what i was searching for but i found this yesterday......how nuclear devices were used in agriculture



Nice find.  One can only wonder if they thought that someday, we'd have pure fusion explosions with no residual radiation to worry about.  Lot's of practical applications there.

Back OT, the Tzar Bomb, brought to you by the USSR:


----------



## StrayKAT (Oct 24, 2017)

The villainization of nuclear delivery systems needs to stop. They have rights too 

Seriously though... hard to call one of the best insurers of peace as Satanic. It's a blessing in disguise.


----------



## Vya Domus (Oct 24, 2017)

FordGT90Concept said:


> Kind of a waste of money when Russia's economy is already hurting.



Interestingly enough whenever a country faces a great economic fall going to war can revitalize many industries , that's how Germany has risen during WW2 after all. However Russia always had trouble doing this , even when the timing was perfect , they've been in this state of limbo for over 100 years now.


----------



## StrayKAT (Oct 24, 2017)

Nukes are the only things insuring Russia gets to control it's own destiny. That's worth more than the actual woes of a failing economy. If it wasn't for that, they'd have even more troubles. But what Vya Domus said applies too. It could help. Or has been known to.


----------



## FordGT90Concept (Oct 24, 2017)

Remember how USA recycled most of Russia's nukes because they couldn't afford to maintain them?  Building nukes only leads to maintenance costs down the road.  Failure to maintain a nuclear arsenal can prove more deadly than detonating them.


----------



## StrayKAT (Oct 25, 2017)

FordGT90Concept said:


> Remember how USA recycled most of Russia's nukes because they couldn't afford to maintain them?  Building nukes only leads to maintenance costs down the road.  Failure to maintain a nuclear arsenal can prove more deadly than detonating them.



True enough. Makes me wonder who is truly prepared to do this besides USA and China (and China's arsenal is very small.. for a superpower. They keep enough just to be left alone).


----------



## bug (Oct 25, 2017)

Vya Domus said:


> Interestingly enough whenever a country faces a great economic fall going to war can revitalize many industries , that's how Germany has risen during WW2 after all. However Russia always had trouble doing this , even when the timing was perfect , they've been in this state of limbo for over 100 years now.


That's the pop culture version of how Germany has risen after The Great War. It's not how it actually happened.


----------



## StrayKAT (Oct 25, 2017)

bug said:


> That's the pop culture version of how Germany has risen after The Great War. It's not how it actually happened.



I'm sure we don't just want to talk about nukes. Care to give some insight? I know other generals were already secretly planning military build up even before Hitler rose, but don't know the details. It almost seems like an "Order 66" and he enacted a plan already prepared.


----------



## bug (Oct 25, 2017)

StrayKAT said:


> I'm sure we don't just want to talk about nukes. Care to give some insight? I know other generals were already secretly planning military build up even before Hitler rose, but don't know the details. It almost seems like an "Order 66" and he enacted a plan already prepared.


Short version: you don't pull yourself out of a depression by public spending (in any domain), the same way you can't pull yourself out of a lake by pulling your ear. Germany rose because wealthy people were investing* to counter the Bolshevik propaganda and the fear of an "October revolution" spreading to Germany. For a bit of perspective on that influence, the German communist party always had 10-13% votes in elections held between 1930 and 1933 and the winning party had something like 25-30%. The the German communist party viewed the social-democrats as mortal enemies.

Of course the discussion way longer, but luckily the net is full of information if you want to know more. I myself am not an expert.

*Those same people invested in NSDAP, thinking Hitler is a harmless nobody they can control. We all know how that plan unfold.


----------



## StrayKAT (Oct 25, 2017)

bug said:


> Short version: you don't pull yourself out of a depression by public spending (in any domain), the same way you can't pull yourself out of a lake by pulling your ear. Germany rose because wealthy people were investing* to counter the Bolshevik propaganda and the fear of an "October revolution" spreading to Germany. For a bit of perspective on that influence, the German communist party always had 10-13% votes in elections held between 1930 and 1933 and the winning party had something like 25-30%. The the German communist party viewed the social-democrats as mortal enemies.
> 
> Of course the discussion way longer, but luckily the net is full of information if you want to know more. I myself am not an expert.
> 
> *Those same people invested in NSDAP, thinking Hitler is a harmless nobody they can control. We all know how that plan unfold.



I probably should read a book. I've seen tons of documentaries, but very few of them touch on the pre-War period (except when it pertains to Hitler himself and his rise). I always find the politics and climate more interesting than the wars (same with the makings of the Great War), but it's actually not touched on enough outside books it seems.

Yeah, I knew how they underestimated Hitler. I don't even think Hitler saw himself that way at first. I heard one historian put it an interesting way. He first saw himself like a "John the Baptist", merely preparing the way. Only later did he realize "No, I am HE!"


----------



## bug (Oct 25, 2017)

StrayKAT said:


> I probably should read a book. I've seen tons of documentaries, but very few of them touch on the pre-War period (except when it pertains to Hitler himself and his rise). I always find the politics and climate more interesting than the wars (same with the makings of the Great War), but it's actually not touched on enough outside books it seems.
> 
> Yeah, I knew how they underestimated Hitler. I don't even think Hitler saw himself that way at first. I heard one historian put it an interesting way. He first saw himself like a "John the Baptist", merely preparing the way. Only later did he realize "No, I am HE!"


I didn't mean to say "go read whatever you can find on the net", I was more referring to the more reliable sources. And I didn't mention books, because kids these days don't do books  Unfortunately, the little I read about the subject haven't been translated into more widespread languages, so I can't point you towards anything.


----------



## Vya Domus (Oct 25, 2017)

bug said:


> That's the pop culture version of how Germany has risen after The Great War. It's not how it actually happened.



It was without doubt a major factor. The resulting temporary economic growth was a very true and well documented thing not just "pop culture". And it didn't happen only in Germany , it happened all over Europe to a degree.


----------



## CAPSLOCKSTUCK (Oct 27, 2017)




----------



## Norton (Nov 18, 2017)

Thread cleaned- this is a Science & Technology thread not a geopolitical thread....


----------

