I still find it very annoying this repeating of the "destroy Texas/France" bit. There is no practical 10xMIRV weapon that can do that.
-
This Tweet is unavailable
-
Get feeling that Russia plays up cumulative yield for propaganda purposes. But presumably developed to counter US missile defense systems
I think yield discussions on "Satan II" are 100% propaganda. I don't know what their actual motivations are, would defer to @russianforces
-
-
Basic idea is that "heavy" missile can better penetrate defense. Also, MIRVed missile will keep number of warheads at "respectable" level
-
This Tweet is unavailable
-
This Tweet is unavailable
-
The throw-weight of these missiles has very little correlation with yield. Prev GRTs devices had relatively small charges.
-
Still, if you have throw-weight you can use bigger warheads. I had some numbers here - http://russianforces.org/blog/2007/05/how_many_warheads.shtml …
-
Why a new heavy Sarmat missile use a liquid fuel? Currently all modern ICBM use a solid fuel which has many advantages than liquid.
-
UDMH-NTO combo can provide higher specific impulse and is more efficient for heavy cargos.
-
This Tweet is unavailable
New conversation -
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.