Russia Unveils First Images Of Nuclear Missile Capable Of Reaching US Soil

Tyler Durden's picture

Submitted by Alexander Mercouris via,

Russia reveals photos of a new highly advanced liquid fuelled heavy ICBM capable of evading anti-missile defences and hitting US territory with 10 tonne nuclear payload.

The Makeyev Design Bureau – the designer of Russia’s heavy liquid fuelled Intercontinental Ballistic Missiles (“ICBMs”) – ie. of missiles capable of reaching US territory from Russian territory, has published the first picture of Russia’s new heavy Sarmat ICBM which is due to enter service shortly, probably in 2018.

The picture is accompanied by a short statement which reads

“In accordance with the Decree of the Russian Government ‘On the State Defence Order for 2010 and the planning period 2012-2013,’ the Makeyev Rocket Design Bureau was instructed to start design and development work on the Sarmat. In June 2011, the Bureau and the Russian Ministry of Defense signed a state contract for the Sarmat’s development.  The prospective strategic missile system is being developed in order to assuredly and effectively fulfil objectives of nuclear deterrent by Russia’s strategic forces.


The Sarmat is the planned replacement of the R-36 family of Russian ICBMs, which entered service with the Soviet armed forces in the 1960s.  The R-36 family culminated in a series of missiles known in the USSR and Russia as the R-36M, which entered service in the 1970s.  With a throw weight of 8,800 kg these were the heaviest and most powerful ICBMs built up to now.  Here is a video of one being launched:

The specifications of the Sarmat have not been disclosed and are classified.  However it is believed to be a significantly smaller and lighter missile than the R-36 family, but to have a larger throw weight of up to 10,000 kg. 

Advances in the chemical industry and in the design of rocket engines since the 1960s have made it possible to build smaller and lighter rockets having the same or greater capability as the heavier rockets designed in the 1960s.


The Sarmat has been specifically designed to defeat the US’s Anti Ballistic Missile systems, which are being deployed in eastern Europe. 

Its range of countermeasures is classified and not known.  However it is believed the Sarmat is capable of manoeuvres during its flight trajectory to confuse incoming missiles, that it is able to launch decoys – also to confuse incoming interceptor missiles – and that at least one of the warheads being designed for it is a hypersonic warhead, which rumours say was tested successfully in April, and which is believed to be impervious to interception by incoming missiles.

A little mentioned fact about the military strategic balance between the US and Russia, is that Russia has been steadily upgrading its strategic deterrent with new advanced missiles, which are entirely different to those of the 1960s, which formed the basis of the Soviet strategic deterrent. 

These include the Topol and Yars light road mobile solid fuel ICBMs, and the very advanced solid fuelled Bulava ICBM, which is sea launched from Russia’s advanced Borei strategic nuclear missile submarines. (Below)


Topol ICBM




Bulava ICBM


Borei-class Strategic Nuclear Submarine

By contrast the US strategic deterrent still relies on missile systems such as the ground-based Minuteman III and the sea launched Trident II, which have their origins in the 1960s and early 1970s.

With the Sarmat missile, which is supposed to enter service in 2018, the Russians will add another powerful modern advanced system to their strategic armoury.

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.
knukles's picture

Size of that Blunt, Dude

TeamDepends's picture

Behold the shlong of doom.

knukles's picture

We, of late, have been regressing.
Used to be that I really didn't think that a lot of folks got up with the idea of working somebody over, maiming or killing each-other.

Latina Lover's picture

Vlad, do us a favor and aim it at Hillary's secret underground nuclear bunker. Even better, aim it at Washington.

eatthebanksters's picture

I thought Hillary had the 'schlong of doom'...

LetThemEatRand's picture

I believe that what Hillary has is better described as a "hell-hole."

UnpatrioticHoarder's picture

That would be a nice first for a world war, if Putin follows through with his "hit first" doctrine and just took out Hillary and saved the rest of us.

Donald J. Trump's picture

Reminds me of Spies Like Us.  The hot little Rusky women soldiers working the missile at the end.  I love the '80s.  So glad we are reliving it.

Motasaurus's picture

The Russian missile tech has always been better than the West. They achieved winnable first-strike capabilities in the early 80s, and their technology has only gotten that much better since then. But unlike the psychopaths in the US, the Russians don't want to sacrifice half their population just to take out all of the US and Europe. They're not interested in "winning" a nuclear war because they know that no one truly does. 

Which is fortunate for us. Can you imagine what the current deep state would do if they got first strike capabilities over Russia? They'd happily sacrifice Berlin, Paris, and half the continental US just to wipe Moscow off the map.  

booboo's picture

Um. no shit, we use their 1960's rocket motors to send our shit into orbit to this day. Our rocket heads were blown away not by their claims of what it could do but the actual fact that they were not bullshitting.

yippee kiyay's picture
yippee kiyay (not verified) booboo Oct 25, 2016 7:03 PM

And you can bet they're not.

letsit's picture
letsit (not verified) yippee kiyay Oct 25, 2016 7:04 PM

Just finished my bunker.

Creative_Destruct's picture

"Behold the shlong of doom."

Loose fit for Hillary's "Hell Hole"

(Source: TD & LTER )

Now, Vlad, please earmark one for Hitlery's "hidy-hole"

Joe Davola's picture

Thankfully we haven't been sitting on our hands, we're about to unveil the Tesla tipped Muskrocket!

Creative_Destruct's picture

Powered by 6 tonnes of Lithium Batteries with a range of 300 miles...

IF it doesn't catch fire and blow up first.

Joe Davola's picture

Yes, but it's capable of decapitating their power structure plus the payload is enhanced if there is rain at the target location.

Dame Ednas Possum's picture

Meh... the wife has one of those already.

It's pink, has 5 speeds and it lives in the top drawer of her bedside table (most of the time).

yippee kiyay's picture
yippee kiyay (not verified) Dame Ednas Possum Oct 25, 2016 9:59 PM

The truth about the conflict with Russia NO ONE dares to reveal.

qomolangma's picture

Dame, you're f#cking funny, RFLOL

"if there is rain at the target location" ha ha

edotabin's picture

nah... .gov insisted that it be solar powered so as not to emit greenhouse gases.

king leon's picture

Preferably with a vibrating function.

jaxville's picture

   No too.  I am still in some sort of cognitive dissonance.   Just bought a refurbished civil defence geiger counter.  Lots of sheet plastic, pails, garbage bags, duct tape.  WTF...? I thought that shit went out with the end of the Warsaw pact. 


de3de8's picture

It looks like the missle on the one episode of Top Gear where one of the guys was trying to light the fuse without success.

philipat's picture

Hey yippee kiyay, previously mofio then santafe then Aristotle of Greece then Gargoyle then bleu then oops then lance-a-lot then Loftie then toro. You are a serial spammer and a serial pain in the ass. Might I politely suggest that you go fuck yourself? And get a life.

Would appreciate regular ZH contributors please take a moment to help me in my campaign against this idiot and report yippee kiyay to

PS. You might have noticed that my attempt to expose you for what you are is always the same. That’s because your Spam is always the same (Using fake links to your BS site which has no connection to your comments; which are deliberately dramatic to mislead people into responding or clicking on the fake link) so it seems only fair that my exposure of your crap should also always be the same. An eye for an eye.

auricle's picture

The world is well aware Russia can deliver more than cosmonots to the ISS. That's why when Russia asserts itself, while not often, the US will back down. 

Archibald Buttle's picture

if it escalates to space, any war will kill all hopes of escaping earth in a meat body once two or three satellites get blown up.

francis scott falseflag's picture


When you think about the asymmetrical retaliation Putin's threatened if the US/EU puts more sanctions on Russia,


isn't denying Americanand/or EU astronauts a trip to the ISS one?  


Or separating the allied part of the ISS from the Russian part (according to the original agreement of operation).  


And if Musk or Boeing can't come up with a tested, safe, manned capsule .... well, what a pity.


Until then only China will have an elaborate Space Station, with plans far beyond what the ISS had.  

Dutti's picture

But, but - can that rocket fly back after dropping it's payload and land on it's tail like Elon Musk's rocket can?

Chris Dakota's picture
Chris Dakota (not verified) Motasaurus Oct 25, 2016 7:15 PM

Anyone who talks about going to war with Russia should be locked up!


Erek's picture

Anyone who who talks about going to war with ANYBODY should be locked up for a long, long time.

Secret Weapon's picture

Watching the video I was impressed with how bad ass clean and surgical the flames were coming out of the tail of that beast.  Super efficient combustion. 

Diatom's picture

It seems small , but its a30 meter long 3 meter wide bad ass motherfucker with

a 20 MT version Its a true Voyevoda...


BlindMonkey's picture

I am pretty sure the video was of the last gen R-36 and not the new SARMAT.


That was a bad ass rocket BTW.

Sokhmate's picture

Russian rockets have always had cleaner combustion than American rockets. Few YT videos explain it in detail, and demonstrate the inferior engineering of the latter's.

Stuck on Zero's picture

All out nuclear war would cause a nuclear Winter canceling the effects of global warming. That would make Al Gore happy.

Luc X. Ifer's picture

And a joke :). Dude, they have windows on that flying schlong! I suppose it is for the reporters filming the Judgement Day like in T3 :)


caconhma's picture

Bulava does not fly well due to many guidance systems problems. There are too many launch failures. The last 10 years, Russians were trying to fix it but have failed to do so. Consequently, nuke subs for them are useless.

Back in 1997.  Russian informed it US partner Lockheed that a 4th-stage unit called Breeze for Russian heavy-lifter Proton launch system used by a joined Lockheed-Energia- Hrunichev venture would be ready by 2000. It is still too unreliable to launch a valuable payload.

Therefore, all these new Russian missiles are only good on a paper.

Finally, in the next 3-5 years, US will field a new generation of strategic weapon systems in space (SDI II) making today Russian & Chinese strategic umbrellas very questionable.

Erek's picture

I'm not so sure I agree with your thesis, but I don't think we should test it either.

Luc X. Ifer's picture

Hey Hillary'ous fanboy, vote $hillary and you will not see that day in 3 to 5 years but much, much sooner - yo psychopath asshole

Max Steel's picture

Your diatribe is hysterical. Firstly Bulava ICBM faced issues at start because it was designed to evade US ABM systems and now it is fully operational and working perfectly. Secondly US Space weapons are nothing but KV ( Kinetic Vehicles ) which in theory will destroy the warhead bus before  but in reality it's not possible to identify and separate targets in space thats why those Kill Vehicles are not in space . Rest US ABM cannot intercept ICBMs. 

Amun's picture

SDI II with the same capabilities as the Aegis on Donald Cook


"Over the bow, right turn, on the deck, below the bridge wing ... change your pants!"

EddieLomax's picture

Yep, the fruitloops in government actually do believe their own propoganda.  The recent Russian fleet movement totally jumped the shark, apparently the aircraft carrier has jets on it that are capable of hitting civilian targets and causing attrocities, do they (the mainstream media) know their audience are adults?

Still its a sad reflection on how poorly defended the UK is when a small flotilla of 5-6 vessels is called a fleet, maybe if we stopped giving billions away on foreign aid and the EU, and stopped the graft in government we could afford to defend ourselves and have our own independant foreign policy without relying on our sugar daddy (the US).

As for nuclear weapons, totally agree, I feel safer knowing the Russians have a credible nuclear arsenal than one that could be easily negated, that says all that there needs to be said about the majority of our current leaders.

More Ammo's picture

If he would load it up with a couple of neutron bombs and take out DC NYC and shitcago I would call it a win for everyone.  Maybe commiefornia would get back in line...

JRobby's picture


"But Hillary said things would be better for women and children?"

If better is being incinerated?

Serfs Up's picture

I hear they call it the 3:30 p.m.

Janet is green with envy.

Now she wants a bigger toy.

SafelyGraze's picture

it cannot possibly reach mars

hedgeless_horseman's picture


it cannot possibly reach mars

Sadly, neither can we.

So, I guess we'll just have to wait and see.