Russia faces persistent setbacks with RS‑28 Sarmat missiles
The Russians are continuing to face technical challenges related to the RS-28 Sarmat intercontinental ballistic missiles. As Timothy Wright from the International Institute for Strategic Studies (IISS) points out, this is largely due to complications in developing the necessary engines.
Reports of difficulties with this Russian missile model have surfaced for many years. Although it was intended to be introduced into service with the Strategic Rocket Forces as early as 2018, only one test has been conducted so far, and it also ended unsuccessfully.
Russians' problems with the RS-28 Sarmat
The designers anticipate that the Sarmat missile, developed as a successor to the RS-20 Voyevoda, will be able to carry a load weighing 10,000 kilograms. Its design allows for the transport of up to ten heavy or fifteen lighter warheads, each capable of striking different targets.
A Ukrainian company developed the engines used in the Voyevoda missiles. However, after Russia's annexation of Crimea in 2014, Ukraine decided to end its cooperation with Russia on this project and in numerous other areas. In the rocket industry, Russia relies on organisations such as the Makeyev Rocket Design Bureau and the Moscow Institute of Thermal Technology. As Wright notes, both institutions lack sufficient experience in building liquid fuel engines suitable for intercontinental ballistic missiles.
Russian missile exploded before launch
The method used to launch the missile is the cold launch technique. This involves ejecting the missile from a silo into the air using compressed gases, after which small engines quickly stabilise the rocket. Only then are the main engines ignited. This approach allows the silo and gas tanks to remain intact, enabling their reuse. However, after the Sarmat missile test in Plesetsk in September 2024, satellite images revealed that the silo and its surroundings were utterly destroyed.
The exact causes of the explosion remain unknown, but the size of the crater, approximately 60 metres in diameter, suggests that the explosion may have occurred in the silo. Wright suggested that one possible explanation could be engine failure, which might have prevented the missile from reaching the necessary ascent speed, causing it to fall back into the silo and explode.
