Could someone with knowledge confirm my theory that ICBMs were used not only for their high capacity but also their attack vector from ABOVE, instead of cruise missile vectors which are HORIZONTAL?
Nuclear-armed ICBMs do not have a terminal dive maneuver. Not needed for any reason. Fuzing is accomplished by altimeter. The guidance system is designed to result in a target dispersion error well within the blast radius of the weapon. (It's a tradeoff between accuracy and weapon yield. My old motto: "When in doubt, add more yield.")
However, if you are using a conventional warhead, you are far more sensitive to target dispersion errors and need to reduce them as much as possible. This leads to a vertical terminal maneuver, as it nullifies any lateral error resulting from projection of a height error. This is used in conventional guided bombs of the JDAM variety. It may be that this "Oreshnik" missile has such a terminal maneuver, especially if it has a terrain-recognition seeker.
Could someone with knowledge confirm my theory that ICBMs were used not only for their high capacity but also their attack vector from ABOVE, instead of cruise missile vectors which are HORIZONTAL?
Nuclear-armed ICBMs do not have a terminal dive maneuver. Not needed for any reason. Fuzing is accomplished by altimeter. The guidance system is designed to result in a target dispersion error well within the blast radius of the weapon. (It's a tradeoff between accuracy and weapon yield. My old motto: "When in doubt, add more yield.")
However, if you are using a conventional warhead, you are far more sensitive to target dispersion errors and need to reduce them as much as possible. This leads to a vertical terminal maneuver, as it nullifies any lateral error resulting from projection of a height error. This is used in conventional guided bombs of the JDAM variety. It may be that this "Oreshnik" missile has such a terminal maneuver, especially if it has a terrain-recognition seeker.