Military Forum for Russian and Global Defence Issues


    Strategic Missile Troops (ICBMs): Discussion & News

    Share
    GarryB
    GarryB

    Posts : 19931
    Points : 20483
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    Re: Strategic Missile Troops (ICBMs): Discussion & News

    Post  GarryB on Sat Oct 17, 2015 12:44 am

    Not at all, there is Iskander with 750kg Thermobaric warhead. The equivalent of that thermobaric warhead should have above 1-2kT yield.

    Oops... no... a 750kg thermobaric warhead does not have the power of 1-2 thousand tons (ie million kgs) of HE.

    The main problem with putting FOABs in an ICBM or an IRBM or SLBMs is that they will count as ICBMs and IRBMs or SLBMs... and as you might have noticed they only have a tiny fraction of the power of a real nuclear device.

    Most importantly the velocity of fragments and blast waves from modern HE max's out at about 4-5km per second so actually making a 7 ton solid concrete warhead would have just as much effect as conventional HE... which is really not much. Replacing the 7 tons of warhead from an SS-18 with small metal cubes of a few hundred grammes each with a small bursting charge to scatter those cubes in the last milisecond before impact would have a greater effect than a full sized 7 ton payload of HE... the shock wave of the incoming warhead would be more powerful than the shockwave of 7 tons explosing and almost 7 tons of shrapnel will do rather more damage than 7 tons of HE bomb most of which turns into hot gas and small fragments.
    Werewolf
    Werewolf

    Posts : 5266
    Points : 5471
    Join date : 2012-10-24

    Re: Strategic Missile Troops (ICBMs): Discussion & News

    Post  Werewolf on Sat Oct 17, 2015 2:29 am

    GarryB wrote:
    Not at all, there is Iskander with 750kg Thermobaric warhead. The equivalent of that thermobaric warhead should have above 1-2kT yield.

    Oops... no... a 750kg thermobaric warhead does not have the power of 1-2 thousand tons (ie million kgs) of HE.

    The main problem with putting FOABs in an ICBM or an IRBM or SLBMs is that they will count as ICBMs and IRBMs or SLBMs... and as you might have noticed they only have a tiny fraction of the power of a real nuclear device.

    Most importantly the velocity of fragments and blast waves from modern HE max's out at about 4-5km per second so actually making a 7 ton solid concrete warhead would have just as much effect as conventional HE... which is really not much. Replacing the 7 tons of warhead from an SS-18 with small metal cubes of a few hundred grammes each with a small bursting charge to scatter those cubes in the last milisecond before impact would have a greater effect than a full sized 7 ton payload of HE... the shock wave of the incoming warhead would be more powerful than the shockwave of 7 tons explosing and almost 7 tons of shrapnel will do rather more damage than 7 tons of HE bomb most of which turns into hot gas and small fragments.

    If a 11.5t FOAB can achieve 44kT then i think 0.75t can achieve at least 1kT equivalent explosion.
    Morpheus Eberhardt
    Morpheus Eberhardt

    Posts : 1929
    Points : 2040
    Join date : 2013-05-19

    Re: Strategic Missile Troops (ICBMs): Discussion & News

    Post  Morpheus Eberhardt on Sat Oct 17, 2015 2:36 am

    FOAB at 7.1 tonne has a yield equivalent to 44 tonnes of TNT, not 44 kilotonnes of TNT. Probably some typo somewhere.
    Werewolf
    Werewolf

    Posts : 5266
    Points : 5471
    Join date : 2012-10-24

    Re: Strategic Missile Troops (ICBMs): Discussion & News

    Post  Werewolf on Sat Oct 17, 2015 2:54 am

    Morpheus Eberhardt wrote:FOAB at 7.1 tonne has a yield equivalent to 44 tonnes of TNT, not 44 kilotonnes of TNT. Probably some typo somewhere.

    Probably.
    GarryB
    GarryB

    Posts : 19931
    Points : 20483
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    Re: Strategic Missile Troops (ICBMs): Discussion & News

    Post  GarryB on Sun Oct 18, 2015 3:19 am


    AlfaT8 wrote:Not sure where to post this question so i am posting it here.

    It's a question that's been bothering me lately. scratch

    I wanted to ask if it were possible for Russia to develop a Non-Nuclear ICBM using multiple FAOBs, and if such a weapon were indeed created what would be it's ramification with respect Treaties and deployment??

    THX in advance.


    Well the obvious problem is that any conventional launch of such a SLBM or ICBM will likely be treated lke a nuke lunch until proven otherwise.

    either side could claim they are only firing conventionally armed missiles but it will only be after impacts that the other side could be sure.
    Militarov
    Militarov

    Posts : 6010
    Points : 6037
    Join date : 2015-09-02
    Location : Serbia

    Re: Strategic Missile Troops (ICBMs): Discussion & News

    Post  Militarov on Fri Oct 30, 2015 4:23 pm









    Topol ballistic missile launched from the Plesetsk Cosmodrome.



    30.10.2015.


    Last edited by Militarov on Fri Oct 30, 2015 9:01 pm; edited 1 time in total
    Militarov
    Militarov

    Posts : 6010
    Points : 6037
    Join date : 2015-09-02
    Location : Serbia

    Re: Strategic Missile Troops (ICBMs): Discussion & News

    Post  Militarov on Fri Oct 30, 2015 9:02 pm

    Big_Gazza wrote:
    Militarov wrote:Topol-M ballistic missile launched from the Plesetsk Cosmodrome.

    Actually, I think you will find that launch appears to be a Topol SS-25/RT-2PM, rather than a Topol-M SS-27/RT-2PM2??

    Yeah, its 15Ж58, i did not even pay attention to be honest. Fixed in post.
    max steel
    max steel

    Posts : 2939
    Points : 2964
    Join date : 2015-02-12
    Location : South Pole

    Re: Strategic Missile Troops (ICBMs): Discussion & News

    Post  max steel on Sun Nov 01, 2015 11:37 am

    Russia Successfully Launches Yars ICBM From Plesetsk to Kamchatka

    Russia has successfully launched a Yars intercontinental ballistic missile equipped with independently targeted warheads from its Plesetsk Cosmodrome to a range on the Kamchatka Peninsula, the Russian Defense Ministry said Wednesday.

    The Yars is a multiple independently targetable reentry vehicle (MIRV) that contains several warheads. Great Britain, France, Russia, the United States, and China are the only countries believed to have these types of ICBMs in their arsenal.

    “The military blocks arrived to the intended region at the Kura Range on the Kamchatka Peninsula. The set goals of the launch have been reached and the tasks have been completed in full,” Igor Egorov, a spokesman for the Defense Ministry’s Strategic Missile Forces, said.




    Meanwhile US is assessing whether to go for a new icbm or not.
    George1
    George1

    Posts : 12858
    Points : 13345
    Join date : 2011-12-22
    Location : Greece

    Re: Strategic Missile Troops (ICBMs): Discussion & News

    Post  George1 on Tue Nov 03, 2015 11:25 am

    Russia Set to Scrap 17 Outdated Topol Missile Launchers by 2017

    The Russian state space corporation Roscosmos is planning to dismantle a total of 17 outdated Topol mobile missile launchers by the end of 2016.

    MOSCOW (Sputnik) — The Topol entered service with the Russian Strategic Missile Forces in 1988 and is being gradually replaced with more advanced Topol-M and Yars mobile missile systems.

    According to a post on the website of state purchase orders, the company is looking for a contractor to dismantle 17 Topol launches from a missile unit based in the Udmurt Republic in Russia's Volga Region "in line with a federal program on the dismantling of weaponry and other military equipment until 2020."

    During the process, the launchers will be placed and scrapped at the facilities coordinated with the United States, in line with the Russian-US New START Treaty of 2010, Roscosmos said.

    The launchers have been designed to fire RS-12M Topol (NATO reporting name SS-25 Sickle) single-warhead intercontinental ballistic missiles that have a maximum range of 10,000 kilometers (6,125 miles) and can carry a nuclear warhead with a yield of up to 550 kilotons.

    Read more: http://sputniknews.com/military/20151103/1029551641/russia-topol-missile-launchers.html#ixzz3qSS1A1CC
    franco
    franco

    Posts : 3145
    Points : 3177
    Join date : 2010-08-17

    Re: Strategic Missile Troops (ICBMs): Discussion & News

    Post  franco on Tue Nov 03, 2015 12:37 pm

    Just a general observation but is anyone else getting the sense that the 27-36 single warhead Topols ICBM's divisions are being replaced with just 18 Yars ICBM's (4 MIRV's). It makes sense if you consider the START requirements in launcher and warhead totals.
    George1
    George1

    Posts : 12858
    Points : 13345
    Join date : 2011-12-22
    Location : Greece

    Re: Strategic Missile Troops (ICBMs): Discussion & News

    Post  George1 on Tue Nov 03, 2015 12:59 pm

    franco wrote:Just a general observation but is anyone else getting the sense that the 27-36 single warhead Topols ICBM's divisions are being replaced with just 18 Yars ICBM's (4 MIRV's). It makes sense if you consider the START requirements in launcher and warhead totals.

    Yes and SS-19 Stilleto with 6 MIRVs also are being retiring
    sepheronx
    sepheronx

    Posts : 7106
    Points : 7378
    Join date : 2009-08-05
    Age : 29
    Location : Canada

    Re: Strategic Missile Troops (ICBMs): Discussion & News

    Post  sepheronx on Tue Nov 10, 2015 11:28 am

    http://tass.ru/en/defense/835356

    Why do they keep saying this? I thought missiles systems like Topol-M, Yars, Bulava and Sineava already have anti ABM systems and are already available? Or do they mean systems designed to strike the ABM's specifically? Cause wouldnt anti radiation missiles do that job?
    franco
    franco

    Posts : 3145
    Points : 3177
    Join date : 2010-08-17

    Re: Strategic Missile Troops (ICBMs): Discussion & News

    Post  franco on Tue Nov 10, 2015 3:18 pm

    sepheronx wrote:http://tass.ru/en/defense/835356

    Why do they keep saying this? I thought missiles systems like Topol-M, Yars, Bulava and Sineava already have anti ABM systems and are already available? Or do they mean systems designed to strike the ABM's specifically? Cause wouldnt anti radiation missiles do that job?

    Never ending battle of technology.

    I have been promoted to a Captain cheers

    thumbsup Very Happy
    kvs
    kvs

    Posts : 3954
    Points : 4055
    Join date : 2014-09-10
    Location : Canuckistan

    Re: Strategic Missile Troops (ICBMs): Discussion & News

    Post  kvs on Tue Nov 10, 2015 3:22 pm

    sepheronx wrote:http://tass.ru/en/defense/835356

    Why do they keep saying this? I thought missiles systems like Topol-M, Yars, Bulava and Sineava already have anti ABM systems and are already available? Or do they mean systems designed to strike the ABM's specifically? Cause wouldnt anti radiation missiles do that job?

    The article is too vague and misses that this is a discussion about changing the launch characteristics of Russian ICBMs. Russia
    already has the maneuverable warheads, but it also needs to reduce the boost phase. In fact, the best counter-measure to
    Uncle Sam's sick ABM ambitions is to reduce the boost phase. Then all of the ABM systems in Poland, Romania, Alaska, and
    even the to-be-deployed ship systems that are supposed to cruise near Russia's shore are going to be irrelevant. This will
    kill the US ABM dreams stone cold dead.
    sepheronx
    sepheronx

    Posts : 7106
    Points : 7378
    Join date : 2009-08-05
    Age : 29
    Location : Canada

    Re: Strategic Missile Troops (ICBMs): Discussion & News

    Post  sepheronx on Tue Nov 10, 2015 6:51 pm

    How do they propose to do this?
    kvs
    kvs

    Posts : 3954
    Points : 4055
    Join date : 2014-09-10
    Location : Canuckistan

    Re: Strategic Missile Troops (ICBMs): Discussion & News

    Post  kvs on Tue Nov 10, 2015 7:30 pm

    sepheronx wrote:How do they propose to do this?

    No information. Reduce the boost phase time. The faster the boost phase the closer the ABM missiles have to be. So NATO will
    have to deploy its ABM "shield" inside Russia itself.

    I wonder if they will have boosters on ICBMs. Right now all of them are stacked stages. Parallelizing the fuel burn during the boost
    phase achieves the time reduction. They won't achieve the shell in gun efficiency of total burn (of powder) in a fraction of a second,
    but they can get the desired result. Russia's large territory helps. An interesting historical feature of Russia, its land mass was always
    a pain for invaders.
    sepheronx
    sepheronx

    Posts : 7106
    Points : 7378
    Join date : 2009-08-05
    Age : 29
    Location : Canada

    Re: Strategic Missile Troops (ICBMs): Discussion & News

    Post  sepheronx on Tue Nov 10, 2015 9:20 pm

    Scramjet technology I suppose. Since they have been working on it for years. Manouverable warheads, as you said, are already in service so last is indeed the speed itself. Element of surprise as well, so reducing the radar cross section of missile as well as reducing the effect from the launch (smoke, infrared signature as example). Newer cruise missiles like KH-555 is an example of developing advanced stealthy missile tech but how to implement such tech to a BM?

    Counter measures too like decoys....

    I suppose there are other ways. And the current ABM systems have so far proven to be far less capable than touted. But are still a threat.
    GarryB
    GarryB

    Posts : 19931
    Points : 20483
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    Re: Strategic Missile Troops (ICBMs): Discussion & News

    Post  GarryB on Wed Nov 11, 2015 1:47 am

    Boost phase... ie the main first stage rocket that blasts the ICBM out of the silo/truck launch tube is made more powerful to give better acceleration so the rocket spends less time in the early boost phase.
    Werewolf
    Werewolf

    Posts : 5266
    Points : 5471
    Join date : 2012-10-24

    Re: Strategic Missile Troops (ICBMs): Discussion & News

    Post  Werewolf on Wed Nov 11, 2015 4:00 am

    kvs wrote:
    sepheronx wrote:How do they propose to do this?

    No information.  Reduce the boost phase time.   The faster the boost phase the closer the ABM missiles have to be.   So NATO will
    have to deploy its ABM "shield" inside Russia itself.

    I wonder if they will have boosters on ICBMs.   Right now all of them are stacked stages.   Parallelizing the fuel burn during the boost
    phase achieves the time reduction.   They won't achieve the shell in gun efficiency of total burn (of powder) in a fraction of a second,
    but they can get the desired result.   Russia's large territory helps.   An interesting historical feature of Russia, its land mass was always
    a pain for invaders.

    You should know it and that was discussed before. The US ABM shields in eastern europe are not there to deal with ICBM's. That is something that is not even in their magnitude to achieve not to mention that majority of ICBM's are flying over north pole and only Canada is a country that would be in the trajectory to intercept them, but they do not have such a technology for such velocities and altitudes.

    The ABM shields in europe of the US are there to deal with russian tactical nukes, IRBM and air/navy launched tactical nukes, that is why US has deployed its tactical nukes in several european countries such as Germany, Turkey, Netherland, Italy and Belgia, not to mention the already existing tactical nukes of France and UK. They know and that is beyond doubt that russia will not and never use ICBM's or any strategic WMD's to annihilate anyone due M.A.D. and will be hand bound to retaliate in tactical exchange which the US plans which can be read from their actions of ABM shield construction, more tactical nukes deployment to germany, NATO hardcore propaganda of the "Russians are coming!" to get the population ready for war rhetoric. The US will be untouched by those nukes, europe however will lose almost everything, entire decapitation.
    max steel
    max steel

    Posts : 2939
    Points : 2964
    Join date : 2015-02-12
    Location : South Pole

    Re: Strategic Missile Troops (ICBMs): Discussion & News

    Post  max steel on Wed Nov 11, 2015 4:16 am

    Give them an ultimatum if they agree fine enough and if they dont simply deploy 50 nuclear tipped Iksanders in Kaliningrad.
    sepheronx
    sepheronx

    Posts : 7106
    Points : 7378
    Join date : 2009-08-05
    Age : 29
    Location : Canada

    Re: Strategic Missile Troops (ICBMs): Discussion & News

    Post  sepheronx on Wed Nov 11, 2015 5:11 am

    Iskander is a key weapon here. Traditional BM's fly all the same trajectory but Iskander flies a quasi ballistic path which would make it very difficult to intercept or possibly even to track. If they can use same missile but drasticallly increase distance of said missile, it will be even more a game changer.
    franco
    franco

    Posts : 3145
    Points : 3177
    Join date : 2010-08-17

    Re: Strategic Missile Troops (ICBMs): Discussion & News

    Post  franco on Fri Nov 13, 2015 3:14 pm


    During recent meetings of Putin drew attention to the foreign projects missile systems that could pose a threat to Russian security. According to the Russian president, the true purpose of these projects implemented US and its allies is no defense against nuclear attack, and the achievement of global military supremacy. Such a violation of the balance of power is very dangerous, because of what Russia will be forced to respond.

    Modernization of the Strategic Missile Forces


    According to the president, Russia will strengthen its strategic nuclear forces. It is planned to build a missile defense system, but for now the main task is to work on the shock systems that will be able to overcome any potential enemy defenses.

    There is an ongoing series production and supply of troops in the latest missile systems. Putin once again said that during 2015 the Strategic Missile Forces must obtain four regiments with the most modern missiles. This information was repeatedly voiced earlier by various officials, and now once again received confirmation. The president did not specify the type of new facilities, but most likely it was a system RS-24 "yars". Available information on the structure of the missile forces suggest that in the current year they will receive 36 new complexes.

    Progress has been made in the establishment of new missile systems, which in the future will replace the existing in-service equipment. The closest to the adoption intercontinental ballistic missile RS-26 "Boundary". She is a further development of the product family "Topol" / "yars" and has similar goals. Previously it stated that the complex "Boundary" in the distant future will replace the existing missiles "Topol-M" and the "yars". However, within the next few years, all three types of complexes, may be used in parallel.

    Drafting of the RS-26 was launched about ten years ago at the Moscow Institute of Thermal Technology. The existence of long-term project was known only to a few years later, when he reached the stage of construction of prototypes and testing. The first launch of an experimental rocket in September 2011 and ended in failure (according to other sources, they were successful throwing trials). Also in 2011 there was an alternative designation of the project, which is why different sources of complex PC-26 may be cited as the "Abroad" and "avant-garde".

    There are currently performed several test launches. Almost all starts, except the first, successfully completed the defeat of the conditional goal. In March 2015 it hosted another successful launch, after which it was decided to launch serial production of missiles, followed by the deployment of the troops.

    In 2014 and 2015 officials have repeatedly raised the topic timing of "Limit" on the arms. For example, last year argued that the missiles entered service in 2015. In the spring of this year, the Strategic Missile Forces Commander Col. Gen. Sergei Karakayev said that the complex will be commissioned in late 2015, and mass production will start within the first months of 2016.

    The project MS-26 "Boundary" entered the final stage. As soon as the new system will be put into service the Strategic Missile Forces, and over the next few months, the army received the first production missiles. By the end of next year on duty to intercede first compound, armed with new systems. So now the project "Border" can be considered successfully completed. Nomenclature RVSN added a new type of missile with improved characteristics.

    The missile RS-26 "Boundary" in the distant future would replace the system "Topol" and "yars". In the nearest future it is planned to gradually replace ICBM heavy class, such as the P-36M, etc., which is currently being drafted missile RS-28, "Sarmat". By now it becomes aware of some features of this promising project, but most of the information is still not subject to disclosure.

    Creating a project "Sarmat" was launched at the end of the last decade. The lead developer became State Rocket Center. Makeyev. In addition, the project employed some other enterprises, in particular, Reutov Machine-Building NPO. The aim of the project is the creation of a heavy liquid ICBM, which will replace the Strategic Missile Forces samples available in its class.

    The exact requirements for the missile remain unknown, though echoed some sample information. For example, the former chief of staff of the Strategic Missile Forces commander and consultant Missile Forces Viktor Yesin mentioned that the throw-weight of the new missile will reach 5 tons. The flight range is not disclosed. At the same time Deputy Defense Minister Yuri Borisov last year noted that the prospective ICBMs able to fly over the North or South Pole.

    In the late spring of last year Y. Borisov also said that all the work on the project "Sarmat" goes according to schedule. In the summer of 2015 there were reports according to which is currently under the third phase of development work. At the same time he mentioned that the prospective missile flight tests will begin next year.

    Previously available information on the timing of construction of the first prototype of the product PC-28. According to Tass, the first prototype of the rocket must be built by the middle of autumn. In the future it will be used in the first trial throwing in which to check the work of the launcher and its systems. It was also reported that as of the end of June the assembly of the prototype is completed by 60%.

    At the moment, we can assume that the test missile RS-28, "Sarmat" will start next year, after which time it will take to carry out all necessary checks and modifications. As a result, prospective ICBMs able to go to the series and went on duty a few years. It has repeatedly argued that the range of "Sarmat" will go into operation by the end of the decade - in 2018-20, respectively. Given the available information on the current status of the project timeframe look real.

    Currently in service with the Strategic Missile Forces are composed of several types of facilities, including developed several decades ago in the Soviet Union. In recent years carried out a program of modernization of weapons RVSN, which aims to create and formulation of the duty of new missile complexes. The result of the current work should be complete rejection of the use of legacy systems with the transition to new ones.

    Several years ago, to finalize the draft RS-24 "yars", after which the Strategic Missile Forces began receiving a new type of rocket. The following year, the troops will receive the first batch of systems "Boundary". By the end of the decade arsenal of missile troops replenish complex "Sarmat". Thus, to the 2020-22 base year arms Strategic Missile Forces will be complex created for the last 10-15 years, which will positively affect the combat capability of the Strategic Missile Forces and strategic security.

    avatar
    Vann7

    Posts : 4010
    Points : 4114
    Join date : 2012-05-15

    Re: Strategic Missile Troops (ICBMs): Discussion & News

    Post  Vann7 on Sat Nov 14, 2015 10:40 pm

    Werewolf wrote:
    kvs wrote:
    sepheronx wrote:How do they propose to do this?

    No information.  Reduce the boost phase time.   The faster the boost phase the closer the ABM missiles have to be.   So NATO will
    have to deploy its ABM "shield" inside Russia itself.

    I wonder if they will have boosters on ICBMs.   Right now all of them are stacked stages.   Parallelizing the fuel burn during the boost
    phase achieves the time reduction.   They won't achieve the shell in gun efficiency of total burn (of powder) in a fraction of a second,
    but they can get the desired result.   Russia's large territory helps.   An interesting historical feature of Russia, its land mass was always
    a pain for invaders.

    You should know it and that was discussed before. The US ABM shields in eastern europe are not there to deal with ICBM's. That is something that is not even in their magnitude to achieve not to mention that majority of ICBM's are flying over north pole and only Canada is a country that would be in the trajectory to intercept them, but they do not have such a technology for such velocities and altitudes.

    The ABM shields in europe of the US are there to deal with russian tactical nukes, IRBM and air/navy launched tactical nukes, that is why US has deployed its tactical nukes in several european countries such as Germany, Turkey, Netherland, Italy and Belgia, not to mention the already existing tactical nukes of France and UK. They know and that is beyond doubt that russia will not and never use ICBM's or any strategic WMD's to annihilate anyone due M.A.D. and will be hand bound to retaliate in tactical exchange which the US plans which can be read from their actions of ABM shield construction, more tactical nukes deployment to germany, NATO hardcore propaganda of the "Russians are coming!" to get the population ready for war rhetoric. The US will be untouched by those nukes, europe however will lose almost everything, entire decapitation.


    AS far im aware. US ABM shield is there not to intercept any nuke.. could do it in midcourse but not exactly for that. The US ABM Shield main objective is for a first nuclear attack to decapitate RUssian leadership and its important military and economical facilities .and provoke a major civil war through nukes on the surviving people . So the ABM "shield" will be for blocking Russian defenses on NATO nuclear attacks. So NATO fire a nuke , Russia fire an S-500 to intercept it,the ABM shield intercept then is used to intercept the S-500 so the NATO missile can enter in Russia. Is like Footbal. The ABM shield can be used to block Russian defenses from intercepting
    their nukes.

    But the ABM shield can also be used for purely offensive attack . The missiles could be armed with nuclear warheads supposedly "to intercept ballistic missiles" but in reality is not to intercept anything but to attack Russia. Those "ABM Shield for example" its "interceptor missiles" could be nothing more than Trident 2/3 missiles deployed in ground near Russia. And US can deploy hundreds of Trident missiles on Land near Russia ,and each one with hundreds of decoys to overwhelm Russian defenses. It will be impossible to defend for Russia or anyone an attack of Hundreds of nuclear ballistics missiles and each one with hundreds of decoys. So 100 missiles with 100 decoys each ,means Russian defenses will need to intercept 10,000 targets that ll will look like missiles on radars but most will be decoys ,with conventional weapons or nuclear warheads.

    The ABM can also used to confuse Russian defenses ,before an attack.. launching thousands of decoys over the trajectory of any NATO missile. There have to be a reason why US have a military warehouse in Norway where they store Abraham tanks.. Norway ,yes the country at russian borders. is not for a tanks movie.. but after a total major nuclear attack on Russia and invasion will follow to take moscow quickly before Russia recovers. Don't understimate the evilness of the west. They Billionaire Elite in the west do NOT care about civilians or middle class. and some of them will be ready to sacrifice millions of american lives if in the end they destroy Russia.

    This is why Putin is worried about Americans militarization of its borders..Because yes Russia have nukes but the west is full of crazy people ,that have bunkers and have mansions in small islands that will not face any destruction .that consider acceptable losing 1/3 of US population if in the end they win.

    This means that for Russia having nuclear deterrence is not enough. THey need real way to stop NATO militarization of its borders and deployment of nukes.


    What i will do if Russia see US continues its hostilities and continue financing terror ,and shutding down Russian civilian Airplanes or attempts on Putin life, and continues militarization of europe and deploying nuclear weapons near Russia.  is to leave all weapons international agreements and start a weapon race. Build for example something like 100,000 to 300,000 kaliber cruise missiles with 5,000km to 10,000km range and build them with the easy option to arm them with nuclear warheads if needed.  and have ready all setup in hidden land based launchers..with the capability to launch them all at same time. And when Russia feel a nuclear war will happen and only force can solve it.. then launch enough missiles to decapitate
    the western leadership and their military facilities and economic zones.  So if for example Russia needs to fight Turkey.. and know it can avoid the war.. Russia can launch thousands of Cruise missiles at them (at the same time) and hit the 1,000 to 3,000 important targets in that country withing half an hour and competely decapitate that nation military and leadership in less than one hour. that by the time they discover they are at war.. they will have no plane or tank left or military base standing.

    Then deploy many thousands of nuclear missiles in CUba with nuclear warheads underground and others and build many merchant ships that could fire thousands of cruise missiles . and more importantly Russia needs to disperse on its territory all their important military installations if possible all underground and have all its borders fully covered with hundreds of tanks in case of an invasion.

    in Short US/NATO strategy is a first nuclear decapitation strike without warning and followed by
    a quick fast NATO invasion on Russia possibly from Norway or baltics or now ukraine. the confusion of so many nuclear attacks and being caught by surprise will make very hard to coordinate an offensive if a rain of nukes continues falling in Russia most important cities.
    Russia objectives should be similar to get rid of US government in a first surprise strike if they
    discover through intelligence that a nuclear attacked will happen and there is no way to stop it with politics. and that they need to strike first for maximum possible opportunity to stop the war before it began.
    Werewolf
    Werewolf

    Posts : 5266
    Points : 5471
    Join date : 2012-10-24

    Re: Strategic Missile Troops (ICBMs): Discussion & News

    Post  Werewolf on Tue Nov 17, 2015 7:48 pm

    jhelb
    jhelb

    Posts : 521
    Points : 604
    Join date : 2015-04-03
    Location : Previously: Belarus Currently: A Small Island No One Cares About

    Re: Strategic Missile Troops (ICBMs): Discussion & News

    Post  jhelb on Wed Nov 18, 2015 1:26 am

    According to the official statement, the purpose of the launch was "to test new combat payload for future ICBMs.

    Any insight guys about the new payload? Thanks.

    Sponsored content

    Re: Strategic Missile Troops (ICBMs): Discussion & News

    Post  Sponsored content


      Current date/time is Sat Mar 23, 2019 7:37 am