Military Forum for Russian and Global Defence Issues


    Russian Strategic Nuclear Warheads: Numbers

    Share
    avatar
    magnumcromagnon

    Posts : 4490
    Points : 4663
    Join date : 2013-12-05
    Location : Pindos ave., Pindosville, Pindosylvania, Pindostan

    Re: Russian Strategic Nuclear Warheads: Numbers

    Post  magnumcromagnon on Sat Oct 11, 2014 6:49 pm

    kvs wrote:
    Viktor wrote:Russian nuclear forces just got bigger Very Happy

    New START September 2014 numbers

    Russia substantially increased the number of deployed launchers - from 498 to 528 - and deployed warheads - from 1512 to 1643. The total number of launchers increased as well, but not nearly as dramatically - from 905 in March 2014 to 911 in September 2014

    Great news!   The whole missile shield boondoggle was predicated on continued arms reduction by Russia.   Obama tried to
    get a new START agreement with Russia but that went nowhere.   Russia should increase the number of launchers substantially
    even if that means breaking the existing treaty.   Nuclear weapons in sufficient amounts is what has kept the global peace
    since WWII.  

    Which nuclear treaty's should Russia leave in your opinion? I have a few that comes to mind, but I want to hear what others have to say and their reasons.
    avatar
    Mike E

    Posts : 2760
    Points : 2806
    Join date : 2014-06-19
    Location : Bay Area, CA

    Re: Russian Strategic Nuclear Warheads: Numbers

    Post  Mike E on Sat Oct 11, 2014 8:04 pm

    magnumcromagnon wrote:
    kvs wrote:
    Viktor wrote:Russian nuclear forces just got bigger Very Happy

    New START September 2014 numbers

    Russia substantially increased the number of deployed launchers - from 498 to 528 - and deployed warheads - from 1512 to 1643. The total number of launchers increased as well, but not nearly as dramatically - from 905 in March 2014 to 911 in September 2014

    Great news!   The whole missile shield boondoggle was predicated on continued arms reduction by Russia.   Obama tried to
    get a new START agreement with Russia but that went nowhere.   Russia should increase the number of launchers substantially
    even if that means breaking the existing treaty.   Nuclear weapons in sufficient amounts is what has kept the global peace
    since WWII.  

    Which nuclear treaty's should Russia leave in your opinion? I have a few that comes to mind, but I want to hear what others have to say and their reasons.
    New START? There are a few that come to mind, but any is fine by me... Disarmament directly resulted in WW2 and gave both Germany and Japan time to plan, nowadays, with nuclear weapons, it doesn't do anything anyway!
    avatar
    kvs

    Posts : 3103
    Points : 3224
    Join date : 2014-09-11
    Location : Canuckistan

    Re: Russian Strategic Nuclear Warheads: Numbers

    Post  kvs on Mon Oct 13, 2014 2:00 pm

    magnumcromagnon wrote:
    kvs wrote:
    Viktor wrote:Russian nuclear forces just got bigger Very Happy

    New START September 2014 numbers

    Russia substantially increased the number of deployed launchers - from 498 to 528 - and deployed warheads - from 1512 to 1643. The total number of launchers increased as well, but not nearly as dramatically - from 905 in March 2014 to 911 in September 2014

    Great news!   The whole missile shield boondoggle was predicated on continued arms reduction by Russia.   Obama tried to
    get a new START agreement with Russia but that went nowhere.   Russia should increase the number of launchers substantially
    even if that means breaking the existing treaty.   Nuclear weapons in sufficient amounts is what has kept the global peace
    since WWII.  

    Which nuclear treaty's should Russia leave in your opinion? I have a few that comes to mind, but I want to hear what others have to say and their reasons.

    The INF and New START. In my view the missile defense shield violates the INF since it will use nuclear warheads on the
    interceptors no matter what is being claimed. These claims are the same retarded drivel as the claim that the missile
    shield is designed to protect Europe from Iran.
    avatar
    nemrod

    Posts : 808
    Points : 1304
    Join date : 2012-09-11

    Russia has strategic nuclear weapons far more advanced than the United States

    Post  nemrod on Sun Nov 16, 2014 11:21 am

    http://au.ibtimes.com/articles/572838/20141115/russia-nuclear-weapons-war-vladimir-putin.org#.VGh3VlS9_lY

    It is reasonable to think in the coming years that Russia will surpass US in every area, maybe except in warships area, because Russia has always been a continental super-power with intention to attack, colonize, slaughter,  steal, loot, and destroy other countries, contrary to the human-rights, women-rights western leaders.
    The shift of balance will hasten during the year 2015 -even though the US decline started in 2005, with the arrivals of Mi-35, and SU-35 - where several new russian weapons will be build up. Even though with the very powerfull Mig-35, and SU-35 Russia has nothing feared nowadays.



    Russia is in possession of strategic nuclear weapons far more advance than the United States, and it will continue to lead the game with its new generation of missiles, according to a comprehensive report from the Russian political newspaper, PRAVDA. Indeed, if World War 3 erupts, Russian Vladimir Putin will win hands down, the report suggested.
    The report titled Russia Prepares Nuclear Surprise For NATO, claims that Russia was able to amass its massive nuclear power because the U.S. had been dismissive and neglectful of achieving innovations in decades after winning the Cold War. Specifically, the U.S. had closed the possibility of developing high-precision long-range weapons that could eradicate enemies even without coming to direct contact. But Russia never stops innovating despite much criticism and the more accepted notion that the country is weak and the west is superior. At this point, Russia has "long-range cruise missiles of a new generation that will soon be deployed on submarines of the Black Sea Fleet and missile ships of the Caspian Flotilla," PRAVDA stated.

    And not only that - Russia's tactical nuclear weapons are far more superior to that of NATO's, the report said. NATO's member countries have only 260 tactical weapons. The U.S. has 200 bombs with an overall capacity of 18 megatons - located in Germany, Italy, Belgium, the Netherlands and Turkey. France has 60 atomic bombs, as outlined by the report. "Russia, according to conservative estimates, has 5,000 pieces of different classes" of tactical nuclear weapons "from Iskander warheads to torpedo, aerial and artillery warheads," the report from PRAVDA highlighted.

    The report seemed to have solid basis. Russia's plans of sending long-range bombers to the Gulf of Mexico are being widely reported. Defence Minister Sergey Shoigu declared that Russia has to maintain its military presence in the western Atlantic and eastern Pacific, including the Caribbean and the Gulf of Mexico. This included sending long-range bombers as part of the drills. Russia will also be sending more troops in Crimea. Shoigu noted that the deployments are in response to the "fomentation of anti-Russian moods on the part of NATO and reinforcement of foreign military presence next to our border," CNN reported.

    U.S. officials did not buy the idea that Russia has the capability of deploying long-range bombers. A source had reportedly told CNN that the U.S. found no security threat proving that such bold and destructive activity is happening. U.S. State Department spokeswoman Jen Psaki echoed the same opinion.

    However, Pentagon retaliates with Defence Secretary Chuck Hagel announcing a proposal of an additional $1.5 billion to the $15 billion a year worth of maintenance to U.S.' nuclear arsenals.  He admitted that US Air Force and Navy were beleaguered with scandals over the years. These scandals resulted to the neglect of the country's nuclear programmes, rendering some infrastructure outdated and maintenance deteriorated, The Washington Post reported.  

    At one point, inspections of the nuclear weapons became burdensome for the force, Deputy Secretary of Defence Robert Work said. For a time, there was shortage of specialised tools for the maintenance. A single tool kit for intercontinental ballistic missiles had to be shipped from base to base to conduct maintenance.

    Hagel said that nuclear mission remains the military's most important job. Hence, Pentagon officials will now be working anew to improve the status of the government's nuclear programmes by modernising nuclear warheads, long-range bombers and ballistic missile submarines - with the billion worth boost to the annual maintenance budget.

    Members of the Congress agreed to the budget proposal. Republicans lauded it too. They said the $1.5 billion boost to the funding is just right. The nuclear programmes had suffered too much neglect because of "insufficient resources, indifferent leadership, and poor morale," Rep. Howard McKeon, the chairman of the House Armed Services Committee, said.

    avatar
    magnumcromagnon

    Posts : 4490
    Points : 4663
    Join date : 2013-12-05
    Location : Pindos ave., Pindosville, Pindosylvania, Pindostan

    Re: Russian Strategic Nuclear Warheads: Numbers

    Post  magnumcromagnon on Wed Nov 26, 2014 12:25 am

    kvs wrote:
    magnumcromagnon wrote:
    kvs wrote:
    Viktor wrote:Russian nuclear forces just got bigger Very Happy

    New START September 2014 numbers

    Russia substantially increased the number of deployed launchers - from 498 to 528 - and deployed warheads - from 1512 to 1643. The total number of launchers increased as well, but not nearly as dramatically - from 905 in March 2014 to 911 in September 2014

    Great news!   The whole missile shield boondoggle was predicated on continued arms reduction by Russia.   Obama tried to
    get a new START agreement with Russia but that went nowhere.   Russia should increase the number of launchers substantially
    even if that means breaking the existing treaty.   Nuclear weapons in sufficient amounts is what has kept the global peace
    since WWII.  

    Which nuclear treaty's should Russia leave in your opinion? I have a few that comes to mind, but I want to hear what others have to say and their reasons.

    The INF and New START.    In my view the missile defense shield violates the INF since it will use nuclear warheads on the
    interceptors no matter what is being claimed.   These claims are the same retarded drivel as the claim that the missile
    shield is designed to protect Europe from Iran.

    I agree, the European Meat Shield probably consists of nuclear warheads (hence the reason for NATO's utter refusal for transparency), and the failed and dubious concept of 'Hit-to-Kill' warheads is nothing more than an expensive 'beard' or 'cover' for that.
    avatar
    George1

    Posts : 10358
    Points : 10829
    Join date : 2011-12-22
    Location : Greece

    Re: Russian Strategic Nuclear Warheads: Numbers

    Post  George1 on Tue Jan 06, 2015 9:38 pm

    According to militaryrussia.ru we have at the end of 2014:
    SS-18 Satan = 52
    SS-19 Stiletto = 40
    SS-25 Topol = 86
    SS-27 Topol-M = 78
    SS-29 Yars = 58

                         ss-18  ss-19  ss-25  ss-27  ss-27  ss-29  ss-29  RS-26
    2011 г. 320 55 35  150     56      18 6 -   -
    2012 г. 313 55 35  130     60      18       15 -   -
    2013 г. 315 52 40  108    60      18       42 -   -
    2014 г. 314 52(?)  40   86(?)  60      18       54 4   - (прогноз был - 4 ед)
    2015 г. 316 50(?)  40   64(?)  60      18       70 12    2 (к концу года)


    So it is clear that production of SS-27 single warhead ICBM has finished. SS-25s are being removed. We will have 24 new Yars ICBM in 2015


    http://bmpd.livejournal.com/1125222.html
    avatar
    George1

    Posts : 10358
    Points : 10829
    Join date : 2011-12-22
    Location : Greece

    Re: Russian Strategic Nuclear Warheads: Numbers

    Post  George1 on Wed Jan 14, 2015 7:05 pm

    Here is another source for missiles numbers:

    http://russianforces.org/missiles/

    Austin

    Posts : 6279
    Points : 6677
    Join date : 2010-05-08
    Location : India

    Russian nuclear forces, 2015

    Post  Austin on Wed Jul 22, 2015 1:17 pm

    Russian nuclear forces, 2015

    http://bos.sagepub.com/content/early/2015/04/13/0096340215581363.full.pdf+html
    avatar
    franco

    Posts : 2505
    Points : 2543
    Join date : 2010-08-18

    Re: Russian Strategic Nuclear Warheads: Numbers

    Post  franco on Wed Jul 22, 2015 10:40 pm

    March'15 Start figures;


    March 2015 New START aggregate numbers released

    The U.S. State Department released aggregate New START numbers from the 1 March 2015 data exchange. The release shows that at that date Russia reported having 515 deployed launchers and 1582 operationally deployed warheads. It also reported having 890 total launchers.

    Compared to the September 1, 2014 data, the number of launchers decreased - from 528 to 515. The number of warheads decreased more dramatically - from 1643 to 1582. The total number of launchers went from 911 to 890.

    The corresponding U.S. numbers are 785 deployed launchers, 1597 warheads, and 898 total launchers.

    Note: a strategic bomber counts as a deployed launcher and one warhead.
    avatar
    sepheronx

    Posts : 7252
    Points : 7546
    Join date : 2009-08-06
    Age : 28
    Location : Canada

    Re: Russian Strategic Nuclear Warheads: Numbers

    Post  sepheronx on Wed Jul 22, 2015 11:09 pm

    franco wrote:March'15 Start figures;


    March 2015 New START aggregate numbers released

    The U.S. State Department released aggregate New START numbers from the 1 March 2015 data exchange. The release shows that at that date Russia reported having 515 deployed launchers and 1582 operationally deployed warheads. It also reported having 890 total launchers.

    Compared to the September 1, 2014 data, the number of launchers decreased - from 528 to 515. The number of warheads decreased more dramatically - from 1643 to 1582. The total number of launchers went from 911 to 890.

    The corresponding U.S. numbers are 785 deployed launchers, 1597 warheads, and 898 total launchers.

    Note: a strategic bomber counts as a deployed launcher and one warhead.

    How is this possible and as well, how did they drop that many? Cause as far as I can tell, Russia is the one building new missiles not USA. As well, how is it that Russia has so few launchers?
    avatar
    franco

    Posts : 2505
    Points : 2543
    Join date : 2010-08-18

    Re: Russian Strategic Nuclear Warheads: Numbers

    Post  franco on Wed Jul 22, 2015 11:25 pm

    sepheronx wrote:
    franco wrote:March'15 Start figures;


    March 2015 New START aggregate numbers released

    The U.S. State Department released aggregate New START numbers from the 1 March 2015 data exchange. The release shows that at that date Russia reported having 515 deployed launchers and 1582 operationally deployed warheads. It also reported having 890 total launchers.

    Compared to the September 1, 2014 data, the number of launchers decreased - from 528 to 515. The number of warheads decreased more dramatically - from 1643 to 1582. The total number of launchers went from 911 to 890.

    The corresponding U.S. numbers are 785 deployed launchers, 1597 warheads, and 898 total launchers.

    Note: a strategic bomber counts as a deployed launcher and one warhead.

    How is this possible and as well, how did they drop that many?  Cause as far as I can tell, Russia is the one building new missiles not USA.  As well, how is it that Russia has so few launchers?

    Yars has 4 warheads compared to the 1 carried by the Topol. The important figure is the total warheads, which is what the START treaty is based on. The Bulava carries 6 warheads as opposed to the 3 that the SS-N-18 carries.
    avatar
    sepheronx

    Posts : 7252
    Points : 7546
    Join date : 2009-08-06
    Age : 28
    Location : Canada

    Re: Russian Strategic Nuclear Warheads: Numbers

    Post  sepheronx on Wed Jul 22, 2015 11:26 pm

    franco wrote:
    sepheronx wrote:
    franco wrote:March'15 Start figures;


    March 2015 New START aggregate numbers released

    The U.S. State Department released aggregate New START numbers from the 1 March 2015 data exchange. The release shows that at that date Russia reported having 515 deployed launchers and 1582 operationally deployed warheads. It also reported having 890 total launchers.

    Compared to the September 1, 2014 data, the number of launchers decreased - from 528 to 515. The number of warheads decreased more dramatically - from 1643 to 1582. The total number of launchers went from 911 to 890.

    The corresponding U.S. numbers are 785 deployed launchers, 1597 warheads, and 898 total launchers.

    Note: a strategic bomber counts as a deployed launcher and one warhead.

    How is this possible and as well, how did they drop that many?  Cause as far as I can tell, Russia is the one building new missiles not USA.  As well, how is it that Russia has so few launchers?

    Yars has 4 warheads compared to the 1 carried by the Topol. The important figure is the total warheads, which is what the START treaty is based on. The Bulava carries 6 warheads as opposed to the 3 that the SS-N-18 carries.

    OK, I get it.

    thanks.
    avatar
    jhelb

    Posts : 432
    Points : 499
    Join date : 2015-04-04
    Location : Previously: Belarus Currently: A Small Island No One Cares About

    Russian Nuclear Forces Numbers

    Post  jhelb on Mon Sep 14, 2015 9:16 pm





    avatar
    franco

    Posts : 2505
    Points : 2543
    Join date : 2010-08-18

    New START September 2015 aggregate numbers

    Post  franco on Sun Nov 08, 2015 2:17 am


    New START September 2015 aggregate numbers

    The U.S. State Department released aggregate New START numbers from the 1 September 2015 data exchange. Russia declared 1648 deployed warheads, 526 deployed launchers, and 877 total launchers. In March 2015 the numbers were 1582, 515, and 890 respectively.

    The increase of 66 deployed warheads and nine launchers is most likely due to the deployment of Bulava missiles on the Alexander Nevskiy submarine that was completed in April 2015. Also, some older missiles were probably withdrawn from service.

    The U.S. numbers in September 2015 were 1538 warheads, 762 deployed and 898 total launchers (1597, 785, and 898 in March 2015).
    avatar
    ExBeobachter1987

    Posts : 445
    Points : 445
    Join date : 2014-11-26
    Age : 29
    Location : Western Eurasia

    Re: Russian Strategic Nuclear Warheads: Numbers

    Post  ExBeobachter1987 on Thu Nov 12, 2015 5:16 pm

    franco wrote:
    sepheronx wrote:
    franco wrote:March'15 Start figures;


    March 2015 New START aggregate numbers released

    The U.S. State Department released aggregate New START numbers from the 1 March 2015 data exchange. The release shows that at that date Russia reported having 515 deployed launchers and 1582 operationally deployed warheads. It also reported having 890 total launchers.

    Compared to the September 1, 2014 data, the number of launchers decreased - from 528 to 515. The number of warheads decreased more dramatically - from 1643 to 1582. The total number of launchers went from 911 to 890.

    The corresponding U.S. numbers are 785 deployed launchers, 1597 warheads, and 898 total launchers.

    Note: a strategic bomber counts as a deployed launcher and one warhead.

    How is this possible and as well, how did they drop that many?  Cause as far as I can tell, Russia is the one building new missiles not USA.  As well, how is it that Russia has so few launchers?

    Yars has 4 warheads compared to the 1 carried by the Topol. The important figure is the total warheads, which is what the START treaty is based on. The Bulava carries 6 warheads as opposed to the 3 that the SS-N-18 carries.

    In that case, shouldn't the number of warheads decrease slower than that of the launchers if the new launchers can launch more warheads?
    avatar
    franco

    Posts : 2505
    Points : 2543
    Join date : 2010-08-18

    Re: Russian Strategic Nuclear Warheads: Numbers

    Post  franco on Thu Nov 12, 2015 10:58 pm

    ExBeobachter1987 wrote:
    franco wrote:
    sepheronx wrote:
    franco wrote:March'15 Start figures;


    March 2015 New START aggregate numbers released

    The U.S. State Department released aggregate New START numbers from the 1 March 2015 data exchange. The release shows that at that date Russia reported having 515 deployed launchers and 1582 operationally deployed warheads. It also reported having 890 total launchers.

    Compared to the September 1, 2014 data, the number of launchers decreased - from 528 to 515. The number of warheads decreased more dramatically - from 1643 to 1582. The total number of launchers went from 911 to 890.

    The corresponding U.S. numbers are 785 deployed launchers, 1597 warheads, and 898 total launchers.

    Note: a strategic bomber counts as a deployed launcher and one warhead.

    How is this possible and as well, how did they drop that many?  Cause as far as I can tell, Russia is the one building new missiles not USA.  As well, how is it that Russia has so few launchers?


    Yars has 4 warheads compared to the 1 carried by the Topol. The important figure is the total warheads, which is what the START treaty is based on. The Bulava carries 6 warheads as opposed to the 3 that the SS-N-18 carries.

    In that case, shouldn't the number of warheads decrease slower than that of the launchers if the new launchers can launch more warheads?

    To clarify, the Topol SS25 has only one, but the SS19 (6) and SS18 (10) which are also being retired are your difference.
    avatar
    max steel

    Posts : 2969
    Points : 3000
    Join date : 2015-02-12
    Location : South Pole

    Re: Russian Strategic Nuclear Warheads: Numbers

    Post  max steel on Fri Nov 13, 2015 12:54 am

    I've already shared the info in INF Treaty thread . SS-18 were decommissioned by 2009 and I guess SS-19 are still in service though. Do you people think Russia will agree on START implementation date of February, 2018? I guess unless US pulls out its interceptors from E.Europe otheriwse not ?


    Last edited by max steel on Fri Nov 13, 2015 1:35 am; edited 1 time in total
    avatar
    franco

    Posts : 2505
    Points : 2543
    Join date : 2010-08-18

    Re: Russian Strategic Nuclear Warheads: Numbers

    Post  franco on Fri Nov 13, 2015 1:26 am

    max steel wrote:I've already shared the info in INF Treaty thread . SS-18 were decommissioned by 2009 and I guess SS-19 are still in service though. Do you people think Russia will agree on START implementation date of February, 2018? I guess unless US pulls out its interceptors from E.Europe otheriwse not ?

    There are still SS18's in service, probably 40ish.

    This site believes 46. I think their totals of SS19 are high. I believe that only the 30 acquired from Ukraine are still in service.

    http://russianforces.org/missiles/

    Vann7

    Posts : 3472
    Points : 3584
    Join date : 2012-05-16

    Re: Russian Strategic Nuclear Warheads: Numbers

    Post  Vann7 on Sun Dec 06, 2015 3:37 am

    George1 wrote:According to militaryrussia.ru we have at the end of 2014:
    SS-18 Satan    = 52
    SS-19 Stiletto  = 40
    SS-25 Topol     = 86
    SS-27 Topol-M = 78
    SS-29 Yars      = 58

                         ss-18  ss-19  ss-25  ss-27  ss-27  ss-29  ss-29  RS-26
    2011 г. 320 55 35  150     56      18 6 -   -
    2012 г. 313 55 35  130     60      18       15 -   -
    2013 г. 315 52 40  108    60      18       42 -   -
    2014 г. 314 52(?)  40   86(?)  60      18       54 4   - (прогноз был - 4 ед)
    2015 г. 316 50(?)  40   64(?)  60      18       70 12    2 (к концу года)


    So it is clear that production of SS-27 single warhead ICBM has finished. SS-25s are being removed. We will have 24 new Yars ICBM in 2015


    http://bmpd.livejournal.com/1125222.html

    even though it looks like a lot..

    I don't think is enough for a total destruction of a nation that is hostile to Russia and Russia needs to defeat completely in just 24 hours. without the need of invading and using ground forces.

    Lets say for example that iSIS takes control of Turkey. with american help (not untinkable since already erdogan family deals with them and are allies.. ) and they plant a flag in the capital as the new ISIS country, and Americans give them the codes of the nuclear weapons and the hows to launch them to Russia and all the nukes distributed through all Turkey territories in random places.  and this new ISIS nation declare war against Russia and start throwing missiles at Russia with nuclear warheads. Then RUssia nuclear arsenal will be unable to stop Turkey from launching nuclear attacks on Russia. It could destroy most cities , but it cannot stop terrorist
    ready to die ,in control of a near hundreds of nukes to attack Russia.  And Russia nuclear inventory will not be enough to stop ISIS if takes control of Turkey.. as it did of Lybia.  

    To have a better idea of the level of the nuclear inventory you need to fully destroy a
    terrorist controlled nation of the size of Turkey if they get a hold of near a hundred of nuclear missiles and they don't care about being killed or million civilian casualties in their side and only want to destroy Russia.  Then i suspect that to really blow up every inch of territory in Turkey ,that is covered by strong mountains and with nuclear weapons in underground bunkers. Then Russia will need an inventory of at least 10x times higher than the ones they have today. about
    15,000 nuclear warheads.  

    I think it was a bad idea for Russia to sign a nuclear treaty with Americans.. since it benefits more them than Russia. because Russia today nuclear inventory is not enough to defeat all NATO in a fight to the last man. that is.  Is crazy to think such a fight can happen ,but having
    the capability to literary wipe every inch of territory of the top 5 NATO countries ,(even if never used) it will be a real deterrence more than anything.

    People needs to remember that there are American military advisors that were in the
    believe that a nuclear war with Russia was worth of it as long 10% of its population survive and
    1% of the elites avoid any casualty by hidding in underground bunkers.  Lets not forget that US military have 1 thousand military bases around the world. about 3,000 combat planes , 400 warships , So its nuclear arsenal will not be enough to completely destroy US military and stop any capability for retaliating with all they have.  Russia already have detonated 2,000 nuclear weapons on its own territory and no one killed.. so yes nuclear weapons are Really powerful.
    But unless they target the right places they can be useless. and if you need to completely stop
    any major country (like turkey) taken by terrorist and supported by most of its people from launching a nuclear attack ,you cant do it unless you have a dozen of thousands of nuclear warheads for that nation alone.

    it is my believe that for Russia really be a nuclear deterrent to the most hardcore lunatic American generals that consider worthy the sacrifice of 90% of US population if they win in the end in a nuclear war with Russia. that you will need an inventory of at least of 50,000 nuclear warheads. and each one with 1 megaton of power at least. and to fight most hostile Nato,at least like 70,000.

    Using this link..

    http://nuclearsecrecy.com/nukemap/

    just for the sake of comparison of nuclear power ,i calculated for example that Russia will need like 50  topol missiles to fully cover a country of the size of Israel which is small. 350x topol M to fully cover every inch of Syria and about half of that, 175 x topol missiles to totally defeat ISIS and Alqaeda in just one day ,just using nukes. and near 3,000 topol ,to fully cover all Turkey. (this however will not take deep underground anti nuclear bunkers)

    But since most Russian missiles are small cruise missiles and tactical of just few kilotons, then that number will increase x 10 to compensate for the low nuclear warhead. so like 30,000 kh-55 (200kiloton) missiles  or about 3,000 topol (1 megaton) missiles.  

    So the world will not end with a nuclear war contrary to what most people believe. there are no enough nuclear weapons for that.. not even close. and US and Russia capabilities are only good enough to take about 10% to 30% of the population of each side. all depends on how fast people seek refuge. when an attack begins..  Is a lot of people but not enough to totally destroy a nation capability to continue attacking the other side.

    All said for Russia to defeat US , it will need way more nuclear missiles about 10x times more , than they have to counter their NATO alliance.
    avatar
    George1

    Posts : 10358
    Points : 10829
    Join date : 2011-12-22
    Location : Greece

    Re: Russian Strategic Nuclear Warheads: Numbers

    Post  George1 on Tue Jan 12, 2016 11:28 pm

    According to site: http://russianforces.org/missiles/ update

    SS-18 Satan = 46
    SS-19 Stiletto = 30
    SS-25 Topol = 72
    SS-27 Topol-M = 78
    SS-29 Yars = 73

    So Yars deployment progresses, Topol-Ms deployment has been completed. And the decommissioning of old 3 types is continuing (SS-18, SS-19, SS-25)


    _________________
    "There's no smoke without fire.", Georgy Zhukov

    avatar
    George1

    Posts : 10358
    Points : 10829
    Join date : 2011-12-22
    Location : Greece

    Re: Russian Strategic Nuclear Warheads: Numbers

    Post  George1 on Tue Jan 12, 2016 11:31 pm

    For SS-19 i see no warheads carried in the table. The remaining missiles might are kept in silos without nuclear warheads


    _________________
    "There's no smoke without fire.", Georgy Zhukov

    avatar
    franco

    Posts : 2505
    Points : 2543
    Join date : 2010-08-18

    Re: Russian Strategic Nuclear Warheads: Numbers

    Post  franco on Wed Jan 13, 2016 12:48 am

    George1 wrote:For SS-19 i see no warheads carried in the table. The remaining missiles might are kept in silos without nuclear warheads

    Not sure about the warhead bit but I believe the total SS-19 count should be 20. The 10 silo based Yars would have replaced the other 10 SS-19. Waiting for the next START exchange in March to confirm warhead count. This gives 6 silo based SS-27 regiments plus 2 mobile regiments and 1 silo based Yars regiment plus 7 mobile regiments for modern ICBM.

    EDIT: a mobile regiment has 9 ICBM's while a silo regiment has 10. A SS-27 has 1 warhead per ICBM while a Yars ICBM has 4 warheads (MIRV) which can hit 4 separate targets within a 1,000 km radius (at least the last I heard)
    avatar
    eehnie

    Posts : 1403
    Points : 1428
    Join date : 2015-05-13

    Re: Russian Strategic Nuclear Warheads: Numbers

    Post  eehnie on Sun Feb 28, 2016 6:54 am

    George1 wrote:According to site: http://russianforces.org/missiles/ update

    SS-18 Satan    = 46
    SS-19 Stiletto  = 30
    SS-25 Topol     = 72
    SS-27 Topol-M = 78
    SS-29 Yars      = 73

    So Yars deployment progresses, Topol-Ms deployment has been completed. And the decommissioning of old 3 types is continuing (SS-18, SS-19, SS-25)

    The decommissioned SS-25 are being destroyed?
    avatar
    franco

    Posts : 2505
    Points : 2543
    Join date : 2010-08-18

    Re: Russian Strategic Nuclear Warheads: Numbers

    Post  franco on Sun Feb 28, 2016 1:52 pm

    eehnie wrote:
    George1 wrote:According to site: http://russianforces.org/missiles/ update

    SS-18 Satan    = 46
    SS-19 Stiletto  = 30
    SS-25 Topol     = 72
    SS-27 Topol-M = 78
    SS-29 Yars      = 73

    So Yars deployment progresses, Topol-Ms deployment has been completed. And the decommissioning of old 3 types is continuing (SS-18, SS-19, SS-25)

    The decommissioned SS-25 are being destroyed?

    Yes or used to launch satellites.
    avatar
    eehnie

    Posts : 1403
    Points : 1428
    Join date : 2015-05-13

    Re: Russian Strategic Nuclear Warheads: Numbers

    Post  eehnie on Tue Mar 01, 2016 6:19 am

    franco wrote:
    eehnie wrote:
    George1 wrote:According to site: http://russianforces.org/missiles/ update

    SS-18 Satan    = 46
    SS-19 Stiletto  = 30
    SS-25 Topol     = 72
    SS-27 Topol-M = 78
    SS-29 Yars      = 73

    So Yars deployment progresses, Topol-Ms deployment has been completed. And the decommissioning of old 3 types is continuing (SS-18, SS-19, SS-25)

    The decommissioned SS-25 are being destroyed?

    Yes or used to launch satellites.  

    Thank you. To launch satellites is not a bad use of them. I expect the TEL launchers are not destroyed.

    Sponsored content

    Re: Russian Strategic Nuclear Warheads: Numbers

    Post  Sponsored content


      Current date/time is Sat Sep 23, 2017 2:49 pm