Home
Latest images
Register
Log in
I would say take advantage of their stupidity and start producing a new ground launched hypersonic scramjet powered missile that could carry one or more nuclear warheads with a flight range of perhaps 5,000km and say four or five 2Kt nuclear warheads the size of 152mm artillery shells that could be released enroute to the target flying at 40km altitude with a small parachute that detonate on impact with the ground. The main missile warhead could be a 300Kt warhead as used in normal cruise missiles and be directed at a city in Europe or Asia while the secondary bombs could be released in flight on the way to that city target or released above the city target to spread the destruction.
Such a weapon would be a fraction of the cost of a ballistic weapon and yet pose a real challenge to intercept most f the time flying at mach 8 to 12 depending on where you try to intercept it.
For instance you could launch a missile at London and have the four or five small nukes released over other countries on the way to the target... just to spread the damage.
Such intermediate range cruise missiles are not restricted by treaty or agreement and while the west is agreement incapable then it makes sense to have the capacity.
It would also mean long range and sub launched missiles can be concentrated on targets further afield like the US.
Thunderbird, with its unlimited flight range and low flight profile will also be useful against very long range targets and Poseidon would also have global reach too.
The difference would be that if needed Russia could launch a hypersonic scramjet powered 5,000km range missile to hit a target in the west with a conventional HE warhead and not necessarily start a nuclear war.
Maybe obliterating the Eiffel Tower could be the message the west needs to hear.
The Germans talked about taking down the Crimean bridge, but the Germans really don't have an equivalent target worth hitting...
Such a weapon would be a fraction of the cost of a ballistic weapon and yet pose a real challenge to intercept most f the time flying at mach 8 to 12 depending on where you try to intercept it.
For instance you could launch a missile at London and have the four or five small nukes released over other countries on the way to the target... just to spread the damage.
Such intermediate range cruise missiles are not restricted by treaty or agreement and while the west is agreement incapable then it makes sense to have the capacity.
It would also mean long range and sub launched missiles can be concentrated on targets further afield like the US.
Thunderbird, with its unlimited flight range and low flight profile will also be useful against very long range targets and Poseidon would also have global reach too.
The difference would be that if needed Russia could launch a hypersonic scramjet powered 5,000km range missile to hit a target in the west with a conventional HE warhead and not necessarily start a nuclear war.
Maybe obliterating the Eiffel Tower could be the message the west needs to hear.
The Germans talked about taking down the Crimean bridge, but the Germans really don't have an equivalent target worth hitting...
