Military Forum for Russian and Global Defence Issues


    Russia in case of a nuclear war with USA:

    Share
    avatar
    kvs

    Posts : 3753
    Points : 3852
    Join date : 2014-09-11
    Location : Canuckistan

    Re: Russia in case of a nuclear war with USA:

    Post  kvs on Wed May 10, 2017 2:28 am

    max steel wrote:
    jhelb wrote:
    The lethality of submarine-borne US nuclear forces has increased drastically because of the advent of the new "Super Fuse" incorporated into the Navy’s W76-1/Mk4A warhead . Before the invention of this new fuzing mechanism, even the most accurate ballistic missile warheads might not detonate close enough to targets hardened against nuclear attack to destroy them. But the new super-fuze is designed to destroy fixed targets by detonating above and around a target in a much more effective way. Many Russian targets are not hardened to 10,000 pounds per square inch blast over pressure.

    http://thebulletin.org/how-us-nuclear-force-modernization-undermining-strategic-stability-burst-height-compensating-super10578

    This should be a matter of huge concern for the Kremlin & immediate efforts must be made to neutralise this US threat.


    Ah! I read this puffpiece 2 months back , you can look for my comment there. If the probability of one SS-18 silo destroying by W-76 warhead is equal to 0.86 due to the "super-fuze", then the probability of destroying this silo by using two warheads will be 0.98. Basing on this fact the authors claim that 272 W-76s on SLBMs are sufficient to eliminate all the Russian ICBMs in silos. But the theory of probabilities dramatically changes this estimate towards increasing of the number of warheads needed.

    Indeed, assume the number of remaining SS-18 is equal to 50 (in fact a bit less). Then the probability of destroying all these 50 silos by using pairs of attacking W-76 warheads is equal to 0,98^50 = 0.36 ! Although the war readiness of these SS-18 is highly questionable, only one such ICBM that has survived, taken off and successfully deployed all the 10 warheads would become a catastrophe for the USA. PS:- SS-18 will be replaced by newly built Sarmat in 2018/19.

    The problem of the ICBMs eliminating by a first strike is not as simple as the authors think.

    "Since these radars cannot see over the horizon " . After I read phrase above in bulletin I stopped reading: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Voronezh_radar

    As per fuses and all that crap--obviously nuclear technologies improve and will continue to improve and so will their accuracy, high as it is today. But there is a reason why Russia more and more begins to rely on non-nuclear (conventional) containment and deterrent.

    First strike masturbators are congenital idiots. Where do they get their ludicrous assumption that Russian silo ICBMs will not be launched shortly
    after Russia detects a first strike? No, Russian silo ICBMs do not need to be fueled up from empty since hydrazine can stay in tanks for years. And
    with all the anti-Russian war mongering going on in NATO right now, what makes these fucktards think that Russia will not have its silo ICBMs fueled up
    and waiting?

    The only chance that a first strike has of taking out any Russian ICBM is if there is a massive sabotage of the command and control system
    that occurs at the right moment. Aside from a coup in the Kremlin, this is as likely as swarms of pigs flying through the icy wastes of Hell.

    PS. I know about Americans wanking themselves senseless thinking that their "stealthy" B-2 and cruise missiles will not be detected until they
    have done their jobs. But seriously, this is patent grade A delusion.
    avatar
    miketheterrible

    Posts : 2865
    Points : 2847
    Join date : 2016-11-06

    Re: Russia in case of a nuclear war with USA:

    Post  miketheterrible on Wed May 10, 2017 6:07 am

    Silo based ICBM's are becoming a thing in the past anyway for Russia with the growth of mobile ICBM's and soon to be railroad based. They also seem to forget that once they (nuclear forces) lose contact with Moscow or command center due to a nuke going off, they will launch theirs.

    Then again, I suppose many morons even on this website forgot Russia has SLBM's and mobile ICBM's with even building the railroad ICBM system. Not surprising. We seem to accumulate a lot of morons on this forum who have no capabilities of reading comprehension.
    avatar
    miketheterrible

    Posts : 2865
    Points : 2847
    Join date : 2016-11-06

    Re: Russia in case of a nuclear war with USA:

    Post  miketheterrible on Thu May 11, 2017 9:14 pm

    https://southfront.org/making-sense-of-the-super-fuse-scare/

    And here is a good long explanation to what I was saying.
    avatar
    GarryB

    Posts : 18971
    Points : 19527
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    Re: Russia in case of a nuclear war with USA:

    Post  GarryB on Fri May 12, 2017 12:10 pm

    Actually the Soviets and Russians have ICBMs fitted with communications systems so even if Moscow is destroyed in a sneak attack the communications rocket will be launched and give launch commands to the Strategic rocket forces so the silos will be empty before any western missile reaches it.

    More importantly the super fusing to destroy silos is a contradiction in terms... like a fuse on an aircraft bomb trying to hit an underground silo... air bursts are pointless... only a direct hit with a penetrating fuse would work and you don't need a super fuse for that... that is just stupid.

    A nuclear warhead is a chain of reactions that need to operate perfectly to create a full power detonation of the main charge... smacking the warhead into the ground at more than 4 km per second will pulverise any contents and make them ineffective mush.

    Any S-400 system nearby should be able to intercept ground hitting ICBM warheads because the atmosphere will slow the warheads down to less than the 4.8km/s flight speed limit of the S-400 system.

    S-500 will be able to hit warheads flying past going for other targets too.
    avatar
    jhelb

    Posts : 482
    Points : 557
    Join date : 2015-04-04
    Location : Previously: Belarus Currently: A Small Island No One Cares About

    Re: Russia in case of a nuclear war with USA:

    Post  jhelb on Sun May 14, 2017 1:14 pm

    GarryB wrote:Any S-400 system nearby should be able to intercept ground hitting ICBM warheads because the atmosphere will slow the warheads down to less than the 4.8km/s flight speed limit of the S-400 system..

    That would have to be an endo atmospheric intercept, which is not safe. If it is not an exo atmospheric intercept you are dead.
    avatar
    kvs

    Posts : 3753
    Points : 3852
    Join date : 2014-09-11
    Location : Canuckistan

    Re: Russia in case of a nuclear war with USA:

    Post  kvs on Sun May 14, 2017 3:24 pm

    jhelb wrote:
    GarryB wrote:Any S-400 system nearby should be able to intercept ground hitting ICBM warheads because the atmosphere will slow the warheads down to less than the 4.8km/s flight speed limit of the S-400 system..

    That would have to be an endo atmospheric intercept, which is not safe. If it is not an exo atmospheric intercept you are dead.

    Not safe in what sense? Stopping a nuke warhead detonation over its intended target is 100% success. Contamination is unavoidable. But mechanical
    disruption of a nuclear warhead will produce contamination that is vastly more localized than any nuclear detonation and Russia can clean it
    up.

    As far as the success rate, there is no difference between end and exo atmospheric cases. In fact, maneuverability makes the exo targeting
    harder (assuming America will use it). A nuclear warhead after it is released from the bus is on a purely ballistic trajectory and easier to intercept.
    Of course, if the warhead is a maneuverable glider it is hard to intercept.
    avatar
    GarryB

    Posts : 18971
    Points : 19527
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    Re: Russia in case of a nuclear war with USA:

    Post  GarryB on Mon May 15, 2017 12:25 pm

    Targeting silos means only ground burst nukes will be effective... hitting them anywhere above the ground... even 2km above the ground will greatly reduce their effect on missiles in silos to the point where the silos are undamaged and can be reloaded for round two...

    Intercepting the incoming missiles inside or outside the atmosphere is not really important.

    The silos are free because they have already been built and offer very good protection from almost anything except a direct hit... which can be defeated with a TOR battery...

    Anything that does not hit the ground and explode is a win... there is no farmland anywhere near... these silos are in the middle of nowhere.
    avatar
    George1

    Posts : 12405
    Points : 12884
    Join date : 2011-12-22
    Location : Greece

    Re: Russia in case of a nuclear war with USA:

    Post  George1 on Tue Dec 11, 2018 11:43 pm

    US nuclear targeting category priorities in the USSR, 1972. Kind of fascinating/horrifying that urban/industrial is #1 priority even if Soviet nukes have not yet been launched at the US (e.g. if the US is launching a "preventative"/first-strike nuclear attack).



    https://t.co/5WHpc91ybN
    avatar
    PapaDragon

    Posts : 7380
    Points : 7474
    Join date : 2015-04-26
    Location : Fort Evil, Serbia

    Re: Russia in case of a nuclear war with USA:

    Post  PapaDragon on Wed Dec 12, 2018 1:45 am

    George1 wrote:US nuclear targeting category priorities in the USSR, 1972. Kind of fascinating/horrifying that urban/industrial is #1 priority even if Soviet nukes have not yet been launched at the US (e.g. if the US is launching a "preventative"/first-strike nuclear attack).

    https://pbs.twimg.com/media/DuJ0qpNXQAEv-FI.jpg:large

    https://t.co/5WHpc91ybN


    Well obviously.

    You really think that anything other than population would be a target in nuclear war?
    avatar
    George1

    Posts : 12405
    Points : 12884
    Join date : 2011-12-22
    Location : Greece

    Re: Russia in case of a nuclear war with USA:

    Post  George1 on Wed Dec 12, 2018 1:24 pm

    PapaDragon wrote:
    George1 wrote:US nuclear targeting category priorities in the USSR, 1972. Kind of fascinating/horrifying that urban/industrial is #1 priority even if Soviet nukes have not yet been launched at the US (e.g. if the US is launching a "preventative"/first-strike nuclear attack).

    https://pbs.twimg.com/media/DuJ0qpNXQAEv-FI.jpg:large

    https://t.co/5WHpc91ybN


    Well obviously.

    You really think that anything other than population would be a target in nuclear war?

    its not my comment. It is the comment of the page i took the info

    https://twitter.com/wellerstein/status/1072549754536673280
    avatar
    GarryB

    Posts : 18971
    Points : 19527
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    Re: Russia in case of a nuclear war with USA:

    Post  GarryB on Fri Dec 14, 2018 12:01 am

    First strike masturbators are congenital idiots. Where do they get their ludicrous assumption that Russian silo ICBMs will not be launched shortly
    after Russia detects a first strike? No, Russian silo ICBMs do not need to be fueled up from empty since hydrazine can stay in tanks for years. And
    with all the anti-Russian war mongering going on in NATO right now, what makes these fucktards think that Russia will not have its silo ICBMs fueled up
    and waiting?

    But it is a perfectly natural result of them being Kool aide fed from birth... America is the best and no one else even comes close... all american weapons are perfect and superior to anyone elses, so with an ABM defence it makes sense that the US could cut the head off the snake with a stealthy first strike that takes out Moscow and all the Soviet leaders (it is still the cold war isn't it?) and so those stupid Russians wont act without orders so NATO forces can attack and destroy all of the Russian nuclear weapons systems and then Russia having been disarmed will have to negotiate an unconditional surrender and hand over all its natural resources to America. America will then have an economic boom and prosperity like the 1950s with all this cheap energy and raw materials and those Russian slaves will get the first taste of American democracy they ever had...

    And they they wake up and their sheets are wet.

    The problem with this is that the Russians aren't stupid and not every westerner is a fucking psycho, so if there was such an attack being planned then a person with some common sense and knowledge of Russian systems and capabilities who knew this plan would never work in a million years would try to sabotage it and stop the west from trying it in the first place.

    Having those B-2s all shot down over the arctic would be a start to stopping the plan... and nuking the ABM bases in Eastern Europe using nuclear armed Kinzhals would be a suitable response that would stop the plan dead in its tracks because with Moscow working as usual and the ABM system damaged, even the dumbest idiot in the US knows the full might of the Russian strategic forces would obliterate the US and the west... they wanted to wipe out much of it... confuse some more of it to not launch, and hope that any dribs and drabs that do get launched can be intercepted with the ABM systems they are setting up all over the place...
    avatar
    PapaDragon

    Posts : 7380
    Points : 7474
    Join date : 2015-04-26
    Location : Fort Evil, Serbia

    Re: Russia in case of a nuclear war with USA:

    Post  PapaDragon on Fri Dec 14, 2018 12:44 am

    George1 wrote:
    PapaDragon wrote:
    George1 wrote:US nuclear targeting category priorities in the USSR, 1972. Kind of fascinating/horrifying that urban/industrial is #1 priority even if Soviet nukes have not yet been launched at the US (e.g. if the US is launching a "preventative"/first-strike nuclear attack).

    https://pbs.twimg.com/media/DuJ0qpNXQAEv-FI.jpg:large

    https://t.co/5WHpc91ybN


    Well obviously.

    You really think that anything other than population would be a target in nuclear war?

    its not my comment. It is the comment of the page i took the info

    https://twitter.com/wellerstein/status/1072549754536673280

    I know

    I mean "you" as in whoever reads

    Sponsored content

    Re: Russia in case of a nuclear war with USA:

    Post  Sponsored content


      Current date/time is Tue Dec 18, 2018 11:28 pm