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.
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
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.