Military Forum for Russian and Global Defence Issues


    Russia's response to NATO ΑΒΜ Shield in Europe

    Share

    sepheronx
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 7302
    Points : 7612
    Join date : 2009-08-06
    Age : 27
    Location : Canada

    Re: Russia's response to NATO ΑΒΜ Shield in Europe

    Post  sepheronx on Wed Jul 30, 2014 8:30 am

    sweetflowers365 wrote:Hi all,

    Do russian weapons have capability to destroy anti missile defense system ?

    Most modern anti missile defense systems are based upon defeating usually missiles like Scuds or other IRBM's. Although, SM-3BII is supposed to be able to deal with shorter ICBM's theoretically. THAAD very similar. But, all of these systems are specific to the type of systems they are to be worked against, and in most tests, they already knew trajectory and where it was going to land, thus it was easier to shoot down. Also, there is a belief that the numbers are fabricated in terms of how effective they are. But that is up for debate.

    That being said, all such systems are usually a launcher platform, with radar systems to detect, track and guide missile to the target. These such systems are susceptible to anti radiation missiles, which usually fly lower, thus harder to detect and engage. So they would need to have secondary systems to protect such sites, but usually they don't or are maybe effective against some targets and not supersonic cruise missiles. There is a belief too that because Iskander flies at a quasi ballistic path, it is harder for such ABM systems to be able to engage it.

    So I would say yes. But that same thing can be said about any other country who has cruise missiles, and or smart munitions.

    sweetflowers365
    Private
    Private

    Posts : 3
    Points : 5
    Join date : 2014-07-30

    Re: Russia's response to NATO ΑΒΜ Shield in Europe

    Post  sweetflowers365 on Wed Jul 30, 2014 8:17 pm

    all these weapons can be made by Company , I am planning t build a system which can easily be build and destory tanks and aircraft, Like Tanks Have Iron shield, IF we can Fire Electricity on it with high voltage, will they kill the people inside tank with electricity current ?

    GarryB
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 15458
    Points : 16165
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    Re: Russia's response to NATO ΑΒΜ Shield in Europe

    Post  GarryB on Thu Jul 31, 2014 8:25 am

    The outside of the vehicle will act like a faraday cage which will protect those inside as long as they are not touching metal themselves... a bit like a person in a car being relatively safe from lightning.


    _________________
    “The West won the world not by the superiority of its ideas or values or religion […] but rather by its superiority in applying organized violence. Westerners often forget this fact; non-Westerners never do.”

    ― Samuel P. Huntington, The Clash of Civilizations and the Remaking of World Order

    George1
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 9423
    Points : 9915
    Join date : 2011-12-22
    Location : Greece

    Re: Russia's response to NATO ΑΒΜ Shield in Europe

    Post  George1 on Mon Dec 01, 2014 3:43 am

    Makei: Euro ABM deployment will disrupt the balance of forces in Europe

    MINSK, 18 November (BelTA) – The deployment of the European antiballistic missile defense system (Euro ABM) is much likely to disrupt the balance of forces in Europe, Foreign Minister of Belarus Vladimir Makei said following the joint meeting of the Foreign Ministries of Belarus and Russia on 18 November, belta has learned.

    “In this respect we need measures for a corresponding response,” Vladimir Makei said. In his words, today's meeting highlighted the issues of international security and arms control.

    According to Vladimir Makei, the parties expressed readiness for closer cooperation in order to strengthen the positions of the two countries in the international arena as well as in favor of strengthening integration in the Union State and other formats. He stressed that Belarus and Russia continue their fruitful cooperation in the UN. The meeting in Minsk also discussed cooperation in the Shanghai Cooperation Organization, including the advancement of the Eurasian Economic Union there.

    The two countries are also ready to advance the joint declaration on the 70th anniversary of the end of WWII on the OSCE platform.

    George1
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 9423
    Points : 9915
    Join date : 2011-12-22
    Location : Greece

    Re: Russia's response to NATO ΑΒΜ Shield in Europe

    Post  George1 on Wed Dec 17, 2014 3:06 pm

    Missile defense deployment in Romania against European security — Russian Foreign Ministry

    US offial said that the interceptor missiles the USA is planning to deploy at the American airbase in Deveselu by the end of 2015 are among other things targeting potential threats from Russia.

    MOSCOW, December 17. /TASS/. Steps towards further militarisation of south-eastern Europe, including missile defense deployment in Romania, run counter to the interests of regional and European security and stability, Russian Foreign Ministry spokesman Alexander Lukashevich said on Wednesday.

    He commented on statements by Chairman of the US House Intelligence Committee Mike Rogers on the “great shield” in Deveselu, Romania.

    Rogers told Romanian Realitatea TV Channel that the interceptor missiles the USA is planning to deploy at the American airbase in Deveselu by the end of 2015 are among other things targeting potential threats from Russia.

    “Thus, the American legislator confirmed the validity of Moscow’s doubts that the ‘missile defense shield’ being created by the US is designed to be used for the purposes that Washington declared,” Lukashevich said.

    “The role assigned to Romania to service the regular American project is hardly as honourable as it is presented,” he said.

    “Bucharest’s involvement in another American project that was confirmed in the US Senate recent report on tortures in secret CIA prisons in other countries has put Romanian officials, who were forced to decline journalists’ questions, in a rather awkward position,” Lukashevich said.

    Kyo
    Lieutenant
    Lieutenant

    Posts : 514
    Points : 563
    Join date : 2014-11-03
    Age : 67
    Location : Brasilia

    Re: Russia's response to NATO ΑΒΜ Shield in Europe

    Post  Kyo on Mon Jan 26, 2015 2:52 pm

    US missile defense system cannot intercept Russian strategic missiles: deputy PM

    “Neither the current nor even prospective American missile defense system can stop or challenge Russian strategic missile potential,” Deputy Prime Minister Dmitry Rogozin said

    MOSCOW, January 26. /TASS/. The American missile defense system is unable to counter Russia’s strategic missiles, Deputy Prime Minister Dmitry Rogozin said on Monday.

    Neither the current nor even prospective American missile defense system can stop or challenge Russian strategic missile potential,” Rogozin said in a program on the Rossiya 1 TV channel.

    However, the deputy prime minister declined to specify any technical characteristics of Russia’s strategic missiles.

    kvs
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 2507
    Points : 2640
    Join date : 2014-09-11
    Location : Canuckistan

    Re: Russia's response to NATO ΑΒΜ Shield in Europe

    Post  kvs on Tue Jan 27, 2015 1:29 am

    Kyo wrote:US missile defense system cannot intercept Russian strategic missiles: deputy PM

    “Neither the current nor even prospective American missile defense system can stop or challenge Russian strategic missile potential,” Deputy Prime Minister Dmitry Rogozin said

    MOSCOW, January 26. /TASS/. The American missile defense system is unable to counter Russia’s strategic missiles, Deputy Prime Minister Dmitry Rogozin said on Monday.

    Neither the current nor even prospective American missile defense system can stop or challenge Russian strategic missile potential,” Rogozin said in a program on the Rossiya 1 TV channel.

    However, the deputy prime minister declined to specify any technical characteristics of Russia’s strategic missiles.

    They have maneuverable warheads. There is no way to calculate their trajectory a priori and send the hypersonic interceptor.
    There are no hypersonic missile systems that can chase warheads. There are only warhead vs. warhead systems being deployed
    and designed.

    So Rogozin is not talking trash.

    GarryB
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 15458
    Points : 16165
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    Re: Russia's response to NATO ΑΒΜ Shield in Europe

    Post  GarryB on Tue Jan 27, 2015 11:11 am

    Interception is 4D maths.

    Very simply it is a question of getting your interceptor object to the 4D position of the target... the 4 dimensions are longitude, latitude, altitude, and time... if all four numbers are exactly the same for the interceptor and the incoming threat then you have a successful interception.

    With incoming ICBM warheads travelling at 6km/s however even a half a second early or late means a miss by 3km.

    the interceptor does not need to be faster than the incoming target but it does need to get to the interception point at the correct time... a 1 degree turn 10 seconds to interception will shift the interception point hundreds of kms with the interception system having a mere 10 seconds to detect the change in trajectory, recalculate the new interception point and redirect the interceptor to the new interception point and time... obviously you can see that a small turn and then another small turn in any direction will render an interceptor useless because after burning enormous amounts of energy and fuel to reach the initial interception point 10 seconds to impact it suddenly needs to be 10km to the left and you have 7 seconds to get there because the target that was 60km away when it started to turn is now 42km away and closing fast... even if you can turn your interceptor and reach the new interception point another turn of 2 degrees the other way will likely mean the interceptor has no chance of turning back and getting to the new interception point before the target has gone past it, which means it will have to over take the target to catch it... and it is unlikely to be moving fast enough, nor will it have any fuel left by now to reach the new interception point... so a new interceptor needs to be launched....


    _________________
    “The West won the world not by the superiority of its ideas or values or religion […] but rather by its superiority in applying organized violence. Westerners often forget this fact; non-Westerners never do.”

    ― Samuel P. Huntington, The Clash of Civilizations and the Remaking of World Order

    max steel
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 2980
    Points : 3014
    Join date : 2015-02-12
    Location : South Pole

    Re: Russia's response to NATO ΑΒΜ Shield in Europe

    Post  max steel on Wed Mar 04, 2015 9:00 pm

    Pervius wrote:There is no reason for a nuclear war between US-Russia. If it came up for a vote today most Americans would elect Putin as US President.

    Both countries are facing huge population loss from Baby Boomer Generation which created nuclear arsenals....all dying off.

    If Russia and US can avert War both countries will finally see their economy come back after old people die off. We all just need to survive trying to provide for all the old people. Hence why Russia and US people are suffering in poverty. Too many old people to clothe/feed.

    1/3rd of US will be dead by 2020. Russia and US will have to join together to survive Chinese Century of domination. We both will be minority countries in the world soon.



    SORRY BUTH RUSSIAN POPULATION IS NOT DYING . IT'S A MYTH :
    http://www.forbes.com/sites/markadomanis/2013/02/04/five-myths-about-russia/ study

    Russia's Baby Boom. Fertility Rate Far Higher Than in EU, Rising Quickly. : http://russia-insider.com/en/politics_opinion_society/2014/10/27/03-27-22pm/russias_baby_boom_fertility_rate_far_higher_eu_rising russia love


    Russia's Birth Rate Is Now Higher Than The United States' : http://www.forbes.com/sites/markadomanis/2013/07/25/dying-russias-birth-rate-is-now-higher-than-the-united-states/ russia

    George1
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 9423
    Points : 9915
    Join date : 2011-12-22
    Location : Greece

    Re: Russia's response to NATO ΑΒΜ Shield in Europe

    Post  George1 on Tue Apr 07, 2015 10:02 pm

    Russia warned that it is ready to neutralize US anti-ballistic missile system
    Russian Aviaton » Tuesday April 7, 2015 16:09 MSK

    Russia is able to counter US anti-ballistic missile system, official representative of Russian Ministry of Foreign Affairs, Alexander Lukashevich, said. Despite having such capabilities, Moscow would rather not use it, the representative added, RBC reports.

    «In order to keep the strategic balance, we have capabilities to counter US anti-ballistic missile system, but we are not going to use it unnecessarily,» the official said. «But just to let members of this system know: Russia has all the capabilities needed to neutralize such threats,» Lukashevich warned countries, which are going to place elements of US anti-ballistic missile system in their territory.

    Over the last few years Moscow has been protesting against deployment of US anti-ballistic missile systems in Europe close to the borders of Russian Federation. Russia also took countermeasures and placed missile early-warning systems in the most western region of the country – Kaliningrad Region.

    Last month Bloomberg reported with reference to some officials that USA might try to pressure Moscow (in light of Ukrainian crisis) by means of expanding its military presence in the Eastern Europe and Scandinavia: deploying air defense and anti-ballistic missile systems, military units of the army as well as surveillance units. In January NATO Secretary General Jens Stoltenberg announced establishment of the alliance’s command centers in six countries: Poland, Romania, Bulgaria, Lithuania, Latvia and Estonia.

    Last September after verbal confrontation between Russia and USA the countries started massive maneuvers. Russia held military exercise aimed at practicing the interaction between Topol missile systems and aviation, while NATO involved thousands of service members in massive maneuvers held in the Western part of Ukraine.

    George1
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 9423
    Points : 9915
    Join date : 2011-12-22
    Location : Greece

    Re: Russia's response to NATO ΑΒΜ Shield in Europe

    Post  George1 on Wed Apr 15, 2015 10:23 pm

    NATO not going to cancel deployment of US missile defense system in Europe — Russian envoy

    max steel
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 2980
    Points : 3014
    Join date : 2015-02-12
    Location : South Pole

    Re: Russia's response to NATO ΑΒΜ Shield in Europe

    Post  max steel on Wed Apr 15, 2015 11:44 pm

    If they don't cancel it russia must pull out from INF Treaty . enough is enough .

    Vann7
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 3225
    Points : 3349
    Join date : 2012-05-16

    Re: Russia's response to NATO ΑΒΜ Shield in Europe

    Post  Vann7 on Thu Apr 16, 2015 1:11 am

    GarryB wrote:Interception is 4D maths.

    Is even more complex..

    Is more like Physics and Differential equations.. with 8-10 unknown variables.. or
    "10D maths" if you like.. Gravity ,Acceleration,speed ,Atmospheric pressure ,Position initial ,
    Position at expected interception ,Mass, Time ,altitude ,range ,etc etc..  then you need to do this for the interceptor and also for the missile.  Then you will end with a very long differential
    equation ..   With computers it can be done fast .. but any unexpected thing can screw the whole thing. Like bad weather , rain ,snow. Why is never perfect any system of defense.. and the rating is never 100% .  Decoys also makes things more complex.. is indeed a real science how to design Ballistic defenses system. According to Russia.. US spend like 15 years of trial and error their THAAD until it had an acceptable performance. But this was of course testing it
    against their own technology.. under ideal conditions. like 3-4 warheads.. and knowing when the attack will happen ,last i read.

    A nuclear warhead can help ,but it can be a problem if you have a continuous attack.
    could end blinding your own radars ,your own defenses.  Ideally Russia should have Space
    Station like the ISS ,but completely made by Russia , and covering the entire Russia federation territory and monitoring any launch of anything. armed with interceptors. for early course intercept..and mid course intercept. that will really takes things to a new level.

    Vann7
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 3225
    Points : 3349
    Join date : 2012-05-16

    Re: Russia's response to NATO ΑΒΜ Shield in Europe

    Post  Vann7 on Fri Apr 17, 2015 9:29 am

    Interesting report..
    Specially for the people who were thinking that Russia thousands nuclear weapons
    were "enough deterrence" to prevent a nuclear war with United States.. shows how US
    military advisors simulated a nuclear war and considered acceptable the losing of many millions
    of american lives if in the end they win.  


    Could America Win a Nuclear War Against Russia?

    During the Cold War the US was ready to sacrifice 40 million Americans to destroy Russia.



    Henry Kissinger and Herman Kahn. In their books‚ Nuclear Weapons and Foreign Policy (Kissinger) and On Thermonuclear War (Kahn), they advocated a more ‘active’ nuclear strategy in order to more effectively defend the national interests of the United States. They argued that a new military strategy and doctrine should be based on assertions that:

    -Nuclear war is possible.

    -A nuclear war can and should be won, although a new definition of the level of ‘acceptable losses’ is needed. For Kahn even 40 million dead Americans would have been ‘acceptable losses’. (At that time the U.S. had a population of 200 million.)

    -A nuclear first strike capability would enable a disarming surprise attack, thus limiting the retaliation possibilities of the adversary.

    -Limited nuclear war should be part of military strategy (this last point wasn’t really new, since, during the Taiwan Strait crisis, Eisenhower threatened to use nuclear weapons as ‘bullets’ to destroy Chinese army bases).

    Chills ran down my spine while reading the sober explanations of Kissinger and Kahn about the different scenarios of nuclear war and the tables, listing the numbers of the immediate dead, the mid-term dead, the dead from long-term sufferings, the injured, the contaminated, the survivors, the radiation effects and other devastating consequences of a nuclear war, are still engraved in my memory. The suggestion by Kahn to feed the elderly with contaminated food, for their life expectancy would not exceed the time it would take them to die as a consequence of contaminated food, took my notion of cynicism to a new level.


    http://russia-insider.com/en/could-america-win-nuclear-war-against-russia/5651

    Wondering what will "conspiracy" skeptic-tards will say about this.. that 2 of the major US
    advisors have nuclear war books advocating for being genocide of up a hundreds of million of american lives in times of peace ,all for what? for allowing US complete global domination? Military advisors that many Neocons warmongers support.   If US is not evil power that ever existed in the planet.. no idea what else could be.. It can't be possible to be more evil than that.

    Not fantasy ,but reality.. the serious concerns of Russia with US militarization and expansion to their borders and deploying missile launchers there ,that could be used offensively for a first nuclear massive strike against Russia.. There are Neocon warmongers in US in power, that will not mind losing so many millions of americans if they can neutralize Russia. After this nuclear strikes of thousands of missiles what very likely follow is a surprise invasion of a militarized
    border.. from NATO countries to completely take control of Russia..,taking advantage of the chaos of the nation and destroyed military bases.

    I have seen reports that that Russia is aware of this and also have studied about
    the possibility of invasion to US west coast with China and take the war directly to their homeland and cut US access to the pacific sea ,completely destroying their economy and disbanding their nation.

    In any case for any first strike on Russia.. can only be done after a united EU front against Russia. This is where Ukraine comes to the western help.. to provoke Russia to first invade them , and later destroy Russia world image with the help of their propaganda media and their False flag attacks on civilians , (as it was Mh-17 .."Putin's missile") and later blamed on Russia ,will be the order of the day.

    Werewolf
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 5390
    Points : 5639
    Join date : 2012-10-24

    Re: Russia's response to NATO ΑΒΜ Shield in Europe

    Post  Werewolf on Fri Apr 17, 2015 1:13 pm

    They indeed do consider a theatre and ICBM tactical nuke exchange. In the late 70's a concept for US and NATO drill has been made based on using around 300 tactical nukes on

    european soil after luring Soviet troops on german soil by attacking GDR and forcing Soviet Union to defend GDR from NATO by rolling on german soil. This concept was actually used in

    exercises of early-mid 80's and even germans participated in this "battle royal" excersices where germans forces were meatshield bait to comprimise Soviet military capability and to

    shrink its army size in a very short time to have military the upper hand afterwards. The most discussed and likely concept among think tanks is not the MAD and actual destruction in

    case of NATO vs Russia war but a limited theatre used tactical nukes while not risking a full blown mutual desctruction and this concepts are the reason why in eastern Europe the

    americans build ABM shields to comprimise russias capability in such a warfare. Like any person with even barely realistic view could imagine neither side wants to launch its entire

    nuclear arsenal first because that would doom every country on earth, so the likelyness of nuclear arsenal use is limited to theatre based and tactical nukes. Since ABM shields can

    handle the limited amounts that are used in such scenarios they are basing exactly this as their basis for further warmongering and planning with direct military confrontation with

    russia on european soil and that is actually very dangerous to russia, because they need to rely on MAD otherwise they need to deploy nukes and ABM shields over canada, greenland

    and iceland to assure the same scenario for the US and to assure MAD.

    max steel
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 2980
    Points : 3014
    Join date : 2015-02-12
    Location : South Pole

    Re: Russia's response to NATO ΑΒΜ Shield in Europe

    Post  max steel on Fri Apr 17, 2015 1:40 pm

    Pull from INF ithe moment they place . Russia can build hundreds of misssiles maneouvring missiles in the cost of a single usa abm shield . Keep them deployed .

    Cant Russia place its S-400/500/2500/300 models in Cuba or any island nation in pacific to shoot down usa nukes earlier .?

    the very term "conspiracy theorist" was coined by the CIA as a means of undermining anyone who would question the government. Fact .

    Werewolf
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 5390
    Points : 5639
    Join date : 2012-10-24

    Re: Russia's response to NATO ΑΒΜ Shield in Europe

    Post  Werewolf on Fri Apr 17, 2015 2:14 pm

    max steel wrote:Pull from INF ithe moment they place . Russia can build hundreds of misssiles maneouvring missiles in the cost of a single usa abm shield . Keep them deployed .

    Cant Russia place its S-400/500/2500/300 models in Cuba or any island nation in pacific to shoot down usa nukes earlier .?

    the very term "conspiracy theorist" was coined by the CIA as a means of undermining anyone who would question the government. Fact .

    Not in Cuba, if it wants to shoot down ICBM's they have to be on the trajectory of US nukes meaning they fly mainly over the northpole and close to greenland and iceland, best would be canada.

    max steel
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 2980
    Points : 3014
    Join date : 2015-02-12
    Location : South Pole

    Re: Russia's response to NATO ΑΒΜ Shield in Europe

    Post  max steel on Fri Apr 17, 2015 2:54 pm

    Canada is usa sook puppet .

    What about North Pole ? Will it help if we make an island like stuff to deploy those batteries .

    sepheronx
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 7302
    Points : 7612
    Join date : 2009-08-06
    Age : 27
    Location : Canada

    Re: Russia's response to NATO ΑΒΜ Shield in Europe

    Post  sepheronx on Fri Apr 17, 2015 6:43 pm

    placing S-400 and S-500's in arctic area at arctic bases. 40N6 and the upcoming 77N6-N should be enough to deal with any such threats. Maybe some Tor's or Pantsirs to deal with PGM's.

    Vann7
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 3225
    Points : 3349
    Join date : 2012-05-16

    Re: Russia's response to NATO ΑΒΜ Shield in Europe

    Post  Vann7 on Fri Apr 17, 2015 9:48 pm

    max steel wrote:Canada is usa sook puppet .

    What about North Pole ? Will it help if we make an island like stuff to deploy those batteries .

    As much i believe Russia have the best system of defense on the world..
    I don't think Russia have a chance with their S-400 or S-500s or any other system based
    on projectiles ,to stop a rain of Ballistic Missiles from space.. you could intercept a few of them..
    but not many at same.. time.. specially because ICBMs today have from 8 to 12 warheads..

    So to stop the attack of a single Ohio submarine.. with 24 trident missiles each one with 12 warheads and with many dozens decoys each missiles at least.. we are speaking about
    24x12x12 = 3,456 interceptions that will be required to do for just 1 ohio attack ,in the case that all the missiles launched at same time and the decoys are identical on radars to the original ICBM missile.

    All say , they way i look at this .. is that unless you do an early course or mid course interception ,(before an ICBM eject its warhead with decoys) the probabilities to stop
    such attack is zero.  Is almost impossible to defeat such attack, using hit to kill air defenses defenses.   The same is true for Americans..  in my opinion , Neither Russia ,neither USA have
    the capability to defend against a multi warhead ICBM on its final phase..  Unless you use a nuclear warhead ,but this nuclear attack could serve as a firewall to blind your own radars of any following attack from close distance.. will pass through the fire and hit its target..  

    From this point of view.. US have a major advantage than Russia ,because they have
    mid course interceptors and they can move their defenses very close to Russian borders..
    either with Europe ABM shield or in the east using its Navy aegis.. destroyers..

    So this explain Russia Bomber patrols near US coast.. to have a better position of firing a missile avoiding US navy defenses. This also explain why US is concerned about cruise missiles
    with nuclear bomb capabilities..  SM-3 defenses are useless against cruise missiles flying low..
    and they can penetrate US airspace close enough to their last target.

    This is why Russia needs militarization of space.. and develop S-400s and S-500s that work from space.. that will allow Russia to intercept missiles not only mid course but also early course too.. it will be a huge blow to US offensive capabilities.. Effectively early course interception
    is significantly easier and even a lazer gun mounted of a satellite or a simple Barrel Bomb with TNT deployed near the flight path of the missile ,will take care of it.

    Apparently Russia is moving in that direction with their new national space station.

    Putin Declares Russia Will Build Its Own Space Station by 2023
    http://russia-insider.com/en/putin-says-russia-will-build-its-own-space-station-2023/5768

    Instead of building so many useless surface warships ,that will NOT defend Russia in a nuclear
    attack ,and maintain Soviets destroyers and Cruisers that cost a lot its operation ,Russia better take that money for a kick ass space defense station.. using a lazer gun or something like pantsirs gatlin gun in space to counter any ICBM and destroy its engines.. Nuclear weapons warheads to counter ICBM are not really needed. for mid course or earlier interception.. before warheads separates from the missile.

    All said Moscow defenses will be next to useless no matter which system they invent..
    a saturation attack will be impossible to stop at the final trajectory..   If the S-500
    can intercept ballistic misisles at any altitude.. then deploying them at the borders of Russia
    should be the key ..and try to do mid course interception. But for real peace of mind they need many satellites with anti ICBM capabiltities.. or several small space stations with rail guns or lazers will be nice. it will allow to shut down any ICBM as soon is climbing into space,where it cannot deploy its warheads or decoys.. and will be a major game changer..

    Cruise missiles flying low can be a pain.. but they are much more easier to intercept with a network of defenses. than an ICBM on its final trajectory.. as Russia try to do.

    max steel
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 2980
    Points : 3014
    Join date : 2015-02-12
    Location : South Pole

    Re: Russia's response to NATO ΑΒΜ Shield in Europe

    Post  max steel on Fri Apr 17, 2015 10:33 pm

    Russia also has mid-course interceptors with them . Militarization of Space is not allowed under the treaty unless russia backs out like usa did with abm treaty . Usa has aegis destroyer near japan though . I KNOW NO ONE CAN STOP HUNDREDS OF NUKES TOGETHER LET ALONE THOUSAND .

    If cruise missile can be intercepted with network of defenses then why russia rely on cruise missiles to neutralize usa abm shields in europe .

    How russia will destroy aegis in its east btw?

    GarryB
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 15458
    Points : 16165
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    Re: Russia's response to NATO ΑΒΜ Shield in Europe

    Post  GarryB on Sat Apr 18, 2015 4:58 am

    Trident missiles have 7 warheads for a total of 168 actual warheads... it carried less than the 200 warheads of the Akula class (20 x 10).

    BTW Trident is a conventional missile in the sense that it has a warhead bus that carries its warheads and releases them as it passes over targets so if you have a ship sailing in the area of the north pole and a trident warhead bus flys over you can hit it with one shot if you get it early enough in its trajectory... decoys and all.


    _________________
    “The West won the world not by the superiority of its ideas or values or religion […] but rather by its superiority in applying organized violence. Westerners often forget this fact; non-Westerners never do.”

    ― Samuel P. Huntington, The Clash of Civilizations and the Remaking of World Order

    George1
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 9423
    Points : 9915
    Join date : 2011-12-22
    Location : Greece

    Re: Russia's response to NATO ΑΒΜ Shield in Europe

    Post  George1 on Wed Jun 17, 2015 12:09 am

    Putin rather sees threat in US missile defense system than weapons deployment in Europe

    The Russian president noted that if someone threatens Russia’s territory, it is to aim its weapons where the threat is coming from

    NOVO-OGARYOVO, June 16. /TASS/. Russian President Vladimir Putin said on Tuesday he sees no real threat in the West’s statements about possible deployment of weapons in Europe, since the missile defense system deployment is a bigger threat.

    "I’d refrain from whipping up emotions. Of course, we will analyze everything but so far I see nothing that might prompt us to do that [take response measures]," he told a news conference. "It’s rather all about political signals to Russia, in its relations with the European Union."

    Read also
    Analysts: US forces Russia to take military, technical steps to forestall aggression
    US plans of deploying heavy weapons close to Russian borders will push Moscow for response
    Military analysts: West embarks on dangerous path of ruining nuclear deterrence

    "We are more worried over the deployment of the missile defence system," he said.

    Putin said Russia has all the grounds to take response measures. "If anyone threatens Russia’s territory, it must aim its weapons at those countries the threat is coming from," he said. "It is NATO that is approaching our borders, not vice versa."

    At the same time, the Russian president stressed that Russia posed no threat to anyone, including Finland. "The best guarantee of Finland’s security is its neutral status," Putin said.

    Shortly after reports about Washington’s plans for deploying 1,200 tanks, armored personnel carriers and other military vehicles organic to a force of 5,000 officers and men the United States on Monday declared it had plans for redeploying to Europe a contingent of fifth generation F-22 Raptor fighter jets. Speaking at the 51th international aerospace show at Le Bourget the Secretary of the US Air Force, Deborah Lee James, said that was necessary to show muscle to Russia. Earlier, the United States stepped up the air patrolling of the Baltic Sea and deployed B-2 and B-52 bombers in Britain.


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


    George1
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 9423
    Points : 9915
    Join date : 2011-12-22
    Location : Greece

    Re: Russia's response to NATO ΑΒΜ Shield in Europe

    Post  George1 on Thu Jun 25, 2015 2:37 pm

    Dmitry Peskov: Russia will take measures if Ukraine deploys elements of foreign ballistic missile defense systems in its territory
    Russian Aviaton » Thursday June 25, 2015 14:01 MSK

    Russia will take measures aimed at assuring the national security if Ukraine deploys elements of US ballistic missile defense systems in its territory, TASS reports with reference to Russian President’s press secretary Dmitry Peskov.

    “If Ukraine wants to deploy elements of US ballistic missile defense systems in its territory, this will cause a negative reaction, because this move is posing a threat to the security of our country,” the Kremlin’s representative said, adding that he didn’t study the details of such statements made by Ukrainian representatives.

    “This will force Russia to take countermeasures in order to assure its national security,” he noted. At that Peskov noted that these speculations are of eventual nature.

    Earlier the Secretary of National Security and Defense Council of Ukraine (NSDCU), Alexander Turchinov, said that he leaves open the possibility of holding consultations related to installation of components of ballistic missile defense systems in the country’s territory in order “to protect the country from Russia nuclear threat”.

    “We are reconstructing our nuclear shield without violating international agreements; its primary objective is to protect the country from Russia nuclear threat,” he said.

    Once again Turchinov accused Russia of deploying nuclear missiles in Crimea. He believes that in this situation “joint efforts of all the leading countries are required”. “This should be a combination of economic, political and military actions. In particular, we need to strengthen the common system, designed for protecting against nuclear threats, and deploy additional elements of ballistic missile defense systems,” the NSDCU secretary said.

    Moreover, Turchinov urged the western countries to block the way through Bosporus for Russian vessels and disconnect Russia from SWIFT system.


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


    ahmedfire
    Captain
    Captain

    Posts : 711
    Points : 885
    Join date : 2010-11-11
    Location : egypt

    Re: Russia's response to NATO ΑΒΜ Shield in Europe

    Post  ahmedfire on Thu Jun 25, 2015 2:46 pm

    Russia should destroy any future US ABM in Ukraine,there is no second choice .

    Sponsored content

    Re: Russia's response to NATO ΑΒΜ Shield in Europe

    Post  Sponsored content Today at 11:15 am


      Current date/time is Sun Dec 04, 2016 11:15 am