Military Forum for Russian and Global Defence Issues


    Russia's response to NATO ΑΒΜ Shield in Europe

    Share
    avatar
    GunshipDemocracy
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 1519
    Points : 1561
    Join date : 2015-05-17
    Location : Stalin´s Strait between Mexico and Canada

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

    Post  GunshipDemocracy on Mon May 16, 2016 5:02 pm

    Austin wrote:
    sepheronx wrote:As scary as that is, it may have to be. Good thing that tomahawk is subsonic, or it would be even more a threat.

    My suggestion would be scrap out of INF Treaty , Move Towards LOW Policy and Deploy Tactical Nukes on Kalingrad , Forward deploy Borei SSBN  , May be scrapping new start is not a bad idea its a useless treaty any ways

    INF is already dead just formal withdrawal is yet to come. I am sure Russians are about to test SRBM/IRBM. Maybe variant of Rubezh with less stages... as IRBM
    avatar
    max steel
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 3000
    Points : 3034
    Join date : 2015-02-12
    Location : South Pole

    very interesting view of General Designer of MIT

    Post  max steel on Tue May 17, 2016 12:48 am

    Austin wrote:very interesting view of General Designer of MIT

    General designer MIT: US missile defense system can be converted to lock the Nuclear Forces

    http://ria.ru/defense_safety/20160516/1434290900.html


    The larger issue here IS NOT much touted (or, rather, marketed) missile "defense" shield--that is not an insurmountable problem at all and, shield or no shield, all necessary targets will be destroyed in case of conflict. The problem here is different--Russia is worried about the use of launchers for very different, other than anti-ballistic, missiles. We are talking about the first strike weapons, which are medium and short range missiles. These are not "defensive" weapons. These are first-strike weapons.

    Putin's quote from Russian President's site:

    this is an obvious violation of the Short And Medium Range Missile Treaty, since these missile-launchers which will be deployed at the sites in Romania and Poland upon activation of the Radars there could easily be reconfigured for short and medium range missiles. This reconfiguration of the launchers could be done in a very short time and for us it will be impossible to see what is going on there. We will not be able to control (used as "monitor" semantics) it and this is an additional threat to us.

    US Missile Defense In Poland And Romania

    avatar
    Flanky
    Sergeant
    Sergeant

    Posts : 186
    Points : 195
    Join date : 2011-05-02

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

    Post  Flanky on Sat May 21, 2016 8:14 pm

    max steel wrote:
    Austin wrote:very interesting view of General Designer of MIT

    General designer MIT: US missile defense system can be converted to lock the Nuclear Forces

    http://ria.ru/defense_safety/20160516/1434290900.html


    The larger issue here IS NOT much touted (or, rather, marketed) missile "defense" shield--that is not an insurmountable problem at all and, shield or no shield, all necessary targets will be destroyed in case of conflict. The problem here is different--Russia is worried about the use of launchers for very different, other than anti-ballistic, missiles. We are talking about the first strike weapons, which are medium and short range missiles. These are not "defensive" weapons.  These are first-strike weapons.

    Putin's quote from Russian President's site:

    this is an obvious violation of the Short And Medium Range Missile Treaty, since these missile-launchers which will be deployed at the sites in Romania and Poland upon activation of the Radars there could easily be reconfigured for short and medium range missiles. This reconfiguration of the launchers could be done in a very short time and for us it will be impossible to see what is going on there. We will  not be able to control (used as "monitor" semantics) it and this is an additional threat to us.  

    US Missile Defense In Poland And Romania

    Exactly... he pointed out the main problem. Because ICBMs are most vulnerable in the initial phase after start trying to reach space. If ABM system have enough range it could intercept such missile very easily... however if Russians would launch these from central Siberia there is no way ABM can intercept them so easily. However if these sites are reconfigured for short and medium range ballistic missiles - thats a totally differrent story as to their strategic value as first strike weapons.
    avatar
    max steel
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 3000
    Points : 3034
    Join date : 2015-02-12
    Location : South Pole

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

    Post  max steel on Sun May 22, 2016 2:06 am

    INF treaty is important to Russia since Russia does not think merely in terms of MIC's profits but really does care about her safety.
    avatar
    sepheronx
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 7301
    Points : 7611
    Join date : 2009-08-06
    Age : 27
    Location : Canada

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

    Post  sepheronx on Sun May 22, 2016 2:11 am

    max steel wrote:INF treaty is important to Russia since Russia does not think merely in terms of MIC's profits but really does care about her safety.

    INF holds Russia back actually. While US is blatantly backtracking on the agreements with these missile defense systems (so called), Russia actually is put in a tough position since its counter measures either have to be massive in range which is just very costly and unproductive and or very short range and has to be quite close to the system. Without INF, Russia could just simply expand the ground based launch systems of Kalibr and even expand it to supersonic for striking ground targets, and creating a multi launch system for it and poof! there goes any advantage US had. They already placed cruise missiles and or nuclear missiles in Europe, so all it will do is force US to spend even greater amount to put more systems in Europe and Russia just continues to expand itself without having to break the piggy bank.
    avatar
    Viktor
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 5666
    Points : 6315
    Join date : 2009-08-25
    Age : 36
    Location : Croatia

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

    Post  Viktor on Sun May 22, 2016 1:11 pm

    sepheronx wrote:
    max steel wrote:INF treaty is important to Russia since Russia does not think merely in terms of MIC's profits but really does care about her safety.

    INF holds Russia back actually.  While US is blatantly backtracking on the agreements with these missile defense systems (so called), Russia actually is put in a tough position since its counter measures either have to be massive in range which is just very costly and unproductive and or very short range and has to be quite close to the system.  Without INF, Russia could just simply expand the ground based launch systems of Kalibr and even expand it to supersonic for striking ground targets, and creating a multi launch system for it and poof! there goes any advantage US had.  They already placed cruise missiles and or nuclear missiles in Europe, so all it will do is force US to spend even greater amount to put more systems in Europe and Russia just continues to expand itself without having to break the piggy bank.

    Russia can produce massive amounts of cruise missiles with the stated range of 500km with its fuel tank almost at low point enabling them to increase its range momentarely.
    avatar
    sepheronx
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 7301
    Points : 7611
    Join date : 2009-08-06
    Age : 27
    Location : Canada

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

    Post  sepheronx on Sun May 22, 2016 1:56 pm

    That is what it will have to do till US decides to go that one extra mile that will cause downfall of INF. I am hoping they will be able to come up with a system that can launch more than two of them though per vehicle.

    Vann7
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 3297
    Points : 3423
    Join date : 2012-05-16

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

    Post  Vann7 on Tue May 24, 2016 2:41 am

    sepheronx wrote:
    max steel wrote:INF treaty is important to Russia since Russia does not think merely in terms of MIC's profits but really does care about her safety.

    INF holds Russia back actually.  While US is blatantly backtracking on the agreements with these missile defense systems (so called), Russia actually is put in a tough position since its counter measures either have to be massive in range which is just very costly and unproductive and or very short range and has to be quite close to the system.  Without INF, Russia could just simply expand the ground based launch systems of Kalibr and even expand it to supersonic for striking ground targets, and creating a multi launch system for it and poof! there goes any advantage US had.  They already placed cruise missiles and or nuclear missiles in Europe, so all it will do is force US to spend even greater amount to put more systems in Europe and Russia just continues to expand itself without having to break the piggy bank.

    This is why Russia needs to create a world issue against United States. To give an Ultimatum
    that they either remove their missiles launchers capable to be used offensively against Russia in Romania or else that Russia will withraw from the Nuclear treaty with Americans and start deploying hundreds of long range kalibers missiles in Kalingrad ,Cuba , but also deploy nuclear long range missiles in IRAN too ,armed with nuclear warheads. But also start deploying nuclear missiles in Space , so that Russia can strike any part of US just withing 5 minutes with a nuclear warhead. Only When they feel a pressure ,that something really bad could happen to their security ,they will back down and retreat .

    But if Mr Putin does nothing ,and just limit to just complain and be so sorry ,and just allow Americans to continue moving lethal missiles ,Air defenses on its borders  ,the last one can be used to attack Putin presidential plane for example. (yes they can do that and later blame it on a happy trigger general),it will seriously damage the national security of Russia territory. and it could even encourage Americans to give it a try ,to a massive first nuclear preventive attack at the first major conflict between them .
    avatar
    George1
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 9917
    Points : 10407
    Join date : 2011-12-22
    Location : Greece

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

    Post  George1 on Thu Sep 22, 2016 2:13 pm

    Moscow sees deployment of US interceptor missiles in Romania as INF treaty violation

    More:
    http://tass.com/politics/901459


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

    avatar
    George1
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 9917
    Points : 10407
    Join date : 2011-12-22
    Location : Greece

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

    Post  George1 on Sun Mar 19, 2017 10:48 pm

    Russia to respond if Norway joins European missile shield - envoy

    "Therefore, there will be no peaceful Arctic anymore," Russian Ambassador to Norway Teimuraz Ramishvili said

    OSLO, March 19. /TASS/. Oslo should understand that its possible move to join the NATO European missile shield will not be left unanswered by its neighbor Russia, Russian Ambassador to Norway Teimuraz Ramishvili said in an interview with Norway’s state-run NRK TV channel.

    "In this case we will have to make military-level technical decisions needed to neutralize the effect of the possible creation of a missile shield element. Naturally, it will trigger a vigorous reaction in Norway, which will claim that Russia poses a military threat to the country," he said in an NRK interview aired late Saturday.

    "Norway has to understand that after becoming an outpost of NATO, it will have to face head-on Russia and the Russian military might," Ramishvili said, adding that the move "will become a new factor that will be included in our strategic planning as an additional problem in the Arctic Region."

    "Therefore, there will be no peaceful Arctic anymore," he added.

    In a comment to TASS, Ramishvili said that Moscow had to express its views on the issue in public, because the Norwegian side is unwilling to communicate on the problem.

    "We have to talk about this in public recently due to the lask of the negotiation process and the Norwegian side’s reluctance to discuss their concerns with the neighbors. For this reason, the embassy tries to attract the public and politicians' attention to the problem in an attempt to prevent the arms race from spreading to the Arctic region," he said.

    In 2015, Norwegian Prime Minister Erna Solberg expressed her country’s readiness as a NATO founding member to make a contribution in the creation of the European missile shield. Norway and US defense experts were to submit their recommendations on the issue to the Norwegian government by the end of 2017.

    The Royal Norwegian Navy currently has in service five modern Fridtjof Nansen-class frigates, equipped with Lockheed Martin's AEGIS combat system, that can be modernized to be incorporated into the European missile shield system.

    The Globus II, a radar station located on the Vardo island near the Russian border, and another radar that the US plans to deploy there by 2020, can also be turned into elements of the European missile shield. Norwegian defense officials, however, dismissed this possibility.


    More:
    http://tass.com/politics/936322


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

    avatar
    kvs
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 2724
    Points : 2855
    Join date : 2014-09-11
    Location : Canuckistan

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

    Post  kvs on Tue Mar 21, 2017 11:25 pm

    Russia must deploy fast delivery nuclear missiles to within 500 km range of these "shield" sites. This way they will become instantly
    irrelevant once WWIII starts. This must be done to send these f*cktards the message. They think they can corner Russia by
    surrounding it with strategic destabilization elements. That Russia is too useless and weak to respond. They must know that
    nuclear warheads will reach them in under 5 minutes.


    George1 wrote:Russia to respond if Norway joins European missile shield - envoy

    "Therefore, there will be no peaceful Arctic anymore," Russian Ambassador to Norway Teimuraz Ramishvili said

    OSLO, March 19. /TASS/. Oslo should understand that its possible move to join the NATO European missile shield will not be left unanswered by its neighbor Russia, Russian Ambassador to Norway Teimuraz Ramishvili said in an interview with Norway’s state-run NRK TV channel.

    "In this case we will have to make military-level technical decisions needed to neutralize the effect of the possible creation of a missile shield element. Naturally, it will trigger a vigorous reaction in Norway, which will claim that Russia poses a military threat to the country," he said in an NRK interview aired late Saturday.

    "Norway has to understand that after becoming an outpost of NATO, it will have to face head-on Russia and the Russian military might," Ramishvili said, adding that the move "will become a new factor that will be included in our strategic planning as an additional problem in the Arctic Region."

    "Therefore, there will be no peaceful Arctic anymore," he added.

    In a comment to TASS, Ramishvili said that Moscow had to express its views on the issue in public, because the Norwegian side is unwilling to communicate on the problem.

    "We have to talk about this in public recently due to the lask of the negotiation process and the Norwegian side’s reluctance to discuss their concerns with the neighbors. For this reason, the embassy tries to attract the public and politicians' attention to the problem in an attempt to prevent the arms race from spreading to the Arctic region," he said.

    In 2015, Norwegian Prime Minister Erna Solberg expressed her country’s readiness as a NATO founding member to make a contribution in the creation of the European missile shield. Norway and US defense experts were to submit their recommendations on the issue to the Norwegian government by the end of 2017.

    The Royal Norwegian Navy currently has in service five modern Fridtjof Nansen-class frigates, equipped with Lockheed Martin's AEGIS combat system, that can be modernized to be incorporated into the European missile shield system.

    The Globus II, a radar station located on the Vardo island near the Russian border, and another radar that the US plans to deploy there by 2020, can also be turned into elements of the European missile shield. Norwegian defense officials, however, dismissed this possibility.


    More:
    http://tass.com/politics/936322
    avatar
    miketheterrible
    Junior Lieutenant
    Junior Lieutenant

    Posts : 436
    Points : 438
    Join date : 2016-11-06

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

    Post  miketheterrible Yesterday at 1:54 am

    They already have the greatest anti ABM system available - Iskander missiles.

    It doesn't fly a standard ballistic path thus it becomes very hard for the ABM system to calculate its position at every given moment for the ABM to make a direct hit. Quasi-Ballistic path is one of the smartest inventions for such missiles. And we know how effective current US ABM systems are (not very) so it becomes even far greater in capabilities. Only thing they need to do, is increase the numbers of it.

    The only other system that I like that I wish Russia invests in or produces their own alternative is the Belorussian Polonez MLRS system. 200KM is long range. If Russia produces one of equivalent or longer range, with high degree of accuracy, then a salvo launch becomes impossible for ABM systems to counter. Guaranteed systems like Iskander and Polonez are significantly cheaper than any ABM system and their intended missiles.

    As well, anti Radiation cruise missiles may be another big step too. Once the radar systems are neutralized, the ABM systems are more or less useless. And in case of a war (if Russia has to go to war with NATO), then first strike at the ABM system's radar installations is the mandatory thing to do to neutralize the systems. Of course they could buddy off of other systems like satellites and maybe ship based radar (I don't know exactly) but I doubt it will even be close to as effective.

    TL;DR - More Iskanders, Anti Radiation missiles and long range MLRS systems to counter ABM sites. As well, increase # of nuclear missiles in order to nullify ABM sites entirely.

    PS

    Maybe leaving INF treaty isn't a bad idea for Russia. It will guarantee Iskander's ranges could increase drastically.
    avatar
    magnumcromagnon
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 4520
    Points : 4711
    Join date : 2013-12-05
    Location : Pindos ave., Pindosville, Pindosylvania, Pindostan

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

    Post  magnumcromagnon Yesterday at 4:39 am

    miketheterrible wrote:They already have the greatest anti ABM system available - Iskander missiles.

    It doesn't fly a standard ballistic path thus it becomes very hard for the ABM system to calculate its position at every given moment for the ABM to make a direct hit.  Quasi-Ballistic path is one of the smartest inventions for such missiles.  And we know how effective current US ABM systems are (not very) so it becomes even far greater in capabilities.  Only thing they need to do, is increase the numbers of it.

    The only other system that I like that I wish Russia invests in or produces their own alternative is the Belorussian Polonez MLRS system.  200KM is long range.  If Russia produces one of equivalent or longer range, with high degree of accuracy, then a salvo launch becomes impossible for ABM systems to counter.  Guaranteed systems like Iskander and Polonez are significantly cheaper than any ABM system and their intended missiles.

    As well, anti Radiation cruise missiles may be another big step too.  Once the radar systems are neutralized, the ABM systems are more or less useless.  And in case of a war (if Russia has to go to war with NATO), then first strike at the ABM system's radar installations is the mandatory thing to do to neutralize the systems.  Of course they could buddy off of other systems like satellites and maybe ship based radar (I don't know exactly) but I doubt it will even be close to as effective.

    TL;DR - More Iskanders, Anti Radiation missiles and long range MLRS systems to counter ABM sites.  As well, increase # of nuclear missiles in order to nullify ABM sites entirely.

    PS

    Maybe leaving INF treaty isn't a bad idea for Russia.  It will guarantee Iskander's ranges could increase drastically.

    Tornado-G is set to grow from 40km range (when it was Grad) to 100km range, and Tornado-S is set to grow from 90km range (when it was Smerch) to over 200 km range.

    https://translate.google.com/translate?sl=ru&tl=en&js=y&prev=_t&hl=en&ie=UTF-8&u=http%3A%2F%2Fvpk.name%2Fnews%2F174562_izvestiya_noveishaya_rszo_tornados_poluchit_sverhtochnuyu_raketu_so_sputnikovoi_navigaciei.html&edit-text=&act=url

    .....BTW the main goal of the Euro ABM shield is to violate the INF treaty with plausible deniability. Aegis Ashore's MK41 cells are capable to store and launch Tomahawk cruise missiles.

    Sponsored content

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

    Post  Sponsored content


      Current date/time is Thu Mar 23, 2017 11:14 am