Military Forum for Russian and Global Defence Issues


    Russian Strategic Nuclear Forces (Nuclear Triad-Warheads)

    avatar
    Azi

    Posts : 412
    Points : 408
    Join date : 2016-04-05

    Russian Strategic Nuclear Forces (Nuclear Triad-Warheads) - Page 7 Empty Re: Russian Strategic Nuclear Forces (Nuclear Triad-Warheads)

    Post  Azi on Tue Dec 10, 2019 11:34 pm

    kvs wrote:
    Hole wrote:Trident II weighs 59 tons. Bulava 37 tons.

    US solid rocket fuel tech used in the Trident II has not improved since it was first deployed (1990).  Russian solid rocket fuel has
    advanced at least a factor of two in energy density for the same mass of fuel.  That easily explains the difference since
    the US solid rocket fuel was better than what as available to the USSR during the 1980s.
    That's true! Trident II is a good piece of technology, but it was not really improved since the 90'ies.

    The USA lacks in hypersonic and missile technology, because since 9/11 USA focused at "war on terror". Focus was SOF, very high mobile units, good SIGINT and HUMINT.
    GarryB
    GarryB

    Posts : 24481
    Points : 25023
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    Russian Strategic Nuclear Forces (Nuclear Triad-Warheads) - Page 7 Empty Re: Russian Strategic Nuclear Forces (Nuclear Triad-Warheads)

    Post  GarryB on Wed Dec 11, 2019 6:59 am

    What new planes? There are no new aircraft in strategic aviation. Only modernization of old Tu-95MS and Tu-160. The Tu-160M2 will only be new in a few years.

    The new build Tu-160M2s they will be building now, and the PAK DAs that will be produced too.

    BTW Their oldest bombers are the Backfires... which are not strategic bombers, the Tu-95s and Tu-160s were all made in the 1980s and 1990s.

    At this time, the US, which is reportedly backward compared to Russia, will introduce B-21...The US in tactical and strategic aviation, in nuclear submarines, the surface fleet is ahead of Russia both in numbers and technologically.

    Hahahaha... they have a factory to produce new Tu-160s and PAK DAs... the B-21 is vapourware... so those B-52s made in the 1950s and 1960s will soldier on for some time yet... they have bet all their money on stealth and it has not paid off...

    The B-21 is just a B-2... ...how pathetic... so their brand new 21st C bomber is going to be a 1980s bomber just like Russia... wow... how ground breaking and advanced of them...

    They have developed a brand new tank too... they are calling it Abrams-1... and it will be amazing... it will have a 120mm smoothbore gun and armour that will stop any tank mounted weapon from the first years of WWII...

    This old strategic missile enough to destroy Russia. What is the advantage of Yars over Minuteman III? What is the advantage of Bulava over Trident II. Trident II has much more firepower than small Bullava. There are only 4submarine in Borey. The rest are old Delta IV. The US is working on a brand new SSBN that will be better than Borey. Where is the mythical advantage of Russian nuclear forces over the US? Russia is not able to defend itself against American missiles. They are still effective and very deadly.

    Funny... you said the US as ahead of Russia in everything but now you say what they have is enough... the US tax payer pays the best part of a trillion dollars every year for good enough... when the Pentagon listens to lawyers most of all you know there is something wrong fundamentally with the system...

    Throw weight MM III is 1.3 tons, throw weight Yars is 1.3 tons. Throw weight Trident is 2.8 tons, throw weight Bulava is 1.2 ton

    Yeah, lets make up some numbers shall we....

    American missiles carry the same amount of decoys and Tridents much more than Bulava. In addition, Trident also flattens a trajectory. Trident is better than Bulava, although older.

    You keep trying to suggest the Americans have more missiles than the Russians ignoring the fact that the new START treaty limits the number of warheads they are allowed... and you do understand decoys weigh a fraction of what a real warhead weighs so you can carry them in enormous numbers... if a decoy took up the same space and weight as a real warhead... well you might as well just carry real warheads...

    The S-500 will not stop a massive nuclear attack.

    It is not currently deployed so you are correct... but when it enters service it is part of the Russian integrated air defence network... a system of radars and platforms and aircraft and ground units all connected together to defend Russian air space... it is supposed to defend Russia from external attack... ie planes and drones and missiles.... so yes... the S-500 is an ABM system that is fully mobile and will get advanced warning of a missile attack and will be gathering target data in real time to shoot down threats... effectively if they make enough of them and they are in the correct place then they should be able to shoot down a shit ton of incoming missiles... THAT IS WHY THE ABM TREATY BANNED ABM SYSTEMS BECAUSE THEY ARE DESTABILISING... ONE SIDE COULD SPEND MONEY ON AN AIR DEFENCE NETWORK TO DEFEND THEMSELVES AND MIGHT BE TEMPTED TO ATTACK THEIR ENEMY IN THE BELIEF THEY MIGHT SURVIVE WHAT THE ENEMY HAS LEFT TO ATTACK THEM WITH.... 1500 WARHEADS IS A LOT TO DEFEND YOURSELF FROM, BUT AN AIRBURST NUKE IN A SATELLITE ABOVE THE US THAT BLANKS OUT ALL YOUR RADAR AND ELECTRONICS FOR HALF AN HOUR ALLOWING A DECAPITATION ATTACK TAKING OUT YOUR ABM SITES AND THE PENTAGON AND THE WHITEHOUSE AND YOUR ICBM FIELDS AND PORTS WITH SSBNS SHOULD SERIOUSLY REDUCE THE NUMBER OF WEAPONS YOU WILL BE SENDING FROM 1,500 DOWN TO A MORE MANAGEABLE NUMBER...

    Russia is defenseless against Trident with many decoys and MM III...

    Rubbish.... Trident is slow... being an SLBM, the 400km range S-400 missiles can intercept them... 4.8km/s intercept speed is not an accident...

    The Russian arsenal is newer but it does not mean technologically better.

    Actually it does. How many hypersonic glide vehicles are entering service in the US right now?

    Yars is level MMIII and Bulava is weaker compared to Trident II.

    You compare throw weights and thinks that means anything?

    An Apple Mac Book Air is small and light... my Amiga 500 is probably heavier than it is... does that make my old Amiga 500 computer better than an Apple?

    Please tell me you are having a giggle...

    There is no mythical technological advantage over the US.

    No, there is a factual... these are brand new and they are now in service advantage over the US which still has the same crap it had in the 1980s in service...

    GBI is successful clown Trident is better than Bulava clown SM3 better than S-500, I'm done with this garbage, finally I understood that to not see arrow trolling is putting him as a foe.Done. Good luck "debating" him. 7 years of trolling

    GBI is making some companies very very rich, and in US terms that is success, Trident is very ordinary these days, and SM3 is based on ships which makes them all dead in WWIII...

    Patience is a virtue.

    Trident II has a better range and better throw weight than Bulava. It can carry more powerful MIRV as well as missile defense systems penetrator.

    Says who? The US is not known for its missile defence penetrator systems, while the Russians have made several of theirs public...

    Yars weighs 50 tons and has a thor weight like MM III from the 70s. MM III weighs 36tons. It means it has more efficient fuel etc.Where is the mythical advantage of Russian strategic missiles?

    Well funny thing... START II limited missiles to a single nuclear warhead, and the Minuteman III was modified to meet that requirement, so the 9,000km range is because it has one warhead... compared with Yars having 6 warheads and 11,000km range... yeah Americans are so much better than the Russians at rocket technology... boy does it show... except the only thing the Americans are better at is bullshit... sorry sales and marketing...

    The USA lacks in hypersonic and missile technology, because since 9/11 USA focused at "war on terror".

    They are also behind on anti stealth technology and also penetrating air defence systems... from aircraft through to ballistic missiles...
    dino00
    dino00

    Posts : 1220
    Points : 1261
    Join date : 2012-10-12
    Age : 32
    Location : portugal

    Russian Strategic Nuclear Forces (Nuclear Triad-Warheads) - Page 7 Empty Re: Russian Strategic Nuclear Forces (Nuclear Triad-Warheads)

    Post  dino00 on Wed Dec 11, 2019 10:07 am

    GarryB " patience is a virtue"

    Very Happy At least in the internet you are by far the most patient person I ever saw.
    It's funny that the troll don't compare air defense systems, or what those bombers will launch.
    GarryB
    GarryB

    Posts : 24481
    Points : 25023
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    Russian Strategic Nuclear Forces (Nuclear Triad-Warheads) - Page 7 Empty Nuclear triad

    Post  GarryB on Wed Dec 11, 2019 11:36 pm

    The West relies on repeating bullshit till everyone gives in and accepts it as being true.... and I don't agree with being that stupid.

    The west does not have to become perfect for me to change my mind about it... but it does need to stop telling lies about countries that are not its enemies and stop supporting countries that are its enemies like Saudi Arabia and Israel... who are perfect examples of the opposite of western politics and morality...
    franco
    franco

    Posts : 3341
    Points : 3373
    Join date : 2010-08-18

    Russian Strategic Nuclear Forces (Nuclear Triad-Warheads) - Page 7 Empty Re: Russian Strategic Nuclear Forces (Nuclear Triad-Warheads)

    Post  franco on Sat Apr 04, 2020 11:49 pm


    New START data as of 1 March 2020

    The U.S. State Department released aggregate New START numbers from the 1 March 2020 data exchange. Russia declared 1326 deployed warheads, 485 deployed launchers, and 754 total launchers. In September 2019 the numbers were 1426, 513, and 757 respectively.

    The drop in the number of deployed warheads is quite notable (although not unprecedented), but all it would take is standing down one R-36M2 regiment. Given the change in the number of deployed launcher, it appears that quite a few Topol ICBMs have been withdrawn from service as well.

    The U.S. numbers in March 2020 were 1373 warheads, 655 deployed and 800 total launchers (1376, 668, and 800 in September 2019).

    Speaking of New START, a few days earlier Russia and the United States agreed to postpone their inspections and the BCC session because of the COVID-19 crisis. They did manage to conduct 2 inspections each since February 5, 2020 (out of the annual quota of 18).

    Sponsored content

    Russian Strategic Nuclear Forces (Nuclear Triad-Warheads) - Page 7 Empty Re: Russian Strategic Nuclear Forces (Nuclear Triad-Warheads)

    Post  Sponsored content


      Current date/time is Mon Jun 01, 2020 4:56 pm