Russian Strategic Nuclear Forces (Nuclear Triad-Warheads)

The last really useful tests were needed to make some observations that computers back then couldn't simulate.

Any computer model is only as good as the information and model it uses... it will perfectly model the facts and reality of the model, but does that model reflect the real world or is it just a model?

Over the years new technology and materials might effect how these things actually work.

One US test in the Marshal Islands they tested a bomb that was massively more powerful than they expected and calculated and a lot of people that were not moved out of harms way because they thought would be safe got a good dose of radiation and the only time they had seen what they thought was snow... it was ash.

New tests with real weapons would be useful to update the models and compare the results with computer models to see if the models do in fact match reality.

Only way to tell is to do real tests and then computer model the tests and look at both sets of results.

A good opportunity to test old stocks to make sure they still work and also some new designs that were all theoretically based using computer models to see if they perform as expected.

I would disagree that the nuclear warheads in Russian nukes are the same as 40 years ago... new requirements for small compact but still powerful warheads means different design solutions and of course for new doomsday weapons an overly powerful weapon would be useful for putting on the Poseidon drone.

Previous restrictions on nuclear warhead design was... will it be air droppable, can it fit into an aircraft bomb bay, will it fit on a reentry vehicle warhead on the end of a missile, will it fit inside the shell case of a 152mm artillery shell.

Well current questions are, how many can we pack into a SLBM or an ICBM or a long range cruise missile, but also how much raw power can we fit into a super sized torpedo called Poseidon and perhaps how many small nukes can we fit into thunderbird for it to deliver on its travels.

New technology and new materials and new ideas might make some things that were not possible before possible now, but how do you check they actually work?

BTW it wasn't that long ago that the Americans were talking about lifting the ban because they wanted dedicated penetrating bunker buster munitions and realised the only reliably way to achieve the effect they wanted (ie create an earthquake to collapse tunnels and bunkers over a large area) was with nuclear warheads.

here is a good text for you...

RIA Novosti
11.02.2023;
08:00

"They can solve everything in a couple of minutes." Which country has the most nuclear missiles?


Demonstration of tests of the Sarmat strategic missile system. Archive photo

MOSCOW, February 11 - RIA Novosti. At the end of January, the doomsday clock was moved forward by ten seconds. Now they show 90 seconds to "nuclear midnight". All because of increased talk about the use of atomic weapons. Which countries are "keeping gunpowder dry" against the backdrop of a growing escalation - in the material of RIA Novosti.

League of Extraordinary Gentlemen
Now the nuclear club includes nine states, which are usually divided into old and new. The first include the five permanent members of the UN Security Council and the victors in World War II - the United States, Russia, Great Britain, France and China.
These countries managed to acquire retaliatory weapons before the adoption of a key document - the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons, which entered into force in 1970. Over time, 190 independent states joined it and still observe it.


Ministry of Defense of the Russian Federation
Launch of the intercontinental ballistic missile RS-24 "Yars"

Only five countries refused to do so: India, Israel, Pakistan, North Korea (North Korea initially supported the treaty, but then withdrew from it) and South Sudan. All of them, with the exception of the young African state, also acquired a non-peaceful atom.
At the same time, Tel Aviv has never officially recognized its existence.

Parity leaders

Russia and the United States are the only ones who officially possess a full-fledged nuclear triad: intercontinental ballistic missiles, strategic aircraft capable of delivering weapons of mass destruction strikes, and submarines with submarine-launched ballistic missiles.
Moscow and Washington, according to experts from the Stockholm Peace Research Institute (SIPRI), accounted for 90 percent of all stockpiles of nuclear weapons in the world by January 2022:

—
   deployed warheads: USA - 1744, Russia - 1588;
   —
   warheads in storage: Russia - 2889, USA - 1964;
   —
   the total number of warheads in service: Russia - 4477, USA - 3708;
   —
   the total number of warheads, taking into account those awaiting disposal: Russia - 5977, USA - 5428.


Photo: Tinker Air Force Base History Office
American B-52 strategic bomber with AGM-28 Hound Dog cruise missiles on board

Lagging behind and catching up

Third place is questionable. Previously, it was occupied by France - the exact number of charges in service with the Fifth Republic is unknown. According to President Emmanuel Macron, there are "less than 300". Paris has sea and air carriers, previously there was also a land component of the nuclear triad, but in 1996 it was decided to deactivate medium-range ballistic missiles. The process took two years.
There is also no exact data on Chinese nuclear weapons. SIPRI believes that Beijing managed to bypass Paris and make 350 warheads. At the same time, the Pentagon announced back in November 2021 that China managed to create a full-fledged nuclear triad.


AP Photo / Mark Schiefelbein
Chinese solid-propellant intercontinental ballistic missile "Dongfeng-41" at the parade in Beijing

They do not want to stop there - by 2035, the Celestial Empire can produce about one and a half thousand warheads, which will allow it to achieve parity with the United States and Russia.
The UK has more modest reserves:
*    120 deployed warheads;
*    another 60 are in storage;
*     in total, including those awaiting disposal - 225.

Pakistan has close capabilities with India - 165 and 160 warheads, respectively. According to SIPRI, Israel is armed with 90 warheads, while experts estimate the stocks of North Korea at 20 warheads.

Reasons for concern

The report of the American "Bulletin of Atomic Scientists" notes that the threat of a collision between nuclear powers is now more acute than ever - this is evidenced by both the hostilities near the Chernobyl and Zaporozhye nuclear power plants and "the degradation of the Strategic Arms Reduction Treaty (START III)" - the last nuclear détente agreement in force. It is it that ensures parity between Moscow and Washington and still remains in force. But there are difficulties.


Press Service of the Ministry of Defense of the Russian Federation
Strategic missile system with a mobile-based intercontinental ballistic missile PGRK "Yars"

In early February, Russian Ambassador to the United States Anatoly Antonov said that Moscow considered it inappropriate to invite American inspectors to verify compliance with the two countries' latest active nuclear defusing agreement. According to the diplomat, such a decision is the result of a hybrid war unleashed by the West against Russia.

The presence of US WMD in Europe, which is contrary to the NPT, does not help the de-escalation either. For example, 150 American B61 tactical thermonuclear aerial bombs are stored at bases in Germany, Belgium, the Netherlands, Italy and Turkey. Moreover, now they are being changed to the updated B62-12.

https://ria.ru/20230211/omu-1851253685.html

Nuclear test is long overdue

I just hope these morons will not be doing it on their own territory, it would defeat the whole point to say nothing of polluting their own country

PapaDragon wrote:
Nuclear test is long overdue

I just hope these morons will not be doing it on their own territory, it would defeat the whole point to say nothing of polluting their own country

Is there anywhere on the finish border and baltic state borders that is suitable? Also in kaliningrad ?

mnztr wrote:

PapaDragon wrote:
Nuclear test is long overdue

I just hope these morons will not be doing it on their own territory, it would defeat the whole point to say nothing of polluting their own country

Is there anywhere on the finish border and baltic state borders that is suitable? Also in kaliningrad ?

Too close, defeats the whole purpose

Central Atlantic or East Pacific

Wait for wind to be just right

Make sure it's steamed live

PapaDragon wrote:

mnztr wrote:

PapaDragon wrote:
Nuclear test is long overdue

I just hope these morons will not be doing it on their own territory, it would defeat the whole point to say nothing of polluting their own country

Is there anywhere on the finish border and baltic state borders that is suitable? Also in kaliningrad ?

Too close, defeats the whole purpose

Central Atlantic or East Pacific

Wait for wind to be just right

Make sure it's steamed live

It would be perfectly adequate to do underground tests. Announce it. Start drilling the tunnels. Give them lots of time to come to their senses. Open to negotiating a new security architecture based on mutual security, if not Europe will get repeated and regular reminders of the power of nuclear weapons.

No country would let foreign military test nukes on their territory, not even underground

On the border, in russian territory. Maybe 200m in.

I wanted to ask this question for quite some time, is there a Russian equivalent to the US W88 nuke warhead?

Apparently, the W88 packs a 475 kiloton yield while small enough to fit in mirved missiles, while similar-sized Russian warheads only have 100-150 yield.

So, is this just another NATzO propaganda? What are your thoughts?

PhSt wrote:I wanted to ask this question for quite some time, is there a Russian equivalent to the US W88 nuke warhead?

Apparently, the W88 packs a 475 kiloton yield while small enough to fit in mirved missiles, while similar-sized Russian warheads only have 100-150 yield.

So, is this just another NATzO propaganda? What are your thoughts?

I think the MIRV warheads of RS-24 Yars have a 300KT yield, so they are quite similar.

mnztr wrote:On the border, in russian territory. Maybe 200m in.

200 meters could make sense but only if it's above ground

Also, underground tests don't result in cool videos

PapaDragon wrote:

mnztr wrote:On the border, in russian territory. Maybe 200m in.

200 meters could make sense but only if it's above ground

Also, underground tests don't result in cool videos

Above ground is too damaging for the environment. You don't need videos when the ground is shaking.

mnztr wrote:

PapaDragon wrote:

mnztr wrote:On the border, in russian territory. Maybe 200m in.

200 meters could make sense but only if it's above ground

Also, underground tests don't result in cool videos

Above ground is too damaging for the environment. You don't need videos when the ground is shaking.

Of course it's damaging for the environment, that's why you make sure it's as far away from your territory as possible or at least close to enemies in order to share the fun

If you fire one off underground maybe couple of thousand people will notice, above ground everyone with internet will notice, even retarded ones who are the main target audience

Everyone had plenty of warning and this is the age of breaking old taboos so do it right or don't do it at all

PhSt wrote:I wanted to ask this question for quite some time, is there a Russian equivalent to the US W88 nuke warhead?

Apparently, the W88 packs a 475 kiloton yield while small enough to fit in mirved missiles, while similar-sized Russian warheads only have 100-150 yield.

So, is this just another NATzO propaganda? What are your thoughts?

Whats the big deal of making a more powerful thermonuclear warhead? Isn't it just a matter of adding a bit more tritium or deutrium? The amount of material that is actually fused in miniscule. So to go from 150 KT to 500KT is really not significant in terms of warhead size.