But you can't use an ICBM armed with nukes,that fly towards United States and later
recall it ? can you ? say.. opps, it was a training.
Actually you can... use their satellite network to send a self destruct code to destroy the warheads before they enter the atmosphere... but even then WTF are you talking about?
Russia doesn't need some sort of piss them off stick... sending hypersonic bombers towards the US would mean the US will launch its ICBMs and send instructions to its subs to launch SLBMs... why the hell would you want to then recall or disable your attack?
That sort of brinkmanship bullshit is how the world would end... only an idiot would consider that a useful feature.
As i told you a million of TIMES. before...
A hypersonic cruise missile or an hypersonic ICBM can't replace the roll of a Long range bomber.
Suggesting that an ICBM or hypersonic cruise missiles from moscow to america can do the same shows you have no clue at all , of the discussion. or simply incredibly ignorant.
Not only can an ICBM or a hypersonic cruise missile do a better job than a hypersonic bomber it can do it much cheaper.
A missile is a payload of maybe 10 tons and does not need to make a return journey. The cost of launching a missile and maybe testing one ever 3-5 years to make sure they still work is a fraction of the cost of maintaining a bomber fleet.
If we use the basketball game analogy ,and the ball is the missile,What you are proposing will be comparable to a long court shot across the entire basketball court . with the difference that it will have the entire opposite team ,blocking his shot ,so the ball will be stopped quickly ,and the probabilities on the accuracy are small.
Basketball is a rubbish game, and of little use in comparison to an air defence network, but which member of that opposing team is 10 metres tall and can stop a supersonic shot at goal?
IF Russia launch an ICBM from moscow to washington dc.. The US leadership will have easily 30 minutes or warning , and then Americans will be launching a retaliation strike before the missile hit.. and all us leaders will have plenty of time to hide.. and you can't abort the mission.
Who cares? First of all they wont have 30 minutes warning... with SLBMs it would be less than 5 minutes warning... and have you ever been in a big city before? How far can you move in city traffic in 30 minutes? Even assuming you get a warning within a second of a launch?
Unless the attack takes place during a meeting in a bunker of all the big officials a lot of those people wont make it.
see this? this is NOT a first nuclear strike at all.. Americans submarines in northen sea will be close to Russia. and will retaliate.. before the Russian ICBM hit US.
And the Russians don't have any SSBNs right...
What im saying is totally different.. to confuse your adversaries of your intentions..
Idiot.
The last thing you want to do at a time of high tension where WWIII is a real possibility is to confuse the US of your intentions... that is the dumbest thing you have said today.
The whole point of MAD is to make it clear that if they attack that the result will be their destruction too... anything less and you encourage them to attack.
A first nuclear strike of Russia in US, will have to come right next to American borders.
but since American borders to east coast is the atlantic sea.. then it will have to be a plane.
Or an SSBN.
it could be done by warships ,but as soon they show up near US they will have many warships
between the Russian warships and US coast.. But planes are different.. they can fly fast and position very fast in any place,and they can fly under the radars and evade radars.. see?
No Vann they can't. If they fly low then they are basically subsonic or very very short ranged...
So with a Hypersonic Mesosphere Bomber..that americans combat planes can't intercept , Russia can take a routine of every 3 days a week flying across the entire US eastern coast.. armed with nukes to the teeth.. and Russia will say is just a "training flight" you have nothing to be worry americans.. and the plane is even empty inside.. no armed with nukes.
And within a month russia will be importing oil to fuel the aircraft...
and the Russian intelligence manage to locate the positions of the top leadership ,in real time..
and it happens that they are not in bunkers but in a conference in the open.. So if Russia understand that war can't be avoided ..and that americans are withing weeks to attack Russia.
There are rules regarding leadership in any country where the entire leadership of a country and its backup are never present in the same place at the same time... do you think the vice president of the US will just say... OK you killed trump... fair enough we surrender?
Or do you think they will launch a full scale attack on Russia?
then a mesosphere Bomber will allow Russia to Strike FIRST without warning... and decapitate the leadership of any nation..and allow the plane to return unharmed. with a super slow plane like Pak-Da it will not hide forever from american radars.. and as soon detected on radars ,
We have been over this 1,000 times a super fast bomber is NOT faster than an ICBM... if they can see ICBMs coming they will see hypersonic bombers coming... whether it is an ICBM or a bomber approaching their airspace they will activate their defence forces and try to intercept... whether they actually do or not is not important because their ICBMs and SLBMs will get launch codes...
the americans will send F-22 and put the Bomber on cross hairs. threatening to shot down the plane if he launch a missile to its nation.. that is what a peaceful interception is..
PAK DA will not get within 3000km of the US so the F-22 wont be a problem.
With a mesosphere bomber ,Russia can do a first strike decapitation strike ,on any nation leadership ,take them by surprise and the bomber escape unharmed.
NO. The bomber alone does not make that possible. You need accurate information about the enemy government too... Saddam pretty much proved the whole idea of a first strike to decapitate a government using bombers is bullshit.
but a Pak-da can't do that..
Nothing can do that... look up the wiki page for the XB-70 and one of its roles was going to be taking out mobile ICBMs... something the B-1B and then B-2 were also supposed to be able to do but never had a chance.
So PAK-DA will be TOTALLY USELESS ...!!!!!! if the americans intercept the planes and position themselves behind ,warning them ,that if they fire a missile the planes will be shot down. see the difference? Pak-da is not a deterrence any more than B2.
PAK DA is not supposed to start WWIII. It is supposed to present the US with the view that if they start a war with Russia that the PAK DA will irradiate the US...
A hypersonic bomber is totally useless... it will prevent war by bankrupting Russia before it could ever possibly be used.
So RUssia needs a bomber that can allow them to be very close to US capital .
and that can't be intercepted . drop a missile and escape unharmed. and so far
a mesosphere bomber is the only thing can do it..
Bullshit.
That would never work as they would see that bomber coming as soon as it took off and in the hour it would take to get to being near the US coast they could shift everyone that might be worth killing in a first strike.
If it flys low to evade radar then it will take 8 hours to get there...
IF Russia had 10x mesosphere bombers.. it could wipe out 10 aircraft carriers in a surprise attack too. Flying right above the US aircraft carriers and they with nothing they could do.
Really? Nothing they could do? Except for shoot down the weapon those bombers try to use to destroy those carriers...
So is not about Destruction power the discussion.. is about taking by surprise your enemies.
Launching an ICBM from moscow will not take by surprise anyone.. the most idiotic thing i have heard ever. the
Russias nuclear arsenal is not about surprise... it is about retribution. It does not need to be secret... it just needs to work and not cost too much.
It will be similar as to deploying snipers in the second floor of a house across the street in your neighborhood. so they will have a very huge headstart on you and it will be a huge deterrence because you will see ,they are aligned for a close shot on you and you will not know which day will pull the trigger. A mesosphere Bomber is one of the ultimate deterrence that Russia can build , that will force Americans to a new treaty ,that will force americans to remove all their military bases and cruise missiles anywhere near RUssian borders.
The next super weapon to make peace the only option... except that the most likely US response apart from developing their own hypersonic bomber that could be based in Eastern Europe, would be a first strike before the Russian system is operational... There is no way the US will remove any of their military bases... they don't do that.
Again don't say an ICBM and a cruise missile fired from 10,000 km away is the same thing.
is total idiocy. If you have intentions to do a first strike ,it will have to do it as close as possible
to the target ,to keep the surprise.. so the enemies not alerted.
Why the fuck would Russia want a first strike capability against the US?
It was you Garry who was saying "Nobody" can't attack Russia because have nukes..
and Turkey did it.. Neutral You simply are really awfully bad in strategy and tactics..and don't
understand how Rules of Engagement ,Politics and public opinion, have a major role in how people do wars. In wars speed and taking by surprise your enemies can be the difference
between a quick victory or a major defeat.
Are you 12 years old?
Nobody has invaded or attacked Russia. Turkey shot down one Russian aircraft and has since apologised and now cooperates with Russia in the conflict in Syria. I am sure your response of an attack on the Turkish air Force to get immediate revenge against a member of NATO would have gone much better...
My point can be illustrated with a simple question..
if Russia have ICBMs in moscow that can reach any part of US.. then why Russia bother
flying with Old soviet bombers near US coast?. why Russia bother sending submarines near US Coast then? since they can reach US anyway from moscow no?
There are no fucking ICBMs near Moscow. They send bombers and SSBNs to the US coast because bomber crews and SSBN crews need training to make sure they know what they are doing and to look for places to hide to attack from. A missile does not need any training and can sit in a silo until it is needed. A hypersonic bomber would need billions of dollars in fuel for training per year.
one of them is Retaliation weapon.. and the other are for practice of first nuclear strike.. but they can't launch
Russia does not need a first strike weapon. They only need a weapon of retaliation. A subsonic flying wing PAK DA does the job without costing too much.
By the time Russian bombers get to the continental US there will be no F-22s.
with a high altitude near space bomber ,Russia will the opportunity a big chance to fly over the airspace of 98% of the countries in the world. and even in case of a war fly deep inside US territory unharmed , if combined with courter electronics. It will allow Russia a Big opportunity
to penetrate any part of US with a bomber.. because traditional combat planes can't intercept it..and only very expensive missiles ,like Thaad or S-500 could do it.. but US don't have many of them. Patriot missiles top altitude is about 30 km to 35km.. so anything higher will be safe from them..
The ABM system they are building has missiles with a range of over 1,500 miles that can intercept targets flying twice as fast as these mythical bombers you keep bleating about... Russia building hypersonic bombers will simply boost funding to the ABM system in the US potentially making it more effective and more of an issue for Russia.
BTW Russia already has things that fly over the airspace of every country on the planet.... they are called satellites... why not fit a bomb and a guidance system to a satellite used for weather mapping or something and park it over the US... when needed... oh no one of our satellites is falling and deorbit it over the US and boom... much cheaper, much easier.
You call me ignorant and wrong Vann but what you need to do is a little more reading... look up the history of the XB-70 Valkyrie bomber. It never went into production because in 1961 they knew SAMs would shoot it down. They knew if it could be seen it would be shot down... the solution was to fly low... and flying low means flying at maybe mach 1.2 at the very best... more likely subsonic for any realistic distance.
Why else do you think the subsonic cruise missile was invented... long range difficult to spot... accurate... deadly... subsonic.
Now look up the history of Tupolev... the Tu-22M was supposed to be a Mach 3 bomber, but Tupolev is no fool... he knew making it mach 3 would make it super expensive and unaffordable. After making the Tu-22 he knew he could not get funding and support for another bomber design so he called it Tu-22M... if you didn't know any better you might think it was like Sukhoi with their Su-7 and Su-17 with applying swing wings to improve performance, except that the Tu-22M is a totally different aircraft to the Tu-22.
At some stage I would love to see an experimental aircraft able to fly mach 8 or mach 10... that would be cool, but first missiles and then probably interceptors... and later heavier aircraft... simply because of the cost.
Missiles and perhaps interceptors will boost development and knowledge in the technology to the point where larger aircraft become viable.
Remember a hypersonic cruise missile does not need to be hypersonic all the way... look at the supersonic club... a hypersonic model could be a small subsonic turbojet engine with a straight wing and external fuel tanks for the first 4,000km at a steady climb to altitude and then drop the tanks and wings and convert to scramjet mode and climb and accelerate for the next 2-3 thousand kms... getting faster as it gets higher and lighter...
Home
Latest images
Register
Log in
But nothing is more expensive than losing a war with Americans or losing
You simply are really awfully bad in strategy and tactics..and don't
