Project 885: Yasen class

GarryB wrote:

GArryB, how would an AS400 be able to shoot down an SLBM? These woudl be launched thousands of miles from Russia. I have serious doubts an AS400 could shoot down the warheads ...maybe they can I dunno. It has never been touted as a missile defence system.

Western SLBMs are ballistic weapons... they can make minor flight corrections to accurately hit a target but have no target evasion capacity.

.

Not only western. The mace is flying the same along a predictable trajectory

Very true, but US ABM systems are designed to stop one or two warheads at a time.... not 1,500 targets and perhaps 10,000 decoys.

Mace currently probably has a warhead that will manouver a tiny amount to ensure it is on target... not enough to make it hard or impossible to hit... but with the end of the new Start treaty and gradual production of Borei going to 10 boats or more then the 10 warhead capacity of Bulava wont be needed, so fitting larger payloads with manouvering warheads to penetrate defence systems and perhaps even destroy ABM defences becomes more attractive.

GarryB wrote:Very true, but US ABM systems are designed to stop one or two warheads at a time.... not 1,500 targets and perhaps 10,000 decoys.

Mace currently probably has a warhead that will manouver a tiny amount to ensure it is on target... not enough to make it hard or impossible to hit... but with the end of the new Start treaty and gradual production of Borei going to 10 boats or more then the 10 warhead capacity of Bulava wont be needed, so fitting larger payloads with manouvering warheads to penetrate defence systems and perhaps even destroy ABM defences becomes more attractive.

No one has an Air defense network meant to stop a mass saturation attack including Russia.

If that many nukes are fired at anyone, the country is going to become radioactive ash so trying to build for that is non-sense.

No one has an Air defense network meant to stop a mass saturation attack including Russia.

Air Defence Networks is what you build to defend against mass saturation attacks... countries or groups like HATO that don't expect the third world countries they fight to fight back don't bother building ADNs...

No one has an Air defense network meant to stop a mass saturation attack including Russia.

If that many nukes are fired at anyone, the country is going to become radioactive ash so trying to build for that is non-sense.

But your government think they can fight and win a nuclear war with Russia... why don't you?

Too stuck to facts and reality perhaps... get back to sleep and enjoy the American dream...

No, we don't lol, The US and Russia know if we start flinging nukes are each other both of us are dead.

I don't know where you got that impression but it's a silly one.

Russian AD cannot repel swarms of Nuclear Missiles, if you think that then you need to "wake up" and stop being such a fanboy.

No, we don't lol, The US and Russia know if we start flinging nukes are each other both of us are dead.

Yet you are spending billions on ABM systems directed at Russia...

I don't know where you got that impression but it's a silly one.

The people spending money on ABM systems in Europe, Alaska and California, Japan, South Korea, and soon Greenland and the UK, not to mention plans for AEGIS cruisers of either US coast and in the Arctic ocean...

Russian AD cannot repel swarms of Nuclear Missiles, if you think that then you need to "wake up" and stop being such a fanboy.

The US ABM defence system started with 50 interceptors... how many does it have now?

What restrictions are there regarding the number of ABM interceptors?

In addition to the expanding system around moscow based on missiles that have been constantly tested and upgraded for 40-50 odd years they have new models like Nudol that could be sent to places like Murmansk and St Petersberg and Vladivostok, and not to mention their S-500 systems that are fully mobile... they have complete radar coverage of their own airspace and an aerospace defence force dedicated to track items... moving Nudol to near the border means its interceptions can be well out over international airspace or over the new HATO allies and neutrals so using nukes for interceptions is probably a good thing...

Right now I would agree that WWIII is futile suicide, but US withdrawal from the ABM treaty and the INF treaty and not interested in ratifying the new START treaty and moving ABM systems in to eastern europe has started and accelerated a similar process in Russia, so while the first systems will not do the job... over time they will get better and more numerous... computer upgrades and radar upgrades will expand their capacity to handle large numbers of targets and their space capabilities means improved ability to spot decoys... I think given more time they would be much more likely to be in the position most American politicians seem to think they are already in...

SeigSoloyvov wrote:Russian AD cannot repel swarms of Nuclear Missiles, if you think that then you need to "wake up" and stop being such a fanboy.

Just because your country is too dumb to do it does not mean that Russia will not be able to in the near future, say by 2035-2050 and your leaders give them little reason to consider peace as an option, I hope you enjoy being on the receiving end of the pentagon monkeys wet dream.

Also you seem to think your country has enough of its low yield firecrackers to wipe out Russia, this is downrite delutional!
Not to mention that unless you want to be a chinese colony you would need to split your arsenal 50/50 between Russia and China and before you say it NO prioritising Russia would not work as China is also developing an ABM network likely far more capable than yours.

Unless ofcourse in addition to being incharge of some operations in Syria and ex navy you are also privvy to the pentagons aerospace defence documents and know something I do not...... then again maybe I I'm Iosif Stalin.

Now that the INF treaty is essentially dead the US is likely to build up its forces around China... likely including developing new IRBMs... in the past China didn't really feel it needed much more than a token nuclear force to defend itself, but US escalation might make them rethink their policy which of course will make India want more nukes and therefore also Pakistan and I suspect both Japan and South Korea will want a nuclear missile capacity too...

The US doesn't project the idea of trust to me... Germany seems to be looking into getting its own nukes too as an option... if I was Japan or South Korea I would not trust the US to save me... and in the process risk escalating a local war into global suicide.

The UK and France and Israel are pretty much under the same umbrella are they not?

Why don't these three countries trust Uncle Sam?

Is it the speed at which all three countries have seen Uncle Sam throw countries under the bus in the past?