Russia Defence Forum

Would you like to react to this message? Create an account in a few clicks or log in to continue.

Military Forum for Russian and Global Defence Issues


    Russia in case of war against US/NATO

    avatar
    Vann7

    Posts : 4582
    Points : 4686
    Join date : 2012-05-16

    Russia in case of war against US/NATO Empty Russia in case of war against US/NATO

    Post  Vann7 on Mon Apr 13, 2020 9:03 am

    Russia major weakness of its military by far.. is the lack of power projection..   this is a real issue..
    in a real war with US , it will have no easy way to fly to the atlantic and to the eastern coast of US and take a major offensive operation. something that NATO can do from plenty of places.. in eastern europe and norway ,sweeden too..

    So the only weapons that Russia can use are nuclear submarines that manage to sneak into atlantic ocean undetected, but they are next to useless for a conventional war.. since russia don't have enough attack submarines that can reach the atlantic.. and do it at the right time.. so NATO closes allies and Anglo powers  in case of war ,will hit all russian strategic and long range airforce before it can reach the atlantic..  they can fly to atlantic sea  through the artic.. but they will face thousands of planes,drones targeting them..

    Russia need to invest more in a powerful airforce ,than a powerful navy.. make flying submarines and call them
    bombers..  and that are stealth and fly at very high altitudes.. something like a mini space shuttle bomber ,
    dozens of them.. that can fire a ton of bombs and hypersonic.. this is what Russia needs ,to become a real
    offensive power.. instead of a defensive one...  because is a major war with NATO start.. Russia fight will be limited to europe ,middle east and zones close to russia main land..  

    Russia needs to prepare for dominating space , with high altitude space bombers.. that can easily bypass the entire NATO airforces ..that will force them to develop space plane interceptors  and build a lot of them..

    in case of a world war 3..Putin weakness will not allow him to take advantage of its powerful weapons ,
    and will limit its fight to defense and regional targets only.. near rusia and europe. have the stomach to use its big nuclear weapons against US mainland..  by having a powerful space force bombers.. Russia could have at hand the option to use its tactical weapons , including hypersonic conventional or nuclear.. , on US main land
    in case a major war start..

    in other words.. the limitations of projection of power that Russia face.. for putin to scale the war ..
    from from 1,2-3  as if was in the fight in syria.. to number 10.. by using bulavas and sarmats missiles..
    Russia needs tactical and strategic near space airforce power projection  , that is fast and highly mobile ,and deploy withing 1-3 hours near US coast..  submarines will take a month ,to reach the US eastern coast from Russia.. and such level of response will be too late... yet they can fire a sarmat withing seconds from russia.
    but the problem remains the same..

    1)-Russia is very good in small scale regional conflicts like syria
    2)-Russia is very weak in intermediate power projection.. lets striking at US main land with conventional or small tactical nukes.. at miltary positions
    3)Russia is very strong in full scale total destruction..

    So because of this weakness in #2.. the end result is that in order to retaliate ..at US ,they will need to scale very fast.. the war ..from zero to ten in a small time.. this limit significatively Russia capabilities to impose its
    will in a war. and defend its interest.. in .small scale conflict or an intermediate one.. as we saw in syria vs turkey.. and vs israel.. Russia is not dominating completely.. and the end result is .. if Russia victory is a very limited one ,and will always fail ,at imposing its will ,in any conflict for ending it.. so even when "win.".
    it will lose. and conflicts will not be solved.. ever.. as it is the conflict in syria ,ukraine and many others that will happen.. and NATO will start..  

    if russia had a real powerful airforce ,it could shut down hundreds of NATO planes from near space orbit altitude, easily destroy nato satelites and reach with total impunity the atlantic ,and reach US aircraft carriers formations..
    as it is now.. Russian submarines is the only thing Russia have to bypass NATO superior airforce formations .
    that is sneaking secretly into the atlantic.. but this is an obsolete policy ..because once russia fire a missile .the position of their subs will be known and wawrships will be sent to the area..

    all that said.. US is way better prepared to fight Russia in a medium scale conventional war.. or a very limited
    tactical nuclear one.. and Putin options vs US and major nato allies will be either .

    1) accept an humiliating cease of fire.. with US losing warships and planes.. but Russia suffering 10x times more .. suffering the worse part..  
    2)escalate the conflict to a total nuclear war.. where russia will hit harder.. but will not achieve a victory either..
    since nobody will win in a full scale nuclear war.. every one will be destroyed .

    So Russia needs to change dramatically their tactics.. all those surface warships ,im not convinced on them..
    versus the $$cost /performance they offer.. is too expensive with so little power..  just 10x  su-34 ,could achieve the same damage results of one russian frigate.. if not higher.. Russia best frigate only fire 32 missiles..
    something that israel airforce can do to syria with 6x cheap f-16s.. and if one of them is shotdown..then it will
    be not much lose.. and only 2 pilots killed.. contrary to a warship ,that if sink you lose near a hundred of sailors. No

    Russia needs to build a space force , with high altitude bombers .if wants to have a real deterrence force ,
    that can easily bypass nato airforces..and nato navies.. in europe and in the atlantic.. so to send the few attack submarines ,that russia have to the atlantic in 3-4 weeks of of travel ,is not real deterrence force..
    in a wars timing ,speed and positioning is everything. having a powerful near space orbit stealth bomber force
    will do far more difference ,than a large surface navy.and more cost effective too..
    ahmedfire
    ahmedfire

    Posts : 1322
    Points : 1498
    Join date : 2010-11-11
    Location : The Land Of Pharaohs

    Russia in case of war against US/NATO Empty Re: Russia in case of war against US/NATO

    Post  ahmedfire on Mon Apr 13, 2020 12:57 pm

    Why Russia would launch a nuclear war if the NATO started a conventional war?

    NATO can't stand a massive hits from Russian conventional weapons ,hypersonic weapons from bombers , land and navy. Russian advantage over NATO in cannon artillery is 4:1, in long-range rocket artillery 16:1, in long-range air defense artillery 17:1 and in short-range air defense artillery the Russians outnumber NATO an astounding 24:1. NATO aircrafts can't fly freely over baltic countries , If Putin send the army into Baltic, they will fight inside a Russian (IADS) bubble that is one of the most formidable in the world.

    Isos
    Isos

    Posts : 5822
    Points : 5814
    Join date : 2015-11-06

    Russia in case of war against US/NATO Empty Re: Russia in case of war against US/NATO

    Post  Isos on Mon Apr 13, 2020 4:00 pm

    ahmedfire wrote:Why Russia would launch a nuclear war if the NATO started a conventional war?

    NATO can't stand a massive hits from Russian conventional weapons ,hypersonic weapons from bombers , land and navy. Russian advantage over NATO in cannon artillery is 4:1, in long-range rocket artillery 16:1, in long-range air defense artillery 17:1 and in short-range air defense artillery the Russians outnumber NATO an astounding 24:1. NATO aircrafts can't fly freely over baltic countries , If Putin send the army into Baltic, they will fight inside a Russian (IADS) bubble that is one of the most formidable in the world.


    Real in service numbers of hardware are not that high. Most of their hardware is in reserve. Russia can't stand alone against NATO conventionaly.

    Hypersonic missiles deceloped are mainly for their nuclear deterrance.
    Hole
    Hole

    Posts : 2998
    Points : 2998
    Join date : 2018-03-24
    Age : 44
    Location : Merkelland

    Russia in case of war against US/NATO Empty Re: Russia in case of war against US/NATO

    Post  Hole on Mon Apr 13, 2020 4:49 pm

    Wrong.
    The same is true for NATO numbers so the relation stays the same. And hypersonic weapons are there for conventional deterrence. No need for a nuclear warhead when your hypersonic missiles can destroy any ABM system or ship.
    ahmedfire
    ahmedfire

    Posts : 1322
    Points : 1498
    Join date : 2010-11-11
    Location : The Land Of Pharaohs

    Russia in case of war against US/NATO Empty Re: Russia in case of war against US/NATO

    Post  ahmedfire on Mon Apr 13, 2020 6:05 pm

    Isos wrote:
    ahmedfire wrote:Why Russia would launch a nuclear war if the NATO started a conventional war?

    NATO can't stand a massive hits from Russian conventional weapons ,hypersonic weapons from bombers , land and navy. Russian advantage over NATO in cannon artillery is 4:1, in long-range rocket artillery 16:1, in long-range air defense artillery 17:1 and in short-range air defense artillery the Russians outnumber NATO an astounding 24:1. NATO aircrafts can't fly freely over baltic countries , If Putin send the army into Baltic, they will fight inside a Russian (IADS) bubble that is one of the most formidable in the world.


    Real in service numbers of hardware are not that high. Most of their hardware is in reserve. Russia can't stand alone against NATO conventionaly.

    Hypersonic missiles deceloped are mainly for their nuclear deterrance.

    The numbers were published by US Rand association .

    NATO militaries have retooled to focus on stability operations and lighter forces that can be more easily deployed out of area to places as Afghanistan but Russia has retained a combined-arms force that ensure mobility and firepower and trains to conduct larger scale combined arms operations. This gives Russian forces an important advantage in conflicts between mechanized forces close to their border.

    If NATO need to achieve surface-to-surface Fires matching it should invest in an arsenal that includes longer range, hyper velocity munitions that can fly at low altitutes, engage moving targets and avoid return fire en route to its destination.
    Viktor
    Viktor

    Posts : 5812
    Points : 6447
    Join date : 2009-08-25
    Age : 39
    Location : Croatia

    Russia in case of war against US/NATO Empty Re: Russia in case of war against US/NATO

    Post  Viktor on Mon Apr 13, 2020 6:53 pm

    Vann7 wrote:Russia major weakness of its military by far.. is the lack of power projection..   this is a real issue..
    in a real war with US , it will have no easy way to fly to the atlantic and to the eastern coast of US and take a major offensive operation. something that NATO can do from plenty of places.. in eastern europe and norway ,sweeden too..

    Ability to turn any country on our planet in aches in a matter of minutes if anyone dares to defy its rightful moves is guaranteed deterrent and of any country only US has the means and all others are either allies or have even smaller power projection so thus US is kept in check. It can escalate and it risks so what will it do no one can know and Russia does not care. Russia needs to do what Russia needs to do and its doing it.

    What you are advocating is ability of Russian army that can conventionally guarantee ultimate blow in a conventional warfare in a matter of hours so no one could even think off doing something against their will and than proceed from that point on as to what might those weapons be and in what numbers. Well throughout history there where times where some country came close to it still it was challenged along the way all the time until its demise. Now we have US blinded with that same idea of world hegemon thinking it can put all others into submission with the power of its army. It has tried and it has failed. Now its situation is that with even its all McDonalds producing money and Silicon Valley and 700+bin $
    per year is still struggling to keep what it has without hope to reach finished job phrase and economy that is crumbling. Essencially it is where SU was with only forward as its choice of option so let them venture there unopposed we already know how will it end up to a point. Still Russia has marked its lines and China has and Iran and India and many other countries with in time more taking on the brave face and stood down for the interest of their own people.

    So at this moment as in any other moment in time no country had the ability to attain military power that could end conflict in a matter of now so war is a process that lasts and takes into consideration many different concepts and there is no wonder weapon that can nullify all which existed so far.
    PapaDragon
    PapaDragon

    Posts : 9269
    Points : 9351
    Join date : 2015-04-26
    Location : Fort Evil, Serbia

    Russia in case of war against US/NATO Empty Re: Russia in case of war against US/NATO

    Post  PapaDragon on Mon Apr 13, 2020 7:53 pm


    I saw this tread flagged in my feed and in my naivete I hoped we might actually have some fresh news about PAK-DA but instead it turned out to be just a side effect of yet another one of Vann's retarded ramblings...
    George1
    George1

    Posts : 14779
    Points : 15278
    Join date : 2011-12-22
    Location : Greece

    Russia in case of war against US/NATO Empty Re: Russia in case of war against US/NATO

    Post  George1 on Mon Apr 13, 2020 9:14 pm

    PapaDragon wrote:
    I saw this tread flagged in my feed and in my naivete I hoped we might actually have some fresh news about PAK-DA but instead it turned out to be just a side effect of yet another one of Vann's retarded ramblings...

    fixed thumbsup
    GarryB
    GarryB

    Posts : 25390
    Points : 25936
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    Russia in case of war against US/NATO Empty Re: Russia in case of war against US/NATO

    Post  GarryB on Tue Apr 14, 2020 9:17 am

    There is no point in Russia planning or preparing to fight HATO in a conventional conflict... such a financial cost would cripple them economically and force them to remain behind, despite their clever use of resources and military spending... no other country spends less and gets as much bang for buck... and in fact many countries who spend more don't get as much value for money as Russia does.

    The point is that any conventional war would quickly spiral into a nuclear conflict and in that regard they are much better off than any other country on the planet.

    It is this nuclear supremacy that will prevent any conventional conflict from spiralling out of control.

    The introduction of hypersonic missiles will actually be ground breaking because conventional warheads can be used for what previously required nuclear weapons to achieve so in terms of conventional potency they will step up above everyone else.

    More fundamentally there is no reason for Russia to have conventional military power except for self defence in situations that don't warrant nukes... Russia does not need to take more land or occupy any countries... Russia already has plenty of land.

    The main uses it would have for military power would be self defence, which essentially would equate to destroying threats. Nukes destroy threats much more quickly and efficiently than any conventional force available currently, though striking countries seats of government, HQs, comms centres, and major military installations with hypersonic missiles would be a very useful thing for them.

    Sponsored content

    Russia in case of war against US/NATO Empty Re: Russia in case of war against US/NATO

    Post  Sponsored content


      Current date/time is Thu Aug 13, 2020 9:35 pm