Hmmm....looks like the long range missle thing didn't work out so well...

[justoffal]

It brought out a new player...an unstoppable medium range ballistic asset that is accurate up to fifty yards, currently non interceptible and can pack up to 150 kilotons in conventional payload delivery. It can also carry tactical nukes. No wonder there has been some complaining about the decision.

The single response seems to have cooled off the idea of repeating that strategy.

Jo

 

[MarathonMike]

The Party of War wanted to get in it's last provocation before they are swept out of power. It worked just as they had hoped. It gave Putin the excuse to test fire a set of hypersonic missiles and threaten NATO allies as this new missile can easily reach most NATO nations.

 

[Litwin]

currently non interceptible and can pack up to 150 kilotons in conventional payload delivery.

1. who said it, got a link (not RT of ´cos )

2. how many of those the horde has ?

 

[Ringo]

 

[kyzr]

It looks like the Oreshnik woke up the EU.
Now they are improving their military capacities.

 

[CrusaderFrank]

The Party of War wanted to get in it's last provocation before they are swept out of power. It worked just as they had hoped. It gave Putin the excuse to test fire a set of hypersonic missiles and threaten NATO allies as this new missile can easily reach most NATO nations.

DNC Theme Song, picked by John Bolton and Dick Cheney

 

[Ringo]

It looks like the Oreshnik woke up the EU.
Now they are improving their military capacities.

Don't run from a sniper - you will die tired.

 

[kyzr]

Don't run from a sniper - you will die tired.

Both Russia and Ukraine are running out of "cannon fodder".
Lets hope peace breaks out soon.

Russia has 750,000 dead, and Ukraine probably around that many. Such a stupid loss of lives.

 

[Mushroom]

It brought out a new player...an unstoppable medium range ballistic asset that is accurate up to fifty yards, currently non interceptible and can pack up to 150 kilotons in conventional payload delivery. It can also carry tactical nukes. No wonder there has been some complaining about the decision.

The single response seems to have cooled off the idea of repeating that strategy.

Jo

It is very interceptable. Just not with anything that is in the theater.

And exactly how useful is an IRBM with conventional warheads? Name any time in history that conventional ballistic missiles really made a difference in warfare. Ultimately, they are an extremely expensive and resource-hungry method to deliver bombs. If Russia was as dominant as many seem to claim, they would be sending over T-160s with bombs and not resorting to ballistic missiles.

Oh, and you are way off of the payload. That is the payload of nuclear munitions, the payload of conventional munitions is less than a third of what you are claiming. Go ahead and do the math, it contains six clusters, each cluster having six 1,200 kg submunitions.

 

[AZrailwhale]

It is very interceptable. Just not with anything that is in the theater.

And exactly how useful is an IRBM with conventional warheads? Name any time in history that conventional ballistic missiles really made a difference in warfare. Ultimately, they are an extremely expensive and resource-hungry method to deliver bombs. If Russia was as dominant as many seem to claim, they would be sending over T-160s with bombs and not resorting to ballistic missiles.

Oh, and you are way off of the payload. That is the payload of nuclear munitions, the payload of conventional munitions is less than a third of what you are claiming. Go ahead and do the math, it contains six clusters, each cluster having six 1,200 kg submunitions.

So you are saying that the missile has a payload of sixty-nine thousand seven hundred and seventy-seven pounds? That's within three hundred pounds of the gross weight of an armed and fueled Minuteman III missile. From what is publicly available the entire payload is only 1,200 kilograms or to us non-metric folks, 1,935.48 pounds. That's just 200 kilograms more than a WWII V-1 missile. So if the "new" missile had six MIRVS, that's only two hundred kilograms each. Putin probably spent ten million dollars. that's DOLLARS, not rubles, to deliver the half the payload of a Vietnam era A-4 Skyhawk, or four hundred kilograms less than the payload of a modern Pucara light attack aircraft. For Russian equivalents, that's half the payload of a Su-25 Frogfoot. That's a bigger loss/benefit that the V-2 was for Hitler. The missile costs Putin more than any possible damage it could do without a nuclear payload AND the missile isn't even in production, it was a mule cobbled together from other, older missiles. As usual Putin is bluffing.

 

[Mushroom]

That's within three hundred pounds of the gross weight of an armed and fueled Minuteman III missile.

It is also an IRBM (at most, many think it is an MRBM), not an ICBM. That means that more of that weight can be dedicated to fuel do loft it up, and more dedicated to warheads.

As I have had to repeat to others, do not try and mix and match differing missiles. Such as an SRBM, MRBM, IRBM, or ICBM. Each of them are rather different, especially when it comes to weight,, fuel, and distance. Just as a sports car, SUV, and big rig are different in weight, fuel, and payload.

The Minuteman is a rather streamlined weapon, like the Trident II SLBM. And unlike what Russia has done, the US did play with the concept of conventional weapons on the Minuteman and Trident, but pretty much dismissed that decades ago. Because unless you are trying to launch nukes or chemical weapons, ballistic missiles are really not all that great of a weapon other than as a terror weapon.

 

[Zavulon]

It is also an IRBM (at most, many think it is an MRBM), not an ICBM. That means that more of that weight can be dedicated to fuel do loft it up, and more dedicated to warheads.

As I have had to repeat to others, do not try and mix and match differing missiles. Such as an SRBM, MRBM, IRBM, or ICBM. Each of them are rather different, especially when it comes to weight,, fuel, and distance. Just as a sports car, SUV, and big rig are different in weight, fuel, and payload.

The Minuteman is a rather streamlined weapon, like the Trident II SLBM. And unlike what Russia has done, the US did play with the concept of conventional weapons on the Minuteman and Trident, but pretty much dismissed that decades ago. Because unless you are trying to launch nukes or chemical weapons, ballistic missiles are really not all that great of a weapon other than as a terror weapon.

It mostly depends on how precise they are and how many conventional warheads they can bear. And from the practical point of view, conventional wiping out of all American Minuteman III silos by two or three IRBM regiments from, say, Cuba, which will cause only minor casualties among US military and no casualties at all among US civilians is not just more ethical, but also more practical than a, say, wiping them out with 500 or 1000 of nuclear warheads (which will cause death of from one to five millions of US civilians). I mean, there are both more chances for success coerction to mutually acceptable but Russia-prefered peace, and keeping NPT active and exclusive nuclear club as exclusive as it is now.

 

[Mushroom]

It mostly depends on how precise they are and how many conventional warheads they can bear. And from the practical point of view, conventional wiping out of all American Minuteman III silos by two or three IRBM regiments from, say, Cuba, which will cause only minor casualties among US military and no casualties at all among US civilians is not just more ethical, but also more practical than a, say, wiping them out with 500 or 1000 of nuclear warheads (which will cause death of from one to five millions of US civilians). I mean, there are both more chances for success coerction to mutually acceptable but Russia-prefered peace, and keeping NPT active and exclusive nuclear club as exclusive as it is now.

You are aware that ICBM silos are hardened and designed to survive nuclear blasts, right? And that there are over 450 such silos in the US?

And what do you think the reaction would be if the US suddenly saw hundreds of ballistic missiles heading to the central part of the US? Likely launch most of them immediately. As well as the over 200 SLBMs currently at sea at any one time.

What you propose is absolute lunacy. It would 100% trigger a nuclear exchange, and even if they hit the damage would be minimal.

What you say really is funny, because it is completely disconnected from reality. Especially as I can't see Cuba ever allowing their nation to be used in that way. They are no longer the "Russian Puppet" they were three decades ago, and they know what the US response would be even if such an attack was with conventional weapons from Cuba. Cuba would largely cease to exist as a nation.

In fact, to show how unlikely Cuba would be in supporting such an action, last year they arrested 17 "Russian Agents" that were working in Cuba trying to recruit their citizens to fight for Russia in Ukraine.

Cuban authorities said they had arrested 17 people on charges related to a ring of human traffickers that allegedly lured young Cuban men to serve in the Russian military amid the Ukraine conflict.
Cuba earlier this week revealed authorities were working to "neutralize and dismantle" the network, which it said operated both on Cuban soil and in Russia.

https://www.reuters.com/world/cuba-arrests-17-trafficking-young-men-fight-russia-ukraine-2023-09-08/

 

[Zavulon]

You are aware that ICBM silos are hardened and designed to survive nuclear blasts, right?

Yes. So were Yuzhmash shelters and deep factories. The keyword is "were".

And that there are over 450 such silos in the US?

Yes. And there are only 400 missiles in them.

And what do you think the reaction would be if the US suddenly saw hundreds of ballistic missiles heading to the central part of the US?

It depends when they saw it. And no, with 36 warheads on a missile we need only 18 missiles (two 9-launcler regiments) to have 648 warheads. Three regiments will make 972 warheads.

Likely launch most of them immediately.

The launch on warning procedure demands at least seven minutes, more realistic estimate (with detection, confirmation and actual launch) is at least 10 minutes. And this is without Russian sabotage on C3I system.

As well as the over 200 SLBMs currently at sea at any one time.

No. You have two or three SSBNs in Atlantic on duty at any given time, sometimes only one. And it makes from 20 to 72 obsolete and aging SLBMs. And this is even if we nothing do with them. In realistic scenario we can wipe out at least one of your SSBNs (especially if it is in the forward patroling area). And it decrease the number of your SLBMs in Atlantic to anemic number "from zero to 24 missiles".

What you propose is absolute lunacy. It would 100% trigger a nuclear exchange, and even if they hit the damage would be minimal.

After effective Russian counter-force strike that exchange will be pretty acceptable for Russia. May be Russia will lost few of cities and, may be, from one to twenty million of Russians, but the USA will cease to exist at all. Virtually total annihilation.

What you say really is funny, because it is completely disconnected from reality. Especially as I can't see Cuba ever allowing their nation to be used in that way.

They already allowed it in the past, and they may allow it in future.

They are no longer the "Russian Puppet" they were three decades ago, and they know what the US response would be even if such an attack was with conventional weapons from Cuba. Cuba would largely cease to exist as a nation.

Really? Do you think that Raul Castro is somehow stupidier than his father and can't play the escalation game?

 

[Mushroom]

You have two or three SSBNs in Atlantic on duty at any given time

And none of those deployed in other areas can reach Russia?

Not to mention that the Los Angeles class is generally believed to have on board nuclear armed Tomahawk missiles.

And what, you think these missiles are going to hit submarines? You really are delusional.

And come on, Raul Castro? You are aware he left office in 2018, right? And that when he was President, he was trying as hard as he could to normalize relations with the US, right?

 

[Deplorable Yankee]

The Party of War wanted to get in it's last provocation before they are swept out of power. It worked just as they had hoped. It gave Putin the excuse to test fire a set of hypersonic missiles and threaten NATO allies as this new missile can easily reach most NATO nations.

Russian TV

 

[luiza]

Both Russia and Ukraine are running out of "cannon fodder".
Lets hope peace breaks out soon.

Russia has 750,000 dead, and Ukraine probably around that many. Such a stupid loss of lives.

Such figure estimates are hopelessly Fake .
Russia until recently ran a deliberate defensive campaign with an artillery superiority of anything up to ten times the strength of the so called UAF .
They sat on higher ground and time after time mowed down the enemy .
Deaths / mutilations / injuries will be in around the same type of ratio . A simple ,easy and accurate calculation method historically .
Which in simple terms is why experts believe the equivalent figure of Russia lies in the 100 000 to 150 000 range and the Ukey comparable figure could now exceeed one million .

Recently ,with the UAF lacking fighters , equipment and ammunition ,the Russians have gone on the offensive and have been eating new territory very fast and their main problem is coping with the huge number of surrendering fighters .

Go for accuracy and not dream fulfillment

 

[Zavulon]

And none of those deployed in other areas can reach Russia?

1) You need Pacific SSBNs to continue at least "Minimal Deterrence" game with China and even with all of them it will be gambling. Chinamen are not warmongers, but if the part of your missiles are destroyed by the first Russian strike and all survived missiles wasted on Russia in your second strike and then Russian counter-value strike destroyed significant part of your infrastructure.... Ok, temptation will be really strong.
2) In practical terms Pacific SSBNs will demand days to nuke most important Russian cities and in all those days, if the war still continues, Russia will evacuate and shelter their cities and hunt those SSBNs (as well as the most important military targets located far away from American cities). And after few more days American negotiation position is worse.

Not to mention that the Los Angeles class is generally believed to have on board nuclear armed Tomahawk missiles.

No. It is not generally belived. Actually, it is generally belived that the USA don't have nuclear Tomahawk missiles at all. But even if they have, Tomahawks are obsolete and vulnerable. They won't be able to reach any more or less valueble and, therefore, well defended target.

And what, you think these missiles are going to hit submarines? You really are delusional.

No. I think that attacking submarines or say, auxiliary frigates (disguised as a fishermen in peace time) will attack them. Of course its gambling, but nuclear war is a gambling anyway. It might become our best chance and lesser evil.

And come on, Raul Castro? You are aware he left office in 2018, right? And that when he was President, he was trying as hard as he could to normalize relations with the US, right?

Of course Cubans want to normalize relationships with the USA. All adequate people want it. But they (and all adequate people) do want to do it from the position of strength, not weakness. If you negotiate with Americans from the position of strength (as Fidel did and Kim, Putin and Assad do) - you'll live long and happy life. If you do negotiate with Americans from position of weakness, as Saddam and Milosevich did - you are deadman.
And as the tensions in the world rise - Cubans may easily decide that it is much more safer for them to have Russian ballistic missiles than not to have them.

 

[Zavulon]

Russian TV


View attachment 1048711View attachment 1048712View attachment 1048713

Twenty four minutes from Chukotka is too long (at least without really good sabotage at US C3I systems or without vulnerability "Biden in loop") as for me. Cuba (or cargo ships) is much more reliable.
But everything else is just a common sense.

 

[Mushroom]

You need Pacific SSBNs to continue at least "Minimal Deterrence" game with China and even with all of them it will be gambling.

And once again, they have to be right off the coast of China in able to do that?

You know those missiles have a range of over 4,000 miles, right?