Current and future size of American & Russian nuclear arsenals

[F-15 Eagle]

I see the U.S. and Russia are talking about reducing their current arsenals to between 1500 to 1675 deployed warheads and between 500-1100 delivery vehicles. Russia is already down to 800 delivery vehicles such as missiles and submarine launched missiles. The U.S. is likely to go for 1675 warheads on 1100 vehicles.

So the question is, how much farther will these nuclear reductions continue? Could this be the last of the nuclear arms reduction treaties or will they keep on reducing until none if left? What is and what will be the minimum number of nukes required for an effective nuclear deterrence for both the U.S. and Russia? Will there always be a necessary nuclear deterrence?

 

[F-15 Eagle]

I just added a multiple choice poll.

 

[Wall83]

I think the russians want to keep downsizing alot more.
When all Topol, SS-18, SS-19 ICBMs have been scrapped they wont have more then a maximum of 200-250 landbased missiles left. Then add all the SLBMs from possible future Borei submarines (~130) they will in total have about 350-370 missiles.

 

[Ananda]

US & Russia will maintain "relatively" large nuclear arsenal. In the sense if there are reductions from everybody else, in percentage they will maintain their domminance on nuclear arsenal. Afterall nuclear arsenal make up most of those two nations weight in this world.

 

[Wall83]

Also Russia is very dependend on its nuclear arsenal this days when all other convential equipmet are rusting away.

 

[localhost127]

with possible upcoming/global nuclear fuel shortages, i would imagine much of the decommissioned missiles be turned into fuel for civilian reactors?

 

[F-15 Eagle]

I think 1500-1675 warheads on 500-1100 delivery vehicles should be the absolute minimum. They should not go any lower. They should retain a nuclear over-kill capability IMO.

 

[dragonfire]

Now that Obama has been "pre-awarded" a Nobel Prize for Peace it will have some effect on overall reduction efforts of nuclear arsenal. However all said and done i dont see any way the US having lesser weapons or delivery vehicles than any other country. But the numbers will come down from current stocks without affecting detterance requirements, if they can bring it down to the levels of UK, France and China, then that itself will be a major achievement

 

[rajeswari]

Also Russia is very dependend on its nuclear arsenal this days when all other convential equipmet are rusting away.

I agree. Given the state of conventional capabilities, there is a reinforced emphasis on strategic weapons. This is unlikely to reduce in the near future. The threat that Russia faces is not from the US, but may come from China, which is strngthening capabilities across the board, including in the nuclear arena. China, not being bound by any arms control mechanism, is likely to augment their capabilities significantly in the years to come.

 

[F-15 Eagle]

I agree. Given the state of conventional capabilities, there is a reinforced emphasis on strategic weapons. This is unlikely to reduce in the near future. The threat that Russia faces is not from the US, but may come from China, which is strngthening capabilities across the board, including in the nuclear arena. China, not being bound by any arms control mechanism, is likely to augment their capabilities significantly in the years to come.

Plus with Russia building more missiles and America looking into building a new ballistic missile submarine, I doubt it will go below 1500-1675 deployed warheads.

Now that Obama has been "pre-awarded" a Nobel Prize for Peace it will have some effect on overall reduction efforts of nuclear arsenal. However all said and done i dont see any way the US having lesser weapons or delivery vehicles than any other country. But the numbers will come down from current stocks without affecting detterance requirements, if they can bring it down to the levels of UK, France and China, then that itself will be a major achievement

Apart from the Nobel Prize for obama being a utter joke, I don't think the arsenals of the U.S. and Russia will go down any farther. Since Russia relies on their nuclear arsenal.

 

[Feanor]

The Russian arsenal will continue shrinking for at least a few more years. Then it will probably start to grow again, slowly.

 

[F-15 Eagle]

The Russian arsenal will continue shrinking for at least a few more years. Then it will probably start to grow again, slowly.

Thats what I'm thinking. Right now its 2800 deployed warheads for Russia and 2200 for the U.S. So if it goes to 1500-1675 it could stay that way for a few years than go back up again for both nations.

 

[Feanor]

I don't think it will drop that low. We'll see I suppose. Current plans call for effectively regenerating up 80% of the nuclear arsenal by 2015. Or in other words by 2015 80% of the nuclear arsenal will be new weapons, rather then ones with extended lifetime.

 

[localhost127]

I don't think it will drop that low. We'll see I suppose. Current plans call for effectively regenerating up 80% of the nuclear arsenal by 2015. Or in other words by 2015 80% of the nuclear arsenal will be new weapons, rather then ones with extended lifetime.

regarding testing new nuclear weapons (replacements) - --all testing will be done with computer simulation, correct? e.g. there won't be any more live tests with current treaties? or is this incorrect.

 

[F-15 Eagle]

I don't think it will drop that low. We'll see I suppose. Current plans call for effectively regenerating up 80% of the nuclear arsenal by 2015. Or in other words by 2015 80% of the nuclear arsenal will be new weapons, rather then ones with extended lifetime.

Hopefully they can get the funding passed for the new warheads.

regarding testing new nuclear weapons (replacements) - --all testing will be done with computer simulation, correct? e.g. there won't be any more live tests with current treaties? or is this incorrect.

No your correct, it will be computer tested. I can't see anyone testing them for real without a huge uproar.

 

[Feanor]

The capability is still retained. I doubt it will actually be done.

 

[SkolZkiy]

It is done not only on computers but fully until the "boom" phase.
Don't forget that RS-24 Yars is ready - 6 or more warheads. It will replace SS-19.
To replace SS-18 it was announced another HEAVY (relatively heavy - something like 100-120 tonn) ICBM.
from this year mobile Topol-M was cancelled, next year may be without any new missiles of this class. But in 2011 it will be mobile version of RS-24.
Also may be a new railway complex with something not so heavy as was SS-24 Scalpel (120 tonn)

So I want to say also that if China India Pakistan and others increase their arsenal then US and RF would have to reconfig their twoside relation in this field

Also don't forget about Russian TACTICAL nukes - which are not counted =)

 

[Feanor]

From what I understand the RS-24 will be part of the 30 missiles promised this year. And secondly... do you have a source for the railway complex? I've heard nothing about that.

 

[SkolZkiy]

No source, it's again just forum info.
By the way - newssights began to take such info also from forums but then wrote "from the sources inside MOD/production/or something else"

 

[Feanor]

What I suspect happened in that sort of situation is that they get the info from a forum, and then find some way to confirm it. At least if we're talking about relatively major news outlets.