- Thread Starter Thread Starter
- #21
The Kinzhal is an aero-ballistic missile. Are you implying the submarines would be destroyed in base? Also, I'm a little confused on the scenario where the UK is nuking Russia but nobody else is...
Russia's New Strategic Arsenal
- Thread starter Feanor
- Start date
Feanor is being too kind to you.
This post does not add any meaningful contribution to the strategic debate between nuclear powers, this is fantasy fear mongering end of world bs.
- Thread Starter Thread Starter
- #23
Ok so you have a scenario where Russia attacks the UK suddenly, with 0 advance notice, leading to two of the 3 SLBM subs being in base, and getting knocked out by airlaunched BMs. But the only retaliation comes, in nuclear form, from the UK and the UK alone. Nevermind that the only carriers for the RS-74 are MiG-31s, and none are based within striking distance of the UK (instead they are based in South MD, within striking range of areas where Russia is actually likely to be in a conflict in the near future). Nevermind that each MiG-31 only carries one missile, due to their huge size. Nevermind that the appearance of even a pair of MiG-31s carrying hypersonic BMs near the UK, with escorts, would immediately cause a response from the UK, and likely other NATO airforces in the region. Nevermind that the missiles carry a payload that isn't guaranteed to destroy the subs or even completely shutdown their ability to launch. Nevermind that even hitting the target isn't guaranteed, the missiles could well get intercepted. Nevermind that the mission itself is a suicide run for the MiG-31s and their escorts. The very scenario is preposterous. On the one hand relations between Russia and the UK have deteriorated to the point where Russia is carrying out a pre-emptive strike against the UK's strategic nuclear arsenal. On the other hand the UK is sitting around with its pants down, none of its European or trans-Atlantic allies are on high alert, or in any position to assist. And, assuming Russia knocks out two SLBM subs with a single lucky missile strike (it won't, but let's pretend) what makes you think the UK's response would be to immediately launch a nuclear strike against Russia, especially if literally nobody else is willing to back up that strike?
There is a massive geo-strategic infrastructure in place to reduce the chances of someone even being able to attempt a strike like this. And we haven't even begun to address the question of why Russia would attempt such a strike. The real world conditions for your proposed scenario don't exist. Russian technological and military capability isn't there either.
Silver Cat
New Member
Ok. We all know, that nobody wants nuclear war (or even limited conflict). There are no, and can not be any "realistic scenario" of a nuclear war. So, we need "unrealistic" one - a "perfect storm" of misinformation, stupidity, ignorance, incompetence, avarice and treason (as most of wars in the real world are started). We don't discuss about "reality", we discuss about possible scenario for Fedor Berezin's , Andy Farman's or Tom Clancy's book "The Windsors: The Last Blood"
So, once upon a time, in the Year of our Lord 2022, process of "deglobalisation" had been continued. Usage of dollar as weapon by political leaders significally decreased its importance as international money, caused a sort of global economical crisis. Everybody are searching for new possibilities, and ready for more and more risky steps.
Goals of sides: USA need to convert their military superiority over China into economical (by some sort of local conflic), but they need to prevent Russia joining the game on the China's side. They have not a carrot, so, they want to distract Russia by some sort of European war, and ready to use any good chance for it. But they, obviously do not want to join full-scale nuclear war against Russia.
EU: they need Russian resources, they are ready to join anybody in succesful "Drung nach Osten", but preffer peaceful trade. Also they need to punish the UK for Brexit to avoid futher fragmentation.
UK: economical war against EU is going to transform in local conflicts in Ireland and Scotland and deep economical crisis. They need a miracle and are ready for very risky games. They believe in their own propaganda about economical collapse in Russia and have no even a minimal understanding of the Russian (as well as EU and US), military and economical reality. Their goal - to crush "Putin's regime" (mostly by diplomatical and economical measures) and with the laurels of dragonslayers restore their leadership in the West world.
So, a small group of conspirators in the UK government (slightely pushed by Americans) decide to start the third season of "The Russian Poisoners" (first two were with Litvinenko and Skripals), but now with secret (as they think) biological weapon.
But something goes wrong: outbreak of plague had killed big part of Royal Family, big part of Parliament and thousands of ordinary citisens, but unproven blames of Russia were not succesful, and leaders of EU, USA and Russia knew, that it was not Russian weapon (even if it was artificially modificated strain of Kemerovo's fever), and demanded proper investigation. So, King Henry raised bets by the declaring war to Russia, waiting other NATO countries to join him in his crusade, and expecting anti-Putin coup or rebellion in Russia. He have only one Vanguard in the sea, two others are not ready (they are still repairing), his decision is not approved by the remains of the Parliament and the Government yet.
Meanwhile, Russia secretly transferred four MiG-31K in Kaliningrad region and ordered their hunting submarines to search Vanguard and keep ear on her.
Right before Harry's declaration of war, Putin had close conversations with USA and EU leaders suggesting them very simple choice: to join Brits in their stupidity and die, or to be neutral and live and may be even take part in the post-war restoration of the former UK.
The range of Kinjals is near two thousands cliks, so they can hit HMNB Clyde even from Russian airspace or from Baltic sea. Same way, Iskander-K and "Land Calibres" can do it from Kaliningrad's region.
Stage one: one pair of MiG-31K attack HMNB Clyde with two nukes, another pair hit buildings of MOD and HMG.
Vanguard launch her Tridents as quick as possible, right after launch of last mussile she sunk by Russian attack submarine. All her warheads intercepted by A-235.
Stage two: Vanguard is killed by Russian hunter submarine. Few Tu-22M3M with four X-47M2 each kill SAM sites and radars. Iskander-K and Land Calibers hit main military bases.
Stage three: Comrade Corbyn declare raisong of British Respublican Army to fight corrupted Windsors and their cronies. Russia support them and establish new Government.
Mod Edit: Warning issued. DefenceTalk is an international defence forum for the discussion of serious defence issues. It is NOT a place for discussion of fantasy, science fiction, or conspiracy scenarios. If someone desires to engage in such discussion, there are other venues to do so. Raise the quality of your engagement and read the Forum Rules before posting again. Continuing to bring up such fanciful scenarios which read like the synopsis of a B-grade (or worse) action/thriller movie plot will quickly led to sanctions.
-Preceptor
Last edited by a moderator:
Silver Cat
New Member
By the way, talking about Russian ABD.
Система С-300 справилась с гиперзвуковыми целями в ходе эксперимента
"Standing on the armament of the air defense units of Russia anti-aircraft missile system S-300V4 can successfully hit hypersonic and complex ballistic targets. The newly formed anti-aircraft missile brigade is armed with new long-range systems.
Система С-300 справилась с гиперзвуковыми целями в ходе эксперимента
"Standing on the armament of the air defense units of Russia anti-aircraft missile system S-300V4 can successfully hit hypersonic and complex ballistic targets. The newly formed anti-aircraft missile brigade is armed with new long-range systems.
- Thread Starter Thread Starter
- #26
I'm going to leave out the Tom Clancy nonsense, and reply to a few details of your post, because I feel that clarification might be helpful to other readers here. For you specifically, I strongly suggest you consider your audience in this conversation. As noted by @Preceptor above, this isn't the right forum for this nonsense.
But the bigger problem is with the MiG-31Ks out of Kaliningrad. Take a map, and consider whose airspace, and over what distances they would have to fly to hit targets in the UK. This applies to aircraft and missile. Also remember, the RS-74 isn't a hypersonic cruise missile that maintains engine burn throughout its flight. It's an airlaunched ballistic missile. To get maximum range you have to launch from a high altitude, from an aircraft already traveling at a considerable speed (there is likely not even enough space over Kaliningrad to perform the launch without straying into NATO airspace) making it much easier to detect and track. Additionally the missile loses speed as it gets closer to the target. To get maximum kinetic performance, and therefore increase the chances of penetrating enemy air defenses, the launch should be done closer to the target, allowing for maximum energy expended on speed and maneuvering (assuming we believe Russian government claims that the missile is both hypersonic and can maneuver, whatever "maneuver" even means at those speeds). The real travel path for Russian military aircraft flying near UK airspace is typically from the north, bending around Fennoscandia, and approaching from the north-east. Even so, it's not a great approach path. You fly along the coast of Norway for quite some time, allowing response units to be scrambled, and you're carrying a rare set of hypersonic BMs on an extremely rare dedicated MiG-31 variant.
Корабельный состав ВМФ РФ (боевые корабли основных классов) на 01.12.2019
On the Tu-22M3Ms... whether they will even be around in any serious quantities by 2022 is questionable. There's 1 right now, the prototype, undergoing trials. Maybe they will reach IOC by then on the first pair of aircraft? But who knows. The program could easily fail state trials or run into issues at the production stage. Even if everything goes smoothly, I doubt that we can expect them to be combat ready by then. Especially since you're also talking about adapting an experimental weapon system to them. This will probably happen eventually, but I suspect that we won't see it until considerably later. I also suspect that the MiG-31 was chosen for the carrier with good reason; it's the fastest fighter jet in the world. I suspect the RS-74 maintains its hypersonic speeds among other things by launching at a considerable speed to begin with. Otherwise such a scarce and dedicated platform makes little sense.
Please note; for the purpose of this discussion I'm assuming the RS-74 works as advertised.
The shape of the Russian nuke sub fleet is somewhere between mediocre and poor. Take a look at the chart from navy-korabel below. The Northern Fleet (NF) has 2 949A, 1 885, 2 945As, 1 971.1 and one antiquated 671RTMK currently in relatively combat ready status. How many of those can be spared, during a period of tensions, with a major war on the horizon, to chase down the UK's Vanguards? How successful will they be considering, the poor state of the AVMF? They have no modern maritime patrol aircraft, and their best airborne anti-submarine kit is only now crawling out of the late 80s with the Novella system mounted on a handful of Il-38s. Their chances of successfully locating even a single Vanguard aren't great.
But the bigger problem is with the MiG-31Ks out of Kaliningrad. Take a map, and consider whose airspace, and over what distances they would have to fly to hit targets in the UK. This applies to aircraft and missile. Also remember, the RS-74 isn't a hypersonic cruise missile that maintains engine burn throughout its flight. It's an airlaunched ballistic missile. To get maximum range you have to launch from a high altitude, from an aircraft already traveling at a considerable speed (there is likely not even enough space over Kaliningrad to perform the launch without straying into NATO airspace) making it much easier to detect and track. Additionally the missile loses speed as it gets closer to the target. To get maximum kinetic performance, and therefore increase the chances of penetrating enemy air defenses, the launch should be done closer to the target, allowing for maximum energy expended on speed and maneuvering (assuming we believe Russian government claims that the missile is both hypersonic and can maneuver, whatever "maneuver" even means at those speeds). The real travel path for Russian military aircraft flying near UK airspace is typically from the north, bending around Fennoscandia, and approaching from the north-east. Even so, it's not a great approach path. You fly along the coast of Norway for quite some time, allowing response units to be scrambled, and you're carrying a rare set of hypersonic BMs on an extremely rare dedicated MiG-31 variant.
Корабельный состав ВМФ РФ (боевые корабли основных классов) на 01.12.2019
See above vis-a-vis discussion of where they could/should launch from. Not to mention that you would need permission from a whole slew of nations to cross their airspace, unless of course you're willing to provoke them, and risk getting your missiles shot down. At the very least, the UK would have plenty of advance warning.
Iskander-K certainly can't hit the UK from Kaliningrad. "Land Kalibrs" as you put it are a scarce and mostly hypothetical weapon system. If we believe the US claims then a single unit (several launchers) exists in Center MD. If we believe Russia then it's literally a single launcher and it was only used to test the Club (export version of the Kalibr with reduced range). The TEL for them has been shown at arms expos in Russia and it's clearly visually distinct from the current Iskander TELs, i.e. they are likely not compatible, at least not without considerable upgrades. In principle Russia could accelerate their deployment by simply sticking them stationary in shipping containers (which could also theoretically be used on the 22160s), but so far this hasn't happened, and there's little to indicate that it will. Regular Kalibr missiles certainly can reach from the VMF bases in Kaliningrad region but again consider the flight path. And these are much slower cruise missiles, so to coordinate the timing you would have to launch them well in advance. This scenario essentially requires that a large number of European countries are not simply willing to stay out of Russia and the UK fighting a near-nuclear war, but essentially be complicit in allowing Russia to use their airspace to launch the attack, while stonewalling the UK on any information regarding advance warning of the attack. Even sillier is the focus on the tiny number of Kalibr missiles in the Baltic when the single 885 in the NF carries 40 of them, and can simply sail out to the North Sea to launch them (with the first 885M and two 22350s also already in the NF or about to be). Note the recurring pattern of where a hypothetical Russian attack could come from. Hint; not the Baltic.
Iskander-K can't reach the UK, not even close. It has a range of 500kms. Kalibr can reach but again consider the scenario, and where you could conceivably use them from against targets in the UK. It's also not clear what would be accomplished by doing this. A surgical strike that takes out British command and control and nuclear capability at least make some sort of sense (the scenario around it doesn't and the strike itself the way you describe it is silly). But what's the point of bombing a handful of bases with 100-200 Kalibr missiles? The UK has proudly declared war on Russia. Ok. Now what? Royal Marines landing in Murmansk? The Royal Navy sailing into the White Sea to do battle? What does "war" even mean here?
On the Tu-22M3Ms... whether they will even be around in any serious quantities by 2022 is questionable. There's 1 right now, the prototype, undergoing trials. Maybe they will reach IOC by then on the first pair of aircraft? But who knows. The program could easily fail state trials or run into issues at the production stage. Even if everything goes smoothly, I doubt that we can expect them to be combat ready by then. Especially since you're also talking about adapting an experimental weapon system to them. This will probably happen eventually, but I suspect that we won't see it until considerably later. I also suspect that the MiG-31 was chosen for the carrier with good reason; it's the fastest fighter jet in the world. I suspect the RS-74 maintains its hypersonic speeds among other things by launching at a considerable speed to begin with. Otherwise such a scarce and dedicated platform makes little sense.
Please note; for the purpose of this discussion I'm assuming the RS-74 works as advertised.
Silver Cat
New Member
As I already wrote in the disclaimer - there are no and can not be any "clever" scenario of a nuclear war. Sorry for any possible misunderstanding, but it was a mere illustration of role and place of ABD in a modern war.
Mod Edit: 1 more warning point issued for failure to heed advice given. Please stop defending this point with further unrealistic scenarios and the current round of warning points given will expire in 3 to 6 months. Many thanks.
Yes, chances are little, but Russians say "Popytka - ne pytka", aren't they?
Yes, but don't forget about Mod Edit: Text deleted as run of the mill flame-bait
If British admirals know position of their submarines - Russian ones know, too.
This forum provides a refuge to members for sane, logical and fact based discussions by all. For that to happen, we need to maintain forum hygiene to ensure we attract and retain members with the same goal. The above warning by the Mod Team serve to maintain hygiene in response to a request by other professionals
-OPSSG
It is much easier to get post-factum forgiving, than pre-factum permission, especially in such complicated situation.
They have nothing to shot down suddely launched high-attitude and hypersonic speed missiles.
1500 kl distance, 3 kl/s speed, 500 seconds between start and finish.
It's a matter of faith. Russian officials say that its range is only 480 kl, American experts say that it is certaintly much more.
Keywords: "believe Russia" and "was" (in time when INF-treaty was active).
To destroy them, of course. And to easier Mod Edit: Text deleted
First of all, it means restoring of two other Vanguards and additional nukes blasted over Russian cities. Then, it means pirating on Russian sea trade routes. And yes, it also means provocations at Russian borders (for example - in Estonia).
Yes, questionable, but possible.
Last edited by a moderator:
I somewhat doubt the validity of that article and would think that if anything the S400 would be given the capability rather than a system that has been superseded and now basically second line, if not already obsolete. The source you cite looks more like a fan boy site rather than a serious analytical site. I think a more authoritative source would be better. I will defer to @Feanor on whether or not it is a legitimate site.
- Thread Starter Thread Starter
- #29
I have no idea about the site, but there was an experiment conducted where an S-300V4 shot down (allegedly) a hypersonic target. With that in mind, please consider a few things; first this isn't the same S-300 that the Soviets used, it's the new V4, which went into production in 2013, second we don't know what munition was used for the intercept, it's entirely plausible that this was a test of a new missile, third this wasn't a training exercise against a realistic attack by a hypersonic inbound, it was an experiment conducted under narrow conditions, fourth the S-300V was always known for ABM capabilities against IRBMs and SRBMs and wouldn't you know, what hypersonic weapon does Russia actually have? The RS-74, an air-launched ballistic missile. With that in mind, if @Silver Cat is implying that Russian PVO SV brigades sporting the S-300V4 have a robust capability to deal with future hypersonic threats, I think he is mistaken.
- Thread Starter Thread Starter
- #30
Ok, this conversation sprouted from a discussion of the potential role that Russian strategic BMD has. Military planning typically, unless we have a massive failure, is grounded in reality, i.e. real scenarios and real threats. What's the purpose of presenting a completely unrealistic scenario? It doesn't illustrate anything. Nuclear ICBMs are so rare that only a handful of countries use them, so developing a massive BMD system to deal with them strongly implies that you're preparing to have to face one of those countries at least hypothetically.
What's your point? You think Russia would risk nuclear retalation, on the off chance that the handful of operational nuke subs will be able to hunt down the British Vanguard, against the efforts of a robust US and UK maritime patrol fleet? What are the odds that the Russian subs will remain undetected vs the odds that they will find the Vanguard?
That's a rather bold assertion. Are you claiming that Russian intelligence services have infiltrated the British military to the point where they can get near-real time information on the position of British nuclear subs?
In principle yes, except that neither one would be very easy, and again, consider that these are the UKs allies, not just a collection of bystanders.
It won't be that sudden. These things don't happen in a vacuum. You'll have the appearance of MiG-31s refitted for RS-74s in Kaliningrad, and the appearance of the RS-74s themselves as warning, at the very least.
Do you have any evidence to suggest that the 9M728 specifically has enough range to reach the UK from Kaliningrad?
Again even if we don't, and take the US side of the story, it still doesn't support you scenario. Stop cherry-picking and answer the entire argument provided.
Cruise missile strikes are devastating in the short term but they have to be followed up, and Russia has nothing to follow up with. Consider ODS, the number of cruise missiles launched, and what had to follow to actually defeat the Iraqis. The UK is a much more formidable adversary, and Russia has far fewer cruise missiles. Also, regular cruise missiles are much easier to down.
I don't understand why you think the UKs response would be nuclear, in a scenario where none of its allies are willing to back them up. Remember even a few nukes blasting over a few Russian cities would mean many nukes blasting over every UK city. Secondly restoring two Vanguards would take time.
So confronting Russia on land, near its borders, where Russia is the strongest. A wise course of action.
War is the continuation of politics by other means. What is the goal of the war here?
The entire scenario you have presented reads like a bad piece of political fiction. For some reason the UK declares war on Russia (the King no less!), but has no actual plan to go to war, and instead surrenders strategic initiative, allowing Russia to carry out a first strike. All of the European allies stand by and do nothing to warn the UK of the potential consequences, or of the impending Russian strike. Russia rebases highly visible and scarce strategic assets into a vulnerable enclave within striking range of the UK and nobody notices, all while the UK is technically at war with Russia (what's a satellite?
nevermind how the MiG-31s would get to Kaliningrad... subterranean tunnels built by reptilians, no doubt, to stay undetected). Then Russia carries out a nuclear first strike, against the UKs subs in dock, and military headquarters, while failing to track down the most credible threat, the one nuke sub out at sea, all on the hail mary that all of the UKs nukes will be aimed at Moscow and only Moscow (none at Murmansk or the NF bases up there that actually post a threat to the UK) and all of them are promptly intercepted. Russia then peppers UK bases with cruise missiles, while the UK prepares for a campaign of piracy and border provocations as a response to getting nuked. While the EU and US stay out of it. And this is why Russia is developing strategic BMD capabilities.
Do you really not see how ridiculous this is?
There's a further complicating factor in that the patrol bastion for the UK deterrent is very close to the French patrol box - so close that there has been at least one collision in the past. I'm wondering what happens when the French learn that Russian HK's have been scrambled and are en-route to or possible *via* their nuclear deterrent patrol area ?
Actually, no, I'm not, I know what they're going to do and it's not survivable. Well done, Russia is now fighting two nuclear powers, both of whom have modern nuclear sub forces with historically far better success in tracking Russian boats than vice versa.
As a scenario, it's uh..lacking in depth.
Actually, no, I'm not, I know what they're going to do and it's not survivable. Well done, Russia is now fighting two nuclear powers, both of whom have modern nuclear sub forces with historically far better success in tracking Russian boats than vice versa.
As a scenario, it's uh..lacking in depth.
Silver Cat
New Member
S Nastupayushim, Feanor!
Second - massive BMD, hypothetically, in future, can be used to stop or significally decrease retaliation strike from major nuclear power (like USA or China).
РК-55 / 3К12 Рельеф - SSC-X-4 SLINGSHOT | MilitaryRussia.Ru — отечественная военная техника (после 1945г.)
"ТТХ ракеты:
Длина ракеты со стартовым РДТТ - 8090 мм
Длина ТПК - 8390 мм
Размах крыла - 3300 мм
Диаметр ТПК - 650 мм
Диаметр фюзеляжа ракеты - 510 мм
Масса стартовая - ок. 1700 кг
Масса КР с ТПК - 2440 кг
Масса БЧ - до 200 кг
Дальность действия - 2600 км / 2900 км (максимальная, данные не потдверждены)
Скорость крейсерская - 0.7-0.9 М
Потолок крейсерский - около 200 м"
---------
And its maximal range was 2600/2900 clicks (really not confirmed in trusted open sources).
I have no doubts, that R-500 didn't violate INF-treaty while it was active (may be because of program limiters or something), but after USA had cancelled it - limiters (highly likely) were turned off.
Goal of the UK - to force Russia for capitulation and to restore theor leadership on Europe.
Goal of Russia - quickly eliminate a threat from at least one West European nuclear state, to keep hands free in the futher politic at West or East directions.
Really? Do you want to say, that there are such states as Ursia and Veishnoria (and they really ready to attack USA and Russia), or that a Zomby-apocalipsys is a real threat?
The same, as in shooting wooden/plastic/paper targets at a shooting range instead real enemy soldiers. People (including military) use games and models. A map is not the territory, and a map is useful because it is not the territory, but only its likeness.
Hypothetically, Russian BMD means that minor nuclear powers (UK, DPRK, Israil, India, may be - France and China) can not nor attack Russia independently, neither detter Russian attack independently. It make political situation much more simple and predictable.
Second - massive BMD, hypothetically, in future, can be used to stop or significally decrease retaliation strike from major nuclear power (like USA or China).
Who knows? In this scenario Russian Generals know, that British Generals prepare agressive war against Russia. They can send attacking submarine, or not send - Brits will attack. So, it is better to send.
In this scenario - yes. What is in reality - I dunno.
How loyal they will be, if they see, that the UK try to pull them into full scale nuclear war against their own interests?
Only if British intelligence do their job well. And it is a very questionable statement.
As far as I know (according words of Col. Donyushkin in 2013), 9M728 is an adaptation of S-10 "Granat", or reincarnation of RK-55 "Rel'yef" (SSC-X-4 "Slingshot")
РК-55 / 3К12 Рельеф - SSC-X-4 SLINGSHOT | MilitaryRussia.Ru — отечественная военная техника (после 1945г.)
"ТТХ ракеты:
Длина ракеты со стартовым РДТТ - 8090 мм
Длина ТПК - 8390 мм
Размах крыла - 3300 мм
Диаметр ТПК - 650 мм
Диаметр фюзеляжа ракеты - 510 мм
Масса стартовая - ок. 1700 кг
Масса КР с ТПК - 2440 кг
Масса БЧ - до 200 кг
Дальность действия - 2600 км / 2900 км (максимальная, данные не потдверждены)
Скорость крейсерская - 0.7-0.9 М
Потолок крейсерский - около 200 м"
---------
And its maximal range was 2600/2900 clicks (really not confirmed in trusted open sources).
I have no doubts, that R-500 didn't violate INF-treaty while it was active (may be because of program limiters or something), but after USA had cancelled it - limiters (highly likely) were turned off.
Ok. Lets take US side of the story. You is the POTUS, and you need to distract Russia from Pacific War Theater. Will you send one of your European pawns on death or protect it?
Do you want to say, that USA used CMs with nuclear warheads against Iraqis?
I think it is just a British mindset.
Sarcasm, yes. Don't you think, that sending few British tanks in Estonia (in our reality - to detter Russia) was a wise decision, too?
Goal of the USA - to distract Russia from Pacific War Theater.
Goal of the UK - to force Russia for capitulation and to restore theor leadership on Europe.
Goal of Russia - quickly eliminate a threat from at least one West European nuclear state, to keep hands free in the futher politic at West or East directions.
Silver Cat
New Member
Thank you for this perfect illustration of British mindset. Do you really believe, that if you'll start a conflict, all your "allies" eagerly join you?
It's got nothing to do with "mindset" - it's purely logical - the Russians have just sortied most of their hunter killer force into an area of ocean jointly used by France and the UK to protect their individual nuclear forces, in what appears to be an escalating nuclear conflict in which the only nuclear weapons fired have been by the Russians. Under what alternate reality do you honestly think they're going to sit there and hope they're not next ?
They'll sortie every boat and ASW asset available to protect themselves and in the process will likely sink a large chunk of the Russian HK fleet.
It was an incredibly uninformed scenario from the start and your refusal to engage with the counter arguments does tend to indicate you're not likely to be around for much longer. Up your game, read what people are writing and respond to it instead of behaving in this fashion.
Silver Cat
New Member
Ok. There is a post-Brexit trade war. EU and France lost a lot of money. There is a military suppression of pro-EU Irish minority in NI.
There are unsubstantiated accusations in usage of biological weapon of the important EU trading partner.
Is it not possible, that in such situation Macron can make a separate deal with Putin and allow Russian submarine to tail British one, or even can give a secret order to his own fleet: "If British submarine start to launch their ICBMs before official confirmation from French government about the Russian guilty - just sink her and say that Russians did it".
And yes, French president may be sure, that Russians are more interesting in the trading with France, than in the war. Especially in the very complicated situation at Pacific War Theatre.
Sharing your defense with somebody else (Yanks, or Frenches, or anybody else) have its own risks, you know, because their interests and goals can be different from your ones.
Mod Edit: Member Banned for continuing to push the plot of a poor quality political/thriller film as though it were a realistic scenario, after receiving multiple warnings from Moderators against doing so on this forum. This demonstrates either an inability or unwillingness to follow the Forum Rules, or participate on this forum with the required quality of discussion. There are places on the internet where people can engage in discussing conspiracy theories, or fantasy/fiction discussions which are not grounded in reality, DefenceTalk isn't such a place.
-Preceptor
Last edited by a moderator:
- Thread Starter Thread Starter
- #36
I want to take this thread back to the topic it's for.
Russia has deployed the first Avangard hypersonic BM attack blocks. The current carriers are UR-100 ICBMs. 30 of them were received in a nondeployed condition from Ukraine in the early 2000s, and left in storage. Russia's future heavy ICBM is likely to be the next carrier for the type. It appears that we're looking at a total deployment of only two ICBMs at this time.
Ракетный комплекс стратегического назначения «Авангард» поставлен на боевое дежурство
Первый полк, вооруженный стратегическим комплексом с гиперзвуковым боевым блоком "Авангард", поставлен на боевое дежурство
Russia has deployed the first Avangard hypersonic BM attack blocks. The current carriers are UR-100 ICBMs. 30 of them were received in a nondeployed condition from Ukraine in the early 2000s, and left in storage. Russia's future heavy ICBM is likely to be the next carrier for the type. It appears that we're looking at a total deployment of only two ICBMs at this time.
Ракетный комплекс стратегического назначения «Авангард» поставлен на боевое дежурство
Первый полк, вооруженный стратегическим комплексом с гиперзвуковым боевым блоком "Авангард", поставлен на боевое дежурство
I'm not sure I'm getting the point of that glide-system - it's surely leading to the payload spending more time in the terminal descent phase where it's most vulnerable to intercept ? I'm not buying the evasive capability either given it's unlikely to have any working sensors to detect something to evade for a lot of it's flight profile as it'll be toasty warm and blind to radar returns due to ionisation in much of it's descent?
- Thread Starter Thread Starter
- #38
Yeah, there's not real answer here. I honestly don't know and the nature of the weapon system makes it unlikely that we will get anything reliable. The best I have come from Military Russia;
15П771 Авангард / 4202, изделие 15Ю71 | MilitaryRussia.Ru — отечественная военная техника (после 1945г.)
Translated;
Purpose and description (personal opinion of the author): object 4202/15Yu71 is an aeroballistic object, that flies most of the path on a ballistic trajectory in notionally airless space. In th eprocess of this movement the device stabilizes and possible, likely, can correct its trajectory using maneuver rocket engines. Similar to the way satellites or ICBM stages (with traditional ICBMs) would do this. Stabilization is required to provide the necessary angle of entrance into the denser layers of the atmosphere and for the systems of correction and possibly even guidance. It's quite likely that the device can use guidance based on a map of the area, comparing it with a map produced by an on-board radar, and a system of astrocorrection. It's also possible that the device has side-facing radar. The device can make several ricochet jumps off of the denser layers of the atmosphere, changing its trajectory. According to the technical specs the device can reach speeds of 27M during this.
When approaching the target to the tune of 200-300kms (maybe even 500kms but probably not more) the device enters atmospheric flight. Consequently at the beginning of atmospheric flight the device has a speed of 14-15M, slowing gradually. The device has no hypersonic engine. Controlling maneuvers during atmospheric flight is done by aerodynamic steering with the use of wings and shields on the fuselage on pitch, yaw, and roll. When speed drops to 6-8M, it's likely to use radar guidance based on an area map. Before that it likely performs pre-programmed maneuvers to counter BMD.
Thanks - as you say, there's not going to be any reliable information available publicly. I believe MARV's were suggested back in the cold war but apart from Pershing's ground penetrator warhead and mapping radar I don't think anything much was done.
Doesn't sound like it'll make much impact deployed in those numbers.
Doesn't sound like it'll make much impact deployed in those numbers.
Mike Wallace
New Member
The weapons inspectors from the US have already have had access to the Avangard hypersonic missiles of the US. This happened under the New START treaty that bounds both countries to limited weapon inspections with an aim of limiting each other's arsenals. But I wonder how much do they show each other and what level of access they provide on such sensitive installations.
Here are the details of the US inspectors visiting the Avangard missiles: No Surprise: The US has already accessed Russian hypersonic missiles
Here are the details of the US inspectors visiting the Avangard missiles: No Surprise: The US has already accessed Russian hypersonic missiles