Military Review

By the year 2022, the United States will have over a thousand antimissiles

86
In the United States, by the year 2022 the number of missile defense systems of the missile defense system will be more than 1000 RIA News a message from the representative of the Ministry of Defense of the Russian Federation Alexander Emelyanov.




In the future, it will exceed the number of warheads deployed on Russian intercontinental missiles,
Emelyanov added at the Russian-Chinese briefing on missile defense on the margins of the First Committee of the UN General Assembly.

He also stated that the United States publicly used unrealistic scenarios of US missile defense work to mislead international public opinion.

The differences lie in the fact that, by overestimating the requirements for the missile defense system, the American specialists use clearly unrealistic scenarios and baseline data. This is done to mislead international public opinion about the real capabilities of missile defense systems,
said the representative of the Ministry of Defense of the Russian Federation.

He also stressed that the White House does not respond to repeated statements by Moscow about violations of international obligations by the United States.

Russian representatives repeatedly at various levels drew the attention of the American side to the danger posed by the global missile defense system for the strategic balance of forces in the world. Unfortunately, our arguments are not perceived, obvious facts are ignored,
said Yemelyanov.
Photos used:
http://www.globallookpress.com
86 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must to register.

I have an account? Sign in

  1. The black
    The black 13 October 2017 10: 14 New
    +4
    Hope is a dubious haven.
    “The hopes of young men feed,
    The elders are given joy ”
    But still gradually melting.

    And finally, on the slope of days
    Suddenly understands man
    The vanity of hope, the futility of ideas ...
    "There are no others, but those farther away,"
    (M.L.)
    1. Burbon
      Burbon 13 October 2017 10: 20 New
      +3
      at the end of the century, he took and subverted-
      -an evil person, kind person!
      From a grenade launcher - a slap of his goat,
      that is, good is stronger than evil !!
      1. Boa kaa
        Boa kaa 13 October 2017 21: 38 New
        +3
        Quote: Burbon
        therefore, good ... stronger than evil !!
        This is to the slogan "Good always conquers evil!"
        Or maybe everything is easier?
    2. viktorrymar
      viktorrymar 13 October 2017 10: 45 New
      0
      Hope is a dubious haven.
      “The hopes of young men feed,
      The elders are given joy ”
      But still gradually melting.

      And finally, on the slope of days
      Suddenly understands man
      The vanity of hope, the futility of ideas ...
      “There are no others, but those farther”

      Gleb Glinka



      Young science nourishes
      The old are served with joy
      In a happy life they decorate
      In case of accident take care;
      Joy at home
      And in distant wanderings is not a hindrance.
      Science is everywhere
      Among the nations and in the desert
      In a city noise and in private
      At rest, sweet and at work.

      Mikhail Lomonosov.
      1. oldseaman1957
        oldseaman1957 13 October 2017 11: 21 New
        +3
        Quote: viktorrymar
        ... Science feeds the youths, serves the Joy of the old ..,
        -
        Burbon /// From a grenade launcher - a slap of his goat, then it’s good then - it’s stronger than evil !!
        - These are damn it, metamorphoses ...
  2. NEXUS
    NEXUS 13 October 2017 10: 24 New
    +7
    In the future, it will exceed the number of warheads deployed on Russian intercontinental missiles,

    And by the year 22 we will have Sarmatians, Frontiers and Barguzins ... at the same time,
    In the United States, by 2022, the number of missile defense systems will amount to more than 1000 units, RIA Novosti reports a message from the representative of the Russian Defense Ministry Alexander Emelyanov.

    How much anti-missile missile is needed to intercept one hyper-fast warhead, taking into account the false targets and maneuvering the warhead? Experts have calculated - from 5 to 50 ... Saw Shura, saw! wassat
    1. Voyager
      Voyager 13 October 2017 10: 28 New
      +1
      And yet, 1000 is not so small, especially if
      Quote: NEXUS
      Experts have calculated - from 5
      1. Muvka
        Muvka 13 October 2017 10: 34 New
        +1
        But to 50. You forgot it. In this case, you need to know where the rockets will fly.
        1. Grandfather
          Grandfather 13 October 2017 10: 38 New
          +4
          By the year 2022, the United States will have over a thousand antimissiles
          And by the year 22 we will have Sarmatians, Frontiers and Barguzins
          .. sad mmmda ... goodbye dreams of a happy old age ... and so we will make ends meet ... with effort. heck...
        2. Voyager
          Voyager 14 October 2017 17: 03 New
          0
          In such matters, it is always better to focus on the worst situation for yourself.
      2. NEXUS
        NEXUS 13 October 2017 10: 37 New
        +7
        Quote: Voyager
        And yet, 1000 is not so small, especially if

        This is in the best case scenario, you can intercept 200 blocks ... but remind me how many RF warheads with nuclear weapons have today? If sclerosis does not change (I could be wrong) more than 1600 warheads. From this, if a tenth of them passes the US missile defense, that's enough. As they say, one tablet is enough. lol
        1. Waterfowl
          Waterfowl 13 October 2017 11: 45 New
          +3
          Tell me, in a surprise attack, how many Russian ICBMs will start?
          1. NEXUS
            NEXUS 13 October 2017 13: 56 New
            +5
            Quote: Waterfowl
            Tell me, in a surprise attack, how many Russian ICBMs will start?

            All ... what kind of suddenness are you talking about? In order to concentrate a sufficient sea fist, how long did it take the USA off the coast of S. Korea, do not remind? Or are our satellites and marine intelligence for beauty needed?
    2. figwam
      figwam 13 October 2017 10: 38 New
      +6
      NEXUS

      They want to destroy mines and installations on the ground, then shoot down a rocket in the accelerating section, and this is logical, and then the remaining flying blocks and when their computer calculates give the go-ahead for the attack, they will start it, and our task is to create conditions for guaranteed destruction of the fs. then they will not dare.
      1. NEXUS
        NEXUS 13 October 2017 10: 40 New
        +4
        Quote: figvam
        They want to destroy mines and installations on the ground, then shoot down a rocket in the upper stage

        To do this, they need to be very close to our borders. A concentration of warships is very easy to notice.
        1. figwam
          figwam 13 October 2017 10: 52 New
          +1
          Therefore, they crawl into our Black Sea and want to cancel the Montreux agreement, their task is to block the entire territory of our country, so the missile defense system will remain in Korea.
          1. Muvka
            Muvka 13 October 2017 11: 11 New
            0
            Well, if they come close, then before launching they will be sent to oblivion Balls and Bastions.
            1. figwam
              figwam 13 October 2017 11: 39 New
              0
              Of course, they will not substitute for the strike, they will massively strike with cruise missiles without entering the zone of destruction, we need a lot, a lot of air defense.
              1. Muvka
                Muvka 13 October 2017 11: 50 New
                +1
                What will they hit? By disguised mobile complexes? Then move on. Suppose they destroy coastal complexes from a distance of 1,5k - 1k km. And our military will chew snot at this time? They will give the go-ahead for the launch of ICBMs. And these same ships at this time will be 1000 km from the place where they should be in order to be able to shoot down our missiles.
                1. figwam
                  figwam 13 October 2017 12: 40 New
                  +2
                  Muvka

                  It’s enough to know that they are located on the coast in the Crimea and hit with a nuclear tomahawk. The theory of a massive global FSA strike implies delivering this strike both to satellites and ICBMs and air defense (ABM) and to headquarters, communications, etc. And where will these same ships and submarines be about 400 units. and what real performance characteristics of these missiles I do not know, but the creation and testing of this system lasts more than 20 years and clearly poses a threat to our country.
                  1. NEXUS
                    NEXUS 13 October 2017 14: 01 New
                    +3
                    Quote: figvam
                    It’s enough to know that they are located on the coast in the Crimea and hit with a nuclear tomahawk. The theory of a massive global FSA strike implies delivering this strike both to satellites and ICBMs and air defense (ABM) and to headquarters, communications, etc.

                    That is, in your opinion, until now we will be stupidly sitting and waiting for nuclear weapons to be worked out for us? wassat wassat Have you heard anything about an adventive strike? Read the updated defense doctrine of the Russian Federation.
                    1. figwam
                      figwam 13 October 2017 14: 16 New
                      +3
                      NEXUS

                      A massive global strike is the preventive strike that they want to inflict, you know how two cowboys in a duel, who will be the first to win.
                      1. NEXUS
                        NEXUS 13 October 2017 14: 19 New
                        +3
                        Quote: figvam
                        A massive global strike is a preemptive strike, you know how two cowboys in a duel, who will be the first to win.


                        Listen ... the subsonic KR ax, only this fact already removes any hope of the USA for a lightning disarming strike. And this means that while the axes are flying, fighting with our layered missile defense, we will have three wagons and a trolley to retaliate. POINT.
                2. Grandfather
                  Grandfather 13 October 2017 13: 15 New
                  +5
                  Quote: Muvka
                  Suppose they destroy coastal complexes from a distance of 1,5k - 1k km.

                  Quote: Muvka
                  It is enough to know that they are located on the coast in the Crimea and hit a tomahawk with a nuclear part.

                  Quote: Muvka
                  What will they hit? By disguised mobile complexes? Then move on. Suppose they destroy coastal complexes from a distance of 1,5k - 1k km. And our military will chew snot at this time? They will give the go-ahead for the launch of ICBMs. And these same ships at this time will be 1000 km from the place where they should be in order to be able to shoot down our missiles.

                  God ... what the site has become ... a kindergarten, a nursery group. There’s nothing to comment on, total illiteracy is almost like on TV. "The first channel" - Katya Strizhenova: about "railgun" - "will we all die ...?" (FROM). belay stop the earth - i will come down ...
                  1. Großer feldherr
                    Großer feldherr 13 October 2017 17: 26 New
                    +3
                    Just noticed now?
                    There are practically no serious articles left, the site more and more resembles instagrams with a military and near-political bias.
                    It’s good or bad, but it has also become more popular in terms of attendance.
              2. NEXUS
                NEXUS 13 October 2017 14: 17 New
                +4
                Quote: figvam
                massively hit with cruise missiles without entering the affected area, we need a lot, a lot of air defense.

                You contradict yourself, dear. God be with him, that the thought does not reach you that no one will wait until the mattresses "swing" for a blow ... but look at the TTX of the ax then fool He is SOUND! In order not to enter the coverage area of ​​our coastal complexes, they need to strike from 600-800 km from the coast. But there is still naval aviation, AWACS, submarines, etc. ... that is, even further ... and now the question is HOW MUCH TIME I HAVE FLY ATTEMPT AT LEAST TO THE COAST, I don’t speak deep into our continent if the ax is SOUND CR? And what kind of SUDDEN BLOW then are we talking about? wassat
                1. demos1111
                  demos1111 13 October 2017 14: 47 New
                  +2
                  I agree. And that is not all. And beat them from. Crimea went home, took with it the entire Black Sea. You cannot shoot joy from him, from the Baltic, I doubt very much that it is not enough for a large fleet with modern missiles.
                  There are not many places from which you can work with axes from ships.
                  No, before the advent of a large number of hypersonic missiles, a global strike can only be against Ukrainians, but we must act effectively.
              3. ARES623
                ARES623 13 October 2017 17: 48 New
                0
                Quote: figvam
                we need a lot, a lot of air defense.

                I would also add a multi-megaton fleet of submarine drones. Against the Navy and US coastal infrastructure. It is very conveniently located on the coast.
          2. NEXUS
            NEXUS 13 October 2017 14: 00 New
            +3
            Quote: figvam
            Therefore, they climb to us in the Black Sea

            I repeat, the concentration of a large group of attack ships cannot be hidden just like that. This is the second and most U.S. missile defense based on ships. And if they get close to our shores in order to build a good salvo, they will expose their shores. And there are mobile complexes that are much more difficult to track. And here the question arises of the so-called "unacceptable damage" for the United States.
            1. figwam
              figwam 13 October 2017 14: 51 New
              +1
              No concentration is needed, the ships and submarines of the missile defense system go across all the seas and oceans without restrictions, where they are all located, we don’t know, it’s not possible to track the entire fleet of FSA, they conduct ongoing exercises, but except for the Black Sea. With Crimea, they did not succeed, therefore, they will now push through the cancellation of the Montreux agreement, so that it is in the Black Sea without restrictions. Yes, the speed of the Tomahawk is 800-900 km / h, the range is 1500 km, the nuclear is 3000 km, and modernization has already begun after the demonstration of our Caliber, but you cannot track the start of the launch and flight of these missiles, this is their advantage over ballistic missiles, go they are very low with envelope relief, but do not forget about their lies, they can start an operation against another country, and they will hit us and you will know about it after the approach of the first wave of missiles.
              1. NEXUS
                NEXUS 13 October 2017 14: 58 New
                +2
                Quote: figvam
                No concentration is needed, ships and submarines of missile defense go across all seas and oceans without restrictions,

                Phew ... dear, to break through a layered missile defense you need a very good salvo density ... different numbers are called, depending on the direction, depth of our missile defense, and so on. Therefore, in order to "quantify" such a volley, you need to concentrate the KR carriers in a certain area, which will be immediately noticeable. The KR launches are visible from satellites, plus our reconnaissance aircraft, submarines, patrol ships ... and add to this "low-speed "the axes themselves. In this case, before getting to our mines, the axes need to deal with our missile defense system. And this is not the Iraqi missile defense system or the Yugoslav one. And while all this will be, letting our ICBMs both land-based and sea time have more than enough.
                1. figwam
                  figwam 13 October 2017 15: 37 New
                  +2
                  Well, let’s say the first salvo is 6000 missiles. We don’t have any layered missile defense, there’s a focal in important directions, the probability of defeating the missile defense is about 0.4, the cost for each 2 missiles, and if by that time the missiles are using stealth technology, this will still reduce the likelihood of its destruction, while only part of the global strike, the remaining our ICBMs will shoot down their missile defense. I am sure of one thing, before us they should test their theory in practice, but on whom time will tell.
                  1. NEXUS
                    NEXUS 13 October 2017 15: 48 New
                    +3
                    Quote: figvam
                    Well, let’s say the first salvo is 6000 missiles.

                    And I wonder how many carriers are these? wassat Well, as I understand it, a very small group of ships. laughing
                    Quote: figvam
                    We don’t have any layered missile defense, we have a focal point in important areas,

                    And the unimportant directions of mattresses are NOT INTERESTING. wassat
                    Quote: figvam
                    the probability of defeating the KR is about 0.4, the consumption for each 2 missiles, and if by that time the KR will be using stealth technology, this will still reduce the probability of its destruction,

                    Well, yes ... dofig probabilities ... precisely probabilities. In addition to anti-missile systems of different radii, there is such a contraption as the MIG-31, which was sharpened specifically for intercepting missiles, as well as electronic warfare systems, which are also made by a non-crooked genital organ. And as a result, while all this fuss will be with our focal missile defense, the reaction time is 5-10 minutes. And fiery greetings in the form of the entire nuclear arsenal, and from different directions will fly with a white dove to the mattress land.
                    Quote: figvam
                    the remaining our ICBMs will shoot down their missile defense.

                    Well, yes ... especially BB Yarsov (maneuvering) and point-blank Sinev missiles, also uniblock, and in fact from a revolving distance ... wassat The mattresses have such a term, UNACCEPTABLE DAMAGE. So while we have time for an answer, they can at least dance, at least arrange gay parades, there can be no talk of any disarming lightning strike.
              2. Vadim237
                Vadim237 13 October 2017 22: 55 New
                0
                In the future, the first strikes will be carried out by tactical strike drones and kamikaze drones - to destroy layered air defense systems.
        2. Stirbjorn
          Stirbjorn 13 October 2017 11: 55 New
          0
          Quote: NEXUS
          To do this, they need to be very close to our borders. A concentration of warships is very easy to notice.

          And you can’t start from planes? They have strategic aviation
          1. Muvka
            Muvka 13 October 2017 12: 14 New
            +1
            Aggis from airplanes ??? Seriously?
            1. Blackmokona
              Blackmokona 13 October 2017 12: 50 New
              +1
              They were engaged in interception of satellites from airplanes.
              It was developed by Vought on the basis of the AGM-69 SRAM rocket with an Altair stage and received the designation ASM-135 ASAT. This two-stage solid-fuel rocket was launched from the side of the F-15 fighter; guidance method - inertial; detachable warhead weighing 13,6 kg, having an infrared guidance head (cooled with liquid helium), was not equipped with explosives and hit the target with a direct hit. For corrections on the approach path for the purpose, several groups of solid fuel engines with a total of 64 were located on the warhead. A total of 15 rockets were manufactured. The first launch was carried out in January 1984. September 13, 1985 completed the first (and only) combat launch of this system. The F-15 fighter, taking off from the Edwards Air Force Base, rose to a height of 24,384 m and launched a vertical rocket at the target satellite: the target was the American scientific astrophysical satellite Solwind P78-1, weighing 907 kg, launched in 1979 and decommissioned. The missile hit the target at an altitude of 555 km, the counter-impact speed was more than 24 thousand kilometers per hour.
              1. Vadim237
                Vadim237 13 October 2017 22: 57 New
                +1
                It is to be expected that the United States will return to these developments.
            2. Stirbjorn
              Stirbjorn 13 October 2017 13: 59 New
              0
              Quote: Muvka
              Aggis from airplanes ??? Seriously?

              I meant blows to our mines and mobile installations
              1. Muvka
                Muvka 13 October 2017 14: 21 New
                0
                Quote: Stirbjorn
                Quote: Muvka
                Aggis from airplanes ??? Seriously?

                I meant blows to our mines and mobile installations

                Well, they need to fly quite deeply.
          2. NEXUS
            NEXUS 13 October 2017 14: 04 New
            +3
            Quote: Stirbjorn
            And you can’t start from planes? They have strategic aviation

            Seriously? So what do they have so long-range and in such numbers? lol
            And besides, I repeat, apparently you firmly believe that our intelligence does not stupidly do nichrome, from the word at all, as well as our satellites are generally blind. laughing
      2. Esoteric
        Esoteric 13 October 2017 12: 28 New
        0
        Quote: figvam
        They want to destroy mines and installations on the ground, then shoot down a rocket in the accelerating section, and this is logical, and then the remaining flying blocks and when their computer calculates give the go-ahead for the attack, they will start it, and our task is to create conditions for guaranteed destruction of the fs. then they will not dare.

        Let them first practice on ... they know on whom, and then with their pork snout they climb into the ranks. We have two tasks: until they faded from Syria, bomb on the base that gathered the Ishilovites and bring down the F-35 ... belay
    3. Chestnut
      Chestnut 13 October 2017 11: 28 New
      +2
      Quote: NEXUS

      How much anti-missile missile is needed to intercept one hyper-fast warhead, taking into account the false targets and maneuvering the warhead? Experts have calculated - from 5 to 50 ... Saw Shura, saw! wassat

      You write as if we already have 500 zircons.
      At best, they will build thirty missiles a year.
      1. Partyzan
        Partyzan 13 October 2017 11: 51 New
        +7
        At best, they will build thirty missiles a year.
        it's not bad too
        Calculations made with these factors in mind show that the probability of a Zirkon missile being hit by one Standard-6 missile defense system is unlikely to exceed 0,02 – 0,03 under the most favorable conditions and target designation directly from the SAM missile. When firing according to external target designation, such as an ARLO aircraft or another ship, taking into account errors in determining the mutual location, as well as the delay time for the exchange of information, the error in the missile target output will be greater, and the probability of hitting it is less, and very significantly - to 0,005 –0,012. In general, it can be stated that the Standard-6, the most effective missile defense system in the Western world, has scanty opportunities for defeating the Zircon.
        1. Muvka
          Muvka 13 October 2017 12: 16 New
          +2
          Quote: Partyzan
          At best, they will build thirty missiles a year.
          it's not bad too
          Calculations made with these factors in mind show that the probability of a Zirkon missile being hit by one Standard-6 missile defense system is unlikely to exceed 0,02 – 0,03 under the most favorable conditions and target designation directly from the SAM missile. When firing according to external target designation, such as an ARLO aircraft or another ship, taking into account errors in determining the mutual location, as well as the delay time for the exchange of information, the error in the missile target output will be greater, and the probability of hitting it is less, and very significantly - to 0,005 –0,012. In general, it can be stated that the Standard-6, the most effective missile defense system in the Western world, has scanty opportunities for defeating the Zircon.

          30 destroyed American ships per year. Great, as for me.
          1. Partyzan
            Partyzan 13 October 2017 12: 18 New
            +5
            Great, as for me.
            and I think it’s not bad, considering that they don’t build so much a year hi
            1. Vadim237
              Vadim237 13 October 2017 22: 59 New
              +1
              Considering how many ships they riveted in World War II, now the loss of thirty will not become significant damage to them.
              1. Partyzan
                Partyzan 14 October 2017 12: 55 New
                +5
                Given how many ships they riveted in World War II
                and they are still in service? I sympathize
        2. ZVO
          ZVO 13 October 2017 15: 07 New
          +1
          Quote: Partyzan
          Calculations based on these factors show that the likelihood of a Zircon missile attack by one Standard 6 missile is unlikely to exceed 0,02–0,03 under the most favorable conditions.


          Please do not read Sivkov ...
          He is a lover of a spherical horse in vacuums ...
          He has alternative thinking. Very
      2. Esoteric
        Esoteric 13 October 2017 12: 34 New
        +2
        Quote: Chestnut
        You write as if we already have 500 zircons.
        At best, they will build thirty missiles a year.

        Are you so worried that you think that electronic warfare systems are completely innocent when working with all kinds of missile defense systems, or are the Americans going to launch something in absolute silence? Is it after that Donald Cook and the grand launch of fifty Tomahawks?
        1. Grandfather
          Grandfather 13 October 2017 13: 19 New
          +2
          Quote: Muvka
          30 destroyed American ships per year. Great, as for me.

          Quote: Partyzan
          and I think it’s not bad, considering that they don’t build so much a year
          a nightmare ... vocational schools at a break ... and I imagine a long, difficult war with the United States ... crying from pain .. apparently with education is still worse than I thought ...
          1. sogdy
            sogdy 13 October 2017 14: 20 New
            +1
            Quote: Dead Day
            a nightmare ... vocational schools at a break ... and I imagine a long, difficult war with the United States ... crying from pain .. apparently with education is still worse than I thought ...

            Apparently, yes.
            The USA-USA has been in a state of “war for peace” since 1887. 130 years, apparently, very short-term?
      3. NEXUS
        NEXUS 13 October 2017 14: 08 New
        +3
        Quote: Chestnut
        You write as if we already have 500 zircons.
        At best, they will build thirty missiles a year.

        And then Zircons, dear? I talked about Sarmatian and Boundary. Sarmat will carry from 10 to 15 blocks with an ulcer (if sclerosis doesn’t fail me), and false BBs go to them ... go find which block is combat and which is empty. And Boundary (Vanguard will be multi-block ...
    4. gromoboj
      gromoboj 13 October 2017 21: 55 New
      0
      And how much is needed at the initial stage of the trajectory? Before dividing into blocks and false targets?
      1. Vadim237
        Vadim237 13 October 2017 23: 01 New
        0
        From start to shutdown of the third stage - approximately 200 seconds.
    5. Vadim237
      Vadim237 15 October 2017 11: 56 New
      0
      It is interesting and by what criteria for the interception they calculated the number of anti-missiles from 5 to 50 per warhead - they probably took the first modification for the calculation of the SM 3 missile, and its latest modifications have kinetic interceptors with the ability to select false targets, which reduces the number of anti-missiles to three per warhead .
  3. svp67
    svp67 13 October 2017 10: 25 New
    +2
    In the future, it will exceed the number of warheads deployed on Russian intercontinental missiles,
    So we should expect the appearance of anti-missile anti-missile .... That's how the arms race and spins. And all that was worth the United States to withdraw from the ABM Treaty
    1. bk316
      bk316 13 October 2017 10: 37 New
      +2
      So you should expect the appearance of anti-missile anti-missile ....

      First, a hit on the satellite guidance system (the benefit is low-orbit)
      Then anti-missiles.
      Then the launcher scanners.
      1. svp67
        svp67 13 October 2017 10: 38 New
        +2
        Quote: bk316
        First ....
        Then ....
        Then ....

        And better all at the same time ....
      2. Vadim237
        Vadim237 13 October 2017 23: 03 New
        0
        We can’t reach the SPRN satellites - missile defense in highly-elemental orbits.
  4. Alexey-74
    Alexey-74 13 October 2017 10: 28 New
    +4
    And who will respond to the statements of Russia? Everyone is under the heel of the United States .... we alone resist on a large scale and can challenge them.
  5. Dzafdet
    Dzafdet 13 October 2017 10: 37 New
    0
    After 10 years, they can be dumped in a landfill. So again to do them ... Tale of urine, start all over again ..
  6. Vard
    Vard 13 October 2017 10: 39 New
    +2
    Another attempt, like Reagan's Star Wars ... In principle, you can put warheads along the coast into the ocean ... and not bother with overcoming missile defense ...
    1. Kerensky
      Kerensky 13 October 2017 10: 53 New
      0
      In principle, you can put warheads along the coast into the ocean.

      There was such a project. A submarine with one mega-torpedo, which (a torpedo) from a distance creeps up to the coast and lays on the ground before the team.
      I don’t know how it ended, - the sources are silent.
      I can be mistaken (from memory): the diameter of this torpedo is 2 meters, the length of 13 meters ...
  7. rotmistr60
    rotmistr60 13 October 2017 10: 45 New
    +1
    by 2022 year

    Our concern is understandable. But in such cases they say - wait and see. It is not yet known what will happen to the world in more than four years. And do not forget that Russia does not stand still.
    1. Chestnut
      Chestnut 13 October 2017 11: 43 New
      +4
      Quote: rotmistr60
      by 2022 year

      Our concern is understandable. But in such cases they say - wait and see. It is not yet known what will happen to the world in more than four years. And do not forget that Russia does not stand still.

      Russia keeps afloat due to the achievements of the USSR, but Lafa is already coming to an end, in 2022 we can only rely on the mercy of the Americans.
      1. rotmistr60
        rotmistr60 13 October 2017 11: 47 New
        +3
        we can only rely on the mercy of the Americans.

        As I understand it, you now rely only on their mercy.
        Russia keeps afloat due to the achievements of the USSR
        It was a basic foundation. And we are holding on for other reasons. And not only hold on, but also move forward slowly.
        1. Chestnut
          Chestnut 13 October 2017 14: 15 New
          +2
          Quote: rotmistr60
          [It was a basic foundation. And we are holding on for other reasons. And not only hold on, but also move forward slowly.


          Read the news:
          Russian President Vladimir Putin will meet with representatives of German business circles. On Monday, October 9, the Russian media reported the assistant to the President of the Russian Federation on foreign policy issues Yuri Ushakov.

          According to him, the meeting, organized at the initiative of the Eastern Committee of the German economy, will be held in Sochi on October 12. The German business will be represented by the heads of approximately 20 enterprises operating in the Russian market. Among them are called Siemens, Metro, Wintersholl, Linde, Knauf and others.


          Instead of investing in our plants and enterprises, Putin is promoting European enterprises on our market.
          That's where we go, ass and slavery
      2. NEXUS
        NEXUS 13 October 2017 14: 10 New
        +2
        Quote: Chestnut
        in 2022 we can rely only on the mercy of the Americans.

        Seriously? wassat Maybe Germany is rotten and should count on the grace of the United States, but what about this before us?
      3. Partyzan
        Partyzan 13 October 2017 15: 18 New
        +4
        in 2022 we can rely only on the mercy of the Americans.
        and you hold the training manual correctly - is it not 2202 written there?
  8. Nemesis
    Nemesis 13 October 2017 10: 51 New
    +1
    So the Russian Federation can’t reduce the number of Strategic Missile Forces missiles, but rather, you need to think about the growth of their number
    1. Waterfowl
      Waterfowl 13 October 2017 11: 53 New
      0
      What is cheaper and better (in terms of vulnerability) to maintain a missile division or a pair of submarines with a mace?
      1. Nemesis
        Nemesis 13 October 2017 12: 59 New
        +3
        The mace is not reliable, the submarines are built very slowly and service on them is dangerous for the crew. It’s better to have a BZHRK with reliable YRS missiles, but for Poland, Romania, Lithuania, Latvia, Estonia and the like it’s better to have Caliber on a wheeled and railway chassis, including tactical nuclear warheads ... In Latvia, they say, the Yankee division is already ...
  9. Whisper
    Whisper 13 October 2017 11: 05 New
    +1
    How they lifted up ...... it's like a neighbor in the country .. which constantly suits the tricks. Previously, they let the "red cock." I think basically nothing has changed ...
  10. Siberian
    Siberian 13 October 2017 11: 07 New
    0
    To withdraw from the START-3 treaty and build up nuclear potential - so far only such an answer has been seen.
    1. Vadim237
      Vadim237 13 October 2017 23: 07 New
      +2
      It does not seem that Russia has money to increase its nuclear potential - only modernization and creation of new ones - writing off old systems.
  11. Some kind of compote
    Some kind of compote 13 October 2017 11: 08 New
    17
    Americans rush forward
    Preparing for past wars ...
    Although
    I read an interesting note today - the more so it was announced by the Russian Ministry of Defense:
    The Ministry of Defense spoke about the danger of instant global strike complexes
    The representative of the Ministry of Defense of the Russian Federation Alexander Emelyanov spoke about the developments that are supposedly being carried out at the Pentagon. It is reported by TASS.
    Emelyanov during a Russian-Chinese briefing on missile defense said that the US military is trying to implement the concept of joint use of offensive and defensive weapons.
    "Realizing the concept of joint use of offensive and defensive weapons, the Pentagon has begun to create promising instant global strike strike systems. In non-nuclear equipment, these complexes should solve the same tasks that are assigned to strategic nuclear forces today," Emelyanov explained.
    Among other things, the representative of the department said that the US missile defense system can go to a whole new level. According to Yemelyanov, this will be facilitated by the increase in satellite constellation in low orbit. Satellites are responsible for detecting ballistic missiles, which will lead to an increase in the capabilities of the system.

    For what, as they say, bought it - for that I’m selling it
    Bell
  12. Tektor
    Tektor 13 October 2017 11: 21 New
    0
    This means that by 2022 we should have at least 2000 interceptors of these supposedly pro missiles, and in fact - first-strike nuclear missiles. Well, we must create a similar threat for the state. But we don’t have to prepare 1000 hypersonic missiles at all, enough of 70 pieces for each coast with a flight time of less than 10 minutes after the order. Although even this is not necessary at all, it would be better to have than not to have. You need to be able to deliver charge to a fault near Hilo Island in Hawaii. And a land mine on La Palma ...
    1. den3080
      den3080 13 October 2017 12: 27 New
      +1
      yeah there ... right away at Yellowstone Nature Reserve wink
  13. Resistance
    Resistance 13 October 2017 13: 13 New
    +1
    Before launching missiles (as they had already practiced in the 60s), undermine SBP in the upper atmosphere and space - the radar field disappears during launch and flight. In the initial section of the trajectory no longer knock down.
    False targets are thrown at the distribution site - how to select targets? Seyfgard systems for selection have long been gone.
    This is offhand.
    The question is when, where and by whom to launch anti-missile launches?
    1. Vadim237
      Vadim237 13 October 2017 23: 09 New
      0
      "The radar field disappears at the time of launch and flight" - And blinds its own radar SPRN and ABM.
  14. Strashila
    Strashila 13 October 2017 13: 32 New
    +1
    1000 missile defense systems by 2020 ... there will really be 200 pieces, just for two missiles announced by Trump ... the rest will go rotten for one reason or another.
    1. Vadim237
      Vadim237 13 October 2017 23: 26 New
      0
      “1000 anti-missiles” Or maybe even more, they’re building another plant for the production of SM 3 anti-missiles GBMD, about 3 SM 900 missiles of various modifications and more than 3 THHAD missiles.
  15. rocket757
    rocket757 13 October 2017 14: 46 New
    +3
    Everything is logical and logical.
    The president promised to raise his industry - please.
    The fact that a lot can change by the deadline ... who cares, we need money here and now.
    The danger of destroying all and at once from this will not disappear.
  16. Firework
    Firework 13 October 2017 23: 41 New
    +1
    if you see only enemies around, it’s hard to live
  17. Old26
    Old26 14 October 2017 01: 34 New
    +1
    Quote: NEXUS
    How much anti-missile missile is needed to intercept one hyper-fast warhead, taking into account the false targets and maneuvering the warhead? Experts have calculated - from 5 to 50 ... Saw Shura, saw!

    Andrei! Do not do what Emelyanov does - scare.
    And "trim the sturgeon." Hyper-speed warhead is certainly a new thing in rocket technology. Maneuvering a warhead is only a prospect. As for the false targets - it all depends on what zkh rocket. It is unlikely that the yars will set heavy atmospheric false targets to the detriment of combat units. "Governors" are already gradually leaving. and light false targets are eliminated even in the upper atmosphere.

    Quote: NEXUS
    This is in the best case scenario, you can intercept 200 blocks ...

    Trim sturgeon. What kind of interception of 200 ICBM blocks can be discussed if the number of such interceptors in 2018 by the Americans is equal to 44

    Quote: NEXUS
    If sclerosis does not change (I can be mistaken) more than 1600 warheads.

    1561. In July there were 1765

    Quote: NEXUS
    From this, if a tenth of them passes the US missile defense, that's enough.

    Not enough, Andrey, not enough. You should not read murzilka and listen to EXPERTS who say that.

    Quote: figvam
    Massive global punch

    Americans don’t have such a term - massive global punch. There is FAST GLOBAL IMPACT. But this BSU does not imply the use of Tomahawk-type cruise missiles at the first stage. The very concept of BSU began to be developed precisely because the Tomahawks fly too long. The beginning of the development of the concept was an attack on Bin Laden, when two "axes" went to the goal for about 2 hours, and the target managed to leave during this time

    Quote: BlackMokona
    It was developed by Vought on the basis of the AGM-69 SRAM rocket with an Altair stage and received the designation ASM-135 ASAT.

    Thank god that at least someone remembers this laughing

    Quote: Partyzan
    Calculations made taking into account these factors show that the probability of a Zircon missile attack by one Standard 6 missile is unlikely to exceed 0,02-0,03 under the most favorable conditions and target designation directly from the missile launcher.

    However. Existing system and not yet existing cruise missile. However, it was already considered that the probability of defeat is 2-3%. I wonder who counted. And the fact that the Zircon does not maneuver at such speeds "did the author of the calculation take into account?

    Quote: ZVO
    Please do not read Sivkov ...

    So is it Sivkov? That's why I think where such figures came from. Now it is clear

    Quote: NEXUS
    I talked about Sarmatian and Boundary. Sarmat will carry from 10 to 15 blocks with an ulcer (if sclerosis doesn’t fail me), and false BBs go to them ... go find which block is combat and which is empty. And Boundary (Vanguard will be multi-block ...

    Andrei! They didn’t try to write fiction. The limit on the number of warheads on a rocket has been in effect for almost 40 years. The number of warheads on ICBMs is no more than 10, on SLBMs - no more than 14 .. Do you already have 15 units on the not yet existing Sarmat, plus heavy false targets? But it’s nothing that he can take heavy false targets only instead of warheads, for the number of “seats” on the platform of the breeding stage is limited. The many-headed “Frontier” is certainly good. That's just to deploy it should have begun in 2016. Now on combat duty there are 0 of them and the same number of tenths. Why not tell me?

    Quote: Vadim237
    From start to shutdown of the third stage - approximately 200 seconds.

    Already less. Something like this, 30 percent

    Quote: Tektor
    This means that by 2022 we should have at least 2000 interceptors of these supposedly missiles about, but in fact - nuclear missiles of the first strike.

    These are not supposedly first strike nuclear missiles. These are commonplace air defense missiles. To make a first strike nuclear missile out of them is like trying to make a racing motorcycle out of a bicycle. The "payload" of these interceptors is about 30-35 kg. And what warhead do you put in there?

    Quote: Persistence
    Before launching missiles (as they had already practiced in the 60s), undermine SBP in the upper atmosphere and space - the radar field disappears during launch and flight.

    Do not duplicate myths. When testing the series “K”, the performance of the SPRN radar returned after about 10 minutes. And do not consider the enemy stupid. An atmospheric nuclear explosion, in addition, it will be necessary to produce several, will be a 100% guarantee that we are preparing launches. And in response, their missiles will fly. Destroy the United States, turning their country into a scorched radioactive desert is not very smart

    Quote: Strashila
    1000 missile defense systems by 2020 ... there will really be 200 pieces, just for two missiles announced by Trump ... the rest will go rotten for one reason or another.

    Больше

    Quote: Vadim237
    “1000 anti-missiles” Or maybe even more, they’re building another plant for the production of SM 3 anti-missiles GBMD, about 3 SM 900 missiles of various modifications and more than 3 THHAD missiles.

    As for the Patriots, you’re right, there are about 900 of them, though I don’t know if they are all modifications of the RAS-3. The many-headed kinetic interceptors are so far only a prospect with an unclear result. The number of GBI missiles on alert EMNIP is about 40-44, SM-3 - you need to watch, but EMNIP about 400. In principle, the Patriot can not be considered, because it is capable of intercepting exclusively operational-tactical missiles and medium-range missiles with a launch range of up to 3000 km. (and then in doubt, since it has never been tested against such missiles)
  18. Lena Petrova
    Lena Petrova 14 October 2017 09: 01 New
    +2
    Quote: Dead Day
    mmmda ... goodbye dreams of a happy old age ... and so we will make ends meet ... with effort. heck...

    Somehow in happiness it is better to be realized at a young and middle age. :)) In old age, there is not much happiness. But it can become even smaller if you do not engage in defense.