Military Review

Why aren't we afraid of a “fast global strike”?

60
Why aren't we afraid of a “fast global strike”?The Mk41 units can be used both for launching anti-aircraft guided missiles of the Standard family and for firing Tomahawk cruise missiles. The Russian military-political leadership and many military experts have recently expressed great concern about the American concept of a “fast global strike.” Its essence is that the United States strives to get an opportunity to strike a non-nuclear strike on any point on Earth with the help of hypersonic aircraft for half an hour. In particular, such a blow could theoretically be inflicted on the Russian strategic nuclear forces (SNF). That is, the United States will disarm Russia without arranging a nuclear catastrophe, while the nuclear arsenal of the United States itself will remain intact. If a small number of Russian ICBMs and SLBMs survive, they are easily destroyed by the American missile defense system.


SUCCESS MUST BE FULL

The author of this article in the 2008 – 2011 years repeatedly wrote about the threat of a disarming non-nuclear strike by the United States on our strategic nuclear forces. It was also said that such a strike would be carried out with the help of the Tomahawk SLCMB and the ALCM, as well as with the help of the B-2 bombers built using stealth technology.

The fact is that a disarming strike cannot be partially successful. You cannot destroy, for example, 20% of Russian SNFs, evaluate the results of the strike, and after a few days deliver a new strike, as the surviving 80% SNF immediately (within a maximum of an hour) after the first American strike will go to the US "under its own power", after which a mutual guaranteed destruction of the United States and Russia, and at the same time, apparently, of all human civilization.

Therefore, there can be only one disarming strike that ensures the destruction of the 100% of the Russian strategic nuclear forces, almost simultaneously. And this is possible only with an absolute surprise strike, that is, Russia should learn about the fact of the strike at the moment when the first American missiles start to hit Russian intercontinental ballistic missiles (ICBMs), submarine strategic missile carriers (PKK CH) and strategic bombers.

Such a suddenness can be provided only by the means of aerospace attack (SVKN), which are extremely difficult to detect, and this is exactly SLCM, ALCM and B-2. Their common drawback is subsonic flight speed, which is why, for example, the Tomahawk flies to its maximum range for two hours. And the detection of even one cruise missile or one bomber immediately destroys surprise. But in the conditions of a sharp reduction in the number of Russian ICBMs and PKK SN and a very significant weakening of the air defense grouping, the blow became real, at least with the trends that were emerging 10 years ago.

Now, however, the situation has changed significantly. The number of ICBMs and SLBMs in Russia as a whole remains stable, as, on the other hand, the number of SLCMs, ALCMs and V-2s that the Navy and the US Air Force can actually use. But the air defense group of the Russian Federation has greatly increased due to the adoption of new types of radars for the radioengineering forces (RTV), anti-aircraft missile systems (air defense systems) S-400 for anti-aircraft missile forces (air defense forces), Su-35S and Su-30SM / M2, modernization of the MiG-31 interceptors in aviation, as well as by strengthening the missile attack warning system (SPRN) by commissioning a Voronezh-type radar. Under these conditions, for the United States, a disarming strike with the help of cruise missiles and B-2 is beyond the scope of what is possible. And a “quick global strike” in no way can become a substitute for this option.

The very hypersonic aircraft that should provide this blow are simply not there yet (at least in mass production and in service). But even when (and if) they appear, their carriers will be traditional ICBMs and SLBMs, or (for the X-51 rocket) B-52 bombers. That is, to deliver a “fast global strike”, Americans will have to remove nuclear warheads from ICBMs and SLBMs and install hypersonic devices instead (this in itself cannot be done quickly and unnoticed). And then you need to make a massive launch of these ICBMs and SLBMs in Russia. While all of our early warning systems (both the new Voronezhs and the old Daryals, as well as satellites in geostationary orbit) are “sharpened” to detect this massive launch. Therefore, his suddenness is absolutely excluded. In Russia, of course, it will be perceived as a nuclear strike, after which a command will be received to use all Russian strategic nuclear forces in the United States.

In the end, it’s not mutual guaranteed destruction, but one-sided suicide of the United States. After all, they, in this case, will deliver a non-nuclear strike, and Russia will respond with a nuclear one. Even if the Americans manage to destroy some part of the Russian strategic nuclear forces, most of the ICBMs and SLBMs will get to the United States guaranteed, after which this country will cease to exist just as guaranteed. Neighboring Canada and Mexico will be hit hard. The rest of civilization, including Russia, will have a hard time, but it will not perish. Moreover, the United States will not have any “spare” ICBMs and SLBMs, and even if they remain, there will be no one to install them. Accordingly, the Russian "fright" before the "fast global strike", apparently, belongs to the field of propaganda.

TAKE A GET

The same can be said about the American missile defense. She has been intimidating us for almost a decade and a half, but the United States has never created anything real, even to a full-fledged missile defense system America even further than to the “rapid global strike. The only real component of the missile defense system is the Aegis system with the Standard standard several standard modifications, but they are not designed to defeat ICBMs and SLBMs. In particular, the missile defense system with naval UVP McNUMX, which is already installed in Romania and will be installed in Poland, theoretically can not create any problems even for the most western missile divisions of the Russian Strategic Missile Forces, since no one has yet succeeded in repealing the laws of physics.

The only Russian claim to an American missile defense system in Europe that could be considered rational is that Tomahawks could theoretically be installed instead of the “Standards” in UWC McNUMX, in which case the flying time to targets in Russia would be sharply reduced . But this threat today is actually fictitious. In the ground version of the McNXX there is a total 41 cell. It is just too little. In addition, from the not yet installed Mc41 in Poland, "Tomahawks" will have to start "under the nose" of the Russian Air Defense Force in the Kaliningrad region, including one of the Voronezh-type radar stations. Therefore, suddenness becomes impossible, and the destruction of the discovered Tomahawks is not a problem. From Romania, however, it is too far to any objects of the Russian strategic nuclear forces, moreover, the missiles would have to fly past the Crimea saturated with various means of air defense.

US officials, both politicians and military, have repeatedly stated that both the “fast global strike” and the missile defense are intended against terrorist groups that can gain access to ballistic missiles and / or weapons of mass destruction, or against countries with large but archaic in organizational and technical terms, armies (such as Iran or the DPRK). To believe in these statements is difficult because, to put it mildly, the doubtfulness of such “threats” and the obvious inadequacy of such a response to them. It is partly also why so many conspiracy theories about the orientation of all this against us appear in Russia. Nevertheless, based on the practical actions of the United States, we have to admit that Washington really was guided by such a strange set of threats (at least, that was before 2014 of the year). Russia in the United States, apparently, was considered completely paralyzed in the political and economic spheres, and the Armed Forces of the Russian Federation - doomed to degrade to the level of those of Iran and the DPRK, if not lower. Therefore, in fact, no one prepared to fight with her in the Pentagon.

MERCENARIES FLEE PENTAGON

The author of this article strongly disagrees with the widespread view that "Americans do not know how to fight." The American army has always been one of the best in the world, it could lead and win wars of any complexity and intensity. But in the last two or three decades, the transition to the hired principle of recruitment (“Contract or draft”, “NVO”, 27.10.17) and an orientation toward a war against a deliberately “understated” adversary in fact noticeably disfigured the US armed forces. They came to believe in the concept of a “high-tech contactless war,” in which the enemy would allow himself to be beaten without complaint and with impunity. And they began to lose the ability to wage a real war.

It’s unclear against whom, while the very costly “quick global strike” and missile defense system based on Ajisa are far from the worst options. For example, as part of the creation of this missile defense system for almost 10 years, the US Air Force tested the YAL-1 - a laser on the Boeing-747 aircraft, designed to shoot down ballistic missiles in the active part of the trajectory. This concept proved to be the height of absurdity from both the technical and the tactical side. Since there are more clever people in the USA than it is customary to think in Russia, they nonetheless realized this absurdity. In 2014, the laser plane was sent for scrap, having managed to absorb at least 5 billion Pentagon dollars.

Ten times more money was “eaten” by the MRAP (mine resistant ambush protected) class of several types of construction programs. These machines with enhanced mine protection were intended for the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, almost 30 were produced. Thousands of vehicles deployed in both theaters began in 2007, when the peak of both wars was passed, the United States lost quite a bit of these machines (77 loss was officially recognized units). At the same time, Americans are rapidly getting rid of MRAPs, distributing them to everyone right and left, most often for free. It became clear that even for a very limited classical war, these machines are completely unsuitable. In today's wars in the Middle East, the armed forces of Iraq, Saudi Arabia, the United Arab Emirates and the Kurdish forces have already lost more than American-made 300 MRAPs. American armored personnel carriers M-113 in the same wars by the same armies lost half as much while practically the same number of them among the troops. M-113 was created half a century (!) Before the MRAPs, and even the Americans themselves do not consider it a masterpiece. But it was created for the classic war, so it turned out to be much more stable than new-fangled handicrafts.

However, the main combat vehicle of the US ground forces is not any of the MRARs or M-113, but the Stryker. The same vehicles are equipped with the brigades of the same name, which the American command still considers a very good compromise between the mobility of the lungs (airborne and airborne assault) and the combat power of heavy (tank and mechanized) connections. At the same time, however, the "Stryker" is an ordinary armored personnel carrier (created on the basis of the Swiss "Pirana"). It is, of course, better than MRARs and M-113s, but this car can be shot in the side even from a large-caliber machine gun. The Stryker brigade does not have any heavier armored vehicles. And if on the battlefield such a brigade meets, for example, with a tank brigade of the Korean People's Army, equipped with ancient T-62s, North Koreans of Americans, speaking football slang, "will be carried out in one gate." Moreover, the Stryker Brigade has no air defense of its own at all. As a result, it is unclear what kind of enemy it is designed for? In Iraq and Afghanistan, about 90 Strikers were lost, although the enemy had no tanks, no artillery, or aircraft. In 2014, it was on the "Strykers" that the Americans staged a clowning in Eastern Europe, pretending to "repel Russian aggression." Unfortunately, our propaganda responded to this ridicule with ritual shameful hysteria in the spirit of "NATO troops are approaching the Russian borders."

CALCULATIONS IN the air defense and navy

However, there is no need to be surprised at the lack of air defense in the Striker brigades, this is a problem of the American army as a whole.

Is it possible to imagine that the Russian ground defense is armed only with the C-300 and C-400 and Igla air defense missiles? And there is nothing intermediate - “Bukov”, “Thors”, “Tungusok”, “Armor”, not even “Wasps” and “Arrows-10”. Such an assumption is so stupid that it is not even funny. Meanwhile, the US ground defense is designed that way. It has the Patriot and THAAD SAMs (in much smaller quantities than we have C-300 and C-400), as well as Stinger MANPADS (either in the original portable version or on the Hummer chassis called Avenger "). Nothing more, and not even planned. Moreover, the TNAAD can solve only missile defense tasks (to shoot down operational-tactical missiles and medium-range ballistic missiles), it cannot even theoretically fight with aerodynamic targets. And the Patriots remained almost exclusively in the PAC3 version, also focused on missile defense. “Anti-aircraft” versions of the PAC1 and PAC2 are mainly converted into the PAC3 or sold abroad. As a result, in order to fight with airplanes and helicopters, in essence, only the Stingers remain with a range of about 8 km in range and about 4 km in height. That is, the American command is not considering the possibility that the troops could be hit by enemy aircraft. Or, he believes that American fighters will certainly cope with this aircraft. Only because fighters, in contrast to ground defense, depend on weather conditions, on the presence of airfields and fuel and lubricants on them. Moreover, it cannot be excluded that the enemy fighters will be no worse than the American ones in terms of quality and there will be no less of them. But, apparently, just this option in the Pentagon has long been excluded. What is not very reasonable, if not stronger.

The orientation on the war is unclear with whom it affected even the US Navy, which received ships of the class LCS (littoral combat ship, a ship of coastal action). As expected, a competition was organized for the best version of such a ship, to which the built according to the traditional Freedom scheme and the futuristic Independence trimaran were displayed. Friendship won in this competition (that is, lobbyists from the military-industrial complex), both ships were adopted (it used to be thought that this was possible only in the USSR). However, the choice was actually very difficult: both the Freedom and the Independence have very weak weapons at a very high price. As in the cases described above with the “fast global strike” or “Strikers”, it is completely unclear for what purposes these ships are intended and against whom they must fight. More or less, they are suitable for the role of patrol ships, but “normal” patrol ships, built mainly in Europe, are not even many times more expensive, but are orders of magnitude cheaper than both LCS variants.

IT IS NECESSARY TO LEARN FOREIGN EXPERIENCE

In this article, it is not necessary to look for gloating or, especially, hats. The US Armed Forces remain the most powerful military machine, with an understanding of the situation and political will, they may well “return to normal”. By this they are fundamentally different from the European armies, which have turned into soap bubbles, and this process has become irreversible. The point is completely different.

For the normal development of any sphere, the most thorough study of foreign experience, both positive and negative, is necessary. For the military, this is doubly important, because the country's armed forces exist to counter external threats, primarily foreign ones. Accordingly, the development of foreign armed forces provides the most important food for thought when organizing military construction in the Russian Federation.

No matter how surprising it sounds, now the Armed Forces of the Russian Federation are close to the ideal. They have ceased to be an army of "Soviet-Asian type", oppressing the enemy by the masses, disregarding losses, but have not turned into a European-type soap bubble, which is an army only in name. And it is extremely important, having gone from one extreme, not to reach the other (and, unfortunately, Russia loves extremes very much).

Until recently, the Israeli Armed Forces certainly were such an ideal. With an extremely reverent attitude to the life of each serviceman, the IDF was able to wage an arbitrarily brutal contact ground war, including with a numerically superior enemy. But the Israelis too were carried away by the American "high-tech contactless" concepts, because of which the Israeli army began to deteriorate perceptibly. Evidence of which was the formally won, but in fact extremely unsuccessful war in Lebanon against Hezbollah in the summer of 2006.

In Russia, many people sincerely hate America, especially since this hatred is constantly fueled by official propaganda. At the same time, for the majority of Russians, including very many haters and propagandists, the same America remains an absolute ideal, which must be copied completely and in all aspects, including mistakes and outright nonsense.

I remember историяthat took place at the end of 40, when in the USSR, under the name of Tu-4, they copied the American “Super Fortress” B-29, which flew to the Far East in 1944 after the bombing of Japan. Tupolev, whom Stalin ordered to direct the copying, said that he could make the plane better. To which Stalin replied with an epoch-making phrase: “It’s not necessary better. Do the same. ” As a result, even an ashtray and a nest for a bottle of Coca-Cola in the dashboard were copied (although it was forbidden for Soviet pilots to fly during the flight, they had no idea about the Coca-Cola in the country), and also an accidental hole wing.

Unfortunately, there is a danger that, in the leadership of our Armed Forces, they can also believe in a “high-tech contactless war” against an uncompromising, dumb adversary, that “the war is now completely different”, that “there will never be tank battles again”, etc. . etc. Despite the fact that our budget is much smaller than the American one, therefore we cannot afford the luxury of throwing out billions on useless crafts like MEPAP and LCS ships.

It is necessary to clearly and clearly understand that the fight against terrorism is not only not the only, but also very far from the main task of the Armed Forces. Organizationally, technologically and psychologically, the army and the navy should prepare first of all for full-scale wars with two strongest potential adversaries — the US military and the renewed PLA (New Great Wall, NVO, 20.10.17). The higher our readiness for these wars, the lower the likelihood that we will ever have to wage them.
Author:
Originator:
http://nvo.ng.ru/realty/2017-11-24/1_974_global.html
60 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must to register.

I have an account? Sign in

  1. demiurg
    demiurg 26 November 2017 07: 25 New
    +2
    How would everything be right. Only global cuts are not planned for the foreseeable future. All markets are divided. Cockroach fussing between corporations in Bantustans is completely solved by PMCs, in the extreme case, a raid of white bevans on Mraps under the cover of aviation.
    No state in the world can take out a full-fledged war with an equal rival. 100 million per aircraft, 10 million per tank. And the production time is six months / year. And the inability to dramatically increase production.
    1. Herculesic
      Herculesic 26 November 2017 07: 45 New
      +7
      All troubles and wars from underestimating the abilities of the enemy, and overestimating their capabilities! Now we are also on the verge of war. They will ask us whether she needs it or not -Russia prevents the United States from dividing the world as they want, therefore, according to the logic of things, it is necessary to draw our country into any war that starts on our borders.
      1. demiurg
        demiurg 26 November 2017 07: 57 New
        +4
        That is, do you seriously believe in the possibility of a non-nuclear conflict between members of the nuclear club?
        Full-fledged aircraft are needed as long as there are territorial claims against Russia.
        1. St Petrov
          St Petrov 26 November 2017 16: 15 New
          +1
          all markets are divided.


          no. the movement will never end.
          1. Alf
            Alf 26 November 2017 23: 31 New
            0
            Quote: c-Petrov
            all markets are divided.


            no. the movement will never end.

            There will always be a desire and the search for opportunities to redo the market at the expense of a neighbor.
        2. Vlad.by
          Vlad.by 2 December 2017 23: 14 New
          0
          There are no territorial claims against Russia. In general, they do not need Russia as an independent state in these territories. GENERALLY!
          If the population can still be selectively useful to them as a labor force, then united in a state with a productive national idea is a nightmare and horror of Anglo-Saxon civilization.
          Hence all the differences, to say the least. Well, the Anglo-Saxon ancestors overlooked, did not crush the Slavs at the dawn of centuries. It seems almost everything has been done, and stories have been deprived, and tortured by wars and sent revolutionaries ... but no, Slavic civilization is not dead. And now even more so, crush without suicide will not work.
          However, it’s too early to relax. Surely again they’ll come up with some dirty tricks.
          We must look for our roots. After all, someone lived in our territories until the 1000s, and by no means in a fragmented tribal form. Otherwise, our fertile land would have long been divided.
          There were Etruscans with the Cyrillic alphabet, there was a white-skinned, fair-haired Atilla with blue eyes, there were Arkaim and the Golden Baba ...
          All of this has been tried diligently and are trying to erase from our genetic memory.
          This is what we need to be careful first of all. And from the first global blow, God will protect ourselves.
    2. crazyrom
      crazyrom 26 November 2017 18: 46 New
      0
      But where is everything right?
      The United States is seeking to be able to deliver a non-nuclear strike [...] with the help of hypersonic aircraft [...] such a strike could theoretically be delivered to Russian strategic nuclear forces (SNF). That is, the United States will disarm Russia without arranging a nuclear catastrophe

      This is what kind of non-nuclear missiles they hope to damage ours, through these covers?
      1. jjj
        jjj 26 November 2017 19: 14 New
        0
        Think of ruthenium. Its peak concentration (although a thousand times less than the permissible limit) was recorded near Bucharest and Chelyabinsk. So it looks like a certain cosmic object on which this isotope was used was destroyed. One part of it fell in Romania, the other in the Urals. The other day there was news about the successful testing of the A-135 system. Maybe then they tested it on a space object?
      2. Sverdlov
        Sverdlov 26 November 2017 20: 31 New
        +2
        Such a cover breaks through a “time” with a direct hit. They counted on a nuclear strike on the area. Moreover, repeated. Around the head (not visible here), mines with folding control antennas are buried. There are six of them. That is, the system could withstand five hits. Now, of course, everything is different ...
    3. Setrac
      Setrac 26 November 2017 21: 15 New
      +1
      Quote: demiurg
      How would everything be right.

      Khramchikhin in his repertoire, the message is simple - the US is not our enemy, then there will be a second article - China is our enemy.
      1. Alf
        Alf 26 November 2017 23: 35 New
        +1
        Quote: Setrac
        Khramchikhin in his repertoire, the message is simple - the US is not our enemy, then there will be a second article - China is our enemy.

        Wrong. The article says that the United States is not our enemy for one reason only - they won’t be able to win in an open war, and that’s why they go to our ears about it. That is why the United States and transferred all efforts to overthrow power in Russia from the military path to the path of collapse from the inside.
        And China, to us, and to nobody in the world, is not a friend. Maximum travel companion.
  2. andrej-shironov
    andrej-shironov 26 November 2017 07: 48 New
    +6
    Dear Alexander! The U.S. Army is focused on attack and not on defense. Hence the lack of some elements. The probability of a global non-nuclear strike by the United States, in my amateurish opinion, is now small, but the situation may change radically. I spoke and I say: strikes will be carried out by hybrid methods at tension points in the Russian Federation. And believe me, these strikes are very accurate and sensitive. Unfortunately, in our country the power is separate, and the people are separate, and this is the most nutritious environment for hybrid strikes. Will it survive? I would very much like to hope for this ...
    1. Sverdlov
      Sverdlov 26 November 2017 20: 39 New
      +1
      We can’t stand it. Any instability, even a jolt and everything will roll into tartarara. Fundamentals of state power: legislative, executive, judicial.
      Legislators are engaged in catching fleas, executive power rests on Putin, the court has become the largest organized criminal group in Russia.
      1. Vlad.by
        Vlad.by 2 December 2017 23: 22 New
        0
        Where to give up?
        And who will lead? Really personally Sverdlov?
        The namesake in the past years has already done a lot of things.
        Really try number 2?
        Or are you so, just finely troll?
    2. Setrac
      Setrac 26 November 2017 21: 17 New
      0
      Quote: andrej-shironov
      Unfortunately, in our country the power is separate, and the people are separate, and this is the most breeding ground for hybrid strikes.

      Can you think in other countries everything is different?
      1. andrej-shironov
        andrej-shironov 27 November 2017 16: 19 New
        0
        Dear, I do not know your name! Maybe not in another way. But they have an advantage, in the first place there is still more order, and secondly they are forwards.
        1. Setrac
          Setrac 27 November 2017 20: 58 New
          0
          Quote: andrej-shironov
          Dear, I do not know your name! Maybe not in another way.

          It cannot, they steal everywhere and a lot, Russia does not stand out in any way here. The only thing - in rich countries there are more opportunities for theft, but the USA is ahead of the rest.
          Quote: andrej-shironov
          But they have an advantage, first of all, there is still more order

          Who brought it to you? The higher the population density, the greater the "order", no higher matters, but there is nothing to be proud of (there is nothing to be proud of).
          1. andrej-shironov
            andrej-shironov 28 November 2017 09: 52 New
            +1
            Unlike others, it is almost impossible for me to get involved. Nevertheless, classical Soviet education, coupled with developed critical thinking and the ability to analyze, makes itself felt. That, at least formally, of order is more visible with the naked eye. I don’t think that in the same Germany races of golden youth would have been possible and the authorities would not have stopped this, as, let’s say, in Great Britain Sechin’s failure to appear in court was impossible.
            1. Vlad.by
              Vlad.by 3 December 2017 00: 48 New
              0
              Well, our golden youth in Nice allows themselves to chase for 200 for Ferrari and somehow THEIR ORDER doesn’t do it very well.
              1. andrej-shironov
                andrej-shironov 3 December 2017 08: 47 New
                +1
                smile Well, I can hardly admit that this is so. Do you have any thoughts about Sechin?
                1. Vlad.by
                  Vlad.by 3 December 2017 19: 04 New
                  0
                  Do you think Sechin will come on call to the import court if something happens ???
                  1. andrej-shironov
                    andrej-shironov 3 December 2017 19: 22 New
                    0
                    smile If he will be a subject of Germany or Great Britain, he will not just come, but will come running!
                    1. Vlad.by
                      Vlad.by 4 December 2017 02: 41 New
                      0
                      Should I send a lawyer as a representative? Not? Or in Germany, money doesn’t solve anything? Something I do not observe lawsuits involving family members of the German business elite. They are apparently so law-abiding that they do not give bribes, they pay all taxes before pfenning, and dissatisfied people at their enterprises do not disappear. Do not tell the German criminal code.
                      1. andrej-shironov
                        andrej-shironov 4 December 2017 08: 56 New
                        0
                        smile Vlad, please tell me, you have knowledge of jurisprudence. Can you distinguish the status of the accused from the status of a witness and the concept of a lawyer from the concept of a representative? Under capitalism, money is everything! And not only in Germany, but respect for laws decides there no less. They understand very well that only this can rest on the inviolability of private property.
  3. shinobi
    shinobi 26 November 2017 07: 54 New
    +9
    At the expense of the ability to fight, the question is debatable. The United States did not win any of the wars on their own. The ordinary war with the USA on the straight line can not be considered at all, since it is impossible for purely financial reasons. Only one transfer of troops through a large puddle will fall into such grandmothers that no one wants to take it. The mediated war didn’t stop at all. This is China, yes here. You have to watch them.
  4. groks
    groks 26 November 2017 10: 03 New
    +3
    Non-nuclear disarmament is needed only to seize power in a country with nuclear weapons. In the case of the Russian Federation, this is not necessary. Almost everything already belongs to TNCs. Western oligarchs will not destroy their own. Then what's the point? Only one option can be seen - they are afraid that we will come to power ... another government. Well, or the current one will abruptly change course to a reasonable one. Then Russia will become a real threat and then the blow may not even be with a 100% guarantee of success. Perhaps this is the only thing that justifies Putin with his ... behavior.
    1. VadimSt
      VadimSt 26 November 2017 10: 39 New
      +6
      Quote: groks
      In the case of the Russian Federation, this is not necessary. Almost everything already belongs to TNCs. Western oligarchs will not destroy their own.
      Have you come up with more nonsense?
      1. groks
        groks 26 November 2017 11: 41 New
        +1
        The lists of owners of the remnants of our production have been repeatedly published at the AS. Maybe you should first get acquainted, and then swear?
        What I can immediately remember is Lebedyan. This is one solid Pepsico. Well, so why bomb your own?
    2. Alf
      Alf 26 November 2017 23: 37 New
      0
      Quote: groks
      Well, or the current one will abruptly change course to a reasonable one.

      Not funny.
      1. Golovan Jack
        Golovan Jack 26 November 2017 23: 39 New
        +7
        Quote: Alf
        Quote: groks

        A pair of trolls on a walk good laughing good
    3. Danny_storm
      Danny_storm 26 December 2017 22: 36 New
      0
      I completely agree. Effective managers in the Kremlin and Washington are guys from the same deck. And it makes no sense to fight against each other. Moreover, 100% of the resources that the Russian Federation, that the United States belongs to them.
  5. T-100
    T-100 26 November 2017 10: 15 New
    0
    Is it possible to imagine that the Russian ground-based air defense is armed with only the S-300 and S-400 air defense systems and the Igla MANPADS? And there is nothing in between - “Bukov”, “Thor”, “Tungusok”, “Carapace”, not even “Wasp” and “Arrows-10”. Such an assumption is so stupid that it’s not even funny. Meanwhile, the American ground-based air defense system is designed that way. It has a Patriot SAM and THAAD (in much smaller quantities than we have C-300 and C-400), as well as MANPADS "Stinger" (either in the original portable version, or on a Hammer chassis called " Avenger "). Nothing more, and not even planned.

    This intermediate state is occupied by their aviation, which for some reason is not taken into account in the article. After all, the foundation of the American army is the fleet and aviation.
    1. Alf
      Alf 26 November 2017 23: 39 New
      0
      Quote: T-100
      This intermediate state is occupied by their aviation, which for some reason is not taken into account in the article. After all, the foundation of the American army is the fleet and aviation.

      I won’t say anything for the fleet. But! The ideology of the US Air Force is the Douet doctrine, which does not roll against the word "general" against countries with powerful air defense.
      1. Vadim237
        Vadim237 27 November 2017 00: 21 New
        +2
        Unfortunately, they have a lot of means for destroying and exhausting air defense systems such as Russia.
        1. Vlad.by
          Vlad.by 2 December 2017 23: 29 New
          0
          I am trying to imagine the state of their airfields and still unflown aircraft 30 minutes after the start of the "exhaustion" of our air defense in any single theater.
          You are aware that any attack by our air defense is a declaration of war, with all the attendant delights of the Russian military doctrine. Including a preventive nuclear strike. Will their Air Force last long after pressing the red button?
  6. Dead duck
    Dead duck 26 November 2017 13: 43 New
    +5
    Therefore, there can be only one disarming strike, ensuring the destruction of 100% of Russian strategic nuclear forces, and almost simultaneously.

    not a ... at least 150%, or even all 200%
    Russians always have something in reserve to answer laughing
  7. Old26
    Old26 26 November 2017 16: 36 New
    0
    What happened to Alexander Khramchikhin ?? I simply don’t recognize his articles. As if they were written by a completely different person than the one who wrote about 10-15 years ago about "rusty Russian missiles" and the like. Two articles in two weeks and ...
    Unfortunately, only one plus.

    Quote: andrej-shironov
    Dear Alexander! The U.S. Army is focused on attack and not on defense. Hence the lack of some elements. The probability of a global non-nuclear strike by the United States, in my amateurish opinion, is now small, but the situation may change radically. I spoke and I say: strikes will be carried out by hybrid methods at tension points in the Russian Federation. And believe me, these strikes are very accurate and sensitive. Unfortunately, in our country the power is separate, and the people are separate, and this is the most nutritious environment for hybrid strikes. Will it survive? I would very much like to hope for this ...

    He will not answer you, because he is not one of those who write in VO. The situation fundamentally for BSU will not be able to change in the coming decades, if only because the Americans do not have the tools to implement this concept. And it is not expected in the coming years. I want to remind those who don’t know where the legs of this concept grow. FAST GLOBAL IMPACT so to speak the original message. Some time ago, EMNIP in the middle of the last decade, the Americans made an attempt to remove their sworn enemy Osama Bin Laden. With a nuclear submarine located in the Gulf of Oman at the base of U. B, L. two Tomahawks were released in Afghanistan. The accuracy of their hit would not allow him to survive, but there was only one thing. Missiles went to the goal of about 2 hours. During this time, bin Laden calmly did the right thing and left. The missiles hit the camp, of course, but the goal of the operation, the destruction of Bin Laden, was not achieved.
    This is where the concept came from - delivering a quick, high-speed strike by non-nuclear means against targets. And as Khramchikhin correctly writes, this BSU is not intended against Russia in many ways
    In particular, those few Minuteman or Trident class non-nuclear missiles that the Americans want to have one way or another will be included in the ceilings of the START-3 treaty. Namely, they and only they can currently provide a strike on the target within half an hour. All other promising weapons systems that were planned under this concept do not exist, and if their prototypes have passed, then 2 or 3 tests are also unsuccessful. But even the option with ballistic missiles is impossible, since this problem has not been settled with Russia. Therefore, I think it’s not worth talking about some mythical hybrid attacks. As it is not worth considering this concept to talk about thousands of American cruise missiles. Their CD is not a quick global blow.
    You say that these strikes will be quick and sensitive. Can you give an example of such strikes?

    Quote: T-100
    This intermediate state is occupied by their aviation, which for some reason is not taken into account in the article. After all, the foundation of the American army is the fleet and aviation.

    The question is not what their aviation occupies, what niche. The question is that the damage zones of our anti-aircraft systems are repeatedly blocked by the presence of various systems, which the Americans do not have. And aviation is certainly good, but it is not a panacea. An airplane cannot hang in the air for hours waiting for the very goal that the THAAD or Patriot will miss. And she (aviation) will be completely out of business if it comes to the defeat of missiles or their warheads
    1. Town Hall
      Town Hall 26 November 2017 22: 04 New
      +1
      Quote: Old26
      The question is that the zones of destruction of our anti-aircraft systems are repeatedly blocked by the presence of various complexes, which the Americans do not have




      Your opinion that the Americans are mistaken in this and incorrectly assess the situation?


      Quote: Old26
      An airplane cannot hang in the air for hours waiting for the very goal that the THAAD or Patriot will miss.



      Or just all sorts of Torahs / Bukas there will be simply useless against a goal that THAAD / PATRIOT cannot handle.
    2. andrej-shironov
      andrej-shironov 27 November 2017 16: 24 New
      0
      Dear Old26! If you are to me, then I wrote that the blows will be accurate and sensitive. American analysts do not eat bread in vain, no matter how much we like it!
  8. a.sirin
    a.sirin 26 November 2017 17: 04 New
    +1
    Unlike articles by most authors on this topic - well and balanced!
    As the “former”, I’ll point out one point that remains beyond the boundaries of the argument about the “fast global strike”: few people pay attention to the fact that using a combination of ICBMs and a non-nuclear warhead requires just high accuracy (i.e., extremely small CWO), and point damage to the target. At one time, we analyzed some of the "hidden" or, let's say, not advertised parameters of the Trident and came to the conclusion that the real CVO of this rocket in reality (in the "real", as they say now) is significantly less than the declared minimum 90 meters and is about 15 - 45 m. Rocket builders and instrumentation mocked us ...
    Well, good laugh, approx. Only now BSU just requires fantastic accuracy, which is practically achieved without active maneuvering on the descending branch of the trajectory - the laws of physics! - impossible to achieve.
    Well, we thought so.
    In fact, yes, it is impossible, only judging by the leaking information, the Americans somehow learned in a cunning way with mines. reducing speed, correct the path of warhead flying almost in a cloud of plasma. So everything, in fact, is not so blessed - because if it is possible to ensure trajectory deviations "at the end of the path", it is possible to put very small-capacity NFBs "in the hole."
    1. jjj
      jjj 26 November 2017 19: 17 New
      0
      You counted according to KVO, and they linearly. Very comparable magnitudes are obtained.
      1. a.sirin
        a.sirin 26 November 2017 21: 55 New
        +1
        No, it’s more complicated. Apparently, they somehow cunningly learned to regulate the precession. There was such a thought
    2. Sverdlov
      Sverdlov 26 November 2017 20: 52 New
      0
      Yes, maneuvering in a plasma cloud in some tricky way. The green man phoned and he pressed the steering wheels ...
      This is from the area of ​​Star Wars for divorce ...
  9. Old26
    Old26 26 November 2017 22: 35 New
    +1
    Quote: Town Hall
    Your opinion that the Americans are mistaken in this and incorrectly assess the situation?

    They simply did not have to repel raids on their territory and therefore the hope that those who fly will be hit by aircraft. Rather, it is not quite a correct and adequate assessment of the situation due to self-conceit.

    Quote: Town Hall
    Or just all sorts of Torahs / Bukas there will be simply useless against a goal that THAAD / PATRIOT cannot handle.

    Everything can be. But our Torahs, for example, can shoot down shells from MLRS, and the Americans hope that this kind of weapon will not be used on their territory

    Quote: a.sirin
    very few people pay attention to the fact that the use of a combination of ICBMs and non-nuclear warheads requires simply high accuracy (i.e., extremely small CWS), and a point target hit. At one time, we analyzed some of the "hidden" or, let's say, not advertised parameters of the Trident and came to the conclusion that the real CVO of this rocket in reality (in the "real", as they say now) is significantly less than the declared minimum 90 meters and is about 15 - 45 m.

    At one time, there was a good job called "Precision weapons and strategic balance." The bottom line is that in order to hit the shaft cover you need at least 2 caliber ammunition of 2 tons. And KVO at the same time should be about 1-2 meters. From existing guidance systems, such accuracy can be obtained using laser illumination. But for this it is necessary that the aircraft, from which the illumination is conducted, be located at a distance of generally several kilometers from the mine, which is physically impossible.
    1. Town Hall
      Town Hall 26 November 2017 22: 50 New
      +1
      Quote: Old26
      They simply did not have to repel raids on their territory and therefore the hope that those who fly will be hit by aircraft. Rather, it is not quite a correct and adequate assessment of the situation due to self-conceit.



      They apply this "doctrine" not only in terms of protecting the national territory. And wherever they have troops. On all the theater of war possible. That is, this is precisely the doctrine, regardless of geographical moments.

      And not only on land but also at sea. What’s out of the air defense on an aircraft carrier?. Phalanxes. An analogue of a land-based MANPADS in essence.


      Just a different assessment of threats and ways to counter them.
    2. Boa kaa
      Boa kaa 26 November 2017 23: 10 New
      +1
      Quote: Old26
      And KVO at the same time should be about 1-2 meters.

      Old, all this is correct, but there is one "BUT".
      The fact is that the OS also has a protection system, KAZ "Mozyr" was called. Now, I think, they have come up with something newer and more effective ...
      Principal device KAZ - several hundred barrels with a propelling charge and a propelling element-rod made of high-strength steel alloy. The speed of the meeting of the warhead and multiple projectiles at 6 km / s. The destruction of the warhead is mechanical. A synchronized volley throws shells with a volumetric cloud of a certain density, concentrating on the flight path of the attacking warhead. The system is equipped with an electronic system for target detection, guidance and salvo. The KAZ control system is fully automatic and probably works without the participation of operators.
      According to unconfirmed reports, one KAZ installation had 80 trunks.

      Personally, I do not know such an aircraft / BB that could pass through a hurricane of tungsten rods!
      Or does Amsk intelligence not know that !? Well, tady - OH!
      1. Vadim237
        Vadim237 27 November 2017 00: 28 New
        +2
        The US in the missile defense system can go further, create hundreds of devices similar to X 37, which will be capable of shooting down ICBMs at altitudes of 1000 kilometers and lower before separating warheads over the entire territory of Russia and the North Pole. The issue price is 36 billion dollars.
        1. Boa kaa
          Boa kaa 27 November 2017 00: 39 New
          +1
          Quote: Vadim237
          US missile defense can go further

          You are right, the States are seriously considering the deployment of a space echelon of missile defense. But 1000 km - "it will not be enough" .... A "window" is formed between the spans of the spacecraft. Geostationary? 36000km is needed to hang over a given area ... But then again, our EMO will burn out nifig sensors along with the brains of this spacecraft, or they will be "inspected to death" by "Repy". So, it’s expensive and angry for the Amans to strive to water us from space with rods of depleted uranium.
          IMHO.
          1. Vadim237
            Vadim237 27 November 2017 18: 16 New
            +1
            "Our EMO will burn the sensors out with the brains of this spacecraft." - This is how, at an altitude of 1000 kilometers, they will not get anything. They may even get reps, but given the ability to maneuver and quickly gain speed, similar to spacecraft, these interceptors will not be scary.
        2. Alf
          Alf 27 November 2017 00: 59 New
          0
          Quote: Vadim237
          create hundreds of devices like X 37

          Hundreds? Their pants will tear.
          1. Vadim237
            Vadim237 27 November 2017 18: 12 New
            +1
            The price of the issue is 36 billion - even a button on the pants is torn off.
            1. Alf
              Alf 27 November 2017 19: 09 New
              0
              Quote: Vadim237
              The price of the issue is 36 billion - even a button on the pants is torn off.

              Let's see how many hundreds will be 37th.
  10. Vadim237
    Vadim237 27 November 2017 00: 18 New
    +1
    We are not afraid of a quick global strike, because no one has hypersonic weapons in service yet.
  11. Old26
    Old26 27 November 2017 11: 09 New
    0
    Quote: BoA KAA
    The fact is that the OS also has a protection system, KAZ "Mozyr" was called. Now, I think, they have come up with something newer and more effective ...

    Hi Boa !!! This calculation is purely mathematical. There is a protective device - the shaft cover, there are a certain number of ammunition of different calibers and different guidance methods. . And the calculation (I think that more or less knowledgeable people did it) says that with any GPS, radar and other homing options it is impossible to achieve the necessary accuracy. Laser backlight only. But she herself is almost impossible due to the fact that the laser carrier must reach the mine almost simultaneously with the ammunition (or earlier). How long will it live in the air? Well, two munitions of two tons each are the necessary minimum of non-nuclear that can penetrate the shaft cover.
    KAZ is a completely unknown factor in the equation. And it also needs to be taken into account by those who dream of BSU against Russia (although IMHO this is fantastic for the next half century or a century). Against certain terrorist structures - this is an option, but again still not tested anywhere and the tools of this GBU do not yet exist in the series

    Quote: BoA KAA
    Personally, I do not know such an aircraft / BB that could pass through a hurricane of tungsten rods!
    Or does Amsk intelligence not know that !? Well, tady - OH!

    I'm afraid, Alexander, that no one knows ...

    Quote: Vadim237
    The US in the missile defense system can go further, create hundreds of devices similar to X 37, which will be capable of shooting down ICBMs at altitudes of 1000 kilometers and lower before separating warheads over the entire territory of Russia and the North Pole. The issue price is 36 billion dollars.

    They can’t. After all, they will not only need to be launched, but also managed (in addition to other satellites). Yes, and other countries, the same Russia is unlikely to be indifferent to dozens and hundreds of potentially dangerous goals and do nothing.
    1. Vadim237
      Vadim237 27 November 2017 18: 36 New
      +1
      They can be launched with the help of Falcon 9, the cost of launching 70 million, for 12 tons of the mass of such an interceptor, the cost of the apparatus itself 20 to 40 million in a total compartment of 400 such spacecraft will cost at least 40 to 80 billion dollars to be launched into orbit, including detection satellites and guidance for these autonomous vehicles, which will have one simple flight program and a dozen programs for combat mode. The satellite sees the take-off ICBM communicates with one of the nearby interceptors that turns around in the direction of the take-off ICBM, picks up speed from 15 to 30 strikes and rams ICBMs, as well as its “bus”, and this device can also be guided using land and sea radars. But Russia will have nothing to answer, since we have no money. The question of creating such a weapon in technical terms has no barriers, the only question is money - the United States definitely has it.
      1. Vlad.by
        Vlad.by 2 December 2017 23: 46 New
        0
        I believe that after the third 37th is removed, a pair of "satellite inspectors" will appear next to them, by coincidence, painted green. And who is there who will knock someone out first, the grandmother will think in two. I have no doubt that thinking people are still behind the puddle.
        Immediately the question arises Doshi-why pay if you do not wash?
  12. Old26
    Old26 27 November 2017 20: 01 New
    0
    Quote: Vadim237
    They can be launched with the help of Falcon 9, the cost of launching 70 million, for 12 tons of the mass of such an interceptor, the cost of the apparatus itself 20 to 40 million in a total compartment of 400 such spacecraft will cost at least 40 to 80 billion dollars to be launched into orbit, including detection satellites and guidance for these autonomous vehicles, which will have one simple flight program and a dozen programs for combat mode. The satellite sees the take-off ICBM communicates with one of the nearby interceptors that turns around in the direction of the take-off ICBM, picks up speed from 15 to 30 strikes and rams ICBMs, as well as its “bus”, and this device can also be guided using land and sea radars. But Russia will have nothing to answer, since we have no money. The question of creating such a weapon in technical terms has no barriers, the only question is money - the United States definitely has it.

    The Americans have about 300-400 satellites of all types in orbit. Are you still planning to launch and manage another 4 hundred X-37s? Detection satellites are not connected to such devices. Exclusively only with ground-based infrastructure. To tie another 6 X-400 into the network, you will need a large number of communication satellites and a couple of control centers on the ground. The game is not worth the candle
    The combat regime program is mainly tied to coordinates, and not some "thing in itself." A satellite of the X-37 type flies, and it has a dozen combat programs. It is necessary to implement the combat program, and the X-37 is at such a distance from the possible trajectory of the ICBM that it "will not have time." Nonsense is all that. Moreover, no one will let the other side deploy so many spaceships. It’s easier to put into orbit a bucket of nuts. to multiply by zero all such a grouping. But seriously - it’s easier to launch interceptor satellites against such ships, since we worked out them 30-40 years ago

    Quote: Vadim237
    The satellite sees the take-off ICBM communicates with one of the nearby interceptors that turns around in the direction of the take-off ICBM, picks up speed from 15 to 30 strikes and rams ICBMs, as well as its “bus”, and this device can also be guided using land and sea radars.

    You still decide that some American interceptor will ram? A rocket or a bus? If the first - then you can throw all your calculations into the basket. If the latter, then the “bus” itself is a maneuvering “product”. How can an interception command filed by an American satellite (the same X-37 that you wrote about earlier) help intercept a “bus” that does not fly along a ballistic trajectory, but makes a lot of maneuvers not pre-programmed? And at altitudes sometimes lower than the American satellite?
  13. P0LYM
    P0LYM 28 November 2017 11: 03 New
    0
    The American army has always been one of the best in the world, it could wage and win wars of any complexity and intensity.

    Strongly said ... Examples are possible ??? Although, perhaps, you are right ... the American army could win wars ... but for some reason did not win ... is it strange?
  14. andrew xnumx
    andrew xnumx 28 November 2017 22: 18 New
    +1
    Great article !!!!! The author is the smartest person !!! Still to make out whether we can withstand the impact of the PLA? Suddenly he will follow in the future? Sometimes it gets scary. Those who think have been fascinating for a long time not the USA, but the rapidly growing power of China.
  15. Vintovkin
    Vintovkin 3 December 2017 09: 07 New
    0
    Quote: andrej-shironov
    Sechina

    Ahh at the scraps swing)) According to the results of the activities the most "effective" manager crying