Experts: the countries of the "nuclear club" continue to improve their weapons

Many countries possessing nuclear weapons (NW), reducing its reserves, modernizing and developing new nuclear systems, leads RIA News the results of the study of the Stockholm International Institute (SIPRI).

The institute's report states that at the beginning of this year, 9 countries (the United States, the Russian Federation, the People's Republic of China, Britain, France, India, Pakistan, North Korea and Israel) had a total of about 14,5 thousand nuclear warheads (of which in operational readiness - 3,7 thousand.). This is slightly lower than last year: at the start of 2017, 15 thousands of units were reported.

The reduction of nuclear weapons occurs mainly due to the reduction of arsenals in the Russian Federation and the United States. The total share of these countries in world reserves of nuclear weapons is 92%. Both sides are also implementing long-term programs for the modernization of nuclear systems.

Experts point out that other members of the “nuclear club” have much smaller arsenals, however, work is also being done there to improve or create new means of delivering nuclear weapons. As an example, the report refers to China, India and Pakistan.

The authors also drew attention to North Korea, which was actively developing its nuclear capabilities in 2017. They stressed that the DPRK last year demonstrated “unexpectedly rapid progress in testing two new types of long-range ballistic missile delivery systems”.

The report submitted by the institute is part of the materials that will be included in its regular annual collection. In it, experts describe global trends in armaments, disarmament and international security.

Comments

[Logall]

Many countries possessing nuclear weapons (NW), reducing their stockpiles, modernize and develop new nuclear systems

A lot - this does not mean good! Reducing nuclear capacity contributes to a reduction in maintenance costs. But you need to think about security. After all, the United States is thinking about our defense, or rather, how to deal with it ... Therefore, we have to work for a smaller number for the sake of quality. "Better is worse, but better."

[Black_Vatnik]

"Better is worse, but better."

I will correct it. Better less, but better)
Thanks to the amers, thanks to their democratic foreign policy, years later ... anyone who wants to be sovereign will be forced to produce nuclear weapons.
Satanovsky said that today there are about 20 states that can, without problems, even tomorrow begin the production of nuclear energy.

[rocket757]

"Better is worse, but better."

Is this black humor like that?

[Logall]

Quote: rocket757

"Better is worse, but better."

Is this black humor like that?

Well, or "a little less, but more" ... So will it fit?

[rocket757]

That I'm not talking about.
It is clear that the more of the one that is "better", the whole planet can become very "worse".
We can even make jokes about it, but this, as you know, cannot be called bright humor!

[Logall]

Quote: rocket757

We can even joke about that.

Victor, because otherwise you can go crazy! Irony and sorcasm are sometimes the only cure ...

[rocket757]

Alexander, we can twist the balls for the rollers at the floor, we can only twist that for us it is not a state of abnormality, the main thing is not for long ... they will spin, turn and return to the place, but they don’t know how to do this over the hill !!! Therefore, they cannot understand us in any way!
This is me to the fact that if there is a piglet No. 1, No. 2, No. 4, there must not be a piglet No. 3 !!! Ha ha ha

[Logall]

Quote: rocket757

This is me to the fact that if there is a piglet No. 1, No. 2, No. 4, there must not be a piglet No. 3 !!! Ha ha ha

[SRC P-15]

That's better:
"... And those were five yesterday ...
but big ... but yesterday ...
but very large
but yesterday
and five,
and these today,
but in three,
but small
but three each. And today ... "(Zhvanetsky)

[Reserve buildbat]

"If I had five rubles yesterday! ....
... today I don’t have three ... "
It seems, after all, Kartsev

[SRC P-15]

Quote: Stroibat stock

It seems, after all, Kartsev

Performed by Kartsev, but still wrote a miniature Zhvanetsky.

[Reserve buildbat]

Have agreed
But I propose starting the reduction of nuclear weapons by destroying it in countries outside the nuclear club. Israel for example

[Totah155]

Not at all, brother

[Egorovich]

They wanted the best, but it turned out as always.

[Wendigo]

Quote: rocket757

Is this black humor like that?

He himself does not know what he meant

[rocket757]

That is all clear. The problem is that the humor is either completely dumb or it is black!
A lot of "fun" is going on around us, because of this black humor blooms with magnificent colors!

[dvina71]

Quote: Logall

But you need to think about security.

Modern delivery vehicles allow the use of many low-power charges, destroying specific targets, and not Todin mega-fugas ... which only suits the city to level out.

[Romario_Argo]

we need, like in the USA, to increase the number of silos to 450. then the USA will not have enough warheads to hit them all (4 for 1 silos). and if even silos cover air defense. it’s generally utopia.
* to avoid restarting (2 hours)
warhead speed in height at the end of the trajectory:
100 km = 7,8 km / s - S-500 (0) and A-135 (0, removed) air defense systems
60-55 km = 4-4,5 km / s - SAM S-300V4 (400 zur), S-400 (1500 zur), A-135 (68 PR)
15 km = 1 km / s - Mig-31 (1000 R-37)

[Vadim237]

SAM 300V4 - this is in my opinion the military air defense system. Russia's only missile defense system is A 235 - 92 launchers covering Moscow and the central industrial region.

[Romario_Argo]

so far only A-135M and only 68 PR 53T6, PR 51T6 have been removed from the database (16), as the S-500 is brought to mind, the abbreviation A-235 (OCD Nudol) will appear. SAM S-300V4 is YES, air defense SV.- 7 brigades

[_Ugene_]

If some did not develop missile defense very actively, others would not need to improve nuclear weapons, and so what is the point if they can be neutralized?

[Romario_Argo]

if you read my comment above, it will certainly destroy your anti-missile defense templates, but the truth is a little different - what is served in the media and Wikipedia
* Our BBs have control and their speed, unlike the USA, is NOT (!) 1 km / s. at an altitude of 15 km.

[rocket757]

There is no such missile defense that will save from a MASSIVE nuclear strike.

[Shahno]

Of course not, just in 2-3 to reduce efficiency, this is quite enough ... And then the war of economies will go ...

[Romario_Argo]

Of course not, just reduce the effectiveness by 2-3, this is quite enough ...

and if you have 450 mine ICBMs, you can even distract from the cities a nuclear strike because for 450 shpu, 1800 warheads will be required. and if you cover all this miracle of air defense in 3 or even 4 echelons + KAZ like Mozyr, then 6000 BB will be small. 50% of the silos will survive and will be able to restart in a couple of hours after the reciprocal
* after a hole in the plutonium shell, a thermonuclear reaction is not possible, and the nuclear warhead turns into trash

[-Pollux]

Quote: Romario_Argo

because 450 warheads will require 1800 warheads

Where does such wealth come from - 450 silos? In addition, you have the wrong math. For 450 silos, 450 warheads are needed.

[Romario_Argo]

count! if you have 450 silos covered by at least 10 S-500 air defense divisions, 4 batteries x 10 PU x 2 PR = 800 PR, + KAZ of the Mozyr type for each silo. for guaranteed destruction shpu requires 4 BB. (to avoid restarting)
450 x 4 BB + 800 PR + 450 KAZ = 3050 BB
in reality, we only have 156 silos and to destroy them we need 156 x 4 BB + 156 KAZ = 780 BB, which for the USA today is 50% of the nuclear arsenal on ICBMs, only 1558 BB (336 Trident x 3 BB, 450 Minuteman - 550 BB)
* still would cover their S-500 air defense systems and reset all US nuclear potential

[-Pollux]

Quote: Romario_Argo

(to avoid restarting)

Then the question (I'm just not up to date) are missiles, fuel and warheads for re-launching?

Quote: Romario_Argo

count! if you have 450 silos covered by at least 10 S-500 air defense divisions, 4 batteries x 10 PU x 2 PR = 800 PR, + KAZ of the Mozyr type for each silo. for guaranteed destruction shpu requires 4 BB.

Your calculation is suitable only for a training ground (I will not talk about a spherical vacuum) in real life a warhead may not reach the target without any opposition from the enemy. A missile may not fly up or fly over, the guidance system may not work correctly, intelligence may not know what needs to be hit, and so on.
For example, the Americans on duty have hardly a third of the submarine strategic missile carriers, with us this figure is hardly better. Airplanes still need to be prepared for flight, but they can carry non-strategic nuclear weapons. However, the aviation service infrastructure is vulnerable to enemy nuclear weapons.

[Romario_Argo]

For example, the Americans on duty are barely a third of the underwater strategic missile carriers

6 Ohio nuclear submarines out of 14 (336 ICBMs x 3 BB = 1008 BB) are located on B.D., BUT (!) Upon arrival at the base (2), Trident 2 D5 ICBMs, are unloaded into the maintenance hangar, so this is a big question, how much BB really costs on them. Maybe not 3 but 8. Then the arithmetic is simple: 6 nuclear submarines x 24 = 144 ICBMs x 8 BB = 1152 BB, which is even more than the allowed strategic offensive quota for START 3.

[-Pollux]

Quote: Romario_Argo

Then the arithmetic is simple: 6 nuclear submarines x 24 = 144 ICBMs x 8 BB = 1152 BB, which is even more than the permissible quota for strategic offensive arms 3.

"" The warhead can accommodate up to 8 W88 warheads with a capacity of 475 ct or up to 14 W76 warheads with a capacity of 100 ct. At maximum load, the rocket is capable of throwing 8 W88 blocks at a distance of 7838 km ""
Pay attention to the last offer - 7838 km. That is, in order to bombard central Russia or Western Siberia, they almost need to throw the Russian coast. Under the START-3 agreement, no more than 4 blocks per rocket. Total 144x4 = 576 BB

[Romario_Argo]

Under the START-3 agreement, no more than 4 blocks per rocket. Total 144x4 = 576 BB

again in a circle (!)
14 Ohio submarines cost 336 ICBM x 3 BB = 1008 BB since there are another 450 silo ICBM Minuteman-3 with 550 BB. TOTAL: 1558 BB
But due to the peculiarity of the American unloading of ICBMs with nuclear submarines, there is a very high share of the probability (!) Of using a larger number of warheads, and only 6 nuclear submarines on alert duty. 6 nuclear submarines x 24 = 144 ICBMs x 8 BB = 1152 BB + 450 ICBMs (silos) - 550 BB = 1702 BB
+ USA, cannot use all their ICBMs against Russia, as there is also China, which in the event of a nuclear war, may join the strikes on the United States.

[rocket757]

Shahno (Paul) Yesterday, 16: 21 ↑ New
Of course not, just in 2-3 to reduce efficiency, this is quite enough ... And then the war of economies will go ...

Well, well, you’ll grow your fifth paw, you will grow hair and you can sleep in the snowdrifts! Yes, instead of a paw you can suck a tail .... the struggle of economies ??? Compete who raised more rats and who has cockroaches.

[Romario_Argo]

There is no such missile defense that will save from a MASSIVE nuclear strike.

who told you that? until you try and find out!
ACS Foundation - automation steers

[voyaka uh]

"There is no such missile defense that will save from a MASSIVE nuclear strike" ///
----
Umbrella absolutely does not save from rain - heavy rain.
But it saves from a light rain perfectly.
For this reason, intelligent people take with them
an umbrella if the weather forecast promised rain.
It is clear why the missile defense appeared?

[rocket757]

Back in the USSR, KSU was held on the topic of breaking through a layered missile defense and repelling a massive missile attack ... all new developments were used, at that time, all the methods and technical means of a conditional enemy were included in the game!
Then the winners could not be identified .... in many respects, except for the military aspect.
I think they’re also playing now, only better graphics, more introductory ..... I don’t think that we could now figure out the winner, if again the evaluation criteria are general, and not just military!
Purely for memory, the methods of breaking through any missile defense system are so effective that they are not talking about any halving of funds! Neither then nor now! Do not have illusions.
You can stop only a small raid, and then if the attacker does not have and can not carry out a special technique for breaking through the ABM defense.
Now everything froze only because of an imminent retaliatory strike.

[sib.ataman]

Alas! No way without it yet! Today the people have divorced such a thing that they’ll roll it on the asphalt. Therese are different with all kinds of Bo'ris! And bring them numbers!

[Butchcassidy]

[quoteStockholm International Institute (SIPRI)] [/ quote]

Did not finish up to the end: Stockholm International Institute world problems (SIPRI).

[Old26]

Quote: Black_Jacket

Satanovsky said that today there are about 20 states that can, without problems, even tomorrow begin the production of nuclear energy.

Satanovsky was a little disingenuous, speaking of immediate production. It’s just that these 20-30 countries, the so-called threshold countries, have the potential and the scientific and technical potential to start, if necessary, the production of nuclear weapons. But this business is still not one year ...

Quote: Romario_Argo

we need, like in the USA, to increase the number of silos to 450. then the USA will not have enough warheads to hit them all (4 for 1 silos). and if even silos cover air defense. it’s generally utopia.
* to avoid restarting (2 hours)
warhead speed in height at the end of the trajectory:
100 km = 7,8 km / s - S-500 (0) and A-135 (0, removed) air defense systems
60-55 km = 4-4,5 km / s - SAM S-300V4 (400 zur), S-400 (1500 zur), A-135 (68 PR)
15 km = 1 km / s - Mig-31 (1000 R-37)

Novel! Are you starting to juggle with numbers again? To begin with, to bring the number of silos now to 450 units is to ruin the country. For this, it is best to raise the retirement age for men to 90 years, for women to 85. Eliminate pensions, instead of giving salaries to employees, give ration. Not working - soldering three times
downward.
Nobody knows what characteristics the S-500 will have, and you have already defined it as a strategic missile defense system.
Further, although the S-300B4 system is capable of hitting targets at speeds of 4,5 km / s, at a range of not more than 40 km and in height is about 30 km. All your calculations about the number of ZUR do not mean that they will cover something. Now S-400 complexes cover mainly industrial centers. The speeds of intercepted targets for the S-400 are approximately the same as for the S-300, that is, in the range of 2,8-3 km / s. Interceptors of the Moscow industrial region except Moscow and the immediate vicinity will not be able to intercept anything else.
Smiled 1000 R-37 missiles on the MIG-31 interceptors. They are now in flight condition of the order of 100-120, with another half a hundred - in storage. Each of them is capable of carrying 4 P-37, EMNIP. That is, in any case, no more than 6 hundred of these missiles, which in such numbers are simply not in service (if they are accepted at all).

Quote: Romario_Argo

if you read my comment above, it will certainly destroy your anti-missile defense templates, but the truth is a little different - what is served in the media and Wikipedia
* Our BBs have control and their speed, unlike the USA, is NOT (!) 1 km / s. at an altitude of 15 km.

Our warheads, like everyone else in the world, are currently out of control. There are no guided warheads in the world from the word ABSOLUTELY. With a stretch, it can be considered controlled by the Avangard. But it is not in service, and if it is deployed, it will be in very limited quantities.

Quote: Romario_Argo

Of course not, just reduce the effectiveness by 2-3, this is quite enough ...

and if you have 450 mine ICBMs, you can even distract from the cities a nuclear strike because for 450 shpu, 1800 warheads will be required. and if you cover all this miracle of air defense in 3 or even 4 echelons + KAZ like Mozyr, then 6000 BB will be small. 50% of the silos will survive and will be able to restart in a couple of hours after the reciprocal
* after a hole in the plutonium shell, a thermonuclear reaction is not possible, and the nuclear warhead turns into trash

Quote: Romario_Argo

count! if you have 450 silos covered by at least 10 S-500 air defense divisions, 4 batteries x 10 PU x 2 PR = 800 PR, + KAZ of the Mozyr type for each silo. for guaranteed destruction shpu requires 4 BB. (to avoid restarting)
450 x 4 BB + 800 PR + 450 KAZ = 3050 BB
in reality, we only have 156 silos and to destroy them we need 156 x 4 BB + 156 KAZ = 780 BB, which for the USA today is 50% of the nuclear arsenal on ICBMs, only 1558 BB (336 Trident x 3 BB, 450 Minuteman - 550 BB)
* still would cover their S-500 air defense systems and reset all US nuclear potential

These are all spherocogs in a vacuum. The Mozyr system, which is being tested and it is not known whether it will be put into service, allows the creation of a protective dome of a very limited size. About a radius of 6 km. It is incapacitated at a time, like all missile defense missile defense air defense systems by the method of undermining the leading nuclear charge. So you can juggle virtual numbers for your own comfort, as you want. Your calculations are very far from reality. How are you going to cover the positional area of ​​the silo launchers when the distance between them is a dozen other kilometers. Creating an impenetrable missile defense is impossible a priori. And this was well understood by the leaders of the USSR and the USA, having concluded a missile defense agreement, in which the number of missile defense was limited to 100 units. You seem to be praying for this KAZ "Mozyr", as a panacea for everything. But in fact it is a complex of artillery barrels scattered in a certain territory to cover the mine. It must be recharged. He has means of radar guidance, which will be disabled during the first nuclear explosion.
I'm not talking about geography, about where and how much you can install the S-400 systems and others, and what they will cover. Again, in a radius of 60-70 km.

it would be so simple to nullify each other’s nuclear potential - would have been done a very long time

Quote: Pollux

Then the question (I'm just not up to date) are missiles, fuel and warheads for re-launching?

Well, in principle, there is. The question is whether the launchers can reload

[-Pollux]

Quote: Old26

Well, in principle, there is. The question is whether the launchers can reload

That is, there is a START-3 treaty that limits the number of warheads on duty, but we and the adversary also have warheads and delivery vehicles that can be manufactured for battle within a few hours?

[Romario_Argo]

exactly.
even the A-135 missile defense system of Moscow. 68 anti-ballistic missiles were deployed at 5 positions with a nuclear warhead of 200 kT, and there are 2 more BC at each of the positions.

[Romario_Argo]

Nobody knows what characteristics the S-500 will have, and you have already defined it as a strategic missile defense system.

PR 77N6E2 / E3 speed of 7 km / s., Range of 600 km.

Further, although the S-300B4 system is capable of hitting targets at speeds of 4,5 km / s, at a range of not more than 40 km and in height is about 30 km.

S-300V4 has a 9M82MD missile system with a speed of 4,5 km / sec., There is a third-party missile defense system at a distance of 385 km, through the ACS Foundation

Our warheads, like everyone else in the world, are currently UNcontrollable. There are no guided warheads in the world from the word ABSOLUTELY.

UBB (guided warheads) are located on the ICBM R-30 Bulava; R-29RMU2 "Sineva" for 4 promising blocks of individual guidance 500 kt; RS-24 "Yars"

Mozyr system which is being tested and it is not known whether it will be put into service

That's it, I wrote, like "Mozyr" because it was not accepted into service, and most likely there is no KAZ for silos.

I'm not talking about geography, about where and how much you can install the S-400 systems and others, and what they will cover. Again within a radius of 60-70 km

10 S-500 air defense divisions supposedly to be deployed around Moscow are untrue since they will cover exactly the regiments of the Strategic Missile Forces with silos

it would be so simple to nullify each other’s nuclear potential - would have been done a very long time

there were no technologies (!) now, but we are far ahead, the entire planet (!)

[Zomanus]

That's right. War blocks are faster and more accurate
are more likely to achieve the goal.
Therefore, megaton equivalent blocks are no longer relevant.
Although on the other hand, the same "Status" is considered?

[Old26]

Quote: Romario_Argo

Under the START-3 agreement, no more than 4 blocks per rocket. Total 144x4 = 576 BB

again in a circle (!)
14 Ohio submarines cost 336 ICBM x 3 BB = 1008 BB since .

Do not invent what is not, Roman. There are 14 missiles on 280 submarines. On each boat, 4 launchers are "deactivated" ... if you position yourself as a connoisseur of this issue, then it is a shame not to know things that are regularly voiced ...

Quote: Romario_Argo

Under the START-3 agreement, no more than 4 blocks per rocket. Total 144x4 = 576 BB

again in a circle (!)
there are another 450 silo ICBM Minuteman-3 with 550 BB ..

There are FOUR HUNDRED mine "Minutemen". FOUR HUNDRED AND FIFTY - this is the number of deployed and not deployed silos. The total number of BGs in service with these deployed missiles is FOUR. If there is an “Exchange Fund”, it is about 20-30 BG, but not 150 at all.
In service are 400 "Minutmen-3" with Mk-21 warheads and W87 blocks. The Mk-12A warheads with W-78 units are in operational storage and, if necessary, can be used as a "return potential."

Quote: Romario_Argo

Under the START-3 agreement, no more than 4 blocks per rocket. Total 144x4 = 576 BB

again in a circle (!)
14 Ohio submarines cost 336 ICBM x 3 BB = 1008 BB since there are another 450 silo ICBM Minuteman-3 with 550 BB. TOTAL: 1558 BB
But due to the peculiarity of the American unloading of ICBMs with nuclear submarines, there is a very high share of the probability (!) Of using more BBs and only 6 nuclear submarines on combat duty. 6 nuclear submarines x 24 = 144 ICBMs x 8 BB.

And despite the fact that in your opinion only 6 boats and 144 SLBMs are on the database, the Americans give (and ours confirm) that on January 12, 2018, the Americans had 11 boats on alert duty. Why do not tell me ??? Maybe because your calculations "from the flashlight" and do not correspond to reality ???

Quote: Romario_Argo

PR 77N6E2 / E3 speed of 7 km / s., Range of 600 km.

Already experienced? And when, let me ask? Maybe you shouldn’t cite as an example materials, even from reputable resources that are not confirmed by anything other than this resource?

Quote: Romario_Argo

S-300V4 has a 9M82MD missile system with a speed of 4,5 km / sec., There is a third-party missile defense system at a distance of 385 km, through the ACS Foundation

Perfectly. And where are these complexes located to cover missile divisions. Moreover, what is the range of interception of ballistic targets they have about 40-60 km?

Quote: Romario_Argo

UBB (guided warheads) are located on the ICBM R-30 Bulava; R-29RMU2 "Sineva" for 4 promising blocks of individual guidance 500 kt; RS-24 "Yars"

Stop coming up with Fables. Now there is NOT A SINGLE CONTROLLED UNIT that is in service. Moreover, their characteristic feature was very significant, compared with uncontrolled blocks sizes. The only unit that passed the test and was not put into service is block 15F178 for Voevoda. Moreover, the amount of these UBBs that she, the Voevoda, could take - FOUR.
Everything else in the arsenal of the BB is UNMANAGED (NUBB). Do not confuse systems with individual guidance, the so-called MIRV with a controlled unit.

Quote: Romario_Argo

10 S-500 air defense divisions supposedly to be deployed around Moscow are untrue since they will cover exactly the regiments of the Strategic Missile Forces with silos

10 divisions ... Allegedly ... Again fantasies on the topic. There are no systems yet, it is not known in what state the trials are, and you are already sharing the "skin of an unkilled bear"
Do ten divisions cover the shelves? Of which nineteen ???? Oh well

Quote: Pollux

Quote: Old26

Well, in principle, there is. The question is whether the launchers can reload

That is, there is a START-3 treaty that limits the number of warheads on duty, but we and the adversary also have warheads and delivery vehicles that can be manufactured for battle within a few hours?

Well, about a few hours - it might be too optimistic. You need to look at such a position as a ban on the means of high-speed reloading of launchers (how much time is considered to be high-speed), but in principle I agree with you that it will take several hours. Yes, there are spare missiles. As is and in storage of warheads to them.
I can give a simple example. The Americans are armed with 400 ICBM Minuteman-3. According to the Agreement and the rules of offset, not rockets are counted, but their launchers. According to this parameter, the Americans have 454 mine launchers.
1 deployed silos containing missiles
2. 50 non-deployed silos in which there are no missiles, but for some time they stored in the arsenal can be assembled (they are stored in stages) and delivered to these 50 reserve mines.
3. 4 silos designed for testing and are considered not deployed.
At the same time, the number of Minuteman-3 missiles themselves is as follows. 400 deployed and 281 non-deployed missiles. That is, as of January 2018, they were able to load 281 silos for restarting. The amount of BG is enough for them. The removed Mk-12A BG with W-78 blocks in an amount of about 950 units are in operational storage.

About the same with boats and SLBMs. The number of carriers the Americans have is 14, the number of missiles on boats is 280. Four mines on each boat are deactivated and are no longer able to launch missiles. In a combat formation, usually 4-10 boats. 12-2 can be on repairs of various types. In January 4, the Americans deployed 2018 SLBMs on boats. That is, about 212 boats are on alert (problems with 11 missiles seem to be temporary). Another 8 boat launchers are considered not deployed, that is, 60 boats are not bogotovye. But the United States does not have such a reserve as land-based ICBMs for boats. I answered your question ???