Nuclear Arsenal of the Fifth Republic

54
Continuing the cycle of publications on the nuclear arsenals of the nuclear powers of the second and third echelons, we, of course, cannot pass by "beautiful" France. Yet the state has acquired nuclear weapons the fourth in a row, in 1960 (thermonuclear weapons - in 1968, here they even missed the Chinese ahead), and it was the third who did it on their own, without relying on someone else's "luggage", like the British. Well, almost without support - yet the French nuclear program was headed by Bertrand Goldschmidt, who worked with Maria Sklodowska-Curie and participated in the Manhattan project. In addition, in the 70s, the Americans consulted the French colleagues with “denying advice” on a number of issues related to the development of ammunition. In order not to violate the laws, the French shared their results with the Americans, and if they moved to a dead end, the Americans didn’t explain anything to them, they simply said no, and if everything was right, they kept silent.

And, it must be said that, unlike the British, whose nuclear-missile arsenal sank to their warheads in the head parts of foreign SLBMs that do not even belong to them, but only rented, the French have kept their “identity” and support of their forces. Both the nuclear weapons and the peaceful atomic complexes with them, especially technologically, are even in better condition than the “most exclusive power” on the globe. In any case, the loss of critical technologies, as in the United States, they did not happen. Although, in general, French nuclear weapons are not a standard in general, they are far removed from the handiwork of various new nuclear countries (India, Pakistan, North Korea). Nevertheless, the number of tests (210) plays its role - the more explosions, the more data for developing more advanced ammunition without them. It was not for nothing that France for a long time did not agree either to stop testing in three environments, or to stop testing altogether - they blew up before 1995, and joined the CTBT only in 1998.



The French at one time, until the mid-90s, had a kind of nuclear "triad" consisting of atomic submarines with ballistic missiles, SSBNs (their number then reached 6), medium Mirage-4 bombers and tactical aviation with nuclear capabilities in the form of AN-22 and AN-52 bombs and ASMP short-range aeroballistic SDs and a ground component in the form of 18 mine-based S-3D SLBMs on the Albion plateau and Pluton OTRK, which were planned to be replaced with a new Hades type. But the "wind of changes" blew out the long-obsolete BRDS, tactical air bombs, reduced the number of SSBNs, and the Hades OTRK (incidentally, the system was very advanced and successful, in some aspects - something similar to the ancestor that failed because of the INF Treaty "Volga" "Iskander").

Currently, the nuclear forces of the 5 Republic consist of two "legs" of different lengths. These are the Triomfan type 4 SSBNs, each of which has 16 mine launchers, and the Rafale tactical light nuclear strike aircraft with aeroballistic UR of the new version of the ASMP-A. Of the 4 SSBNs, one is always being repaired, and one is undergoing postrepair or preprepare, so the French did not even manufacture 4 missile carriers, which are only available for 3 SSBN weapons, i.e. 48 pieces, plus an extremely small stock for training launches and exchange stock. The 70 SSBN is constantly on combat service lasting up to the 1SAT, in essence, this retards the potential for France and is exhausted (if you can’t even launch another SSBB during the crisis period, of course). Only the reciprocal use of this arsenal is supposed, and for reliable communication with the boats a center of superlong-wave radio communication is built, there are also aviation repeaters, although the French or the United States have sophisticated and highly developed combat control systems very far. But not Pakistan any either.

These missile carriers go to combat service in the Bay of Biscay, patrol there, and the English SSBN usually goes there, which even led to a serious clash between them - somehow they managed to meet two loneliness and please in a fairly long repair. After that episode, in countries suffering from budget cuts, they even discussed the issue of patrols in turn, they say, you can still save money and you don’t have to fear new accidents. But national pride leaped, and the only thing that was finally agreed upon was the joint defense of the SSBN patrol area by the forces of the fleets, they say, you can use less forces. All SSBNs are based in the same base near Brest, where there are 2 dry docks, a protected storage of warheads and an SLBM storage, where they can be stored up to 24 missiles (in the vertical position - this is not a hidden launcher, it is the storage features of the French missiles).


One of the test launches of the M51 SLBMs from the ground stand

The “triomfans” from the end of 2016 no longer carry the SLBM of the previous M45 modification (advanced SLNX M4 of the development of the 80-x end). All are equipped with the M51 SLBM, which came into service in 2010. This is a stripped-down version of the much more ambitious M5 project, which was assumed to be a missile with a range first from 10 to 14 thousand km with different loads and capable of carrying up to 10 BB. But I had to become more modest, and the M51 with a mass of 52-56 ™ carries no more than 6 BB to the range of 6-8 thousand km. The rocket is solid, three-stage, with a liquid BB dilution step. There are two versions of SLBMs - M51.1 (for the time being on 2 SSBNs) and M51.2 (on 1 SSBNs). The first is equipped with old BB TN75 with power 100 and carries a set of means to overcome (PCB) missile defense, probably quite a primitive level. The second carries the new TNO BB with adjustable power from 30 to 150kt (previously it was thought that power up to 300kt) and more advanced PCB PRO, has increased accuracy, and, probably, increased range - estimates differ from 8 to 9 km. But there were no launches at a distance of more than 6 thousand km, so all the French stories about the 10 range or even 12 thousand km with one BB or about 8-9 with 6 BB, follow the same statement as the anglers' stories about such a fish that has collapsed "- without launching to the maximum range, any rocket is not considered capable of flying at that very range, and with all the experience the likelihood of an unpleasant outcome with such a launch, if it was not during the tests, is very high. About the flat trajectory, strongly reduced active section and other possibilities of domestic SLBMs, with reference to М51, nothing is reported, regarding the energy-mass perfection of the product, of course, far from the 40-tonne P-29РМУ2.1 "Sineva" (with equipment "Liner") or to "Bulava ", but, in general, it is a very worthy product, made at a good technological level. True, in the construction they tried to save where possible, for example, using the technology of solid-fuel boosters for space rockets of the Ariane type. In total, 7 launches of this rocket were conducted, of which 1, in 2013, was unsuccessful, the rest were declared successful. With the SSBN, an 4 launch was carried out; 3 was successful.

Usually, Triomfans patrol with an incomplete set of BBs on missiles, it is believed that their 4, and on some missiles and on 1 BB, obviously, for "warning" strikes, or for firing at long ranges. Obviously, however, that a "precautionary" strike by an SLBM would not cause a precautionary full salvo, because no one would be interested in how many warheads on a strategic level rocket fly - they will answer "from the heart." But this delusion, unfortunately, is rooted in the West, and now the Americans are also sick of it, with their program of vivisection of warheads W76-1 100к in W-76-2 6.5к. The total number of charges for the 51 SLBMs, taking into account the reserve and the exchange fund, can be estimated in 240 units TN-75 and TNO (it is assumed that TN-75 through 4 will be converted into TNO). A third version of the M51.3 SLBM is being developed; it is expected by 2025, with a new third stage, with increased range and accuracy.

The second "foot" of French nuclear deterrence is aviation. After writing off in the middle of 2018. the last two-seater nuclear attack aircraft Mirage-2000N, all functions of nuclear deterrence from the air transferred to the two-seater Rafali. Two squadrons of the Air Force, EC 1 / 4 "Gascony" and the EU 2 / 4 "Lafayette", based at the Saint-Dizier airbase, 140km east of Paris. Before the cancellation of the "Mirage" they were also based at the Istr airbase, now all the eggs are in the same basket. Although the storage of nuclear munitions has been preserved in Istra, and at another air base, where the Mirage had previously been used for nuclear purposes. In these two squadrons there is up to 40 "Rafal" modification BF3, now equipped with an aeroballistic supersonic SS ASMP-A, weighing up to 900kg and having a range of flight to 500km (with a high-altitude flight profile, with a combined will be less, with a low-altitude - less than several times) and carrying a special TNA warhead with a capacity of up to 300. Total was released from 2009g. 54 such missiles, including those used in the tests, just now there are only 50.


Rafal BF3 with UR ASMP-A

Along with the flight range of the Rafales, which have refueling in the air, nuclear strikes can be launched several thousand kilometers from the house, which is quite enough for the French. In addition to the land Rafale, 10 double Rafale MF3s from the 11F squadron of the Navy aviation are also capable of carrying this missile from the aircraft carrier Charles de Gaulle. On this ship there is also storage for "products", which, however, never got on board. And training on nuclear use from its side is extremely rare - only one is known last year. But the very possibility makes Charles the only NATO naval surface ship capable of carrying tactical nuclear weapons (American ships, including aircraft carriers, have long been deprived of this opportunity). Unlike our ships fleetwhere there are enough non-strategic nuclear carriers.


Deck "Rafal" MF3 with UR ASMP-A

Previously, the French function of the French Navy could be carried by the famous (successful participation in the Anglo-Argentine war) deck subsonic attack aircraft Super-Etandard, but in 2016, the last of them were written off.

SD ASMP-A is considered a “pre-strategic” weapon, according to French views, and can be used as a “warning weapon” in front of a submarine-launched SLBM with a SSBN. So, if we sum up the charges to the 51 SLBMs and the ASMP-A SD, we get the total figure of 290, according to other data, slightly less than the 300 nuclear warheads. This is the nuclear arsenal of France. This makes 5 Republic the owner of at least the fourth nuclear arsenal, and if you take the lower estimates of the Chinese arsenal in 280 charges, then the third. Obviously, this is more than enough for them: over the past decades, the arsenal has been gradually declining, but this figure is likely to linger for a long time.
54 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must sign in.
  1. -3
    18 February 2019 06: 38
    Where is the confidence that a single ICBM, with a single BB that has separated from it, flying somewhere in a sparsely populated area, for example, Siberia, will immediately respond with a "full volley" and "the whole world is in dust"?
    1. +12
      18 February 2019 07: 20
      Quote: ares1988
      Where is the confidence that a single ICBM, with a single BB that has separated from it, flying somewhere in a sparsely populated area, for example, Siberia, will immediately respond with a "full volley" and "the whole world is in dust"?

      In some sparsely populated areas of Siberia (for example, for peaceful purposes - the Sayano-Shushenskaya hydroelectric station), one cannot miss a missile with an ordinary warhead. In addition, this is a precedent, today alone, tomorrow ten, etc. Did you get the logic?

      By the way, in the days of the USSR, the secondary school was protected by an air defense regiment.
      1. -8
        18 February 2019 07: 32
        I didn't get it. A single missile in a sparsely populated area can be answered with the same single ICBM in a similar sparsely populated area of ​​the same France. Alaverdi, so to speak, so that tomorrow 10 won't arrive. Here, recently, at the top war, it was discussed that we do not provide for a massive attack on ICBMs as the only option for their use - a more flexible strategy, from the "demonstration" option to the EMNIP option, "retaliation".
        1. +1
          18 February 2019 07: 37
          I would be grateful for the link to the article and discussion.
          1. +3
            18 February 2019 07: 53
            Yes of course:
            https://topwar.ru/153069-morskie-razbojniki-protiv-jadernogo-sderzhivanija.html
            1. +11
              18 February 2019 10: 48
              Quote: ares1988
              Yes of course:
              https://topwar.ru/153069-morskie-razbojniki-protiv-jadernogo-sderzhivanija.html

              Thank you, I read almost the entire discussion. But the point is not in the comments, but in the article. In essence, its author models various situations in which it will be difficult for Russia formally to justify the use of nuclear weapons according to the Military Doctrine of the Russian Federation. KSHU, familiar. Only doctrine is not dogma.

              You, too, argue that we should not erase France because of just one missile, 100 kilotons and yes across deserted Siberia. Only who gave you the right to determine for the Siberians, 100 kT is so, nothing, it would be more - then unacceptable. Who, in the end, gave the right to launch a single launch to the French, didn’t they take away his wife from Macron?

              My personal opinion is that if Russia was attacked with nuclear weapons, we are obliged to use nuclear weapons in response to the amount we have for retaliatory strike. All planned goals must be destroyed without the slightest regret.
              1. -4
                18 February 2019 12: 20
                Respected! We seem to be talking a little about different things. Let me try to explain in order. "The point is not in the comments" - so I also had in mind the article itself, first of all: the scenarios for the use of nuclear weapons described in it: from a demonstration to full Armageddon. "Doctrine is not the norm" - yes, but they themselves sent me to it) I am so not offended, and I understand that scenarios are possible in which the Russian Federation will be the first to use nuclear weapons. "Through deserted Siberia" - they can (within the framework of the demonstration) and by tervodes or Novaya Zemlya. This is the same light version. "Who gave you the right" - nobody. As well as you. And the Siberians. Completely different people will decide, and I'm just trying to understand (and you too) what decision they will take in this hypothetical situation. "Who gave the right ... to the French" - nobody. Again, we are talking about a scenario (hypothetical) in which France decided to use nuclear weapons against the Russian Federation in a "demonstration" format. You have one vision of VLOOKUP responses in such a situation, I have another. Well, the script itself m. something like this: in the course of the conventional conflict between the CSTO and NATO, ours reached the English Channel and reached the borders of France (and in some places crossed). Allies-Anglo-Saxons of France on NATO refuse to use nuclear weapons, fearing a massive response, but are ready to fight the Russian threat to the last Frenchman. Seeing the threat of losing its sovereignty, France demonstrates its readiness to use nuclear weapons in order to declare a truce with subsequent (possibly separate) negotiations.
                1. +2
                  18 February 2019 12: 47
                  but who will shoot rockets at them, because half of our generals and the government have real estate there, but what about their children on the Cote d'Azur, you think about their children, and the Russians don’t get used to dying, women will live
                2. +2
                  18 February 2019 13: 50
                  Quote: ares1988
                  Well, the script itself something like this: during the conventional conflict of the CSTO vs NATO, ours reached the English Channel and reached the borders of France (and in some places crossed).

                  In this scenario, the French are already "too late to drink Borjomi, because the kidneys have already failed." Naturally, we will not use nuclear weapons against our own troops. If someone decides to hurry up in such a situation and use nuclear weapons in Russia, then it is obvious that the answer should be applied to the main beneficiary - the United States.
                  1. 0
                    18 February 2019 16: 55
                    1) Well, why is it too late - it's time, the loss of sovereignty and statehood is at stake 2) Why in your own way? In Paris etc 3) and the point is after a single one for bombing the United States from the French? To avenge polar bears in Novaya Zemlya (or brown in the taiga)? Well, they will launch them back and forth - it will not seem enough. For 40-70 million victims on each side - isn’t it too cool for the bears?
                    1. +1
                      18 February 2019 20: 26
                      A matter of principle.
                      1. 0
                        18 February 2019 20: 37
                        Another one was going to heaven. Wife / children / friends / relatives agree?
                3. 0
                  6 May 2019 18: 06
                  Quote: ares1988
                  Well, the script itself something like this: during the CSTO vs NATO conventional conflict, ours reached the English Channel and reached the borders of France

                  Brad. Which of your CSTO will go to war with Europe? They are there for their own purposes, IMHO, so that Russia defends them
              2. mvg
                +5
                18 February 2019 14: 53
                have ours taken Macron’s wife?

                Macron's wife is safe. It’s like the Eiffel Tower, in importance and age ...
        2. +7
          18 February 2019 07: 54
          Quote: ares1988
          Not understood.

          The risks are too great that this is not the last and the sooner to destroy the enemy, the more likely they will cause less damage. There will be no time to think, everything is in time pressure mode.
          1. -1
            18 February 2019 08: 36
            Time trouble - yes. But the fact of launching a single ICBM will not automatically trigger the launch of "everything and everyone" at the aggressor. Similar situations were in case of false alarms of the early warning system (at least 4 cases, we and they) - nothing, we figured it out. Thanks to Comrade Petrov for our happy childhood.
            1. +3
              18 February 2019 15: 14
              Quote: ares1988
              But the fact of launching a single ICBM will not automatically trigger the launch of "everything and everyone" at the aggressor.

              Why?
              The fact is that there will be no certainty in detecting ALL missiles. Accordingly, even one missile will cause a massive strike.
              And where it will fly, to the uninhabited regions of Siberia or Moscow, is deeply parallel. For a very simple reason: a retaliatory strike will be delivered immediately upon detection of a launch. That is, long before the warhead reaches its destination.
              1. +1
                18 February 2019 16: 49
                Practice shows otherwise. There was no massive response in cases of false triggering of the sprn, they tried to figure it out. Even when the scenario was very suspicious, for example, the same meteorological rocket at EBN. The same "Perimeter", as far as can be judged, was supposed to launch Armageddon when traces of several nuclear explosions were found, not one. If, according to your logic, then any neo-Nazis / terrorists who launched a BR in the Russian Federation (where they will take it, and not necessarily even with nuclear warheads) - will automatically bring on the country from whose territory the launch was carried out massive nuclear retaliation from the Russian Federation.
                1. +2
                  18 February 2019 16: 56
                  Quote: ares1988
                  Practice shows otherwise.

                  What practice ?????


                  Quote: ares1988
                  In cases of false positive response, there was no massive response, they tried to figure it out.

                  Well yes. Because there was a time. This will not work with France. In general, this is precisely this very thing that makes a dangerous medium and small missile. Lack of time for analysis.

                  Quote: ares1988
                  If, by your logic, then any neo-Nazis / terrorists who launched BR in the Russian Federation (where they get it, and not necessarily even with YaBCh) will automatically bring to the country from whose territory the launch was made, massive nuclear retaliation from the Russian Federation.

                  In fact, yes. The probability of such a massive blow is extremely high. The only option is a direct connection and an attempt to agree. While the rocket is flying.
                  1. +4
                    18 February 2019 17: 47
                    "what practice?" - cases of false alarms. There is no other, and I hope there won't be. "there will be no time" - there will be. We're talking about mbr, not brigade. In general, since we are talking about a global conflict, then most likely by that time the same Perimeter will be transferred to the "active mode". Let him monitor and decide for himself. "In fact, yes" - well, here only life could judge. No offense, but I am sincerely glad that in this case you will not make the decision to strike back. IMHO it is stupid to destroy the country without even understanding: what is it flying out of there and are they really to blame there. And it's not a matter of humanism.
                    1. +1
                      18 February 2019 18: 38
                      Quote: ares1988
                      "what practice?" - cases of false triggering of sprn

                      No, this "practice" is at the level of agitprop tales. No one will tell the truth, thereby revealing how decisions are made. That is, information of the "burn before reading" level

                      Quote: ares1988
                      "there will be no time" - there will be. We're talking about mbr, not brigade.

                      We are talking about retaliatory strike. And therefore, it does not really matter in response to what noticed launches it is applied. The fact itself is important.

                      Quote: ares1988
                      In general, since we are talking about a global conflict, then most likely by that time the same Perimeter will be transferred to the "active mode"

                      This is also an agitprop scarecrow. If "Perimeter" is applied, then the blow was missed.

                      And the retaliatory strike will be scanty compared with the retaliatory counter. Because most nuclear weapons will be destroyed by an enemy strike.

                      Quote: ares1988
                      No offense, but sincerely glad that in this case you do not make a decision on retaliation.

                      There, nothing depends on the person's personality 8))) Only strict execution of instructions. It is precisely this that preserves the very "mutual assured destruction" that saved the world from nuclear catastrophe. It is it, not humanistic snot

                      Quote: ares1988
                      IMHO it’s stupid to destroy a country without even understanding: that it flies from there and whether they really are to blame. And it is not humanism that matters.

                      Sorry, but we are discussing a "warning strike" by a ballistic missile in Siberia. What kind of "trial" can we talk about ???? Is it not our own fault that they used nuclear weapons against us? And shouldn't we repent instead of punishing the aggressor?
                      1. 0
                        18 February 2019 19: 22
                        About the implementation of instructions: well, what instructions are there for the president, the minister of defense and the head of the FSB (it seems like, from memory, these three are authorized), when the three of them in time trouble decide in 5 minutes what to do in the conditions of a single MBR flight to the uninhabited expanses of Siberia? Instructions - they are before and after, and here is an express assessment and decision making. "not to blame" - no. "to repent" - also not)
                      2. +1
                        18 February 2019 19: 30
                        Quote: ares1988
                        Well, what are the instructions of the president, the minister of defense and the head of the FSB

                        The same as those of the sentry, in accordance with which he uses weapons. At the sentry they are in the UGKS, they have, most likely in some "combat regulations of the Strategic Missile Forces"

                        Quote: ares1988
                        Instructions - Before and After

                        No, they are on time. There is an act of aggression, must be answered. There is no guarantee that the rocket is alone.
                      3. 0
                        18 February 2019 19: 32
                        And the existence of such instructions for higher education is not from the field of propaganda?
                      4. +2
                        18 February 2019 19: 39
                        Quote: ares1988
                        And the existence of such instructions for higher education is not from the field of propaganda?

                        Rather, their lack of propaganda.
                      5. -1
                        18 February 2019 19: 42
                        Already value judgments) Not 100% are already available. But I, Dear, do not insist, see below.
                      6. 0
                        18 February 2019 19: 34
                        Well, God would be with you, even if they are, in the form of recommendations there, or something else - you are not familiar with them. So do I. How do you know that there is indicated on any use of nuclear weapons, including a demonstration, to massively use nuclear weapons in response to the aggressor?
                      7. +2
                        18 February 2019 19: 40
                        Quote: ares1988
                        including a demonstration

                        How do you know that this is a "demonstration"?
                      8. -1
                        18 February 2019 19: 52
                        Are we considering a specific situation? By the number of ICBMs and the BB separated from them, by the estimated area of ​​their fall. Proceeding from this, taking into account the radio message transmitted in clear text ... We look at where it flies (thanks to the service), we understand that the trajectory corresponds to the one voiced, we are sitting on a betrayal ready to press the button ... After 20-25 minutes after starting, we observe a fungus in the conditional Siberia or another uninhabited area (yes they can even gasp on the cords - this is a demonstration), we understand that the opponent is not joking. Well, to make him joke more like that - similarly we demonstrate our willingness to use nuclear weapons, and ... we make some kind of decision . Bearing in mind the fact that farther tanking to Paris will not work, and that the French have nothing to lose, they can even go baw. Question: is there anything to lose for us in such a situation?
                      9. +2
                        18 February 2019 20: 02
                        Quote: ares1988
                        Are we considering a specific situation? By the number of ICBMs

                        ??
                        It is a specific situation. You make a decision. You are reported "at least one ballistic missile has been fired at us."
                        There is absolutely no guarantee that all missiles are detected. On the contrary, you must consider that this is a massive disarming strike, just the means of counteracting observation are so good that only one missile was detected.

                        What is the right solution? Unambiguously reciprocal, as yet all means of a nuclear attack have not been destroyed.

                        Quote: ares1988
                        In 20-25 minutes after the launch, we observe a fungus in conditional Siberia or another uninhabited area (yes, they can also gasp on the cords - this is a demonstration), we understand that the opponent is not joking.

                        Such nonsense was recently suggested by Obama. Say "let's move from retaliatory to retaliatory strike." But even hamburgers in a Washington eatery failed to bribe Dmitry Evgenievich. Obama with his idea was sent to a distant pedestrian.
                        For a retaliatory strike after the first "disarming" strike is quite possible to repel with existing missile defense systems.
                      10. 0
                        18 February 2019 20: 25
                        Must? This is for those instructions that neither you nor I have seen? Judging by your description in these instructions, there is one phrase: if at least one rocket flies at us, launch everything that is available to everyone with whom you are fighting. Concisely, but does not take into account the whole diversity of life. Well, if our means of detection are so good that they can track only one missile with a massive launch of ICBMs, I would in this situation immediately after the outbreak of the war transfer it from conventional to nuclear. Why wait then? With this technique, we can completely miss the launch of the mbr in our direction. I don’t know about Obama, if it doesn’t make it difficult, I will be grateful for the details.
                      11. -1
                        18 February 2019 19: 29
                        I proceed only from the fact that in the conditions of the situation under consideration, the people who will make the decision will figure one against the other, and, in general, even a couple of minutes will be enough to understand that to begin a massive exchange because of one ICBM with one warhead - not worth it. Moreover, this warhead is flying somewhere in the Siberian swamps or on Novaya Zemlya. What is the point in such conditions to launch a massive attack on the same France? What will it give? What will avoid it?
                      12. +2
                        18 February 2019 19: 42
                        Quote: ares1988
                        what is the point in such conditions to launch a massive attack on the same France? What will it give?

                        There are no more "originals" who are ready to test the country for strength.
                        As for NATO, all obligations are included only in case of aggression directed at a member country. And to enter the war is not necessary.
                      13. -1
                        18 February 2019 19: 58
                        Sorry, but you and I considered the situation that was described at the beginning: the NATO-CSTO war, conventional war, Russian tanks on the French border, etc. Let us either consider in the framework of this situation, or consider a completely different situation, when in peacetime for no reason they launched a rocket at us. There will be a completely different alignment.
                      14. +3
                        18 February 2019 20: 04
                        Quote: ares1988
                        but you and I considered the situation that was described at the beginning: the NATO-CSTO war

                        Then all the more, no thought. Unambiguous reciprocal
                      15. -2
                        18 February 2019 20: 16
                        Well, what will it give you?) Minus ~ 30-40 million compatriots? Great price for polar bears and Siberian swamps, don’t you?
                      16. +5
                        18 February 2019 20: 24
                        Damn, are you joking "including the fool" or don't you really understand?
                        I have already pointed out more than once: the fact that the launch of just one missile is detected does not mean at all that it is alone. It’s not at all difficult.
                        If this happens during the conduct of hostilities. the probability that the rocket is not one is even higher.
                        So you found a cockroach in the kitchen. Slammed down and calmed down? Of course not, you will go to the store for a cure for these insects. Because by default you will consider that you saw one of many.
                      17. 0
                        18 February 2019 20: 33
                        Well, I answered above. We are here with you in several places correspond. 30-40 million "cockroaches" are too high a price. Maybe there is more than one rocket. Or maybe one. This is not known at the time of the decision. It is known that the tool used to assess the situation (sprn in general and sgrls in particular) was previously serviceable and could distinguish a single launch from a massive one. The answer is necessary, but reasonable sufficiency is required. You find a cockroach in the kitchen: are you fighting cockroaches, or will you burn the whole house together with your neighbors?
                      18. +2
                        18 February 2019 20: 39
                        I give up .... You are still joking. But it’s not very interesting for me.
                      19. 0
                        18 February 2019 20: 46
                        No. You cited cockroaches as an example - I tried to explain them. A clear answer could be given by the very same instructions, but we will not see them. Anyway - thanks for the conversation. hi
                      20. 0
                        18 February 2019 20: 17
                        Ah, yes: we, of course, immediately - to paradise, they - I don’t think that either)
      2. +7
        18 February 2019 11: 19
        ..in the days of the USSR, the secondary school of hydropower plants guarded the air defense regiment

        and then they managed without enemies ... ((
      3. 0
        20 February 2019 15: 23
        Yes, even if all the country's air defense would be guarded - what would the S-300 ICBMs do? correct- NOTHING (even for the S-400 maximum, this is the interception of medium-range ballistic missiles (up to 3500 km) against ICBMs, an anti-missile defense system is needed, which is only around Moscow, with high-altitude interceptor missiles (although they say that nuclear warheads have been removed from them, so the probability of interception even there it has greatly decreased) By the way, what about your opinion, do you think ours would have struck a full-scale blow in response to one missile? but figs there, Peskov's daughter is studying in Paris, he would not have allowed this, again they would have gotten off with "tomatoes", well, maximum French Guiana one missile would be sent as a similar action
        1. 0
          21 February 2019 00: 05
          Air defense there was not intended to protect against ICBMs, but from threats in the form of an enemy aircraft that broke through in case of war. In peacetime it could be either a pre-prepared plane - "kamikaze", or an aircraft captured by terrorists.

          Quote: Nikolay Ivanov_4
          By the way, about your opinion, do you think ours would have inflicted a full-scale blow in response to one missile? yes figs there, Peskov's daughter is studying in Paris, he would not allow this, again they would get off with "tomatoes", well, a maximum of one missile would be sent across French Guiana, as a similar action


          Today, in a message to the Federal Assembly of the Russian Federation, Putin V.V. said:
          How do we assess the situation in this regard? I have already said and I want to repeat: Russia does not intend - it is very important, I repeat it on purpose - Russia is not the first to deploy such missiles in Europe. If they are actually produced and delivered to the European continent, and the United States has such plans, in any case, we have not heard the reverse statements, then this will sharply aggravate the situation in the field of international security, create serious threats for Russia, because some classes of these missiles flight time to Moscow can be up to 10-12 minutes. This is a very serious threat to us. In this case, we will be forced, I want to emphasize this, it is forced to provide for mirror and asymmetric actions. What does it mean.

          I’ll say it directly and openly today, so that no one later reproaches us with anything, so that it is clear to everyone in advance what this is about. Russia will be forced to create and deploy types of weapons that can be used not only in relation to the territories from which the corresponding direct threat will come for us, but also in relation to those territories where there are decision centers on the use of missile systems that threaten us.


          Above on the topic, I wrote:
          Quote: asv363
          If someone decides to pry in advance in such a situation and applies nuclear weapons in Russia, then it is obvious that the answer should be put on the main beneficiary - the United States.
    2. 0
      18 February 2019 07: 38
      Doctrine R.F. Lurk, Lurk. But seriously, there will be no warning volleys. They mean Siberia, but where are we going ??? I see only one possibility: a high-altitude explosion with the aim of exposure to an electromagnetic pulse. But about him in any case: the whole economy is in dust, panic. There will be no less victims. Imagine everything is up.
      1. -7
        18 February 2019 08: 00
        Read and read. "Reserves the right" = / = must. "Apply" = / = apply everything at once. The French will choose an unpopulated area of ​​taiga or tundra, and 100kt will be there. They will also inform on the radio in plain text: what, where and why it is flying. To avoid escalation. Well, in response, we use one BB. In Corsica, for example, or nearby. For demonstration and prevention. It is not a fact that this will not lead to an escalation, but in theory it can just make the parties slow down a bit and think about: is it worth launching Armageddon?
        1. +6
          18 February 2019 12: 20
          No one will believe the word of the country that launched the MBR on you and no one will wait until it flies to find out how many kilotons there are and for which settlement it is crashing. A response blow will be dealt even before this rocket lands.
          1. -2
            18 February 2019 12: 23
            Where will it crash? It will be yes. Question: on what scale.
    3. -1
      19 February 2019 10: 34
      Where is the confidence that a single ICBM, with a single BB that has separated from it, flying somewhere in a sparsely populated area, for example, Siberia, will immediately respond with a "full volley" and "the whole world is in dust"?

      You may not answer, but then after 12 hours, Siberia will not be part of the Russian Federation, even if all parts of the eastern and southern districts are thrown ....
  2. Elk
    +2
    18 February 2019 12: 17
    The important point is that France, unlike Great Britain, Germany, Italy, Japan, has kept his scientific and military-industrial potential and develops technologies in all sectors: space, nuclear, aviation, naval, land. It produces high-quality products, but at the same time does not try to surpass the Americans in terms of quantity or to break up its military-industrial complex to please the American.
  3. 0
    18 February 2019 12: 35
    In general, the main striking weapon of the French is indefatigable ambition.
  4. +3
    18 February 2019 14: 01
    Quote: asv363
    have ours taken Macron’s wife?


    this is impossible, she is guarded by an aircraft carrier and an air defense regiment !! so to speak, strategic object number 2.
  5. +2
    18 February 2019 18: 46
    Now let's play the game "who will find more differences"
    https://topwar.ru/145090-yadernyy-potencial-francii-chast-2.html
  6. for
    0
    18 February 2019 23: 58
    Quote: asv363
    You can not miss a missile with a conventional warhead.

    There will not be anyone who will not launch it; there are effective managers.