The Russian general spoke about the likely duration of the missile battle during the defense of Moscow


In the departmental newspaper of the Armed Forces "Red Star" an interview was issued with the commander of the missile defense system, Major General Sergey Grabchuk. The interview was dedicated, inter alia, to the functioning of the missile defense of the Russian capital.


Answering a question about the time required to protect Moscow from a missile attack, General Grabchuk replied that this time could be "up to several tens of minutes."

According to Sergey Grabchuk for "Red Star", the missile defense system detects targets at a distance of several thousand kilometers. At the same time, a thorough analysis is carried out, thanks to which war blocks are calculated from among multiple distracting (false) targets. Then anti-missiles are sent to the “meeting” points.

The direct missile battle to defend Moscow, as noted by the missile defense commander, can last several seconds.

An important remark from Sergey Grabchuk is that, according to his statement, Moscow is reliably defended against missile defense: the system allows attacking the capital’s missiles to be intercepted "with almost 100 percent probability."

Recall that in Russia large cities, including the most important industrial and political centers, are covered with a missile shield.
Ctrl Enter

Noticed a mistake Highlight text and press. Ctrl + Enter

245 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must to register.

I have an account? Sign in

  1. sleeve 22 January 2020 06: 09 New
    • 9
    • 9
    0
    Is this something that has expanded the shield in 20 years? It is a pity that the very interest in breadth and depth is, to say the least, not patriotic.
    1. mark1 22 January 2020 07: 17 New
      • 17
      • 10
      +7
      Quote: sleeve
      Is this something that has expanded the shield in 20 years?

      It is rather desirable and not real. If only a radar field ...
    2. Vol4ara 22 January 2020 08: 35 New
      • 35
      • 5
      +30
      Recall that in Russia large cities, including the most important industrial and political centers, are covered with a missile shield.

      Recall that a235 is covered only by Moscow
      1. megadeth 22 January 2020 10: 03 New
        • 1
        • 4
        -3
        And 135 ... probably ...
      2. knn54 22 January 2020 10: 28 New
        • 3
        • 3
        0
        In Soviet times, each military district had a separate air defense army.
        \ Moscow and Baku (oil, however) were covered by the Air Defense District.
        Today the equipment has changed, but not the concept.
        By the way, Azerbaijan has a VERY powerful air defense system.
        1. orionvitt 22 January 2020 16: 50 New
          • 3
          • 2
          +1
          Quote: knn54
          By the way, Azerbaijan has a VERY powerful air defense system

          Of course, what an inheritance.
        2. Simargl 23 January 2020 19: 25 New
          • 1
          • 0
          +1
          Quote: knn54
          In Soviet times, each military district had a separate army PВО.
          It would seem, what does PРABOUT?
      3. poquello 22 January 2020 21: 13 New
        • 3
        • 3
        0
        Quote: Vol4ara
        Recall that a235 is covered only by Moscow

        recall, the speed of the minuteman is 4000, the speed of targets is from 400 to 4800
      4. Boa kaa 23 January 2020 11: 50 New
        • 6
        • 1
        +5
        Quote: Vol4ara
        Recall that a235 is covered only by Moscow

        A-235 (PRS-1M Nudol) covers the central economic region. And the capital of the state - Moscow - too.
        2-stage rocket. Having a transverse overload of up to 100g, and a longitudinal overload of up to 210g, it is able to work on hypersonic targets.
        D intercept. up to 900 km of a target having V = 4,0-5,5 km / s; with a target height of 150 to 750 km. Defeat by direct kinetic blow. But maybe with the use of NBC.
        Quote: megadeth
        And 135 ... probably
        Her (A-135 "Cupid"), darling, is replaced ... by A-235.
      5. ABM
        ABM 23 January 2020 13: 10 New
        • 1
        • 1
        0
        Moscow and the entire western part of Russia - at least 2000 km in diameter
        1. Vol4ara 23 January 2020 19: 10 New
          • 1
          • 3
          -2
          Quote: ABM
          Moscow and the entire western part of Russia - at least 2000 km in diameter

          But only what falls on Moscow will be shot down
          1. PSih2097 23 January 2020 21: 09 New
            • 0
            • 0
            0
            Quote: Vol4ara
            But only what falls on Moscow will be shot down

            Smolensk will defend itself (air defense), and there Desnogorsk NPP ...
            1. Vol4ara 23 January 2020 21: 38 New
              • 0
              • 3
              -3
              Quote: PSih2097
              Quote: Vol4ara
              But only what falls on Moscow will be shot down

              Smolensk will defend itself (air defense), and there Desnogorsk NPP ...

              We have a lot of nuclear power plants, and everyone will defend themselves for strategic air defense, as described above, covers only Moscow
              1. PSih2097 23 January 2020 21: 43 New
                • 0
                • 1
                -1
                Smolensk, Kursk and Leningrad - this is the first blow ...
                Where a lot ??? 100 - 200 ???
                1. Vol4ara 23 January 2020 23: 31 New
                  • 0
                  • 2
                  -2
                  Quote: PSih2097
                  Smolensk, Kursk and Leningrad - this is the first blow ...
                  Where a lot ??? 100 - 200 ???

                  And why not just 1000-10000? Forget about your first strike, the strike will be massive, for all goals at once
    3. Gray brother 22 January 2020 08: 42 New
      • 11
      • 7
      +4
      Quote: sleeve
      Is this something that has expanded the shield in 20 years?

      Actually, yes. Due to the S-400.
      1. NEXUS 22 January 2020 10: 56 New
        • 9
        • 7
        +2
        Quote: Gray Brother
        Actually, yes. Due to the S-400.

        The S-400 is not capable of intercepting ICBM warheads. To intercept targets flying with hyperspeed, the S-500 was developed.
        1. ak1978 23 January 2020 22: 40 New
          • 0
          • 0
          0
          ABM should cover the mines of ICBMs. The key is guaranteed destruction of the aggressor. Then for cities alone missile defense is enough. From proxy wars.
          1. ccsr 24 January 2020 12: 12 New
            • 1
            • 2
            -1
            Quote: ak1978
            ABM should cover the mines of ICBMs.

            It’s completely useless - they will already be empty by the time the American warheads arrive, since this was laid down even when calculating the time it would take from the moment the SPRN detects the launch of enemy missiles and until our missiles leave the mines. According to existing calculations, we have enough time to release the bulk of our nuclear forces on duty, so covering the mines is a waste of money.
            1. ak1978 28 January 2020 05: 41 New
              • 0
              • 0
              0
              When starting from near Kharkov and Narva? ....
      2. 1Alexey 22 January 2020 11: 11 New
        • 6
        • 6
        0
        Quote: Gray Brother
        Actually, yes. Due to the S-400.

        The C-400 is an air defense system, not a missile defense system and strategic missiles with nuclear warheads attacking from space are not intercepted.

        So far, only Moscow is protected by a missile defense system.

        Over time, when the A-235 and S-500 will be adopted and deployed throughout the country, then other cities will be covered.
        1. Gray brother 22 January 2020 11: 19 New
          • 8
          • 2
          +6
          Quote: 1Alexey
          The C-400 is an air defense system, not a missile defense system and strategic missiles with nuclear warheads attacking from space are not intercepted.

          The S-400 has different missiles. 48N6E3 / 48N6-2 / 48N6DM / 48N6E2 / 48N6M are suitable for interception - their speeds are from 2,8 to 4,8 km / s, and the maximum height of interception is from 27 to 35 km.
          1. 1Alexey 22 January 2020 11: 22 New
            • 7
            • 7
            0
            Quote: Gray Brother
            The S-400 has different missiles. 48N6E3 / 48N6-2 / 48N6DM / 48N6E2 / 48N6M are suitable for interception - their speeds are from 2,8 to 4,8 km / s, and the maximum height of interception is from 27 to 35 km.

            This is neither sufficient in speed. Nor in height.
            1. Gray brother 22 January 2020 11: 27 New
              • 7
              • 5
              +2
              Quote: 1Alexey
              This is neither sufficient in speed. Nor in height.

              Quite enough, nothing prevents the launch of a rocket even before the head enters the affected area.
              1. 1Alexey 22 January 2020 11: 34 New
                • 7
                • 7
                0
                Quote: Gray Brother
                Quite enough, nothing prevents the launch of a rocket even before the head enters the affected area.

                Do not knock. The speed of ICBMs is higher than the capabilities of the S-400; in principle, the S-400 cannot fire at such targets.
              2. oborzevatel 22 January 2020 13: 24 New
                • 4
                • 1
                +3
                The "head" from the rest of the "bus" must be allocated.
                1. Gray brother 22 January 2020 13: 32 New
                  • 11
                  • 5
                  +6
                  Quote: oborzevatel
                  The "head" from the rest of the "bus" must be allocated.

                  The "bus" falls earlier, and false targets in the atmosphere lag behind because they have less mass.
                  1. ABM
                    ABM 23 January 2020 13: 14 New
                    • 0
                    • 0
                    0
                    it makes no sense to shoot down at such a height - a high-altitude thermonuclear explosion is more dangerous than a ground
                    1. Gray brother 23 January 2020 21: 54 New
                      • 1
                      • 0
                      +1
                      Quote: ABM
                      it makes no sense to shoot down at such a height - a high-altitude thermonuclear explosion is more dangerous than a ground

                      For it to happen, the device must work properly. Damaged will not work properly.
                      1. ABM
                        ABM 24 January 2020 10: 14 New
                        • 0
                        • 0
                        0
                        The S-400 is not able to deal with objects moving at a speed of 6 km / s (warhead speed) - maximum 4.8. Consequently, it is necessary to roughly swing a nuclear charge in order to bring down. 20-30 km is very dangerous
                  2. Simargl 23 January 2020 19: 27 New
                    • 1
                    • 0
                    +1
                    Quote: Gray Brother
                    false targets in the atmosphere lag behind because they have less mass
                    When they are in the atmosphere - it's too late.
        2. Gray brother 22 January 2020 11: 30 New
          • 8
          • 1
          +7
          Quote: 1Alexey
          The C-400 is an air defense system, not a missile defense system and strategic missiles with nuclear warheads attacking from space are not intercepted.

          The first regiment equipped with the S-400 Triumph anti-aircraft missile system will take up combat duty near Moscow at the end of 2006, ITAR-TASS reports.

          The S-400 anti-aircraft missile system should replace the S-300 air defense systems of the P and B series, designed to provide air defense and missile defense, respectively. The S-400 system was created in order to ensure the same efficiency of intercepting both aerodynamic targets (aircraft, cruise missiles, UAVs) and ballistic missiles, and should be put into service as parts of the air defense of the ground forces, and parts of the country's air defense.

          The S-400 is a long-range anti-aircraft missile system. The arsenal of the system includes the existing 48N6E and 48N6E2 missiles used in the S-300 air defense system, and in addition the new generation 9M96E and 9M96E2 missiles. It was also reported about an ultra-long-range missile developed for the S-400 (up to 400 kilometers), the index of which has not yet been disclosed.

          The S-400, in addition to the anti-aircraft missile defense units of the ground forces and the air force, will also be used in the aerospace defense - aerospace defense forces carrying out missile defense of the country. In VKO formations, the S-400 will complement the A-135 missile defense system designed to protect the central regions of the European part of Russia from intercontinental ballistic missiles.
          1. 1Alexey 22 January 2020 12: 00 New
            • 7
            • 2
            +5
            From the fragment you quoted shows that the ICBMs will be shot down by the A-135, and other targets by the S-400.

            The S-400 complements the A-135, similar to how the Shell-C1 complements the S-400.
            1. Gray brother 22 January 2020 12: 06 New
              • 8
              • 5
              +3
              Quote: 1Alexey
              The S-400 complements the A-135, similar to how the Shell-C1 complements the S-400.

              They perform the same task, they simply distribute the goals. ICBMs will not go astray; the warheads entering the atmosphere will be missed.
              1. 1Alexey 22 January 2020 12: 09 New
                • 9
                • 6
                +3
                Quote: Gray Brother
                They perform the same task, they simply distribute the goals. ICBMs will not go astray; the warheads entering the atmosphere will be missed.

                Full of crap !!!

                S-400 can not shoot down ICBM warheads, and for this they make the S-500.
                1. Fan-fan 22 January 2020 16: 47 New
                  • 4
                  • 8
                  -4
                  So I have doubts about this article. After all, it used to be known that, according to the ABM treaty with the Americans, there is one area covered by missile defense - this is Moscow. And the article says
                  Recall that in Russia large cities, including the most important industrial and political centers, are covered with a missile shield.
                  But it is impossible to quickly create new areas with missile defense, especially when there is not enough funding. Why does the author write a lie?
              2. Simargl 23 January 2020 19: 35 New
                • 0
                • 0
                0
                Quote: Gray Brother
                ICBMs will not go astray
                Naturally! They start from a submarine or from enemy territory.
                S-400 - from the Kyrgyz Republic, not ICBM warheads! So understandable? It can be assumed that it is against strategists, but with a range of inconsistency.
            2. oborzevatel 22 January 2020 13: 26 New
              • 3
              • 1
              +2
              But what, the task of pairing two different systems have already been implemented?
          2. PSih2097 23 January 2020 21: 13 New
            • 0
            • 0
            0
            Quote: Gray Brother
            S-400 should replace the S-300 air defense systems of P and B series

            these are different systems, the S-400 is a large air defense, and not military ...
        3. major147 22 January 2020 22: 21 New
          • 2
          • 0
          +2
          Quote: 1Alexey
          So far, only Moscow is protected by a missile defense system.

          I was always wondering where downed rockets will fall?
          1. Vol4ara 23 January 2020 09: 08 New
            • 1
            • 2
            -1
            Quote: major147
            Quote: 1Alexey
            So far, only Moscow is protected by a missile defense system.

            I was always wondering where downed rockets will fall?

            They will be shot down in space, they will burn in the atmosphere
          2. Simargl 23 January 2020 19: 37 New
            • 2
            • 0
            +2
            Quote: major147
            I was always wondering where downed rockets will fall?
            To the planet. A couple of tons of "cast iron", even in one piece, will do much less harm than a few megatons in TNT ...
      3. PSih2097 23 January 2020 21: 11 New
        • 0
        • 0
        0
        Quote: Gray Brother
        Actually, yes. Due to the S-400.

        The S-400 didn’t even come close in terms of capabilities to the S-300V (“so I walked somewhere nearby”) ...
    4. The comment was deleted.
  2. Victor_B 22 January 2020 06: 14 New
    • 19
    • 4
    +15
    Forces the enemy to use a larger BB outfit.
    Again, one of the first to explode on approach in the troposphere, causing EMP, thereby creating severe interference for the radar for a short time.
    Hiding behind the disturbances of the ionosphere subsequent BB can break through missile defense.
    And the explosions of the nuclear warheads of the missile defense themselves do not improve the radar situation ...
    Total - hard to have a missile defense!
    1. lwxx 22 January 2020 08: 09 New
      • 31
      • 4
      +27
      As soon as the first nuclear warhead explodes, the world will no longer be in Moscow.
      1. Nychego 22 January 2020 09: 23 New
        • 16
        • 1
        +15
        Quote: lwxx
        As soon as the first nuclear warhead explodes, the world will no longer be in Moscow.

        If you have to explode the nuclear warhead in the course of repulsing a massive strike, then the world is very close in which Moscow, as a settlement in the same place, already “with almost 100 percent probability” will not exist, as I hope, both London and Paris, and Berlin, and Warsaw, and Washington with several thousand more large and not very populated areas.
        1. poquello 22 January 2020 21: 23 New
          • 0
          • 1
          -1
          Quote: Nychego
          If you have to explode the NFC during the reflection of a massive strike,

          yes no such need
        2. Stalllker 23 January 2020 00: 08 New
          • 1
          • 0
          +1
          You cruel !!
      2. Nyrobsky 22 January 2020 10: 30 New
        • 19
        • 0
        +19
        Quote: lwxx
        As soon as the first nuclear warhead explodes, the world will no longer be in Moscow.

        On this occasion, the GDP expressed itself in the sense that - "If the world does not need Russia, then why does Russia need this whole world?" hinting at a particularly “aggressive and proactive” part of the world that the answer would be “The whole world is in ruin”.
        So within the framework of what has been said, “the world” has something to think about.
        1. Fan-fan 22 January 2020 16: 50 New
          • 3
          • 6
          -3
          "The whole world is in ruin."
          Are we going to bomb Australia?
          1. Nyrobsky 22 January 2020 16: 57 New
            • 9
            • 0
            +9
            Quote: Fan-Fan
            "The whole world is in ruin."
            Are we going to bomb Australia?
            Eh “Fan-Fan”, if Russia and the USA fully exchange missile strikes with nuclear warheads, then Australia and Vanuatu with Honolula will suffice to “breathe” nuclear dust. yes
            1. Fan-fan 22 January 2020 17: 06 New
              • 5
              • 15
              -10
              Eh people, in vain do you believe in the unimaginable power of a nuclear bomb. I’ll give a few fragments from the article by Evgeny Pozhidaev: "Nuclear myths and atomic reality" -
              1. "Russia and the United States can jointly turn into a zone of destruction up to and including medium-sized countries the size of France, but not the whole world."
              2. "Nuclear winter is not possible even if the nuclear arsenals again rise to the level of the 1980s."
              3. "On the whole, a single destruction of humanity, and especially all forms of life on Earth using nuclear weapons, is technically impossible."
              1. Timurleng 22 January 2020 18: 27 New
                • 6
                • 5
                +1
                What is this nonsense? If it were so simple and safe, nuclear wars have already begun. But NATO did not have to expand east. All scientists and the military agree that there will be nothing behind a nuclear war. but some kind of Pozhidaev knows everything and rejects everything. NATO is striving closer to Russia and is developing mini-nuclear weapons that would take place in the form of a local nuclear war.
              2. Tenet 22 January 2020 23: 13 New
                • 1
                • 7
                -6
                3. "On the whole, a single destruction of humanity, and especially all forms of life on Earth using nuclear weapons, is technically impossible." you understand what energies will be activated and the consequences can be predicted with a probability of 1001% ... the destruction and extinction of all living things! you are my friend, a super layman, although I am not a dock, but to argue in this vein is the height of ignorance. You for the desk and deuce! wassat
                1. Passing 23 January 2020 21: 29 New
                  • 1
                  • 0
                  +1
                  Quote: TENET
                  you understand what energies will be activated ... with a probability of 1001% ... the destruction and extinction of all living things!

                  Stop the panic! For a real understanding:
                  https://nuclearsecrecy.com/nukemap/
                  Enter your city, choose a warhead in the range of 90-455ct, place a marker on a strategically important object of your city, not on your home))), and evaluate what will happen to the city and you. I suggest - the complete destruction of buildings, this is 2/3 of the radius of the yellow circle.
                  You can check the box Casualties - it will calculate the approximate loss.
              3. Tenet 22 January 2020 23: 15 New
                • 0
                • 0
                0
                a mixture of orbit and magnetic poles, unrest in the ocean, etc. ..... mda.
              4. Tenet 22 January 2020 23: 23 New
                • 0
                • 0
                0
                in the depths of the ocean, if the ocean survives, perhaps life will remain, but on the surface of the Earth everything will die out !!!
              5. Eddie 23 January 2020 08: 01 New
                • 2
                • 0
                +2
                Quote: Fan-Fan
                Eh people, in vain do you believe in the unimaginable power of a nuclear bomb. I’ll give a few fragments from the article by Evgeny Pozhidaev: "Nuclear myths and atomic reality" -
                1. "Russia and the United States can jointly turn into a zone of destruction up to and including medium-sized countries the size of France, but not the whole world."
                2. "Nuclear winter is not possible even if the nuclear arsenals again rise to the level of the 1980s."
                3. "On the whole, a single destruction of humanity, and especially all forms of life on Earth using nuclear weapons, is technically impossible."

                However, you are repeatedly wrong! Elementary count the bombing in Hiroshima and multiply by the equivalent of modern missiles. You will be very surprised !!!
                1. ABM
                  ABM 23 January 2020 16: 38 New
                  • 0
                  • 0
                  0
                  it, if it does not change memory, was only 9 ct
                2. djdf.tvtkz 23 January 2020 20: 10 New
                  • 2
                  • 1
                  +1
                  Count a little and it turns out that you are wrong. Destruction, so this is the current of industry, radiation ??? again, Chernobyl for a hundred modern bombs in terms of radiation however we live there. Atoll where the French have experienced dozens of charges you know ??? teeming with life today. Industry will be destroyed, that’s right, the population .... well, in the cities 70% and in the rest of the area they will not destroy 10%, there will be no nuclear winter, one average, active volcano dusts like all nuclear charge of all countries in a year.
              6. stalki 23 January 2020 14: 35 New
                • 1
                • 0
                +1
                Eh people, in vain do you believe in the unimaginable power of a nuclear bomb. I’ll give a few fragments from the article by Evgeny Pozhidaev: "Nuclear myths and atomic reality" -
                Yes? Chernobyl alone, how much it worked on, still comes around. You can keep silent about Japan. And these are not rockets and not massively, but exceptional tragic isolated cases. If real calibers speak, one can’t count on the future of the planet, so on the remnants of civilization.
              7. Simargl 23 January 2020 19: 47 New
                • 1
                • 1
                0
                Quote: Fan-Fan
                Eh people, in vain do you believe in the unimaginable power of a nuclear bomb.
                In fact, it is unimaginable for an ordinary person.

                Quote: Fan-Fan
                1. "Russia and the United States can jointly turn into a zone of destruction up to and including medium-sized countries the size of France, but not the whole world."
                Carpet nuclear bombing is only for trying to provoke a "nuclear winter" for the sake of "evil geniuses", as a natural experiment. Nuclear weapons serve to reduce military and economic potential. To reduce the economic potential - power plants, distribution stations, factories are destroyed, to reduce the military - think for yourself.

                Quote: Fan-Fan
                2. "Nuclear winter is not possible even if the nuclear arsenals again rise to the level of the 1980s."
                Well ... if you hammer on volcanoes ...

                Quote: Fan-Fan
                3. "On the whole, a single destruction of humanity, and especially all forms of life on Earth using nuclear weapons, is technically impossible."
                Gouging in the century before last is quite possible.
            2. major147 22 January 2020 22: 25 New
              • 5
              • 1
              +4
              Quote: Nyrobsky
              Quote: Fan-Fan
              "The whole world is in ruin."
              Are we going to bomb Australia?
              Eh “Fan-Fan”, if Russia and the USA fully exchange missile strikes with nuclear warheads, then Australia and Vanuatu with Honolula will suffice to “breathe” nuclear dust. yes

              One American, not one of the rank and file, said: "If Russia detonates its nuclear weapons at home, it will die quickly, and we will die long and painfully."
              1. djdf.tvtkz 23 January 2020 20: 12 New
                • 2
                • 1
                +1
                Once Zhukov detonated a charge and conducted exercises, that is, he immediately threw an army at the site of the explosion, there was radiation sickness, but not very much.
                1. major147 23 January 2020 20: 15 New
                  • 1
                  • 1
                  0
                  Quote: djdf.tvtkz
                  Once Zhukov detonated a charge and conducted exercises, that is, he immediately threw an army at the site of the explosion, there was radiation sickness, but not very much.

                  The Chinese have long associated a nuclear explosion with a strong wind .....
                2. your1970 23 January 2020 22: 57 New
                  • 0
                  • 1
                  -1
                  Quote: djdf.tvtkz
                  https://nuclearsecrecy.com/nukemap/
                  -Well, now imagine that this background is forever and there’s nowhere to go / leave stupidly-everywhere such a background will be ... both here and in Europe ....
                  1. ccsr 24 January 2020 12: 16 New
                    • 1
                    • 2
                    -1
                    Quote: your1970
                    both here and in Europe ...

                    I recalled the ditties of the time of Chernobyl:
                    "Acceleration is an important factor
                    But the reactor could not stand it.
                    And now all over Europe
                    Peaceful atom in every ...
                    I think instead of a peaceful atom of war will be in everyone who survives ....
                  2. djdf.tvtkz 15 February 2020 15: 44 New
                    • 0
                    • 0
                    0
                    Damn .... I’ve been living with this background after Chernobyl for more than 30 years, the other day I’ve buried my grandmother, 93 years old, after 60 with the background I extended so much ....
                    1. your1970 15 February 2020 18: 49 New
                      • 0
                      • 0
                      0
                      Grandmothers had a natural selection ... weak / ailing died immediately .... 35 years ago (more recently !!) Children weighing in kilograms were registered if they lived 9 days ...
                      And now they are boasting - they say they nursed half a kilo .. it's less than a loaf !!
                      What kind of health can such a child have in the future? And what about his offspring?
                      God forbid - I do not call for the death of such children, but it’s pointless to expect health and healthy offspring from them ....
          2. poquello 22 January 2020 21: 36 New
            • 4
            • 1
            +3
            Quote: Fan-Fan
            "The whole world is in ruin."
            Are we going to bomb Australia?

            if there will be a command center, etc.
    2. 1Alexey 22 January 2020 11: 14 New
      • 12
      • 0
      +12
      Quote: Victor_B
      Total - hard to have a missile defense!

      Home missile defense is the threat of a retaliatory nuclear strike!
  3. Mityay65 22 January 2020 06: 14 New
    • 11
    • 3
    +8
    Recall that in Russia large cities, including the most important industrial and political centers, are covered with a missile shield.

    This is something incomprehensible. The "missile defense system of Moscow and the central industrial region" covers only Moscow and the territory with a radius of 350 km (A-135) and up to 1000 km (A-235).
    1. bayard 22 January 2020 06: 58 New
      • 12
      • 1
      +11
      Quote: Mityai65

      This is something incomprehensible. The "missile defense system of Moscow and the central industrial region" covers only Moscow and the territory with a radius of 350 km (A-135) and up to 1000 km (A-235).

      Apparently this is allegorical, both about the A-235 you mentioned (draw a radius of 1000 km and see how many large cities and industrial centers it will include), and about the already deployed S-400 and S-300BM4 regiments, which are true from missiles medium and shorter range, as well as from OTR, but de jure also belong to missile defense.
      .... and if we take into account cruise missiles fellow ... then it will be possible to include the “Shell-s” with the “Thor” as a missile defense system.
      but this is, of course, a joke of humor.
      1. mark1 22 January 2020 07: 27 New
        • 16
        • 2
        +14
        A-235 does not work yet, A-135 - only 100 km (53T6)
        1. Simargl 23 January 2020 19: 49 New
          • 0
          • 0
          0
          Quote: mark1
          A-135 - only 100 km (53T6)
          Is it right in the Kremlin? Or several divisions around Moscow?
          1. mark1 23 January 2020 20: 17 New
            • 0
            • 0
            0
            Where they put it there and it costs. And what's wrong?
      2. Mityay65 22 January 2020 08: 05 New
        • 9
        • 1
        +8
        Quote: bayard
        draw a radius of 1000 km. and see how many large cities and industrial centers it will include

        Now it is in service with the A-135, elements of the A-235 are in trial operation. A-235 is not accepted for service. What will be there in the end is not entirely clear. Including Opinions are expressed about the wider deployment of the system with the aim of expanded coverage of the territory. For example, the Volga industrial region - the creation of a second operational missile defense area somewhere in the Samara region.
        There are two types of missiles - short-range and long-range, whether the long-range interception missile will be in the final configuration for now.
        But in any case, one cannot say that the A-235 missile defense system will cover something other than the central industrial area, unless other missile defense areas appear, IMHO.
        1. 1Alexey 22 January 2020 11: 19 New
          • 2
          • 2
          0
          Quote: Mityai65
          But in any case, one cannot say that the A-235 missile defense system will cover something other than the central industrial area, unless other missile defense areas appear, IMHO.

          A-235 is a mobile system (on a car chassis), not a stationary one. It is intended to cover the territory of the country (as well as the S-500).

          Since the ABM Treaty has not been in effect for a long time, there are no restrictions on the deployment of A-235.
          1. Boa kaa 23 January 2020 12: 15 New
            • 3
            • 0
            +3
            Quote: 1Alexey
            A-235 is a mobile system (on a car chassis),

            A-235 stationary system and the product starts from silos. And on the chassis - a conveyor, such as TZM, which delivers the product to the mine. No mobile "pipe" can withstand such dynamic loads! In addition, it is necessary to provide a long-lasting microclimate ...
      3. den3080 22 January 2020 08: 35 New
        • 4
        • 1
        +3
        Quote: bayard
        Quote: Mityai65

        This is something incomprehensible. The "missile defense system of Moscow and the central industrial region" covers only Moscow and the territory with a radius of 350 km (A-135) and up to 1000 km (A-235).

        Apparently this is allegorical, both about the A-235 you mentioned (draw a radius of 1000 km and see how many large cities and industrial centers it will include), and about the already deployed S-400 and S-300BM4 regiments, which are true from missiles medium and shorter range, as well as from OTR, but de jure also belong to missile defense.
        .... and if we take into account cruise missiles fellow ... then it will be possible to include the “Shell-s” with the “Thor” as a missile defense system.
        but this is, of course, a joke of humor.

        a radius of 1000 km is to Helsinki, if to the west :))
        1. bayard 22 January 2020 08: 48 New
          • 9
          • 2
          +7
          So we will protect Helsinki - our glorious Helsingfors, we will restore the Russian Empire! fellow
          what And we also have Fort Ross to return with Alaska ... winked
      4. Vadim237 22 January 2020 10: 58 New
        • 5
        • 3
        +2
        When entering the ICBMs, when entering the atmosphere they sharply lose speed up to 3 kilometers per second - and to shoot them down with a 400koy 300koy at altitudes up to 40 kilometers is quite realistic.
    2. shark 22 January 2020 09: 16 New
      • 3
      • 6
      -3
      Well, why else cover in Russia?
    3. Butchcassidy 22 January 2020 09: 55 New
      • 4
      • 2
      +2
      And what is incomprehensible? This is a strategic stationary missile defense. And the remaining major cities are covered by the S-400. I am sure that all this is integrated with the radar detection system, and as far as I know, it covers the entire territory of the country.
      1. 1Alexey 22 January 2020 11: 26 New
        • 4
        • 7
        -3
        Quote: ButchCassidy
        And the remaining major cities are covered by the S-400.

        S-400 - unable to cover from ICBMs.
        1. Butchcassidy 22 January 2020 14: 15 New
          • 2
          • 2
          0
          Why? Can't destroy an ICBM on hit?
          1. ABM
            ABM 23 January 2020 16: 44 New
            • 0
            • 0
            0
            at altitudes of 20-30 km it makes no sense to shoot down, a combat platoon, a high-altitude explosion is more dangerous than a ground
        2. Sanichsan 22 January 2020 17: 48 New
          • 5
          • 1
          +4
          Quote: 1Alexey
          S-400 - unable to cover from ICBMs.

          explain. what is the problem of defeat not maneuvering goals?
          I would agree with you if it was a maneuvering hypersonic unit, but if the flight path of the object is known, then what is the problem? high speed gives invulnerability from oncoming fragments? request
          1. Butchcassidy 23 January 2020 09: 51 New
            • 2
            • 0
            +2
            I think that the problem can only be in the strength of the ICBM case. Everything else, I think, is not a problem.
        3. Boa kaa 23 January 2020 12: 27 New
          • 5
          • 0
          +5
          Vicki may be lying, but it says:
          Upon completion of testing a new long-range missile, the complex will be able to hit aerodynamic targets at ranges up to 400 km and tactical ballistic targets at a distance of up to 60 km, flying at a speed of up to 4,8 km / s: cruise missiles, tactical and strategic aircraft, ballistic missile maneuvering warheads.
          There is no talk of strategic ICBMs. But with OTR S-400 must cope. S-500 Prometheus will be placed on strategic ICBMs.
  4. The comment was deleted.
    1. R-140 22 January 2020 06: 23 New
      • 33
      • 6
      +27
      Foolishness some kind of froze.
      1. AUL
        AUL 22 January 2020 08: 53 New
        • 12
        • 6
        +6
        Quote: R-140
        Foolishness some kind of froze.

        Stupid Troll.
    2. The comment was deleted.
      1. Sidor Amenpodestovich 22 January 2020 07: 43 New
        • 11
        • 3
        +8
        Quote: Dmitry Potapov
        And the majority of Muscovites if you dig not Muscovites at all.

        I did not quite understand this thesis. And if there were only Muscovites, then you can snoop, or what?
        1. Dmitry Potapov 22 January 2020 08: 07 New
          • 17
          • 6
          +11
          No, I mean the fact that my opponent does not understand the sick attitude towards Muscovites as such, while not being a native Muscovite, I often come across people who hate Muscovites only because they are Muscovites.
          1. Sidor Amenpodestovich 22 January 2020 08: 28 New
            • 18
            • 5
            +13
            Thank you for the clarification.
            The nature of this hatred is the same as that of some Ukrainians, and not only to Russia and the Russians.
            For some reason, it seems to such people that if there weren’t Russia / Moscow, then their life would immediately improve tremendously.
          2. balunn 22 January 2020 14: 14 New
            • 4
            • 4
            0
            Rather, due to the fact that Moscow and Zamkadye are two different countries.
        2. Grits 22 January 2020 09: 35 New
          • 12
          • 5
          +7
          Quote: Sydor Amenpospestovich
          I did not quite understand this thesis. And if there were only Muscovites, then you can snoop, or what?

          “Well, unfortunate ones, get ready.” Now we will beat Muscovites and fishermen very hard.
          “But for what anglers?”
          - Well, that's nice. We thought that there would be no questions about Muscovites.
          1. Sidor Amenpodestovich 22 January 2020 11: 17 New
            • 5
            • 2
            +3
            Such empty-minded anger reminds me of Hochma about a woman who invented something for herself there, was offended, and decided to take revenge on the basis of all this.
            1. dauria 23 January 2020 01: 59 New
              • 2
              • 5
              -3
              Such a vain malice


              So not empty. During the peasant revolt, the master escaped, but the estate, along with the entire courtyard (maids, kennel, grooms, cooks) burned to the ground. And lackeys are called the lackeys of the lordly Muscovites. What the truth is offended?
              1. Sidor Amenpodestovich 23 January 2020 05: 36 New
                • 3
                • 1
                +2
                Have you personally spoken to everyone from Muscovites, indigenous, and came to this conclusion?
                However, some, those that C (namely C, not from) Moscow, residents of the periphery are called uncouth illiterate cattle. In your opinion, is this also true?
      2. maidan.izrailovich 22 January 2020 08: 08 New
        • 12
        • 12
        0
        .... Plus the Central Industrial District ....

        I agree with everything else, but the "Central Industrial District" .... it's all in the past ... in the USSR.
        What is left of the industry there now that falls under the missile defense umbrella?
        1. hydrox 22 January 2020 08: 58 New
          • 5
          • 1
          +4
          Potapov is right: no matter how much industry is left there, the mobile reserve is still there, and everything that concerns him has not been canceled yet!
        2. Charik 22 January 2020 11: 18 New
          • 7
          • 0
          +7
          5 pieces of nuclear power plants
      3. hydrox 22 January 2020 08: 54 New
        • 5
        • 3
        +2
        Physicians and radiation safety specialists had to think before, before arranging such a humane man in place of M-you!
        Well, he froze without thinking, but then what can you think (and say !!) about the headless urban planners, developers, who arranged ultra-stylish buildings and placed 30 million people in it. (the entire Central industrial district!) precisely from the point of view of nuclear damage at a time to one fifth of the country's population with 40% of industrial capacity.
        This is real wrecking - to immediately incapacitate such a number of the population :: working for the defense and reserve of drugs in case of mobilization events !!
        1. Dmitry Potapov 22 January 2020 09: 52 New
          • 2
          • 2
          0
          I think that in the theory of the USSR it was planned to be densely populated in the likeness of the Central Region the entire territory of the RSFSR, Belarus, and Ukraine. By the way, in the United States it is not the population and production that is strongly protected, but the place where the loot is stored.
          1. Blackmokona 22 January 2020 10: 47 New
            • 6
            • 2
            +4
            The United States built its missile defense around the mines of ICBMs, and the USSR around Moscow.
        2. Sergey10789 22 January 2020 12: 23 New
          • 8
          • 7
          +1
          For some reason I have a feeling that most of the local commentators are relatives. And why are you considering the options of "fly / fly, hit / not hit" and so on ?! Firstly, this topic is as old as the world, any self-respecting expert
          (in all seriousness, a competent expert) has already spoken out on this topic: no one will use a nuclear missile strike on anyone, because this will mean “apolipsian,” since the principle is the same for both “them” and “us”: There are a lot of missiles on combat duty, and each one is “aimed” at its own target, and it can only be changed at the factory. In the event that at least one ICBM is detected by tracking means of an uncoordinated launch, measures are first taken to clarify the question “was this sho ?!” Yes Yes. Any training and test launch is agreed with all interested countries. and besides the Caribbean crisis, the world was on the verge of death several more times, when either side conducted exercises with the deployment of forces and (or) with launches, simply stupidly not coordinating its actions with other countries. And all the observers overnight turned into mobile brick factories. Calls, correspondence, attempts to find out “does this damn what happens at all?” .... And if the launch of a potential enemy was real and military, then all of their missiles are launched at once !!! And absolutely do not care where she flies, it will go to everyone, both innocent and innocent. And such "settings" as it seems to me in all countries with nuclear weapons. Naturally, the decision on retaliation or destruction of ICBMs by ABM forces is made by a person, but in the event of a retaliatory strike, it’s kind of impossible to make a decision on retaliation against a specific barn. And therefore, all this talk about “WE WILL REFLECT a missile strike in Moscow with a 100% result” is most likely 100% justified, because in order not to REFLECT an imaginary mass missile strike or that would not bring down one, two or three misspells crazy about some Kim Jin Il, you have to be a fabulous idiot. And the probability of reflecting a real massive blow with a hundred percent probability approaches zero. Because the ICBMs will be involved not only in the Russian Federation and the USA, but also everyone who can launch at least something.

          I do not pretend to be the all-knowing, or 100% right, but based on the knowledge that I possess, for some reason it seems to me that if something like this happens, it will be so. But I am more than sure that will not happen, at least in our lifetime.
          1. ccsr 22 January 2020 13: 50 New
            • 3
            • 3
            0
            Quote: Sergey10789
            And the probability of reflecting a real massive blow with a hundred percent probability approaches zero.

            Anyone will agree with this, and this is a guarantee that we, at least the USA, will not be attacked in the foreseeable future.
            Quote: Sergey10789
            Because the ICBMs will be involved not only in the Russian Federation and the USA, but also everyone who can launch at least something.

            But this is a controversial statement - what Pakistan will do in this case is difficult to say, because it is unlikely that they will decide what exactly they are attacked by Russia or the USA. And the Indian leadership is unlikely to expect a war with us or the United States.
            Quote: Sergey10789
            and besides the Caribbean crisis, the world was on the verge of death several more times, when either side conducted exercises with the deployment of forces and (or) with launches, simply stupidly not coordinating its actions with other countries.

            Honestly, I don’t remember this, because from the late sixties everything was pretty well controlled and predicted from incoming information from various types of military intelligence. So this is more like some fictional stories, such as one lieutenant colonel stopped the third world because of a false positive, or how the war did not start, because the Pacific Fleet reconnaissance lost an aircraft carrier for a couple of days.
            1. Sergey10789 22 January 2020 14: 10 New
              • 3
              • 4
              -1
              Both Pakistan and India will answer because the point here is not whether they are waiting or not waiting for an attack from Russia or the United States, but because missiles are set targets at the factory and it is simply impossible to redirect them. I am far from the idea that we do not have a single missile aimed at India. And in the event of an uncoordinated launch by some crazy ICBMs, the answer will be, as I THINK, with all the missiles on duty. Or do you think we’ll answer according to the principle "the rocket flies from the USA, give the command to that mine in Siberia that is aimed at Washington!" ?! What if there was a launch from the Premier League ?! How to identify it by affiliation? There will be a retaliatory strike by all means at once. I think so.
              1. Fan-fan 22 January 2020 17: 11 New
                • 3
                • 7
                -4
                Sergey10789 (Sergey), have you been introduced to the plans for a nuclear war in the Shoigu department? Or in ward number 6?
                1. Sergey10789 22 January 2020 19: 29 New
                  • 2
                  • 2
                  0
                  And you are not a sinful deed from the same chamber ?! Because approximately the same stories that I told were told at the Strategic Missile Forces Institute in the period from 2007 to 2012. .
              2. ccsr 22 January 2020 18: 51 New
                • 7
                • 2
                +5
                Quote: Sergey10789
                Both Pakistan and India will answer because the point here is not whether they are waiting or not waiting for an attack from Russia or the United States, but because missiles are set targets at the factory and it is simply impossible to redirect them.

                They do not install anything at the plant - the general staff determines the goals and this is information of national importance. And the situation can change, that's why the goals are determined based on the operational situation.
                Quote: Sergey10789
                I’m far from the idea that we don’t have a single missile aimed at India.

                Why on earth should we do this?
                Quote: Sergey10789
                What if there was a launch from the Premier League ?! How to identify it by affiliation?
                So they are tracked by naval intelligence, and determine where they are.
                Quote: Sergey10789
                There will be a retaliatory strike by all means at once. I think so.

                You should not think so - we have only one serious adversary.
                1. Sergey10789 22 January 2020 19: 37 New
                  • 2
                  • 3
                  -1
                  The General Staff determines the goals, but the missile is already on target and aimed, and it’s impossible to simply change the flight program by calculating the operational post. And the flight program is recorded on a primitive “computer” and it’s impossible to drive in new coordinates using the keyboard, because this primitive computer is not connected to anyone from the world outside the mine) even the warriors who press the buttons of this very mine have no idea have where this rocket is flying. Therefore, I am sure that the bulk of the missiles are aimed at sworn friends, and at least one at all the others. It’s clear that in which case, our solder-faced with a shoigimeter and with someone else just choose a previously developed plan, give orders to specific posts. But this is in theory.
                  1. ccsr 22 January 2020 19: 46 New
                    • 6
                    • 3
                    +3
                    Quote: Sergey10789
                    But this theory.

                    You have the wrong theory, you feel the lack of basic basic knowledge.
                    1. Sergey10789 23 January 2020 06: 37 New
                      • 2
                      • 2
                      0
                      Well, then, surprise, you are our All-Russian base of basic knowledge!)
                      1. ccsr 23 January 2020 13: 40 New
                        • 2
                        • 2
                        0
                        Quote: Sergey10789
                        Well, then, surprise, you are our All-Russian base of basic knowledge!)

                        To begin with, understand that everything that is released from the plants must first be sent to the central storage base, and only then, depending on the decision of the Strategic Missile Forces command, it will be delivered to one or another connection or will remain in storage. This is done not only for the sake of secrecy, but also for control by the customer, before sending such an expensive and complex equipment to the troops.
          2. Sanichsan 22 January 2020 17: 54 New
            • 0
            • 0
            0
            Quote: Sergey10789
            so as not to bring down one, two, or three nedoratki half-mad Kim Jing-il, one must be a fabulous idiot.

            there are many not high opinions about the United States and Japan, but so fluently expressed it .... guy, and you're good! good
          3. Boa kaa 23 January 2020 14: 02 New
            • 4
            • 0
            +4
            Colleague Sergey10789 (Sergey)! Yes you, I’ll take a look, just a fount of .... "mind"! (with)
            Let's start in order:
            1. Where did you get that
            nobody will use a nuclear missile attack on anyone,
            Then why do we and they improve their nuclear weapons and missile defense? What, money has nowhere else to go, as in these tsatsk? Or plans like "Drop shot" in nature did not exist?
            2.
            each (ICBM) is “aimed” at its own target, and it can only be changed at the factory.
            In my opinion, you weren’t even stuck with your knowledge in the 60s of the last century, but somewhere at the dawn of "space navigation"! To install (on the spot, in the warhead ICBM!) The flight task used to be punched tapes, then punched cards, cassettes, disks, now there is probably something more modern ... And the time it was installed in the head of the product began from the day, then hours, minutes , and now the Amy are working to redirect the BB during the flight of the ICBM to the intended target! And you say - "at the factory"! DARKNESS!!!
            3.
            Any training and test launch is agreed with all interested countries.
            And where did you get this? All launches within nat. Territory is a purely personal matter of the state conducting a test of its rocket technology. If the "field" is outside the territory of the state, for example, in the Pacific Ocean, then there is a warning about the closure of an area that is dangerous for sailing ships and aircraft overflights. And no one agrees with anyone. Just NOTIFY!
            4.
            And if the launch of a potential enemy was real and combat, then all of their missiles are launched at once !!!
            Oh how! And about the direct line Moscow - Washington (the so-called "red telephone") did you hear a thread? And why was it carried out. Read at your leisure. Learn a lot of interesting things.
            5.
            the decision to retaliate or to destroy the ICBMs by missile defense is made by the person, but in the event of a retaliatory strike, it seems like you cannot make a decision to retaliate against a specific barn.
            The decision is made by 3 people. There is a Kazbek system, a Cheget nuclear case, giving a command to remove the code block. And if there is no one left after BSU, then there is the Perimeter command system (Dead Hand). I think no one will remain deprived. Our strategic nuclear forces, who are supposed to, will bless everyone.
            6.
            nedorakity half-mad some Kim Jin Il
            Lord And the dead man didn’t please you !? And there wasn’t any “under-launch” with it capable of carrying SBPs, however, nor were the nuclear charges themselves. This is his heir, not without the help of a neighboring country, managed to find an antidote to the attacks of the Yankees.
            Now Donya says that he is friends with Eun, as the determination of those who, by and large, have nothing to lose - well, the cowboy was very impressed!
            And the last. You absolutely correctly noticed:
            based on the knowledge that I possess, for some reason it seems to me that
            you need to learn a little. And behave ... somehow more restrained. laughing
            Ага.
            1. Sergey10789 24 January 2020 22: 54 New
              • 0
              • 1
              -1
              1. From there, and in more difficult periods of relations with our colleagues in the opposing bloc, even in the hottest moments, no one used nuclear weapons. All of these missile defense systems, YaRS, MINITMEE, TOPOLI are just a lie for raising taxes, pumping money out of the population!) How can one judge the effectiveness of the same missile defense system or that this missile defense system will overcome all existing missile defense systems when these two things never happen in real life? have met? On fingers?! Or according to the comments in such "authoritative" sites ?!

              2. I heard somewhere that the ideal control system is an autonomous control system. And autonomous - this means not connected with the outside world. And the harder it is, the more vulnerable it is. In which section of the rocket’s flight will it be controlled, from the ground ?! What channels ?! No, you really, right now, in serious ways, declare that someone will decide to make sure that the rocket is controllable from the ground, and that it can now be redirected by the personnel of the duty station ?! Those. a retargeting specialist, can take and redirect a missile to Hohland in a matter of minutes, just because he has a wife with a crest ?! Your statements about ground control, about retargeting in seconds, about a flight program on an awesomely modern digital computer are contrary to common sense, even from the point of view of a stubborn patriot, here recently everyone was delighted with pseudo-stories about how an airplane with electronic warfare complexes the size of an air bomb on board, paid off, for a second !!!!! Destroyer !!! yeah !!!! And what then prevents two ships with EW on board the size of a dry cargo ship, to extinguish, control, rewrite the missile flight program ?! ?! Probably enchanting manufacturability and security of our missiles!



              No, dear! The flight program, as written on analogue media, is written. A punched card, a notched wire, a mechanical timer, as on old automatic washers, but not on a digital scraper, a super-mega computer, and even more so not on any remote communication channels, it is recorded in a rocket!

              By the way, it doesn’t bother you that even those of your fashionable POPLAR AND YARS, who drive on patrol routes on wheels, can start from strictly installed specially equipped points, and maybe only from one point, and not from anywhere ?! (Although perhaps you were not told about this on this site). Probably because tying the rocket to the launch point, as well as retargeting, is a matter of 2 minutes!)))

              On points 3-6: digging into words, when people conveyed the essence in general terms, the indicator is rather doubtful. I know about hotlines, intelligence, etc. but it all works cool while everything goes according to plan. Therefore, this is why I am taking this long text of yours, in paragraphs 3-6, I will post it without attention.
              1. Boa kaa 25 January 2020 13: 15 New
                • 2
                • 0
                +2
                Quote: Sergey10789
                ... I heard somewhere ... On points 3-6 ... Probably because ... it all works great,
                I won’t even argue with you, because proving anything radio is useless!

                1. Sergey10789 25 January 2020 14: 46 New
                  • 0
                  • 1
                  -1
                  That well, where am I going to you, experts))) Well, I had to think of it, write down the program for controlling the worst weapon on the spot, and remotely control it. PPC!)
                  1. Boa kaa 25 January 2020 18: 05 New
                    • 2
                    • 0
                    +2
                    Quote: Sergey10789
                    Well, I had to think of it, write down the program for controlling the worst weapon on the spot, and control it remotely.

                    Colleague! Yes, you, as I look, is also a sharpie !!!
                    There was no talk about “recording the program,” it was about putting in the place of the flight mission into the head of the ICBM and the possibility of re-targeting the ammunition at targets for strike! (unless of course you still remember this), within their breeding zone ...
                    But we did not talk about the fact that the strategic nuclear forces can be controlled remotely. And it is possible, judging by the SBU of the submarine forces of the Navy.
                    So, you don’t need to trick your grandmother! Learn the lessons. Gain knowledge.
                    AHA.
                    1. Sergey10789 26 January 2020 09: 57 New
                      • 1
                      • 0
                      +1
                      wink laughing lol who else is shagging anyone!) If you remember, it was originally about retargeting in the direction of the strike, for example, from Australia to redirect to the United States. But tuuut already in m is already within the breeding zone. In short, the argument is about nothing!) I’ll go learn lessons!)))
                      1. Boa kaa 26 January 2020 12: 33 New
                        • 1
                        • 0
                        +1
                        Quote: Sergey10789
                        I'm going to learn lessons!)))

                        Good luck! drinks
            2. Sergey10789 24 January 2020 23: 03 New
              • 0
              • 1
              -1
              And the credibility of this resource can only be judged by the headings of some articles: here, one expert author was seriously planning to shoot down enemy helicopters and planes from s-300/400/500 ... yeah. and another of the screw cutter hit a dynamic target in SIBZ means from a distance of 1000 m!)
      4. Mordvin 3 22 January 2020 10: 13 New
        • 4
        • 6
        -2
        Quote: Dmitry Potapov
        where else in a relatively small area is concentrated more than 20000000 people?

        Absolutely stupid planning.
        1. Nastia makarova 22 January 2020 10: 41 New
          • 1
          • 1
          0
          and american cities?
          1. Mordvin 3 22 January 2020 10: 59 New
            • 3
            • 3
            0
            Quote: Nastia Makarova
            and american cities?

            In New York - less than 9 million, and in the US capital - half a million.
            There are 10 million cities in the USA, we have 16, while their population is more than twice as large.
            1. Blackmokona 22 January 2020 11: 25 New
              • 1
              • 2
              -1
              New York is not yet a circular city, but stretched along the coast
              1. ccsr 22 January 2020 13: 51 New
                • 4
                • 3
                +1
                Quote: BlackMokona
                New York is not yet a circular city, but stretched along the coast

                And we will cover them with a wave, as Sakharov planned in the sixties ....
                1. Fan-fan 22 January 2020 17: 13 New
                  • 4
                  • 6
                  -2
                  Someone came up with this nonsense about the Sakharov wave and everyone repeats it with enthusiasm.
                  1. Fan-fan 22 January 2020 17: 17 New
                    • 1
                    • 5
                    -4
                    In a word, Americans have better conditions for nuclear war, their population is distributed more widely. People live compactly with us, we need to spend less on them than we do on them, and they are just 2 times more.
                  2. ccsr 22 January 2020 18: 55 New
                    • 2
                    • 2
                    0
                    Quote: Fan-Fan
                    Someone came up with this nonsense about the Sakharov wave and everyone repeats it with enthusiasm.

                    Have you read his memoirs?
                    In his memoirs ac. Sakharov wrote about his own idea of ​​a nuclear torpedo that arose much later than the development of the T-15, after successful tests in 1961 of the 50 (100) megaton bomb AN602:
                    I decided that such a carrier could be a large torpedo launched from a submarine. I fantasized that it would be possible to develop a direct-flow water-steam atomic engine for such a torpedo. The goal of the attack from a distance of several hundred kilometers should be the ports of the enemy. <...> The hull of such a torpedo can be made very durable, it is not afraid of mines and fencing networks. Of course, the destruction of the ports - both with a surface explosion of a 100-megaton torpedo that “jumped out” from the water and with an underwater explosion — is inevitably fraught with very large casualties. One of the first people with whom I discussed this project was Rear Admiral Fomin ... He was shocked by the "cannibalistic nature" of the project and noticed in a conversation with me that sailors were used to fighting an armed enemy in open battle and that the idea was disgusting to him about such a massacre. I was ashamed and never again discussed this project with anyone.
                    A. Sakharov “The Cosmic World”: TSAR-TORPEDA
              2. Tenet 22 January 2020 23: 45 New
                • 0
                • 0
                0
                Quote: BlackMokona
                New York is not yet a circular city, but stretched along the coast

                and what, how will this affect its destruction ?! it is still coastal, also a plus, but minus Moscow ...?!)
            2. Nastia makarova 22 January 2020 13: 08 New
              • 1
              • 2
              -1
              with suburbs over 20 million
    3. savment 22 January 2020 09: 23 New
      • 1
      • 3
      -2
      Is everything normal with your head?
      1. il-z 22 January 2020 20: 23 New
        • 0
        • 0
        0
        To discourage us from attacking, they think that not everything is really with us ... normally ... I think so ....)))
    4. Procopius Nesterov 22 January 2020 20: 39 New
      • 0
      • 2
      -2
      15 percent of the country's population lives in Moscow and the region, so everything is quite reasonable. A political, military, transport center.
  5. Same lech 22 January 2020 06: 19 New
    • 9
    • 0
    +9
    Answering a question about the time required to protect Moscow from a missile attack, General Grabchuk replied that this time could be "up to several tens of minutes."

    But what about short- and medium-range enemy missiles that can be fired from the territory of the Baltic states or Ukraine in Moscow or St. Petersburg ... there they’ll be counting in minutes.
    1. Victor_B 22 January 2020 06: 24 New
      • 16
      • 0
      +16
      There, BBs fly not at a speed of 7 km / s, but much slower, therefore, they are easier to intercept.
      Cruise missiles in general CLOCK fly! But there are VERY many of them!
      Well, and besides, all this muck can maneuver. Actively...
      1. Grits 22 January 2020 09: 40 New
        • 3
        • 0
        +3
        Quote: Victor_B
        Cruise missiles in general CLOCK fly! But there are VERY many of them!

        And for cruise missiles there are Torah and Armor.
    2. bessmertniy 22 January 2020 06: 30 New
      • 3
      • 0
      +3
      Indeed, no matter how late it was. It is a little consolation that we can answer them the same. repeat
      1. Zoldat_A 22 January 2020 06: 52 New
        • 11
        • 1
        +10
        Quote: bessmertniy
        It is a little consolation that we can answer them the same.

        As GDP said
        "Adequate response to inappropriate actions"
        But in general, the development of these “strategies” by our “partners” is something in the spirit of computer “shooters.” Or the debate “Who is stronger - a whale or an elephant?” They have been planning everything since April 45. Only this will not happen. Russia is not Yugoslavia , not Iraq and not Libya. Well, if it was boiling up against North Korea so that the steam came out of our ears, and it all ended “zilch,” then they will bark at us all the more from afar, and they will not snuggle close with their missiles. They considered it possible damage from our retaliatory strike ( laughing ) and considered that it was "unacceptable." If memory serves, they calculated more than 15 percent of the loss of population and more than 25% of the loss of infrastructure. Mathematicians, damn it! ...
        1. sergo1914 22 January 2020 07: 47 New
          • 13
          • 3
          +10
          Quote: Zoldat_A
          Well, if it was boiling against North Korea so that the steam came from the ears, and it all ended in a “zilch”, then we will be barked at from afar,


          There was no fifth column in North Korea. And we have? We have people from the General Staff stole money from trucks ...
          1. Aviator_ 22 January 2020 08: 25 New
            • 10
            • 1
            +9
            That's right, about the DPRK. In terms of ideology, Russia is much weaker than the North Koreans.
            1. Boa kaa 23 January 2020 14: 28 New
              • 3
              • 0
              +3
              Quote: Aviator_
              In terms of ideology, Russia is much weaker than the North Koreans.

              So they have the ideas of JUCHE and the Kim dynasty - the reddest sun in the desert!
              And in our country, even in the Constitution, we managed to score the thesis that we do not have a state ideology! Article 13.2 states: "No ideology can be established as state or mandatory."
              So the electorate staggers around the political field from left to right ... bypassing the middle! That's why the guarantor is looking for "clips" ...
              1. Aviator_ 23 January 2020 19: 11 New
                • 0
                • 2
                -2
                The “guarantor” has only one historical bond - “autocracy, Orthodoxy, nationality” - but now it is the XNUMXst century, and this does not work.
                1. Boa kaa 23 January 2020 20: 58 New
                  • 2
                  • 1
                  +1
                  Quote: Aviator_
                  The “guarantor” has only one historical bond - “autocracy, Orthodoxy, nationality” - but now it is the XNUMXst century, and this does not work.

                  Sergei! Well do not tell! Yes, in the courtyard of the 21st century. But nonetheless:
                  1. Nationality - the guarantor created and himself headed the ONF (Popular Front);
                  2. Orthodoxy - churches grow by leaps and bounds (By May 9, they will open the Main Temple of the Armed Forces, 75m high - according to the number of years after the Victory!) ...
                  3. Autocracy. Dead idea. It’s only Volfovich from the rostrum of the State Duma who can sing “God save the Tsar!” ... Among the people this idea will not work. Well, he does not want to be "slaves" again ...
                  == Therefore: 2/3 of what has been said is implemented. And the place of "autocracy" should be taken by the idea of ​​"Victory obtained by the great sacrifice of the people." We will probably hear about this during the celebration of the 75th anniversary of the Victory .... (Perhaps this will take shape in the idea of ​​"Conciliarity and Justice")
                  Somehow, however.
                  1. Aviator_ 23 January 2020 22: 07 New
                    • 0
                    • 3
                    -3
                    Well, yes, their victories are not enough, they privatized the Soviet Victory. And each year the temple will be built on the meter, so that it corresponds to the years.
          2. Zoldat_A 22 January 2020 10: 40 New
            • 7
            • 0
            +7
            Quote: sergo1914
            There was no fifth column in North Korea. And we have? We have people from the General Staff stole money from trucks ...

            Maybe there is a hand that will uproot them?

            Rooobochaya such hope is warming somewhere deep. Very deep... repeat
          3. il-z 22 January 2020 20: 45 New
            • 1
            • 1
            0
            Tying for relatively many people is just entertainment or a hobby, but the fifth column ... is simply not our method. Moreover, a certain citizen who managed trucking money, is unlikely to “be recorded” in the fifth column, because it is no longer a “turma, but a barrel at the temple” ...
        2. Grits 22 January 2020 09: 41 New
          • 5
          • 0
          +5
          Quote: Zoldat_A
          If memory serves, they calculated more than 15 percent of the loss of population and more than 25% of the loss of infrastructure.

          Something is not very actively believed. Without a hitch.
        3. Boa kaa 23 January 2020 14: 20 New
          • 3
          • 0
          +3
          Quote: Zoldat_A
          If memory serves, they calculated more than 15 percent of the loss of population and more than 25% of the loss of infrastructure.

          I came across infa, in which the death of 20 million people. was considered unacceptable damage to the United States.
          But these are seeds in comparison with what only Poseidons can do on both coasts of the States. And also the Sarmatians will arrive from the southern direction (not protected by the SPR system and NORAD too), the Vanguards can fly in hypersound ...
          Well, damn it, misfortune was drawn for the AMA analysts ...
    3. bayard 22 January 2020 07: 06 New
      • 5
      • 2
      +3
      Quote: The same Lech
      But what about short- and medium-range enemy missiles that can be fired from the territory of the Baltic states or Ukraine in Moscow or St. Petersburg ... there they’ll be counting in minutes.

      The deployed S-400 and S-300BM4 regiments, as well as the S-300 of previous modifications, other air defense systems and fighter aircraft (in the work on the Kyrgyz Republic) will make their contribution to the common cause of reflection ... And of course, "reciprocal-oncoming" which is inevitable, compelling and compulsory. yes
      1. mark1 22 January 2020 07: 31 New
        • 6
        • 1
        +5
        Quote: bayard
        And of course the “reciprocal-oncoming,” which is inevitable, irresistible, and obligatory.

        - rockets, rattling with a sparkle of steel (nozzles), will go on a furious campaign ...
        1. bayard 22 January 2020 08: 51 New
          • 3
          • 1
          +2
          Will definitely go fellow
          But later stop
          Every rocket has its own time. bully
    4. hydrox 22 January 2020 09: 05 New
      • 1
      • 1
      0
      With these it’s just easier: they are all subsonic and it’s supposed to cope with medium and near radius air defense, but the Yankees have the wisdom to equip Axes with ultra-small 5kTn heads - I don’t have any idea how to deal with this ...
  6. Klingon 22 January 2020 06: 23 New
    • 3
    • 16
    -13
    Quote: R-140
    Foolishness some kind of froze.

    wassat
  7. eagle owl 22 January 2020 06: 26 New
    • 2
    • 11
    -9
    belay
    Do you really want to be wise, type of tape? The meaning of the article. And what is she doing? are you lost, no? The moderator is not like me, right?
    1. Grits 22 January 2020 09: 43 New
      • 6
      • 0
      +6
      Quote: Uhu
      Do you really want to be wise, type of tape? The meaning of the article. And what is she doing? are you lost, no? The moderator is not like me, right?

      The bodun got stronger ... time to take a pill.
      1. eagle owl 22 January 2020 09: 57 New
        • 6
        • 1
        +5
        Shpasib, otherwise I was thinking - I definitely forgot something
        1. Grits 22 January 2020 14: 57 New
          • 1
          • 0
          +1
          Quote: Uhu
          Shpasib, otherwise I was thinking - I definitely forgot something

          You are welcome. Although I prefer wedge to wedge.
          1. eagle owl 22 January 2020 15: 16 New
            • 0
            • 3
            -3
            There is such a joke ... Sniper "wedge" good Here they have a lot to knock out Mona)
  8. Klingon 22 January 2020 06: 28 New
    • 4
    • 15
    -11
    Quote: R-140
    Foolishness some kind of froze.

    Well, of course, you are probably one of them, how do you live on macaroni, are you satisfied? and I meant that the air defense should work out regularly throughout the territory of the Russian Federation. )))
    1. neri73-r 22 January 2020 07: 04 New
      • 3
      • 1
      +2
      There’s a conversation about missile defense, not air defense!
    2. Sidor Amenpodestovich 22 January 2020 07: 50 New
      • 7
      • 1
      +6
      Are you absolutely sure that those in power do not want to shut down all of Russia’s ABM power because they only care about their seats, and not because completely objective reasons impede this, right?
      The hard-won experience of your hard work indicates this directly and non-foolishly.
  9. aszzz888 22 January 2020 06: 30 New
    • 1
    • 0
    +1
    Interview with Missile Defense Commander Major General Sergey Grabchuk.
    Specialists of course are more visible.
  10. bald 22 January 2020 07: 12 New
    • 0
    • 1
    -1
    Grabchuk said what can be said, but go into details ...? - yes, even though there will be targets and not necessarily for each target on the rocket, maybe one umbrella for 10 minutes. This is me, for example.
    1. Boa kaa 23 January 2020 14: 43 New
      • 3
      • 0
      +3
      Quote: bald
      Yes, at least how many goals there will be and not necessarily for each missile target, maybe one umbrella for 10 minutes.

      Ours considered the probability of interception of our 4202 state GBI and came to the conclusion: at least 20-40 missile defense will go away. And the Amov have only 48 of them!
      Well, and why are they, nafig, flutter !? And their placement of an additional 24 missiles in Alaska will not save at all. Is it really that hard to comprehend?
      1. bald 23 January 2020 15: 15 New
        • 1
        • 0
        +1
        I’m about the same, why about, yes, because on the forum, units know our products thoroughly, naturally smile. It should be so.
  11. The comment was deleted.
    1. Victor_B 22 January 2020 07: 23 New
      • 8
      • 1
      +7
      Quote: Professor
      the system attacking the capital’s missiles allows it to be intercepted "with almost 100 percent probability."

      Most likely, one set of BB (with one missile) and really with a high probability can reflect.
      But there will be dozens of such “sets” ...
      They, bastards, will not regret to Moscow.
    2. vadimtt 22 January 2020 07: 26 New
      • 11
      • 1
      +10
      Professor, aren't you tired yet? laughing
      Have you heard anything about acceleration selection?
      And besides, the goal is the same (city), warheads go pretty closely, about nuclear, and are guided by the largest clusters after selection and filtering.
      But, yes, it’s enough to start the second / third wave with a delay of 10-15 minutes and it’s a disaster. Radar blind.

      PS: It’s just like the Moscow missile defense system and is not designed for a full-fledged attack, but only from randomly launched missiles. Here in such a scenario there is a 100% probability of interception.
      1. Professor 22 January 2020 08: 56 New
        • 5
        • 9
        -4
        Quote: vadimtt
        Have you heard anything about acceleration selection?

        It's not about a spherical horse, but still about a vacuum. A false target and a real warhead behave identically when divided. This is precisely the reason for the presence of false targets on Russian ballistic missiles.

        Quote: vadimtt
        Here in such a scenario there is a 100% probability of interception.

        There is no case in nature with a 100% probability of interception. Be it just one bourgeois missile and all your missiles at once.
        1. vadimtt 22 January 2020 23: 21 New
          • 0
          • 0
          0
          Quote: Professor
          A false target and a real warhead behave identically when divided

          But not at altitudes below 150 km, where interception takes place in the form of undermining of nuclear warheads with a given directional cone of damaging elements (tungsten in ceramic with an ablative coating). Moreover, in such a situation, a single JBF can destroy many subsequent targets (both false and real), however, with a much lower probability.

          Quote: Professor
          There is no case with 100% in nature

          In our casual world, everything above 97% is absolutely 100% laughing
          1. Professor 23 January 2020 08: 13 New
            • 1
            • 1
            0
            Quote: vadimtt
            But not at altitudes below 150 km, where interception takes place in the form of undermining of nuclear warheads with a given directional cone of damaging elements (tungsten in ceramic with an ablative coating). Moreover, in such a situation, a single JBF can destroy many subsequent targets (both false and real), however, with a much lower probability.

            And at these heights, too. That is why Russian missiles are equipped with false targets.

            Quote: vadimtt
            In our casual world, everything above 97% is absolutely 100%

            Yeah. Especially considering that 3% that break through will cause unacceptable damage.
        2. Boa kaa 23 January 2020 14: 54 New
          • 1
          • 0
          +1
          Quote: Professor
          A false target and a real warhead behave identically when divided.

          This is true only for "heavy" LCs. But such a load reduces the amount of BB (payload), so there are options ...
          There are also options for selection of LC. They are not corrected by the guidance system and therefore, after breeding, they fly like “bricks”. But all this takes time, which is clearly not enough ... Therefore, time pressure is provided for the PRO NORAD system!
    3. Mityay65 22 January 2020 08: 25 New
      • 4
      • 4
      0
      Quote: Professor
      In general, there is no missile defense, since the fairytale promised everyone a paradise.

      Already a bargain? Will you buy? Correct solution.
      The only option for Israel to sleep peacefully is to buy the A-235 + S-400.
      1. mark1 22 January 2020 09: 11 New
        • 3
        • 1
        +2
        Quote: Mityai65
        The only option for Israel to sleep peacefully is to buy the A-235

        After triggering 53T6 over, say, Tel Aviv, not only Jews but also nearby Arabs will sleep peacefully.
    4. AUL
      AUL 22 January 2020 08: 59 New
      • 6
      • 2
      +4
      Quote: Professor
      In general, there is no missile defense, since the fairytale promised everyone a paradise.

      Oleg, something you are not in the mood in the morning! Disagreement with wife?
    5. Grits 22 January 2020 09: 45 New
      • 4
      • 0
      +4
      Quote: Professor
      In general, there is no missile defense, since the fairytale promised everyone a paradise.

      ... Do not confuse you with the Metal Dome
  12. Donald72 22 January 2020 07: 17 New
    • 6
    • 2
    +4
    It’s not the ABM system that rescues from a real rocket threat, but poplars and the like.
    1. Victor_B 22 January 2020 07: 31 New
      • 7
      • 0
      +7
      Quote: Donald72
      It’s not the ABM system that rescues from a real rocket threat, but poplars and the like.

      Perform the role of air defense in the form of tanks at enemy airfields!
  13. rocket757 22 January 2020 07: 26 New
    • 8
    • 0
    +8
    Recall that in Russia large cities, including the most important industrial and political centers, are covered with a missile shield.

    Recall that absolute protection DOES NOT EXIST, no one and in the foreseeable future this is not foreseen in anyone and nothing!
    This is not a threat, it is simply a statement of fact on either side of the confrontation.
  14. Was mammoth 22 January 2020 08: 11 New
    • 10
    • 0
    +10
    Almost half a century ago he served in air defense at a missile base. First strike time - half an hour. As they said: "We need to hold out for half a day, and then, if we are alive, into the infantry." wink All exercises took place under conditions of a nuclear strike.
  15. The comment was deleted.
  16. Mountain shooter 22 January 2020 09: 20 New
    • 2
    • 0
    +2
    A high probability of intercepting warheads is poor consolation if they are massively massed. All the same, the destruction will be catastrophic. But the answer will be - just crushing. The hegemon did not expect it all the last time, counting on a "donkey loaded with gold" ...
    1. Grits 22 January 2020 09: 48 New
      • 5
      • 0
      +5
      Quote: Mountain Shooter
      But the answer will be - just crushing. The hegemon did not expect it all the last time, counting on a "donkey loaded with gold" ...

      And given how famously intercepted missiles in Saudi Arabia and Iraq, this confidence is growing.
  17. 2 Level Advisor 22 January 2020 09: 29 New
    • 3
    • 0
    +3
    There is no missile defense system in the world capable of protecting against a massive strike, neither us, nor minke whales, nor anyone else, at most a few pieces can be recaptured ... and this is GOOD, because the same minke whales, knowing this, perfectly understand that our Strategic Rocket Forces if they fulfill their purpose ...
  18. Ryzhiy A.P. 22 January 2020 09: 46 New
    • 6
    • 7
    -1
    Maybe I'm wrong, but if suddenly a war (God forbid!), Then the expressions “Defense of Moscow” and “Battle for Moscow”, with the current realities of the development of the “state of Moscow” in the state of Russia, will not have the same value and upsurge of patriotism as in 1941
    1. Procopius Nesterov 22 January 2020 20: 44 New
      • 0
      • 1
      -1
      And in 1812? Communists constantly carry their own power. You are the fifth column. Communists. You carry propaganda that the country does not need to be defended and Moscow.
  19. JonnyT 22 January 2020 10: 23 New
    • 4
    • 1
    +3
    Something is more like a calming population, rather than a real analysis. They cannot intercept all missiles. And if the Defense Ministry spoils the concentration of shock weapons at our borders, and the deployment of the RSD in Kharkov and the Baltic states, then it will remain at the air defense for 15 minutes at best, to visit the target, and civilians to escape in the subway. So discard this pink noodle from your ears.
    1. Nastia makarova 22 January 2020 10: 46 New
      • 0
      • 1
      -1
      all no one can and do not
    2. Fan-fan 22 January 2020 17: 28 New
      • 2
      • 5
      -3
      If earlier Pershing flew to Germany, would have been 10 minutes to us, how much will they fly from Kharkov? Minutes 3 or 4?
      1. ccsr 22 January 2020 19: 01 New
        • 2
        • 2
        0
        Quote: Fan-Fan
        If earlier Pershing flew to Germany, would have been 10 minutes to us, how much will they fly from Kharkov? Minutes 3 or 4?

        From Cuba, you can also quickly deliver nuclear weapons to Washington - Cubans are asking us to return, negotiations have already been conducted.
      2. Tenet 23 January 2020 00: 34 New
        • 0
        • 0
        0
        Quote: Fan-Fan
        If earlier Pershing flew to Germany, would have been 10 minutes to us, how much will they fly from Kharkov? Minutes 3 or 4?

        what answer will suit you, what ?! in 10 or 15 minutes ??? !!!))) and to Western Siberia they will fly for how much ?!))) do you even turn on the logic. Reread the training manual ... "everything is gone, chef!"
      3. JonnyT 23 January 2020 08: 55 New
        • 1
        • 0
        +1
        Well, yes, I also heard that from Kharkov, and 3 minutes is enough. But the fact is that the accelerating trajectory will be in the area of ​​our air defense, which is a 100% guarantee of the destruction of RSD. So, they will most likely be hit by a land tomahawk from Kharkov, they will fly longer, but many of them will maneuver. For example, tomagovki from the apple will fall on my native plant
  20. voyaka uh 22 January 2020 12: 25 New
    • 6
    • 2
    +4
    Americans do not have false targets (false warheads) on their ICBMs.
    There are no maneuvering goals.
    Their ICBMs and warheads are very simple in ballistics.
  21. Old26 22 January 2020 12: 45 New
    • 5
    • 1
    +4
    Quote: Vol4ara
    Recall that in Russia large cities, including the most important industrial and political centers, are covered with a missile shield.

    Recall that a235 is covered only by Moscow

    There is no anti-missile shield of a large city and industrial centers from ICBMs. There is only a missile defense system covering Moscow and the central missile defense from ICBMs / SLBMs.
    And the A-235 system is not yet in service. Only A-135M

    Quote: 1Alexey
    Over time, when the A-235 and S-500 will be adopted and deployed throughout the country, then other cities will be covered.

    Nationwide5 A-235 will not be deployed. This is too expensive an event to cover other cities. S-500 is another matter. They will not be in a single copy and the cover of other cities will be possible. But only from medium-range missiles at a greater distance than the S-300 / S-400 can now cover. But hardly from ICBMs ...

    Quote: Gray Brother
    Quote: 1Alexey
    The C-400 is an air defense system, not a missile defense system and strategic missiles with nuclear warheads attacking from space are not intercepted.

    The S-400 has different missiles. 48N6E3 / 48N6-2 / 48N6DM / 48N6E2 / 48N6M are suitable for interception - their speeds are from 2,8 to 4,8 km / s, and the maximum height of interception is from 27 to 35 km.

    It doesn’t matter which missiles. Speed ​​and range are not the ones to intercept ICBMs. There must be a coincidence of so many factors in order for this to happen theoretically.

    Quote: Gray Brother
    Quote: 1Alexey
    This is neither sufficient in speed. Nor in height.

    Quite enough, nothing prevents the launch of a rocket even before the head enters the affected area.

    They’ll launch it, and then this rocket will fly back and forth and wait for the BG to fly from the ICBM ...

    Quote: Mityai65
    Quote: bayard
    draw a radius of 1000 km. and see how many large cities and industrial centers it will include

    Now it is in service with the A-135, elements of the A-235 are in trial operation. A-235 is not accepted for service. What will be there in the end is not entirely clear. Including Opinions are expressed about the wider deployment of the system with the aim of expanded coverage of the territory. For example, the Volga industrial region - the creation of a second operational missile defense area somewhere in the Samara region.
    There are two types of missiles - short-range and long-range, whether the long-range interception missile will be in the final configuration for now.
    But in any case, one cannot say that the A-235 missile defense system will cover something other than the central industrial area, unless other missile defense areas appear, IMHO.

    As for the 1000-km radius - this is still unknown. To do this, they must put into service a missile, which is the development of 51T6, and about this, there is still silence. The PRS-1 analogs intended for the A-235 system are periodically tested, but as for the 51T6 - complete, one might even say grave silence.
    The configuration is also not fully defined. According to open data, she planned three echelons - long, medium and near interception. Nothing is heard about the far and medium.
    Will the A-235 system cover other areas? IMHO no. It’s too expensive an event, but it is possible to increase the number of interceptors over 100 within the framework of the IMHO A-235 system, all the more so since missile defense restrictions have not been in effect for a long time.

    Quote: 1Alexey
    A-235 is a mobile system (on a car chassis), not a stationary one. It is intended to cover the territory of the country (as well as the S-500).

    Since the ABM Treaty has not been in effect for a long time, there are no restrictions on the deployment of A-235.

    You are confusing the two systems. A-235 stationary system, which should replace the A-135M system in the Moscow region and the Nudol mobile system

    Quote: Vadim237
    When entering the ICBMs, when entering the atmosphere they sharply lose speed up to 3 kilometers per second - and to shoot them down with a 400koy 300koy at altitudes up to 40 kilometers is quite realistic.

    Provided that if they are in-1 within the reach of these missiles and the time period is sufficient, in-2 if the Don-2N radar is interfaced with the S-300 and S-400 systems for target designation

    Quote: BlackMokona
    The United States built its missile defense around the mines of ICBMs, and the USSR around Moscow.

    Actually, it was originally planned that each side would have two positional areas. One around the capital, the second around one of the missile bases. But later, according to the protocol of 1974, they decided to stop at one positional area. The United States has chosen a missile base, we are the capital.

    Quote: The same Lech
    But what about short- and medium-range enemy missiles that can be fired from the territory of the Baltic states or Ukraine in Moscow or St. Petersburg ... there they’ll be counting in minutes.

    For this, there are S-300 and S-400 systems.

    Quote: Sydor Amenpospestovich
    Are you absolutely sure that those in power do not want to shut down all of Russia’s ABM power because they only care about their seats, and not because completely objective reasons impede this, right?
    The hard-won experience of your hard work indicates this directly and non-foolishly.

    It is technically very difficult to do and extremely expensive. It’s also pointless. In 1972, the ABM Treaty was concluded because the leadership of the United States and the USSR had an understanding that the mass deployment of missile defense systems in order to cover the whole country would lead to the opposite result. Therefore, each of the parties agreed to be limited to a small - one missile defense area
  22. iouris 22 January 2020 12: 50 New
    • 1
    • 0
    +1
    Quote: "... allows you to intercept" with almost 100 percent probability. " The end of the quote.
    If he said so, then he does not know that probability is not measured as a percentage. Probability is a number that can take values ​​in the range [0,1]. This is suspicious.
    Now, if he said that missile defense is capable of ensuring the probability of destroying n targets at a level of at least 0,95 (0,975, 0,999), and if 40 warheads arrive at the protected object right away ... then I'm sorry. That would be correct.
    1. Fan-fan 22 January 2020 17: 31 New
      • 1
      • 6
      -5
      The article is generally strange: either the author is not in the subject, or the author has done a lot of rubbish in advance, or the journalists themselves have framed.
  23. NordUral 22 January 2020 13: 30 New
    • 2
    • 2
    0
    Recall that in Russia large cities, including the most important industrial and political centers, are covered with a missile shield.

    Hardly a pity!
  24. Victor March 47 22 January 2020 13: 36 New
    • 0
    • 2
    -2
    Quote: 1Alexey
    Quote: Gray Brother
    Actually, yes. Due to the S-400.

    The C-400 is an air defense system, not a missile defense system and strategic missiles with nuclear warheads attacking from space are not intercepted.

    So far, only Moscow is protected by a missile defense system.

    Over time, when the A-235 and S-500 will be adopted and deployed throughout the country, then other cities will be covered.

    To do this, you need to wait for the United States to come out with a system of missile defense treaties, (we cannot take such an initiative) in accordance with which they, and we, have the right to have one, covering only one territory. We chose Moscow, and they are their strategic missile base in Alaska.
    1. Boa kaa 23 January 2020 15: 12 New
      • 3
      • 0
      +3
      Quote: Victor March 47
      you need to wait for the US to come out and the missile defense treaty systems,

      Sir, have you been sleeping all this time? Or were out of control ...
      On December 13, 2001, US President George W. Bush issued a formal notice of his withdrawal from the ABM Treaty. In accordance with Article 15 of the Treaty, the date of the final withdrawal of the United States from this agreement came six months later, on June 13, 2002.
      https://www.gazeta.ru/army/2016/12/13/10424657.shtml
  25. oborzevatel 22 January 2020 13: 37 New
    • 2
    • 0
    +2
    Quote: Mityai65
    Recall that in Russia large cities, including the most important industrial and political centers, are covered with a missile shield.

    This is something incomprehensible. The "missile defense system of Moscow and the central industrial region" covers only Moscow and the territory with a radius of 350 km (A-135) and up to 1000 km (A-235).

    I dare say: she covered, but from single (Karl!) Missiles. How many warheads are in one ICBM? And then we consider, bending our fingers: an anti-missile (PR) outfit for hitting one warhead (BG) - 2 pcs., As elsewhere In one PRK we take (roughly) up to 12 PR., I.e. on 6 BG. How many PPH around Moscow? So think further yourself.
    Indeed, a few seconds of missile defense.
  26. Victor March 47 22 January 2020 13: 44 New
    • 1
    • 2
    -1
    Quote: Victor_B
    Total - hard to have a missile defense!

    It will be hard for the survivors.
  27. Traveler 22 January 2020 13: 48 New
    • 2
    • 2
    0
    Why did you decide that there will be a missile attack? For what ? After a hundred years no one will enter this land. Why is this all. They are already here. And without any missile strike.
  28. Pavel57 22 January 2020 14: 10 New
    • 1
    • 1
    0
    An attack on Moscow is a hundred warheads. And there are only 64 missiles around Moscow.
  29. Old26 22 January 2020 15: 24 New
    • 7
    • 1
    +6
    Quote: ButchCassidy
    And what is incomprehensible? This is a strategic stationary missile defense. And the remaining major cities are covered by the S-400. I am sure that all this is integrated with the radar detection system, and as far as I know, it covers the entire territory of the country.

    It is unlikely to be tied directly.

    Quote: Sergey10789
    Both Pakistan and India will answer because the point here is not whether they are waiting or not waiting for an attack from Russia or the United States, but because missiles are set targets at the factory and it is simply impossible to redirect them.

    What nonsense are you writing? Putting a flight mission into a rocket does not occur at the factory. Several targets can be introduced into the missile defense zone, and additional targets can be introduced already at the place of deployment. And the missiles are not “tied” tightly to one goal

    Quote: voyaka uh
    Americans do not have false targets (false warheads) on their ICBMs.
    There are no maneuvering goals.
    Their ICBMs and warheads are very simple in ballistics.

    Controversial statement. On the same MX (Piskipper) there were up to 10 heavy false targets, a bunch of lungs, jammers and dipole reflectors
    At the current "Minutemen" the complex of means of overcoming missile defense can certainly be "thinner", but nevertheless it is
    There are no maneuvering targets (?), As in principle they are not on the bulk of our ICBMs

    Quote: Sergey10789
    I’m far from the idea that we don’t have a single missile aimed at India. And in the event of an uncoordinated launch by some crazy ICBMs, the answer will be, as I THINK, with all the missiles on duty. Or do you think we’ll answer according to the principle "the rocket flies from the USA, give the command to that mine in Siberia that is aimed at Washington!" ?! What if there was a launch from the Premier League ?! How to identify it by affiliation? There will be a retaliatory strike by all means at once. I think so.

    Maybe there is no rocket aimed at India ... It makes no sense to keep rockets aimed at the country with which we have friendly relations. But it will always be possible to introduce a PP. And in one rocket or in 10 - they know only in the General Staff ...
    In the event of an unauthorized launch by some half-wit ICBMs, a protocol will first be put in place, according to which communication will be established with those from whose territory the launch took place. If the ICBM is single, then most likely such a missile will be shot down by missile defense, and only then they will find out the causes of the emergency and will look for the guilty one. And no one in their right mind will launch all missiles to a single launch, and for all of them.
    Approximately the same thing when starting from the submarine. Each country that has SSBNs has its own combat patrol areas. Which are geographically approximately known. In addition, the characteristics of missiles are also known.

    Quote: iouris
    Quote: "... allows you to intercept" with almost 100 percent probability. " The end of the quote.
    If he said so, then he does not know that probability is not measured as a percentage. Probability is a number that can take values ​​in the range [0,1]. This is suspicious.
    Now, if he said that missile defense is capable of ensuring the probability of destroying n targets at a level of at least 0,95 (0,975, 0,999), and if 40 warheads arrive at the protected object right away ... then I'm sorry. That would be correct.

    He knows that. But it means the majority of readers and listeners, which means a probability of 0,975 or 0,999. Therefore, the man said the same thing, but in percentage terms. Instead of “the probability of hitting the target 0,975,” you can say that “the target will be hit with a probability of 97,5%"

    Quote: Pavel57
    An attack on Moscow is a hundred warheads. And there are only 64 missiles around Moscow.

    Nonsense. Read the old American plans. The number of BGs aimed at Moscow was 6-8, maybe a little more than BG, but not hundreds
    1. iouris 22 January 2020 22: 36 New
      • 0
      • 0
      0
      Quote: Old26
      Instead of “the probability of hitting the target 0,975,” you can say that “the target will be hit with a probability of 97,5%"

      Now it is clear that you can say anything (see Art. No. 1 of the Charter, and if ..., then .. see Art. No. 2 of the Charter). And the textbook "Probability Theory" can be referenced? "Probability Theory" is a mathematical science, and liberties are not allowed in mathematics.
  30. ABM
    ABM 22 January 2020 16: 25 New
    • 0
    • 4
    -4
    Moscow undoubtedly has some chances to survive! the fact is that our interception is carried out by A135 with thermonuclear warheads - no one has studied in practice how the factors of a nuclear explosion propagate in near space, what will happen to the atmosphere after that, but personally I continue to be optimistic.

    The flight path and the launch time of the first anti-missile missiles are easy to calculate, then the radar will be “blinded", which is not so important with this method of interception - it is necessary to launch missiles at some intervals. How the warheads react to a fairly close thermonuclear explosion (within a radius of several kilometers) is a mystery to me. On the one hand, they are able to overcome the atmosphere at speeds of a dozen MAX, on the other hand, to be in the near zone of the radius of destruction of a thermonuclear explosion is also not a gift!

    S-400, unfortunately, will not help - in the final section, the missiles fly on the so-called “combat platoon” and an air explosion at an altitude of 15-30 km above the ground are even worse than ground
    1. 1970mk 23 January 2020 01: 21 New
      • 0
      • 0
      0
      an air explosion at an altitude of 15-30 km above the ground is even worse than a ground explosion.

      What are you talking about? A ground explosion is a complete and long-term infection of the area ... it will be impossible to live for a century ... Air - the same damaging factors with a minimum of nuclear infection.
      1. iouris 23 January 2020 11: 42 New
        • 0
        • 0
        0
        As the classic said: "We will go to heaven, and they will die." The main thing is a retaliatory strike. After Moscow, after all, ICBMs are also based.
        Did I reassure you?
      2. ABM
        ABM 23 January 2020 12: 55 New
        • 0
        • 0
        0
        At an altitude of 2-3 km, the head shock wave of destructive force diverges to the maximum possible distance and a larger area of ​​damage by light radiation and penetrating radiation is achieved compared to a ground explosion due to the absence of darkening of the outbreak by dust clouds and shielding by buildings and the terrain. Such an air explosion by the action of a shock wave at long distances is likened to a ground power of almost two times greater.
        1. 1970mk 23 January 2020 14: 47 New
          • 0
          • 0
          0
          What are you poisoning? Power ... not power .... in a ground-based nuclear explosion in fact hundreds of square kilometers total radioactive contamination of the area for hundreds of years .....
          Such an air explosion by the action of a shock wave at long distances

          What are these distances? Do you even imagine the effect of a shock wave depending on range?
          1. ABM
            ABM 23 January 2020 16: 31 New
            • 0
            • 0
            0
            here you confuse the factors a little - I agree that the radioactive contamination of the area is higher with a ground explosion due to the involvement of the earth’s mass in the mushroom, etc., but penetrating radiation, light radiation, electromagnetic impulse - and these are the key points of the damage - with air!

            the impact force of the shock wave decreases in proportion to the cube of the distance from the epicenter, this is understandable, but with a ground explosion the shock wave is partially screened! for example, in Hiroshima, a policeman escaped with light injuries, only 300 meters from the epicenter of the explosion
            1. 1970mk 24 January 2020 19: 17 New
              • 0
              • 0
              0
              Wake up)))) There was no ground explosion in Hiroshima, which is why they live there now ...
              1. ABM
                ABM 25 January 2020 09: 08 New
                • 0
                • 0
                0
                "In general, although the power of the atomic explosion in Nagasaki was greater than in Hiroshima, the devastating effect of the explosion was less. This was facilitated by a combination of factors - the presence of hills in Nagasaki, and the fact that the center of the explosion was above the industrial zone - all this helped protect some areas of the city from the effects of the explosion "(C) - low-altitude nuclear explosion at 500 m altitude
        2. 1970mk 24 January 2020 19: 18 New
          • 0
          • 1
          -1
          an air explosion at an altitude of 15-30 km above the ground is even worse than a ground

          IT is who is grinding? A nuclear explosion 30 km above the ground is generally miserable destruction ....
    2. Boa kaa 23 January 2020 15: 40 New
      • 2
      • 0
      +2
      Quote: ABM
      How the warheads react to a fairly close thermonuclear explosion (within a radius of several kilometers) is a mystery to me.

      What kind of TJ explosion are you talking about? There will be no fusion in space, because in the airless space he will have only one PF - light radiation! The space echelon of ground-based missile defense is equipped with N-warheads. A powerful neutron flux, at a close distance from the BB (there is no talk about any km: The flux power is inversely proportional to the distance!), Is able to initiate neutron knocking out of the nuclear fuse (the so-called "champagne effect"), thereby creating less than critical mass Pu 238 for the explosion of the first cascade ... After undermining the blasting "crimp" BB will simply fly apart into fragments without a chain reaction.
      Amy those go along the path - not to pollute their atmosphere / territory, so they use kinetic interceptors. But it is worth the BB "wag" from the trajectory - and you can write DECREASED in capital letters!
      Also, the Yankees suffered for a long time with the selection of the LC ... Whether or not this problem has been solved is impossible to say for sure, because to believe them is the same as to believe the bazaar predictor of earthquakes!
      1. ABM
        ABM 23 January 2020 17: 53 New
        • 0
        • 0
        0
        I heard about Amov, for the first time about us. “In the transatmospheric section, a change in the trajectory of the target’s flight under the influence of a nuclear (so-called selective) explosion was used as a distinctive (selective) sign” (C) - it was planned to even distinguish targets using a nuclear explosion. How to achieve the necessary neutron flux without a thermonuclear explosion?
  31. Free Island 22 January 2020 17: 19 New
    • 3
    • 4
    -1
    We were delighted)) Moscow is reliably protected))) let's honestly call them by their own names - millions of migrant workers and a small handful of Russian rulers are reliably protected unlike the rest of Russia and Russian citizens)))
    1. ABM
      ABM 23 January 2020 12: 58 New
      • 0
      • 0
      0
      not quite Moscow - along a circle with a radius of 1000 km with the commissioning of A235 (so far at the test stage)
  32. Old26 22 January 2020 17: 33 New
    • 6
    • 1
    +5
    Quote: ABM
    How the warheads react to a fairly close thermonuclear explosion (within a radius of several kilometers) is a mystery to me.

    Differently. Americans checked
    • "Nike-Hercules" with BG capacity from 40 kt. Could hit individual BG from BRDS and BRMD. The destruction of the aircraft within a radius of several hundred meters
    • Nike-Zeus with a BG of 60 kt or more could hit a BG at a distance of 30 meters and with a BG of 400 kt at a distance of 2 km from the target
    • "Spartan" with a 5 mt BG, the radius (calculated) of the BG damage is 46 km (soft x-ray radiation). Guaranteed radius of destruction - 19 km or 6,4 km, if the BG with special coating
  33. G. Georgiev 22 January 2020 18: 28 New
    • 2
    • 1
    +1
    Russia is not protected from nuclear warheads, except for the capital of Moscow, with the A-135 system, about 100 missiles, and the new A-235 located in the vicinity of Moscow. Why 10 years ago, modern development was stopped (a plasma missile defense system with mobile PLANET generators), which represents ionization of sections in the atmosphere against flying rockets.
  34. Old26 22 January 2020 18: 40 New
    • 4
    • 1
    +3
    Quote: Victor March 47
    To do this, you need to wait for the United States to come out with a system of missile defense treaties, (we cannot take such an initiative) in accordance with which they, and we, have the right to have one, covering only one territory. We chose Moscow, and they are their strategic missile base in Alaska.

    It looks like you slept for almost 20 years. According to the ABM Treaty of 1972, more precisely, according to the protocol of 1974, each of the parties chose one missile defense deployment area. The USSR chose the capital, USA - Grand Forks Base in North Dakota
    On December 13, 2001, US President George W. Bush announced the US withdrawal from the Treaty, after which, according to the provisions of the treaty, it remained in force for another 6 months, until June 12, 2002.
    After that they have already deployed TWO POSITIONAL AREAS. One is in Alaska, where there has never been a missile base, the second position area is in California
  35. Bersaglieri 22 January 2020 18: 47 New
    • 1
    • 1
    0
    Missile defense area (against ICBMs, limited raid) - only Moscow. All.
  36. Old26 22 January 2020 19: 04 New
    • 3
    • 1
    +2
    Quote: Fan-Fan
    If earlier Pershing flew to Germany, would have been 10 minutes to us, how much will they fly from Kharkov? Minutes 3 or 4?

    About.
  37. IL-64 22 January 2020 19: 43 New
    • 1
    • 1
    0
    And the effectiveness of the defense does not change from the number of attacking warheads? And if the missile defense at the starting positions is less?
    1. ABM
      ABM 23 January 2020 13: 01 New
      • 0
      • 0
      0
      if several warheads fall into the radius of a guaranteed anti-missile strike, all of them will be destroyed. Hence the optimism
  38. Tokhtamysh 22 January 2020 20: 04 New
    • 1
    • 3
    -2
    And when and where in Russia was the last time an anti-ballistic missile launcher interceptor was intercepted by a missile defense system?
    In general, as always. We will beat the enemy on its territory, and fight with little blood. As everyone in a chorus happily danced and sang before the Soviet-German war. And then suddenly bang ... and 42 million were missing. They didn’t calculate a bit. It happens.
    1. ABM
      ABM 23 January 2020 13: 22 New
      • 0
      • 0
      0
      space nuclear tests prohibited
  39. 1970mk 22 January 2020 20: 25 New
    • 1
    • 1
    0
    Recall that in Russia large cities, including the most important industrial and political centers, are covered with a missile shield.

    What is this? And why not write as it is - Moscow - EVERYTHING!
    1. Procopius Nesterov 22 January 2020 20: 49 New
      • 0
      • 1
      -1
      When they signed a missile defense agreement with the United States, each country was allowed to choose one area that could be covered by missile defense. The United States has chosen a command center somewhere in the mountains. Our Moscow.
  40. Old26 22 January 2020 21: 10 New
    • 3
    • 1
    +2
    Quote: Sergey10789
    The General Staff determines the goals, but the missile is already on target and aimed, and it’s impossible to simply change the flight program by calculating the operational post.

    Well, with stationary complexes, we can and agree that they are already with the introduced PP. But a specific goal will be introduced after the receipt of information from a higher order to a lower level.
    The mobile complex takes aim only after taking its place on the PSBP and after the AGK is lowered.

    Quote: Sergey10789
    it’s just not possible to drive in new coordinates from the keyboard,

    And no one says that everything is very simple

    Quote: Sergey10789
    so even the warriors who press the buttons of this very mine have no idea where this rocket is flying.

    Buttons are already very, very long time gone. But the warriors really have no idea about the goals introduced in the missile defense

    Quote: Sergey10789
    Therefore, I am sure that the bulk of the missiles are aimed at sworn friends, and at least one at all the others.

    Confidence is certainly a good thing, but it should be based at least on rough estimates of how many goals in each country. And how much and where it is aimed is impossible to say. For example, can you say how many missiles are aimed at the FRG, if there are about 60-65 targets and several blocks are planned to be used for some of them?

    Quote: Sergey10789
    It’s clear that in which case, our solder-faced with a shoigimeter and with someone else just choose a previously developed plan, give orders to specific posts. But this is in theory.

    The application team will be lowered from above. And the coordinates of the goals will be entered into the flight mission, depending on who will be the target (enemy). And not in theory. The theory you have is "far-fetched"
  41. Old26 22 January 2020 21: 28 New
    • 3
    • 1
    +2
    Quote: Procopius Nesterov
    When they signed a missile defense agreement with the United States, each country was allowed to choose one area that could be covered by missile defense. The United States has chosen a command center somewhere in the mountains. Our Moscow.

    Well, if there is no desire to read serious materials, or at least the text of the contract - they would read Wikipedia. Then they would not have written such a thing. According to Article III of the ABM Treaty, paragraph b), the Americans chose not a mythical command center in the mountains, but a banal Grand Forks missile base in North Carolina

    Quote: G. Georgiev
    Russia is not protected from nuclear warheads, except for the capital of Moscow, with the A-135 system, about 100 missiles, and the new A-235 located in the vicinity of Moscow. Why 10 years ago, modern development was stopped (a plasma missile defense system with mobile PLANET generators), which represents ionization of sections in the atmosphere against flying rockets.

    A new system - A-235 in service is not yet. Well, a plasma missile defense with mobile Planet generators is from a series of alternative stories ...
  42. Alexey from Perm 22 January 2020 23: 26 New
    • 0
    • 0
    0
    I heard about missile defense of Moscow, but there is no defense of other major cities
  43. Old26 22 January 2020 23: 48 New
    • 3
    • 1
    +2
    Quote: iouris
    Quote: Old26
    Instead of “the probability of hitting the target 0,975,” you can say that “the target will be hit with a probability of 97,5%"

    Now it is clear that you can say anything (see Art. No. 1 of the Charter, and if ..., then .. see Art. No. 2 of the Charter). And the textbook "Probability Theory" can be referenced? "Probability Theory" is a mathematical science, and liberties are not allowed in mathematics.

    Kamrad! You do not want to understand one. If you, I or this general would consider the probability of hitting the target, then of course there would be numbers less than unity, that is, the same 0,975 or 0,999.
    But he gives interviews to people very distant including and from probability theory. Which all these 0,85 or 0,97 are unlikely to say. But that absolutely everyone will understand if it is said with a probability of 85 or 97 percent. Of course, from the point of view of mathematics, in particular probability theory, this is not correct, but THE UNDERSTANDING BASIS OF LISTENING
  44. Umsan Umsanov 23 January 2020 04: 32 New
    • 1
    • 3
    -2
    The question is where the United States will strike with its nuclear missiles ...
    1. Command centers.
    2. Radar centers.
    3. Launchers and mines.
    4. Airbases, flight bands - clusters of aircraft.
    5. The accumulation of armored forces.
    6. The accumulation of infantry.
    They will be destroyed within 1 hour if they want.

    And that’s it. Many cities will be intact. And they will be destroyed - Moscow-Peter-Vladivostok-Murmansk- and other cities-ports of the Navy. And that’s it.
    Other cities are not touched.

    And the United States will be destroyed less, since the number of missile defense from ICBMs is three times more than our carriers. + aviation.

    But such a scenario does not suit them. Since the US economy will fail anyway, and China-India-Iran-Egypt will become the hegemons in the world. And a completely different "eastern" life will begin around the world. Part of Russia will be captured by the Chinese, Europeans, Japanese.
    And the United States will be left with nothing, starting a mess.

    Now the US plan is to torpedo other countries to Russia, Ukraine, Turkey and China. They have no other plan.
  45. Kamaz 23 January 2020 04: 34 New
    • 0
    • 0
    0
    The force of an asteroid explosion that has fallen on dinosaurs is thousands of times stronger than all the nuclear weapons on earth and nothing of the earth is still spinning. So the margin of safety near the earth is very high
    1. ccsr 23 January 2020 13: 51 New
      • 1
      • 2
      -1
      Quote: Kamaz
      The force of an asteroid explosion that has fallen on dinosaurs is thousands of times stronger than all the nuclear weapons on earth and nothing of the earth is still spinning. So the margin of safety near the earth is very high

      The Earth itself may be high, but the person living on it doesn’t have such a margin of safety - we are heat-loving creatures, and if the “nuclear winter” begins, we are unlikely to be able to survive for long. And the influence of radiation and combustion products is still unclear, so there’s only one scenario - apparently it will be the same with us as with dinosaurs ...
  46. Old26 23 January 2020 12: 41 New
    • 3
    • 1
    +2
    Quote: Vol4ara
    They will be shot down in space, they will burn in the atmosphere

    Missiles most often fall on their own territory during the first 3-6 minutes. Only space warheads are already flying in space

    Quote: ButchCassidy
    I think that the problem can only be in the strength of the ICBM case. Everything else, I think, is not a problem.

    Strength of the ICBM case? Do ICBMs have inseparable warheads? ICBM cases fall on their own territory ...

    Quote: Umsan Umsanov
    The question is where the United States will strike with its nuclear missiles ...
    1. Command centers.
    2. Radar centers.
    3. Launchers and mines.
    4. Airbases, flight bands - clusters of aircraft.
    5. The accumulation of armored forces.
    6. The accumulation of infantry.
    They will be destroyed within 1 hour if they want.
    And that’s it. Many cities will be intact. And they will be destroyed - Moscow-Peter-Vladivostok-Murmansk- and other cities-ports of the Navy. And that’s it. Other cities are not touched.

    Add here millionaire cities, large cities and industrial centers, large power plants, transportation hubs
    Considering that in cities with population over one million people and in large cities a large number of industrial facilities are concentrated, they will also be targets. Like large power plants and transportation hubs. Of course, the number of goals has decreased, compared with the plans of the 50-70s, but some still remained in the list of goals. For example, according to the plans of the 50s, it was planned to spend 3 ammunition on my hometown. Now the industry that was no longer there. Therefore, it is possible that "under the distribution" does not fall. But the neighboring city with industrial enterprises - that will remain in the list of goals

    Quote: Umsan Umsanov
    And the United States will be destroyed less, since the number of missile defense from ICBMs is three times more than our carriers. + aviation.

    Is there three times more anti-missiles than our ICBMs? How interesting. About 44-48 missile defense systems capable of intercepting our ICBMs have been deployed in the United States. The number of our ICBMs is about 3 hundred. Plus SLBMs of intercontinental range - another 160. And how? Do they have more missiles than ours? What nonsense about the ratio of interceptors and ICBMs? Where did you get this?
  47. ABM
    ABM 23 January 2020 12: 47 New
    • 0
    • 0
    0
    Quote: Old26
    Quote: ABM
    How the warheads react to a fairly close thermonuclear explosion (within a radius of several kilometers) is a mystery to me.

    Differently. Americans checked
    • "Nike-Hercules" with BG capacity from 40 kt. Could hit individual BG from BRDS and BRMD. The destruction of the aircraft within a radius of several hundred meters
    • Nike-Zeus with a BG of 60 kt or more could hit a BG at a distance of 30 meters and with a BG of 400 kt at a distance of 2 km from the target
    • "Spartan" with a 5 mt BG, the radius (calculated) of the BG damage is 46 km (soft x-ray radiation). Guaranteed radius of destruction - 19 km or 6,4 km, if the BG with special coating


    I guessed something like that! it remains to be understood how safe the detonation is for structures and people on the surface
  48. Old26 23 January 2020 13: 11 New
    • 2
    • 1
    +1
    Quote: ABM
    Quote: Old26
    Quote: ABM
    How the warheads react to a fairly close thermonuclear explosion (within a radius of several kilometers) is a mystery to me.

    Differently. Americans checked
    • "Nike-Hercules" with BG capacity from 40 kt. Could hit individual BG from BRDS and BRMD. The destruction of the aircraft within a radius of several hundred meters
    • Nike-Zeus with a BG of 60 kt or more could hit a BG at a distance of 30 meters and with a BG of 400 kt at a distance of 2 km from the target
    • "Spartan" with a 5 mt BG, the radius (calculated) of the BG damage is 46 km (soft x-ray radiation). Guaranteed radius of destruction - 19 km or 6,4 km, if the BG with special coating


    I guessed something like that! it remains to be understood how safe the detonation is for structures and people on the surface

    You know, comrade, information about such tests that I cited can be found on the network, but there is only one parameter - the height of the blasting. And if with Nike Hercules it is even less clear, since there is a mention of the aircraft. And if we take into account that the test was in the mid-50s and the flight altitude of the aircraft was then about 15-18 km, then we can assume that the height of the YaBZ bombing was somewhere in the range of 10-15 km.
    But in relation to “Nike Zeus” and “Spartan” - everything is more complicated. The first is reachable at a height of 280 km, the second - 560 km
  49. VladVlad 23 January 2020 16: 16 New
    • 0
    • 1
    -1
    "Answering a question about the time required to protect Moscow from a missile attack, General Grabchuk replied that this time could be" up to several tens of minutes. ""
    General, your troops will not have time to bring down anyone in such a time. This is a very slow response to a threat. Recently, Trump and the US Secretary of Defense said that they would destroy all the enemy’s ICBMs right in the mine at launch !!! This means that the enemies have vehicles that can take about 30-120 seconds to cross the border and destroy all mbr mines with missiles! And you say "up to several tens of minutes." Ask at the General Staff, they are in the know. Ask them why we are not introducing the same technologies as our enemies. Such technologies have existed in Russia for a long time. What is the problem?
  50. Old26 23 January 2020 16: 57 New
    • 3
    • 1
    +2
    Quote: VladVlad
    Recently, Trump and the US Secretary of Defense said that they would destroy all the enemy’s ICBMs right in the mine at launch !!!

    Yeah! And they also have a system that explodes our missile warheads in the mines. Moreover, the Americans have a system that allows us to deploy our warheads in space and return them to the launch point. Continue?

    Quote: VladVlad
    This means that the enemies have vehicles that can take about 30-120 seconds to cross the border and destroy all mbr mines with missiles!

    Are you talking nonsense about an alien technology device again? Not tired? Here, after all, it’s not a club of science fiction lovers or a club of followers of Yuri Mukhin and his comrades-in-arms (but the truth is more like drinking companions, because by sober such nonsense as he cannot write)

    Quote: VladVlad
    Ask at the General Staff, they are in the know. Ask them why we are not introducing the same technologies as our enemies. Such technologies have existed in Russia for a long time. What is the problem?

    What is the problem? Why not implement? And how to implement what is not? What has not one of the countries in the world grown technologically yet?