Military Review

US Air Force general called "stupid" idea to place long-range missiles on the Pacific coast

55
US Air Force general called "stupid" idea to place long-range missiles on the Pacific coast

The main priority of the modernization of the American ground forces is the development of long-range high-precision missile systems, in particular, the creation of a land-based hypersonic missile system by 2023.


General Timothy Ray, who heads the US Air Force's Global Strike Command, called the US Army's idea of ​​deploying long-range missiles capable of destroying Chinese defenses on the country's Pacific coast "expensive, duplicate and stupid".

He stated this during a podcast conducted by the Mitchell Institute.

Department, do you have the money to go for this? This is stupid. I just think it's a stupid idea to go and invest that kind of money into it.

- General Ray was indignant.

Like many other members of the United States Air Force Command, he believes that the bomber aviation most effective for penetrating enemy airspace and suppressing its anti-missile defense. He is also worried that significant budgetary funds will be spent on the US Army project. Moreover, by 2022, the first air-launched hypersonic missile should appear in service with the Air Force.

In addition to the ground forces and the Air Force, plans for a hypersonic weapon have the US Navy. In particular, there is an idea to equip the latest Zumwalt destroyers with hypersonic missiles. True, it must be emphasized that the plans for the armament of these destroyers in the United States change almost weekly. It all started with an electromagnetic gun ...
55 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must sign in.
  1. The comment was deleted.
  2. tralflot1832
    tralflot1832 April 4 2021 11: 39
    +13
    The general hopes that if the aviation begins to "penetrate" into the territory of China, then the Chinese ICBM will not arrive in the United States? It was as if the virus of exclusivity had infected their brains.
    1. Prisoner
      Prisoner April 4 2021 12: 03
      +3
      What about him? He will not be piloting the bomber that the Air Defense Forces are likely to overwhelm. laughing And in general, the main thing for him is to "take away" the grandmother of his missilemen.
      1. 210ox
        210ox April 4 2021 12: 32
        +3
        Bombers have not entered the air defense zone for a long time. But about the bubble, I agree.
      2. venik
        venik April 4 2021 12: 47
        +14
        Quote: Captive
        What about him? He will not be piloting the bomber that the Air Defense Forces are likely to overwhelm. laughing

        =========
        Once upon a time, our commander taught me, a green "jacket": "Always demand from your subordinates" AT THE MAXIMUM "! But NEVER demand what you CANNOT do CAM"!!!
        The same applies to those who plan military operations: "Planned an operation - be ready to take PERSONAL participation in it!"
        1. Krasnoyarsk
          Krasnoyarsk April 4 2021 13: 31
          +5
          Quote: venik

          Once upon a time, our commander taught me, a green "jacket": "Always demand from your subordinates" AT THE MAXIMUM "! But NEVER demand what you CANNOT do YOURSELF" !!!

          I don’t understand why you got a minus. I corrected it a little. But in fact - only this way and not otherwise.
          1. venik
            venik April 4 2021 14: 00
            +5
            Quote: Krasnoyarsk
            I don’t understand why you got a minus.

            =======
            God knows them !? Someone probably didn't like it! Moreover, the truth is kind of "capital", banal! Moreover, for me it seems obvious: after all, a son and grandson officers! Father - he captured the Patriotic War (though he was already "exhausted", but he had awards), and Grandfather - so he did THREE!) Waved the war - from private to colonel.
            We just had a commander good Here's a guy! Him in part Batey called and not for beautiful eyes! When another guy and I were sent to the "foreign", he called us, opened the safe, took out the "cherished" and 3 "granchak": he poured it and suddenly asked:
            - Do you guys know what scary in our profession?
            -?
            - And the worst thing: to send subordinates to hell when you yourself are sitting in an easy chair!

            Yes, how he bangs on the table with his fist! And this despite the fact that he himself only recently returned from Afgan! Such are the men were (and now there will be too!) .....
            1. Krasnoyarsk
              Krasnoyarsk April 4 2021 14: 36
              +1
              Quote: venik
              a truth like "capital", banal!

              Neither add nor subtract!
              Good luck, namesake. hi
          2. yehat2
            yehat2 April 5 2021 16: 11
            0
            those. from subordinate women the commander can not demand to give birth? laughing
            1. Krasnoyarsk
              Krasnoyarsk April 5 2021 18: 00
              0
              Quote: yehat2
              those. from subordinate women the commander can not demand to give birth? laughing

              Of course not. These are not his wives wink
        2. Mikhail3
          Mikhail3 April 5 2021 12: 21
          0
          You do not understand. Now the world is, and in the American army, as in all armies of the world (except for the North Korean one), peacetime generals rule. They absolutely do not care about some kind of soldiers and officers. There is a war for money! The most important war on the planet! And the general, who is paid by the manufacturers of air launch systems, justly and powerfully strikes those who are trying to reallocate the appropriations already distributed into the pockets of his masters.
          Such a war. The fact that everyone will pay for the dead does not bother the generals of a monetary war.
    2. Thrifty
      Thrifty April 4 2021 12: 57
      -2
      No! Only rockets, and more! Every 20 meters along the ICBM, immediately start digging new mines for them wassat Give 1000 new ICBMs! !! wassat
    3. xorek
      xorek April 4 2021 12: 57
      0
      Department, do you have the money to go for this? This is stupid. I just think it's a stupid idea to go and invest that kind of money into it.

      Well, now the general will be removed and generally accused of being an agent of the Kremlin .... This was his last statement! laughing
      The US Congress has already written an order on the resignation of this upstart .. There such money should go, stupid American general, does not fumble in geopolitics and budget financing .. lol
    4. Alarmist79
      Alarmist79 April 4 2021 13: 06
      +3
      = then the Chinese ICBM will not arrive in the USA =
      Uh ... China's doctrine provides for the non-use of nuclear weapons first.
    5. Alex777
      Alex777 April 4 2021 14: 21
      +1
      The general hopes that if the aircraft begins to "penetrate" into the territory of China, then the Chinese ICBM will not arrive in the United States?

      ICBMs in the States also belong to the Air Force. hi
      1. Lara Croft
        Lara Croft April 4 2021 15: 21
        0
        Quote: Alex777
        The general hopes that if the aircraft begins to "penetrate" into the territory of China, then the Chinese ICBM will not arrive in the United States?

        ICBMs in the States also belong to the Air Force. hi

        Yes, yes. Strategic Aviation Command (SAC), which includes all land-based ICBMs and strategic aviation ....
        1. Alex777
          Alex777 April 4 2021 15: 53
          0
          IMHO, this general does not understand why he should be duplicated?
          1. Lara Croft
            Lara Croft April 4 2021 16: 07
            +1
            Quote: Alex777
            IMHO, this general does not understand why he should be duplicated?

            When approving the budget, usually the Army and the ILC "drive one wave", the BOKHR and the Navy "their own", so there each Ministry and the ILC has its own development programs, the expediency of which they are trying to prove, in our case they heard a representative of the Air Force Ministry, he is rude started because his program was probably recognized as the most expensive and began to remove some specific projects from there, recognizing either premature or expensive ...
            Everyone will readily listen to the representative of the KMP, there will be a reduction by 20 military units in the near future (they will disband all tank battalions and military battalions in all divisions, reduce the helicopter units of the KMP Aviation) .... in the long term, the DMR will be transformed into regiments .. ..
            There will be a reduction in the Amphibious Ships in the Navy ....
            So the Air Force has the most expensive projects - F-35, V-21, the update of ICBMs in the SAK (part of the Air Force) ...
            In general, he shouldn't have begun to be rude, most of the money in the Air Force will go anyway ...
      2. tralflot1832
        tralflot1832 April 4 2021 16: 07
        -1
        But he is from that galaxy of deytels who are ready to rush to China on top of a vigorous bomb in a Texas hat! The film was like: How I learned not to be afraid of a nuclear bomb !!!
    6. Roman070280
      Roman070280 April 5 2021 09: 00
      -5
      The general hopes that if the aircraft begins to "penetrate" into the territory of China, then the Chinese ICBM will not arrive in the United States?


      The general knows very well that no one will bomb anyone ..
      Therefore, it knocks out the loot for its Air Force, and not for the ground forces ..
  3. Nikolay Ivanov_5
    Nikolay Ivanov_5 April 4 2021 11: 42
    +4
    And there are still smart people in the Pentagon ???
    1. Prisoner
      Prisoner April 4 2021 12: 41
      +1
      And where is the manifestation of the mind? One greed. Money flies past your nose. hi
    2. xorek
      xorek April 4 2021 12: 59
      -1
      Quote: Nikolai Ivanov_5
      And there are still smart people in the Pentagon ???

      Well, when they retire, sometimes they say adequate things ... And this general has decided to express everything now and will pay with his career, or maybe he will be thrown into prison as an agent of China and Russia wassat
      1. Nikolay Ivanov_5
        Nikolay Ivanov_5 April 4 2021 13: 06
        -1
        Why does America invent enemies for itself? Both Russia and China do not call the United States an enemy. We ask them to behave in a civilized manner, and they only get mad about it.
        1. Lara Croft
          Lara Croft April 4 2021 16: 10
          0
          Quote: Nikolai Ivanov_5
          Why does America invent enemies for itself?

          Competitors need to spread rot in the bud, the United States is not afraid of us, they are afraid of our unification with either the PRC or the FRG ...
  4. knn54
    knn54 April 4 2021 11: 45
    +2
    The current "hawk" believes that: "... the main role in the air component of the nuclear triad is to be played by the B-21 Raider bomber ... The B-21 will easily overcome any air defense system, remaining invisible to trackers."
    1. hrych
      hrych April 4 2021 12: 20
      +2
      There is a reasonable grain. The main centers of the PRC are close to the coast. The disarming strike of the Tomahawks from submarines (some of the converted Ohio are doing something) and hiding behind the curvature of the earth, the strategists may not enter the active zone of China's air defense. Also, an aeroballistic hypersonic missile, albeit not as a powerful and long-range Dagger, but a frail one based on SM-3, will be completely done in the coming years, and again, taking into account the geography of the Maoists, this will be quite ...
  5. voyaka uh
    voyaka uh April 4 2021 11: 54
    +3
    The general is right.
    In fact, they propose to create ground-based ICBMs without nuclear warheads
    (Vanguard non-nuclear)
    to strike at China's nuclear ICBMs.
    And place them in California.
    It is wiser to place MRBMs on ships serving near
    coast of China.
    1. abc_alex
      abc_alex April 4 2021 23: 18
      0
      Quote: voyaka uh
      In fact, they propose to create ground-based ICBMs without nuclear warheads
      (Vanguard non-nuclear)
      to strike at China's nuclear ICBMs.

      The idea is completely idiotic. Because it comes from the idiotic concept of "disarming strike". This concept, if you remember, implies the first strike on the enemy's strategic nuclear forces and the subsequent trampling it into the Stone Age by all available means.
      Such a concept can only be realized in the sick imagination of state politicians. In real life, China's strategic nuclear forces will respond with a retaliatory strike, as soon as the US detects a missile launch, an approaching bombers, or a missile launch from ships. Nuclear missiles will, must be (!), Launched beforehow the US CD will achieve its goals. And no one will care whether the state-owned CDs are carrying nuclear blocks or not. Spit. Since if sanity in the United States has reached such a low level to strike the first blow at a nuclear power, then the States should be recognized as a territory of insanity, and the population as a dead-end branch of human evolution. And destroy. No compromise.
      Therefore, any way of implementing this doctrine is idiocy, dangerous, on the verge of violent insanity. That ships, that rockets, that airplanes created within the framework of this doctrine, all this is idiocy. Do you think that the Chinese, seeing two dozen MRBM carriers off their shores, will look at them with tears of affection? That they will not bring their strategic nuclear forces into a state of highest combat readiness?
      1. voyaka uh
        voyaka uh April 4 2021 23: 32
        +1
        The Chinese have thousands of MRBMs. Both nuclear and non-nuclear.
        The Americans have no MRBM (because of the treaty with the USSR-Russia recently canceled).
        Russia also does not have MRBMs (for the same reason).
        ---
        So the Americans are planning to develop, manufacture and place
        MRBM on ships or bases in the Pacific Ocean.
        Non-nuclear.
        And nuclear - ICBMs with mini-hydrogen warheads on Tridents on submarines.
        It is difficult for the Chinese to prevent this.
        They can only increase the number of their BRs of all types.
        1. abc_alex
          abc_alex April 4 2021 23: 50
          0
          Quote: voyaka uh
          The Chinese have thousands of MRBMs. Both nuclear and non-nuclear.
          The Americans have no MRBM (because of the treaty with the USSR-Russia recently canceled).
          Russia also does not have MRBMs (for the same reason).
          ---
          So the Americans are planning to develop, manufacture and place
          MRBM on ships or bases in the Pacific Ocean.
          Non-nuclear.
          And nuclear - ICBMs with mini-hydrogen warheads on Tridents on submarines.
          It is difficult for the Chinese to prevent this.
          They can only increase the number of their BRs of all types.


          And who said that an INF attack should be responded to with an INF counterstrike? And in general, that in response to the launch of missiles from US ships, the Chinese will retaliate with a strike at the ships, and not at the US bases in Korea and Japan, and then at US cities? Immediately, the shtatovites have the whole concept based on fantasy, on some strange assumptions. Like we will hit the enemy's territory, and he will first wait for the missiles to fall, then he will see that they are not nuclear, and will no longer respond with a nuclear strike.
          And the enemy will not wait until the missiles reach, he also understands where and why the missiles are flying, the strike will be delivered when the missiles are still in the air and the response will be nuclear, because no one knows how much the cowboys moved with their minds. To the holy faith in Hollywood or to complete inadequacy.
          And only one thing can keep cowboys from stupidity: the animal fear of total nuclear annihilation from which neither bank accounts nor stock quotes will save. Therefore, the further the statesmen develop the doctrine of the first disarming strike, the further China will advance in matters of strikes on US territory. The Chinese already have ICBMs with nuclear weapons capable of reaching US territory. Well, they will also expand their arsenal.
          Well, the logic is simple: the United States wants to strike at the territory of China, China will strike at the territory of the United States in response. Well, it's stupid to expect that instead of responding to a blow to itself, China will begin to catch ships in the sea, and not crack at stationary objects such as "city" in the United States.
          1. voyaka uh
            voyaka uh April 5 2021 01: 56
            +1
            The Americans are pushing China towards a new doctrine:
            limited nuclear war without mutual strikes on cities.
            The Americans are hitting the Chinese military bases and the navy.
            The Chinese are hitting American military bases and the navy.
            Ground-based ICBMs are not used by either side.
            Who will win militarily? - Hard to say...
            On the side of the Americans - the great many years of experience in the Navy and Air Force.
            On the side of the Chinese - the proximity of bases and supplies and the number
            active ships and aircraft.
            What do both sides gain? - their economies are not destroyed.
            This is beneficial to the Chinese (they have an economic global expansion)
            even more than the Americans.
            And the Americans can retreat a little "proudly", inflicting losses on China, without abandoning their allies - Japan and others. And not "losing face".
            (what I have expressed is a hypothesis, no more).
    2. ironic
      ironic April 5 2021 17: 36
      0
      The general very much resembles the position of our air force in his position. Give all the money to us. Don't duplicate us with rockets. We will defeat everyone.
  6. Boa kaa
    Boa kaa April 4 2021 11: 57
    +1
    I don’t understand the general’s confidence that the Avug raid will not be met at the A2 / AD zone ... The whales, in my opinion, have everything they need to provide echeloned air defense. Again, our S-400s were ordered. And then they replicate their clones. And their aviation also flies regularly. And VV BD missiles, it seems, are also there ...
    But about theater missile defense, I'm not entirely sure. Therefore, the deployment of the BSBB on the Japanese islands and in the South Caucasus will be the very thing ... The whales will have to strain a lot. Maybe then they will still press themselves harder on the back of the "northern neighbor" ... (Of course, not in the sense of "position from behind." This is for fans of a perverted reading of posts bully )
    Therefore, it is difficult to say why the general is against the missile variant of the PLA's air defense breakthrough. Maybe he is lobbying for someone, or maybe he already relies on the super-duper GZO, which does not exist yet ... But they promised to give him a lift. laughing
    1. poquello
      poquello April 4 2021 12: 27
      0
      Quote: Boa constrictor KAA
      Therefore, the deployment of the BSBB on the Japanese islands and in the South Caucasus will be the very thing ...

      and the Chinese easily reach the islands, maybe this is the reason
    2. Lara Croft
      Lara Croft April 4 2021 15: 32
      0
      Quote: BoA KAA
      Therefore, the deployment of the BSBB on the Japanese islands and in the South Caucasus will be the very thing ... The whales will have to strain a lot.

      South Caucasus, Japan and about. Eun will take over Guam, all other PLA targets ...
      Maybe then they will cuddle harder against the back of the "northern neighbor" ...

      Why do we need him with his back, if we can't count on him?
      1. Boa kaa
        Boa kaa April 4 2021 15: 59
        0
        Quote: Lara Croft
        Why do we need him with his back, if we can't count on him?

        The enemy of my enemy can become my ally! -- no?
        1. Lara Croft
          Lara Croft April 4 2021 16: 14
          0
          Quote: BoA KAA
          The enemy of my enemy can become my ally! -- no?

          The United States is the main trading partner of the PRC and Vietnam ...
          RF is the main trade partner of RB and Armenia, add a list (Abkhazia and South Ossetia are not to be offered) ...
  7. rocket757
    rocket757 April 4 2021 11: 58
    0
    Department, do you have the money to go for this? This is stupid. I just think it's a stupid idea to go and invest that kind of money into it.
    - General Ray was indignant
    ... What is this, the general began to count denyushku ??? He began to guess about something or KNOWS !!!
  8. Jaromir
    Jaromir April 4 2021 12: 09
    +5
    Like many other members of the US Air Force Command, he believes that bomber aircraft is most effective.

    based on this proposal and the next proposal
    He is also worried that significant budgetary funds will be spent on the US Ground Forces project.

    it can be concluded that the general is concerned with the distribution of budgetary funds. He is fighting to increase budgetary money for the Air Force by reducing funding for the US Army. yes
  9. Ros 56
    Ros 56 April 4 2021 12: 22
    0
    And why bother with striped missiles, no one is going to attack them. The Chinese will make them their economy without firing a single shot.
  10. rotmistr60
    rotmistr60 April 4 2021 12: 23
    0
    he believes that bomber aviation is most effective for penetrating enemy airspace and suppressing its anti-missile defense
    No, this is not the general's conservative thinking at first glance, but an offense at the distribution of the military budget. It is not for nothing that he is worried about the funds allocated to the Ground Forces, which he considers too large. In the United States, every self-respecting general lobbies for certain military-industrial complex firms. Business and nothing else.
  11. ont65
    ont65 April 4 2021 12: 45
    +1
    It's OK. The general did not take into account the defense prospects of the PRC Navy. The Pentagon decided to back up the possibilities with ground forces reserves.
  12. Old26
    Old26 April 4 2021 13: 28
    +1
    Quote: tralflot1832
    The general hopes that if the aviation begins to "penetrate" into the territory of China, then the Chinese ICBM will not arrive in the United States? It was as if the virus of exclusivity had infected their brains.

    It is very possible that it will not arrive. The Chinese have tested their ICBMs at a maximum range of 3500 km. And this is despite the presence, albeit a small, but a fleet of ships of the test complex. So both the Chinese and Koreans cannot guarantee a retaliatory strike against the mainland United States. The first are due to the fact that they do not carry out launches to the maximum range. the second - they do not have a KIK fleet at all and the tests are more theoretical

    Quote: voyaka uh
    The general is right.
    In fact, they propose to create ground-based ICBMs without nuclear warheads
    (Vanguard non-nuclear)
    to strike at China's nuclear ICBMs.
    And place them in California.
    It is wiser to place MRBMs on ships serving near
    coast of China.

    Alexei! We (USSR, Russia) have always been against:
    1. Deployment of intercontinental (intermediate-range) missiles with non-nuclear warheads due to the impossibility of guaranteeing that they actually carry a conventional warhead, and not a nuclear one. It is fraught with a "response" from our side and "the soul rushed to heaven"
    2. There is a ban on the deployment of ballistic missiles on watercraft (other than submarines) if their range exceeds 600 km.

    The Americans can deploy their promising MRBMs only in a ground version at their bases, in particular in Guam.

    Quote: poquello
    Quote: Boa constrictor KAA
    Therefore, the deployment of the BSBB on the Japanese islands and in the South Caucasus will be the very thing ...

    and the Chinese easily reach the islands, maybe this is the reason

    They can and will get it (we got the Pershing and Griffons in Europe, as they did our Pioneers and P-12s in the western part of the USSR). The question is, who will have time to press the "button" earlier?
    Most missiles capable of reaching the same YK from the Chinese with conventional warheads
    1. OgnennyiKotik
      OgnennyiKotik April 4 2021 13: 40
      -1
      Quote: Old26
      There is a ban on the placement of ballistic missiles on watercraft (except for submarines) if their range exceeds 600 km.

      And in what contract is this song?
      1. Lara Croft
        Lara Croft April 4 2021 15: 37
        0
        Quote: OgnennyiKotik
        Quote: Old26
        There is a ban on the placement of ballistic missiles on watercraft (except for submarines) if their range exceeds 600 km.

        And in what contract is this song?

        Good question! Because, there is no such prohibition.
    2. Lara Croft
      Lara Croft April 4 2021 15: 54
      0
      Quote: Old26
      The first are due to the fact that they do not carry out launches to the maximum range. the second - they do not have a KIK fleet at all and the tests are more theoretical

      If there is no evidence of the defeat of the PLA and KPA BRs on the territory of the United States, this does not mean that the BRs cannot reach the United States, and the United States itself will want to check this, so that the United States is doomed to hit the BR launchers themselves, so that it is certain .... wind rose "and radioactive contamination of areas of the PRC and DPRK, I think the United States does not care ...
      In the South Caucasus, the American TAADs seemed to be placed during the period of deterioration in relations with Eun under Trump, how effective they can be against the PLA / KPA ... I don't know ...
      There is a ban on the placement of ballistic missiles on watercraft (except for submarines) if their range exceeds 600 km.

      There is no prohibition. START Treaty Text
      https://doc.mil.ru/documents/quick_search/more.htm?id=10947115%40morfNPAChapter
      The Americans can deploy their promising MRBMs only in a ground version at their bases, in particular in Guam.

      Yes, they can place anywhere, but you are right, most likely they will be placed on about. Guam, although it is possible to place in the North of Australia or on the Japanese islands, only they will not agree ...
  13. Old26
    Old26 April 4 2021 14: 05
    +3
    Quote: OgnennyiKotik
    And in what contract is this song?

    This was the first time in the SALT-2 agreement. But the overwhelming majority of the provisions of this fundamental treaty "by default" are used in other treaties.
    Each side understands that violation of such provisions will trigger an uncontrolled arms race.
    1. OgnennyiKotik
      OgnennyiKotik April 4 2021 14: 13
      -2
      Understood thanks.
      Then the new hypersonic missiles fall under this ban? They can be classified as winged and talk about a range of 1000 km or more.
  14. Old26
    Old26 April 4 2021 14: 21
    +2
    Quote: OgnennyiKotik
    Understood thanks.
    Then the new hypersonic missiles fall under this ban? They can be classified as winged and talk about a range of 1000 km or more.

    The fact of the matter is that hypersonic WINGED missiles, and indeed cruise missiles, do not fall under the prohibitions of the treaties. Purely theoretically, it is possible to "push through" a ban on hypersonic aeroballistic missiles such as our dagger. But in the treaty, the ban on aeroballistic was stipulated only in the context of the armament of strategic bombers (again, the range limit is 600 km)
    That is, if you deploy the same "Dagger" or American counterparts on strategists like TU-95 or TU-160 (they have it on B-1, B-2, B-52) - theoretically it can be considered a violation.
    But aeroballistic ones have a very peculiar flight path. If the GZBR fly, let's say, horizontally, then they may not be subject to restrictions. Everything here is very ambiguous and complicated. There are many protocols, definitions and other related documents on the network, but there are certainly protocols with a stamp that we do not know about
    1. OgnennyiKotik
      OgnennyiKotik April 4 2021 14: 32
      -2
      Mmmm ... thanks for the clarification, a lot of hypersound gestures are now understandable. I wondered why there are so many developments in this direction, when there are ballistic missiles that perform the same tasks and have existed since the 40s. It is not technically difficult to put them on ships and aircraft, the problem is in the prohibitions. But this gives a serious advantage to China, in terms of delivery vehicles they approach the United States, it is clear why they so want to join them in START.
  15. MakStVik
    MakStVik April 4 2021 14: 39
    +1
    Different types of troops are engaged in the division of the budget. Everyone says that he is more important. That's all.
  16. 123456789
    123456789 April 4 2021 14: 55
    0
    Quote: Captive
    What about him? He won't fly that bomber which air defense men are likely to overwhelm. laughing And in general, the main thing for him is to "take away" the grandmother of his missilemen.

    Nothing is impossible for someone who does not have to do it himself.
  17. Boromir1941
    Boromir1941 April 4 2021 15: 05
    +1
    Quote: tralflot1832
    The general hopes that if the aviation begins to "penetrate" into the territory of China, then the Chinese ICBM will not arrive in the United States? It was as if the virus of exclusivity had infected their brains.

    they just got used to thinking of themselves like that. only reality has changed
  18. Lister
    Lister April 4 2021 15: 16
    +1
    US Air Force general called "stupid" idea to place long-range missiles on the Pacific coast

    They would have taken and disbanded their army. It is complete "stupidity" for the United States to have its own armed forces. laughing
  19. Old26
    Old26 April 4 2021 16: 16
    +4
    Quote: MakStVik
    Different types of troops are engaged in the division of the budget. Everyone says that he is more important. That's all.

    It has always been, is and will be. And not only among the Americans, but also here. When necessary, the same fleet is pushed aside and the entire stake is placed on the Strategic Missile Forces or aviations, as a last resort.

    Quote: Lara Croft
    Good question! Because, there is no such prohibition.

    Yes? Well then try to answer the following questions:
    1. why we still do not have the "Krechet" complex in service (so as not to have to look for it, I will remind you. This is a TU-160 with two "Krechet" ICBMs (range - 8000 km, 6 warheads). Not because there is such a ban ?

    2. why we still do not have the same Ruslan-type transport aircraft in service. which would carry nearly a hundred long-range cruise missiles? Not because there is such a prohibition?

    3. why we still do not have a single surface ship armed with ballistic missiles. What seemed simpler, especially since the projects of such a ship with EMNIP 20-24 ballistic missiles were in the late 80s? Let it not be a cruiser now, but who would interfere with placing Iskander-class missiles with a real range of 600-800 km on destroyers / frigates? Not because there is such a prohibition?

    4. Why do we still not have a surface ship that would carry several intercontinental ballistic missiles, for example, Sineva or Bulava missiles? But such projects were based on our ships of science and cargo ships of the "Amguema" type? Not because there is such a prohibition?

    5. Why do we still have no underwater vehicles in service (at the bottom or in the water column, which would be equipped with intercontinental SLBMs, albeit with a low speed, especially in our territorial waters, where the enemy could not find them? But there were such projects, not because there is such a ban?

    6. Why do we still have no ICBMs or SLBMs in service with the number of warheads exceeding 10 for ICBMs and 14 for SLBMs? But the throwing weight of the same "Voevoda" is such that instead of 10 blocks it could easily be placed 14 regular ones, but what if low-power ones with a capacity of 100-50 kt and a couple of dozen? Not because there is such a prohibition?
  20. Old26
    Old26 April 4 2021 17: 17
    +4
    Quote: Lara Croft
    Quote: Old26
    The first are due to the fact that they do not carry out launches to the maximum range. the second - they do not have a KIK fleet at all and the tests are more theoretical

    If there is no evidence of the defeat of the PLA and KPA BRs on the territory of the United States, this does not mean that the BRs cannot reach the United States, and the United States itself will want to check this, so that the United States is doomed to hit the BR launchers themselves, so that it is certain .... wind rose "and radioactive contamination of areas of the PRC and DPRK, I think the United States does not care ...

    Nuclear missile weapons are not guessing on a daisy: "will it fly or will not." Here you need a 1000% guarantee that it will fly and most importantly get to the right place. Unfortunately, there is no such confidence in the DPRK and PRC ICBMs. Simply NO WARRANTY... Maybe it will fly, but maybe not. Even in the mid-70s, we had the same situation when, having “scored” on such a test as launches to the maximum range, they took the missile into service. EMNIP at the end of the 1st stage operation, a pitch buildup occurred and, alas, the rocket did not hit the target. But this was already the 3rd generation of our ICBMs.
    Striking a PU is a standard procedure. Especially if you have decent missile accuracy and are about to launch a preemptive strike.
    Nobody bothers with the "wind rose" when hitting the enemy's territory. Is it just so that there is as much contamination of the area as possible
    THAAD is quite effective, but only for medium-range missiles. This complex will intercept intercontinental ships only if a number of conditions are met. This complex will not intercept Chinese ICBMs, but North Korean ones - such an event is likely, because many conditions will be met.

    Quote: Lara Croft
    There is a ban on the placement of ballistic missiles on watercraft (except for submarines) if their range exceeds 600 km.

    There is no prohibition. START Treaty Text
    https://doc.mil.ru/documents/quick_search/more.htm?id=10947115%40morfNPAChapter

    The treaty should be watched SALT-2, not START

    Quote: Lara Croft
    The Americans can deploy their promising MRBMs only in a ground version at their bases, in particular in Guam.

    Yes, they can place anywhere, but you are right, most likely they will be placed on about. Guam, although it is possible to place in the North of Australia or on the Japanese islands, only they will not agree ...

    Japan is unlikely, too close, but Guam is suitable. North of Australia - the MRBM is unlikely to reach only the southern regions of China
  21. shahor
    shahor April 4 2021 18: 26
    0
    The article is empty. The Air Force general was looking for the money of the army ... Yes, there is such a thing every day. Tomorrow the admiral will encroach on the sacred for the Air Force - on the F-35, call it (F-35) an indecent word and demand that this money be given to the Navy. Struggle for the budget, nothing more. And the noise from the sofas is immeasurable.
  22. Old26
    Old26 April 5 2021 15: 43
    0
    Quote: voyaka uh
    The Chinese have thousands of MRBMs. Both nuclear and non-nuclear.
    The Americans have no MRBM (because of the treaty with the USSR-Russia recently canceled).
    Russia also does not have MRBMs (for the same reason).
    ---
    So the Americans are planning to develop, manufacture and place
    MRBM on ships or bases in the Pacific Ocean.
    Non-nuclear.
    And nuclear - ICBMs with mini-hydrogen warheads on Tridents on submarines.
    It is difficult for the Chinese to prevent this.
    They can only increase the number of their BRs of all types.


    The Chinese do not have a thousand MRBM
    At the beginning of 2021, the PRC missile forces deployed: 186 launchers with medium-range missiles (80 with nuclear warheads and 106 with conventional warheads)

    • 2 brigades of IRBM DF-16 = 36 DF-16 (CH-SS-11 Mod 1/2) with conventional warhead
    • 2 brigades of IRBM DF-17 = 16 DF-17 with GZPB (deployment continues) with conventional warhead
    • 6 brigades of IRBM DF-21A / E = 80 DF-21A / E (CH-SS-5 Mod 2/6) with nuclear warhead
    • 2 brigades of IRBM DF-21C / D = 24 DF-21C (CHSS-5 Mod 4) and 30 DF-21D (CH-SS-5 Mod 5 / BKR) with conventional warhead