Military Review

"Powerlessness" of the US nuclear industry

125

In the past few years, much has been written on the Runet about the degradation of the defense segment of the American nuclear complex and the inability of the United States to develop and produce a new nuclear weapon... Is this really so - we will try to figure it out.


Cuts in US and Russian nuclear arsenals since the end of the Cold War


In the second half of the 1980s, the process of reducing tension in relations between the USSR and the United States began, which, in turn, made it possible to start a dialogue on nuclear disarmament. After the collapse of the Soviet Union and the end of the Cold War, the strategic offensive arms agreements actively reduced the number of nuclear warheads in the arsenals of the United States and Russia.

"Powerlessness" of the US nuclear industry

As follows from the graph above, the United States began to reduce the number of deployed nuclear weapons in the second half of the 1970s, while their number remained almost unchanged in the 1980s.

In addition, due to the increase in the accuracy of the warheads of American ICBMs and SLBMs, the power of the warheads placed on them decreased, at the same time, free-fall thermonuclear bombs of the megaton class remained in service with the strategic bombers of the US Air Force.

In the Soviet Union, the explosive growth in the number of nuclear charges continued until 1986, and after the conclusion of the treaty on the elimination of MRBMs, their reduction began. As of 1991, the USSR had a significant superiority over the United States in tactical nuclear weapons (this situation still persists), and the Soviet nuclear arsenal had about 8 more charges than the American. In addition, Soviet ICBMs were mainly equipped with more powerful warheads, which was supposed to compensate for more than American KVO missiles.

Ten years after the collapse of the USSR, the number of nuclear charges in the strategic nuclear forces of the United States and Russia has reached approximately the same level. This not only contributed to the security of the parties, but also proved to be economically beneficial.

The United States saved many billions of dollars by disposing of obsolete strategic carriers and warheads of the Cold War times, abandoning the production of new types of weapons and nuclear charges for them.

Russia, having entered the era of "economic reforms", was categorically unable to continue the arms race, and the available funding was barely enough to maintain the number of ICBMs and sea-launched ballistic missiles at the minimum required level.

On the whole, for our country, agreements with the United States on the reduction of strategic nuclear arsenals were a boon. Regardless of the obligations assumed, we would still have to withdraw from combat duty the ballistic and cruise missiles that have exhausted their resource.

Impact of international detente on US nuclear forces and the nuclear industry


After the end of the Cold War and reducing the risk of a global conflict to a minimum, the US nuclear arsenal and delivery vehicles began to dramatically decline.

Along with frankly outdated missiles, bombs and shells, such as, for example, the MIM-14 Genie unguided air-to-air missile and the B57 depth charge, relatively new ones were removed from service. aviation long-range cruise missiles AGM-129 ACM (entered service in 1993) and solid-propellant ICBMs LGM-118 Peacekeeper (entered service in 1986).

At the same time, the W87 warheads, dismantled from the decommissioned ICBMs, were used to replace the old warheads with the LGM-30G Minuteman-III ICBMs, and the LGM-118 Peacekeeper rockets themselves were converted into launch vehicles and used to launch spacecraft.

Thermonuclear bomb В53

There are known cases when "special ammunition" officially decommissioned was stored for more than 10 years. Thus, 50 B53 thermonuclear bombs with a capacity of 9 Mt each were withdrawn from combat service in 1997. However, their disassembly began only in 2010.

According to data released by the US Department of State, more than 30% of American tactical nuclear weapons were eliminated from September 1991, 30 to September 2020, 90, and until recently, only aviation thermonuclear bombs were available for solving tactical tasks.

Dynamics of changes in the number of American nuclear warheads from 1945 to 2020

From 1994 to 2020, the United States dismantled 11 warheads. Since September 683, 30, the United States has dismantled 2017 nuclear warheads. Approximately 711 more charges are currently decommissioned and awaiting dismantling.

The reduction of American strategic and tactical nuclear weapons led to the curtailment of a number of large-scale projects and for some time to a halt in the production of warheads.

Thus, the United States reduced its stockpiles of nuclear weapons by almost 90% from the maximum value (31) at the end of 255 and by about 1967% of the available arsenal (83) when the Berlin Wall fell at the end of 22.

Such a large-scale reduction of American nuclear weapons became possible after the collapse of the USSR and the liquidation of the Warsaw Pact Organization, which was the main deterrent force of the United States and NATO. Subsequently, the US high command moved to the concept of "dominant power", according to which the American armed forces should be able to defeat any enemy and solve most of the tasks with conventional weapons.

However, despite huge defense spending, the United States has never been able to achieve unconditional military superiority.

The degradation of the Russian army was largely stopped, and our country is quite capable of inflicting unacceptable damage to any enemy in a global nuclear conflict. The growing economic and military power of China leaves no doubt that in the future, Washington will have to confront Beijing's claims to world leadership.

New challenges caused the American leadership to reconsider its views on nuclear weapons and, along with the modernization of the existing strategic triad, to start creating new ballistic missile submarines, strategic bombers and more advanced thermonuclear charges.

American laboratories, enterprises and testing centers involved in the creation, modernization and disposal of nuclear weapons


Nuclear weapons are made up of several key elements: warheads, delivery systems, maintenance and storage infrastructure. To create and maintain a nuclear potential in a working condition, an appropriate scientific and technical base is required, which develops, manufactures, tests and maintains nuclear weapons.


The nuclear industry employs scientists, engineers, technicians and operators involved in the design and testing of individual elements of nuclear weapons, as well as their assembly, maintenance and disposal.

The oldest organization in the American nuclear industry is the Los Alamos National Laboratory in New Mexico (abbreviated as Los Alamos or LANL), established in 1943 to implement the Manhattan Project. Along with the Livermore National Laboratory, all types of nuclear weapons adopted by the United States were developed here. LANL currently employs over 12 people.

Los Alamos National Laboratory

At present, research on improving nuclear charges carried out at Los Alamos is primarily associated with computer modeling, which makes it possible to abandon full-scale tests. Also in the laboratory, work is underway to extend the life of the existing warheads.

Google Earth Satellite Image: Los Alamos National Laboratory

A test complex with buried structures is located 5 km south of the LANL administrative and scientific center in a mountainous area.

Satellite image of Google Earth: entrance to the underground test complex of Los Alamos National Laboratory

The test complex includes free particle accelerators, blast chambers reinforced and isolated from the external environment, and a two-axis radiographic hydrodynamic unit. This equipment makes it possible to carry out a comprehensive simulation of nuclear tests without a real explosion with a full fission reaction.

Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory (LLNL) is a federal research facility located in the eastern part of Livermore, California. The number of the laboratory staff reaches 8 people. Some of the most powerful American supercomputers operate here.

LLNL is the leading research and development institution in science and technology for national security, according to the US Department of Energy. The laboratory is responsible for the creation of new nuclear and thermonuclear weapons, the development of technology and measures to ensure the safety, security and reliability of national nuclear weapons.

In 2008, the National Nuclear Safety Administration (NNSA) presented a plan for the development of a national nuclear weapons complex. According to this plan, LLNL is to become a center of excellence in nuclear research and design. Also lead projects in the development of weapons based on new physical principles and high energy physics.


Due to the fact that Lawrence's laboratory is located in a populated area, the main testing facilities and most of the radioactive materials have been taken out of the city limits.

Satellite image of Google Earth: research facilities at the site "Plot 300"

A 300 km² experimental site known as Site 2,8 with various research facilities and underground storage facilities is located 24 km southwest of Livermore.

Sandia National Laboratory (SNL), along with the above scientific organizations, is one of the main centers where the US nuclear arsenal is being improved.

The laboratory, located in Albuquerque, New Mexico, was established in July 1945 and was used to assemble the first atomic bombs. In the future, non-nuclear high-tech components of nuclear explosive devices were designed, manufactured and tested here.

Currently, 11 SNL employees are tasked with maintaining the reliability of the electronic and electromechanical systems of nuclear weapons. The laboratory also conducts research in the field of nuclear weapons control, and develops methods for the disposal of hazardous radioactive waste from the American nuclear weapons program. Other tasks include research in energy and environmental programs.


To solve these problems, the ASCI Red Storm supercomputer and the world's largest X-ray generator Z Machine, designed to test materials under extreme temperature and pressure conditions, are used.

Oak Ridge National Laboratory (ORNL) in Tennessee, employing 5 people, is the leading US research center for research in radiation-resistant materials, plasma physics, high-temperature superconductivity and compact nuclear reactors. On the territory of the laboratory complex, the production of various radioactive isotopes used for scientific and medical purposes is carried out, as well as programs for nuclear safety and tracking of fissile materials are being implemented.

Google Earth Satellite Image: Oak Ridge National Laboratory

The laboratory was built as part of the Manhattan Project. In February 1943, the Kh-10 graphite reactor, intended for the production of Plutonium-239, began to operate here.

Currently, the most significant objects at ORNL are the supercomputers ORACLE, Summit and Jaguar, as well as three powerful laboratory neutron sources.

Reactor block HFIR

The HFIR neutron and gamma radiation source is an 85 MW water-cooled beryllium reflector nuclear reactor located 1 km south of the main Oak Ridge laboratory building.

This reactor operates on highly enriched Uranium-235, suitable for creating a nuclear explosive device. In the future, in order to reduce risks, the research reactor is planned to be converted to nuclear fuel with a Uranium-235 content of no more than 5%.

Google Earth Satellite Image: HFIR Reactor

The HFIR reactor was commissioned in 1965 and, after modernization in 2007, is the world's most powerful continuous source of neutron radiation.

In the near future, in parallel with the replacement of nuclear fuel, another package of improvements should be implemented. It is planned to operate the reactor until 2060.

Free particle accelerators ORELA and SNS generate neutrons in a pulsed mode. The SNS installation with a capacity of 1 MW was launched in 2006, in 2022 it should reach a capacity of 3 Mt.

On the territory of the Oak Ridge laboratory is the Y-12 National Security Complex, where the process of enrichment of Uranium-235 was launched during the Second World War.

After the end of the Cold War, the main tasks of the Y-12 complex were to extend the life of nuclear weapons, participate in the nuclear non-proliferation program, ensure the operability of offshore nuclear reactors, and provide expert services to other federal agencies. Specialists of the Y-12 complex are also responsible for the maintenance and production of all uranium parts and "secondary" mechanisms of nuclear weapons.

In addition, the main reserves of highly enriched uranium are concentrated on the territory of Y-12. $ 6,5 billion has been allocated for the modernization and development of the complex. Currently, the number of Y-12 employees is 3 people.

The Nevada Nuclear Test Site (NTS), designed for full-scale testing of nuclear charges, was founded in January 1951. It is located on an area of ​​3 km² (mostly desert and mountainous).


From 1951 to 1992, 928 nuclear tests were carried out in Nevada, of which 921 were underground. Currently, a huge area is covered with craters formed as a result of soil subsidence caused by underground explosions.

Satellite image of Google Earth: craters at the test site "Zone-3", formed after underground nuclear explosions

Although nearly 30 years have passed since the last nuclear test, the Nevada nuclear test site continues to function. During the detonation of powerful charges of conventional explosives, various components of the nuclear warheads in service are tested here. Until 2012, 27 tests of real nuclear devices were carried out at the test site, without reaching a critical mass.


Exercises to eliminate nuclear accidents and counter nuclear terrorism are regularly held in Nevada. Several research laboratories monitor the effects of radiation on living organisms and monitor groundwater pollution.

In the southeastern part of the landfill, on the territory of the "Zone-5" test site, located on the surface of a dried salt lake, there is an enterprise for the processing of radioactive waste. Vitrified waste is deposited in mines cut in the mountains. The radioactive liquid is pumped into cavities formed after underground explosions at a depth of up to 1,5 km.

Radioisotope thermoelectric power generators intended for disposal at the Nevada landfill

In some cases, products containing radioactive substances are left for storage in mines, the dismantling of which is associated with great risk or is excessively expensive.

In connection with the large volume of radioactive materials accumulated as a result of the activities of nuclear enterprises, the issue of their disposal and safe disposal is acute in the United States. A significant portion of the radioactive waste is planned to be disposed of at a facility located 8 km east of Eunice, New Mexico. This area, known as the "nuclear alley", is also home to a uranium enrichment facility.

Satellite image of Google Earth: a radioactive waste processing and disposal plant near the city of Eunice, New Mexico

Geological surveys carried out in the area in the 1970s indicate that stable salt deposits with an age of about 900 million years are located at a depth of up to 250 m.

The absence of tectonic activity makes it possible to safely store spent radioactive materials for 10 years. For this, at a depth of more than 000 m, artificial cavities with a volume of about 600 m³ are created, into which a radioactive solution is pumped, after which the adits collapse, and salt deposits naturally seal the storage.

The first shipment of waste from Los Alamos National Laboratory arrived for processing and disposal in March 1999. Over the 10 years that have passed since the start of work, 76 m³ of radioactive substances have been neutralized. It is assumed that the plant will receive waste for 561–30 years. As of 35, about $ 2019 billion was spent on these purposes.The total cost of the program is estimated at $ 1,7 billion.

The site of the uranium enrichment plant, known as the National Enrichment Plant (NEF), is located in the immediate vicinity of the radioactive waste reprocessing and disposal plant, which creates a closed technological cycle and ensures radiation safety.

Google Earth Satellite Image: National Concentration Plant near Eunice, New Mexico

According to information released by the US Department of Energy, the improved technology of gas centrifuges, launched in 2012, in the future will meet up to 50% of the demand for enriched uranium.

Since 1954, uranium has been enriched in gas centrifuges at the Portsmouth Gas Diffusion Plant. This plant is so named because it is located 22 kilometers south of Portsmouth, Ohio. In the past, the plant, along with facilities in Oak Ridge (Tennessee) and Paducah (in Kentucky), was one of the three major American producers of enriched Uranium-235 and the processing of Uranium-238.

Satellite image of Google Earth: Portsma gaseous diffusion plant

In 2024, it is planned to stop the production cycle and clean up the territory. In the future, a new generation of nuclear power plants can be built on this site.

The Kansas City plant, directly overseen by the National Nuclear Safety Administration (NNSA), produces 85% of the mechanical, electronic, and electrical components used in American nuclear warheads.

The plant also manufactures lasers, microwave generators and miniature electromechanical drives for military use. Services for metallurgical analysis, chemical sample analysis, non-destructive testing, computer modeling, and technical certification are provided.

South Carolina, 40 kilometers southeast of Augusta, is home to a nuclear complex known as the Savannah River Zone (SRS). The complex, operated by the US Department of Energy, is located on an area of ​​800 km². About 10 people are employed here.

The Savannah River Zone houses several operating and decommissioned nuclear reactors, burial sites and a radioactive waste processing facility, as well as research laboratories.

In the past, weapons-grade plutonium was manufactured here at the L reactor facility, but at present there is no reliable information whether work in this direction is being carried out now. It is known that in this area it was planned to build an enterprise for the processing of weapons-grade plutonium into nuclear fuel for nuclear power plants.

Satellite image of Google Earth: reactor plant "L"

SRS operates the only US radiochemical plant for the extraction of tritium, which is necessary to maintain nuclear charges and produce glow-in-the-dark devices.

The Pantex Plant, Texas, is located 27 kilometers northeast of Amorillo. Manufacturing workshops, auxiliary infrastructure, bunkers and warehouses for nuclear warheads and nuclear weapons elements cover an area of ​​65 km².


The plant is operated by a panel of representatives from the Department of Energy, Sandia National Laboratory and the private company Consolidated Nuclear Safety. The company employs approximately 3 people and has an annual budget of $ 300 million.

Google Earth Satellite Image: Pantex Plant

The plant began work in the early 1970s, and in the second half of the 1980s, after the closure of the Rocky Flats plant in Colorado, it became the only enterprise for the assembly, technical support, disassembly and disposal of decommissioned nuclear weapons.

Satellite image of Google Earth: underground nuclear storage in the vicinity of "Pantex Plant"

According to expert estimates, there are approximately 1 charges in storage, as well as a significant amount of material that can be processed to create nuclear weapons. If necessary, underground storage facilities can accommodate more than 800 warheads.

Satellite image of Google Earth: transport near one of the nuclear cellars in the vicinity of "Pantex Plant"

The available production facilities and stocks of components currently allow the collection of more than a hundred nuclear weapons per year. In case of urgent need, the assembly volumes can be increased many times over several years.

Preparing the delivery of a nuclear warhead by a military transport aircraft

Amorillo airbase is located 16 km south-west of the Pantex Plant plant, with a concrete runway 4 km long, which makes it possible to quickly deliver nuclear warheads to any part of the C-17 Globemaster III, C-130 Hercules and C-5 Galaxy aircraft The United States and foreign military bases.

Potential and Prospects of the American Defense Nuclear Complex


In the Russian media, including in Voennoye Obozreniye, articles regularly appear with headlines such as “Rotted US Nuclear Shield”, which form in readers an erroneous idea of ​​the capabilities of the American military-industrial complex to maintain and create new types of nuclear weapons.

Underestimating the American nuclear potential is dangerous because some of the Russian citizens may have an opinion about the toothlessness of the US strategic nuclear forces, and about our country's ability to easily win a global conflict.

In fairness, it should be said that, until recently, the enterprises of the American defense nuclear complex did not produce new warheads.

In addition to fundamental research, nuclear laboratories were engaged in practical work in the field of increasing the reliability and safety of the existing nuclear arsenal, as well as extending the service life of the charges in service. Also among the priorities were: diagnostics, safe disassembly and disposal of decommissioned warheads, as well as disposal of radioactive waste.

This approach was fully consistent with the situation that had developed after the implementation of nuclear warhead reductions under the strategic offensive arms treaties, and the available nuclear potential was sufficient to maintain the necessary parity of the United States.

At the same time, the United States has maintained the infrastructure needed to quickly rebuild the assembly of new nuclear weapons.


Each of the three nuclear weapons laboratories (Los Alamos National Laboratory, Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory, and Sandian National Laboratory) each annually prepares reports that provide conclusions regarding the safety, security and reliability of the national nuclear industry and the state of the nuclear arsenal. A similar report is also provided by the headquarters of the Strategic Command.

Based on these secret reports, the President and Congress make decisions on certain measures in the field of nuclear security.

The aggravation of the international situation has led to the restoration of the assembly of new nuclear charges in the United States and an increase in funding for the American nuclear industry.

So, in fiscal 2021, the National Nuclear Safety Administration (NNSA) received $ 19,7 billion, which is $ 3 billion more than it was allocated in fiscal 2020.

These funds went to the restoration of plutonium production and the modernization of existing nuclear charges.

The US Department of Nuclear Energy is currently implementing a plan to reform and develop the infrastructure of the nuclear weapons complex required for the production of strategic materials and components for nuclear weapons.

As part of the planned measures, stable production of plutonium blocks should be restored. If in 2019 four new plutonium blocks were assembled at the production site of the Los Alamos laboratory, then in 2024 there should already be 10 of them, and as of 2030 it is possible to assemble at least 80 such products annually.

Large-scale financing is planned for the production of lithium-containing compounds, the provision of the necessary reactor capacities for the production of tritium and an increase in the volume of uranium enrichment. In parallel, a start was made for a program for the production of new radiation-resistant microelectronic systems.

Staff training has not been forgotten either. For young scientists and engineers who decide to find a job in the American nuclear industry, very attractive conditions are created, which in the future should guarantee the turnover of personnel, the continuation of research and development.

The measures taken, if necessary, should ensure the possibility of large-scale production of new generation thermonuclear warheads.

It is stated that this task is not paramount, and at the moment the US defense needs are fully met by warheads that have passed through the service life extension program, as well as new SLBM warheads and controlled-yield thermonuclear bombs based on existing products.

The next publication will consider the current and advanced models of American nuclear weapons, as well as their storage locations and delivery vehicles.

To be continued ...
Author:
125 comments
Ad

Subscribe to our Telegram channel, regularly additional information about the special operation in Ukraine, a large amount of information, videos, something that does not fall on the site: https://t.me/topwar_official

Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must sign in.
  1. Toucan
    Toucan 30 December 2021 05: 41
    +43
    A very informative and well-illustrated publication, in places it resembles an analytical note based on intelligence.
    1. yuriy55
      yuriy55 30 December 2021 05: 59
      +3
      Quote: Tucan
      Very informative and well illustrated publication

      It's right. Only the betrayal of the famous Russian drunkard played a significant role in the ability and ability of the United States to produce nuclear weapons:
      The HEU-LEU Agreement (highly enriched uranium - low enriched uranium) is an intergovernmental agreement between the Russian Federation and the United States of America, concluded in Washington on February 18, 1993, providing for the irreversible reprocessing of at least 500 tons of Russian weapons-grade (highly enriched) uranium (equivalent to about 20 thousand nuclear warheads into low-enriched uranium - fuel for nuclear power plants in the US To secure an intergovernmental agreement, a HEU-LEU Contract was later concluded between the Russian and American uranium enrichment companies.
      1. bayard
        bayard 30 December 2021 07: 52
        +3
        Quote: yuriy55
        an intergovernmental agreement between the Russian Federation and the United States of America, concluded in Washington on February 18, 1993, providing for the irreversible processing of at least 500 tons of Russian weapon-grade (highly enriched) uranium

        Yes, the scandal that happened in the Supreme Soviet of the Russian Federation led to the impeachment of Yeltsin, brought to a legal end, led to the Yeltsin putsch, the massacre in Moscow and his usurpation of power ...
        But only later, after the Soviet Uranium-235 was processed into nuclear fuel, the American Uranium-235 from their warheads was also processed at the same Russian facilities. And also in nuclear fuel for American nuclear power plants.
        But they did not utilize weapons-grade plutonium, only diluting and "burying" it. Apparently from it now, once again enriching, they began to collect warheads.

        Congress met several times on the disastrous state of the US radiochemical industry to hear the state of affairs on the state of nuclear weapons. They dragged on for a long time with the issue of creating and financing new radiochemical facilities. And so far, as far as is clear, it turns out only to bring the plutonium back to the required concentration and collect ammunition ... Not very quickly yet.
        But the fact that the nuclear warheads in service have exhausted their maximum shelf life for the state of the uranium core itself and now they only need to be fully reprocessed ... this is a fact that has been repeatedly stated in Congress.
        So today, the US nuclear potential can be considered zero. In the presence of only a few newly assembled plutonium ammunition, and ultra-low-yield nuclear warheads, which are the detonators of normal nuclear warheads.
        Apparently, they talked with Biden about that ... they drew red lines.
        And they will talk one of these days.

        If the authorities of the Russian Federation correctly understand the moment and the opening window of opportunity, then they can only wish firmness and decisiveness.
        And to restore order in the country.
        If she (the authorities) is still capable of it.
        1. Bongo
          30 December 2021 09: 01
          +30
          Quote: bayard
          Yes, the scandal that happened in the Supreme Soviet of the Russian Federation led to the impeachment of Yeltsin, brought to a legal end, led to the Yeltsin putsch

          In fact, this was the cause of the events of the fall of 1993, are you confusing anything?
          Quote: bayard
          So today, the US nuclear potential can be considered zero.

          Do not wishful thinking. No. Sadly, the US strategic nuclear forces are far from being "zeroed" and are quite capable of causing unacceptable damage to any country.
          As for the creation of new plutonium assemblies and thermonuclear charges, do you seriously believe that the United States will not be able to repeat what was done in the 50-60s?
          1. bayard
            bayard 30 December 2021 09: 40
            -11
            Quote: Bongo
            In fact, this was the cause of the events of the fall of 1993, are you confusing anything?

            No, I don't. It was this event that triggered the impeachment of Yeltsin. I talked about this with several deputies of that very Supreme Soviet of the Russian Federation. Although there were plenty of other reasons. But after the speech of a group of academicians in the Armed Forces on this topic, all those events began.
            Quote: Bongo
            Sadly, the US strategic nuclear forces are far from being "zeroed" and are quite capable of causing unacceptable damage to any country.

            I didn’t talk about full zeroing. But all nuclear warheads collected at the end of 1991 have reached their maximum shelf life by now. It is the state of the uranium charge. This is physics request .
            And since then no other nuclear warheads have been produced in the United States, except for about a dozen plutonium charges over the past year and a half - at a new radiochemical plant, which, in fact, is still being tested and debugging the technical process.
            Yes, two or three dozen ultra-low-power charges of their old nuclear warhead detonators.
            So at the moment the United States does not have a strategic potential.
            And they talked about this for a long time (that such a day will come). Trump tried in every possible way to intensify work to restore competencies, while Obama ten years ago generally tried to persuade the nuclear powers ... to complete nuclear disarmament.
            But no one bought into this divorce.
            Quote: Bongo
            Do you seriously believe that the United States will not be able to repeat what was done in the 50-60s?

            They are trying ... but they missed too much and did not prepare specialists for this.
            But they are already collecting nuclear warheads. Another thing is how many of them they have now, at what rate they will collect them, and how long it will take for them to restore their potential.
            And - is it worth giving them this time.
            China has also set the task of bringing the number of nuclear warheads on strategic delivery vehicles to 1000 by the end of this decade. And they will definitely succeed.

            And the Russian Federation today may simply strike the United States with a preventive disarming strike and not receive an answer. Moreover, due to the loss of combat readiness of American ICBMs, the mines of the "Minutemans" will not have to be hit. But for command centers, administrative centers, naval base and airbases, industrial and energy centers, ammunition is enough.
            "Daggers" in special equipment can neutralize their AUG and KUG in Japan, the Mediterranean Sea and, in general, in the reach zone. And then methodically resetting their garrisons at bases around the world will be a routine job.
            That is why they were asked to agree on the withdrawal of their nuclear weapons and the troops themselves from Europe and all countries neighboring Russia.
            Now you can and should talk to them in this way.
            1. Bongo
              30 December 2021 09: 56
              +27
              Quote: bayard
              No, I don't. It was this event that triggered the impeachment of Yeltsin.

              You have an interesting look at the events of those years. what
              By and large, the majority of the deputies and the leadership of the Supreme Council were indifferent to this issue. No need to idealize them and put an owl on the globe. No.
              They shared power and took care of their own welfare. Why are Rutskoi and Khasbulatov better than Yeltsin by and large?
              Quote: bayard
              I didn’t talk about full zeroing.

              Is it?
              Quote: bayard
              So today, the US nuclear potential can be considered zero.

              In my opinion, you should not be so categorical. No.
              Quote: bayard
              But all nuclear warheads collected at the end of 1991 have reached their maximum shelf life by now.

              Storage or operation, is it really all? Have you heard about the program of modernization and extension of the service life of American nuclear weapons?
              Quote: bayard
              It is the state of the uranium charge.

              What US charges use Uranium-235?
              Quote: bayard
              And the Russian Federation today may simply strike the United States with a preventive disarming strike and not receive an answer.

              Extremely dangerous statements that do not correspond to reality.
              1. Toucan
                Toucan 30 December 2021 10: 22
                +10
                Quote: Bongo
                What US charges use Uranium-235?

                Uranium initiators and crimpers are used in the W88 warheads. But your opponent is wrong about the lifespan of the U-235 parts.
                1. Bongo
                  30 December 2021 16: 46
                  +12
                  Quote: Tucan
                  Uranium initiators and crimpers are used in the W88 warheads. But your opponent is wrong about the lifespan of the U-235 parts.

                  Thanks! I know this, but my counterpart apparently meant uranium warheads.
              2. Osipov9391
                Osipov9391 30 December 2021 13: 22
                +8
                Uranium-235 and is used in significant quantities by the Americans for the reactors of aircraft carriers and nuclear submarines. This means that there are sources of obtaining and purifying it. There is everything for the charges. We don't know everything.
                And what about the forces of Britain and France? In general, these are half a thousand strategic charges and more than a hundred SLBMs for 8 SSBNs.
                Will this not be enough for Russia?
                1. dorz
                  dorz 30 December 2021 14: 03
                  +11
                  “Rotted US Nuclear Shield”?

                  Until 2028, $ 494 billion will be allocated to upgrade the nuclear triad in the United States. By 2023, Americans will have produced 480 modern B61-12 nuclear bombs that will replace the old ones in Europe. sad
                  1. Vadim237
                    Vadim237 30 December 2021 16: 51
                    -8
                    That is, they are modernizing the weapons of the 60s - and what is the use of these free-falling bombs in modern warfare - the carrier will need to enter the air defense zone of action.
                    1. Bongo
                      30 December 2021 17: 02
                      +9
                      Quote: Vadim237
                      That is, they are modernizing the weapons of the 60s - and what is the use of these free-falling bombs in modern warfare - the carrier will need to enter the air defense zone of action.

                      I always respected the opinion of professionals, or at least just literate people.
                      Please tell me how the thermonuclear B61-12 differs from earlier modifications? And do I understand correctly, you say that we do not have "obsolete" free-fall nuclear bombs in our armament?
                      1. Military77
                        Military77 30 December 2021 17: 31
                        +1
                        Please tell me how the thermonuclear B61-12 differs from earlier modifications?

                        The fact that she:
                        1. Most likely, nuclear and not thermonuclear
                        2. A guidance kit is hung on it, including the use of GPS, the tail part is replaced from a passive one to an actively steering one according to the commands of the on-board computer
                        3. Calculations on matmodels showed that when reducing the radius of the circle into which the product will be guaranteed to fall to 30 meters, and providing not ground, but underground detonation of the warhead at a depth of at least 3 to 12 meters, the destructive force of the impact, due to the processes taking place in a dense soil medium are the same, and the explosion power can be reduced up to 15 times. Roughly speaking, the same result is achieved by 17 kilotons, instead of 170.

                        Taken from here: https://geoenergetics.ru/2016/08/03/kak-rzha-sozhrala-amerikanskie-termoyadernye-aviabomby/
                      2. KKND
                        KKND 30 December 2021 17: 59
                        +7
                        Quote: Military77
                        , and providing not ground, but underground detonation of a warhead at a depth of at least 3 to 12 meters, the destructive force of the impact, due to the processes taking place in a dense soil environment, turns out to be the same, and the explosion power can be reduced up to 15 times. Roughly speaking, the same result is achieved by 17 kilotons, instead of 170.

                        Complete nonsense, the most powerful shock wave is obtained with an air blast at a certain distance from the surface. Since the energy of the explosion is distributed in the form of a 3-dimensional sphere. With an air blast, objects on the ground will hit the entire lower hemisphere, and with a ground blast, only narrow steradians of the upper hemisphere will hit objects on the ground, most of the energy of the upper hemisphere will go into the sky.
                        These are the basics. It looks like you are not in the subject at all. And everything that is written on the Internet should not be trusted at all. fool
                      3. ja-ja-vw
                        ja-ja-vw 30 December 2021 22: 28
                        +4
                        Since the energy of the explosion is distributed in the form of a 3-dimensional sphere.

                        fool
                        Like in our reality there is a TWO-DIMENSIONAL sphere? Or one-dimensional?
                        1. Energy (its flux density) decreases inversely proportional to the square of the distance, i.e. ~ 1 / R ^ 2
                        2. Since the shock wave is not an infinitely thin shell of a sphere, but has a thickness (front), the pressure in the front decreases
                        ~ k1 * / R + k2 / R ^ 2 + k3 / R ^ 3
                        k3
                        k2 depending on mass = 0,6-08
                      4. ja-ja-vw
                        ja-ja-vw 30 December 2021 22: 23
                        +3
                        1. Nuclear or thermonuclear is just a play on words.
                        Where the fusion of nuclei: then thermonuclear (nuclear)
                        Where there is division: then atomic
                        FUFU on U235 don't get
                        3. The stump is clear: the inverse square law has not yet been canceled.
                        Geoenergy is such a cool site drowning for Miller and Nazarov. Vlavred there is still a poz
                      5. The comment was deleted.
                      6. Vadim237
                        Vadim237 31 December 2021 17: 34
                        -6
                        "Even those who passed the exam document: they will never give up cheap air bombs from Yabch." Well, you obviously have problems with the documans - all free-falling nuclear bombs of the last century, since air defense systems have significantly advanced in development - and the likelihood of delivering a free-falling bomb to the target by an airplane has significantly reduced, therefore, high-precision weapons with a long range are a priority, which allows you not to enter the air defense zone ...
                      7. Bongo
                        1 January 2022 04: 23
                        +6
                        Quote: Vadim237
                        Even the one who passed the exam documents: they will never give up cheap aerial bombs from Yabch. "Well, you obviously have problems with the docking - all free-falling nuclear bombs are from the last century, since air defense systems have significantly advanced in development - and the probability of delivering a free-falling bomb to the target by This is a priority for high-precision weapons with a long range, which allows you not to enter the air defense zone.

                        Vadim, we have really well covered air defense Moscow and partly St. Petersburg. As for the rest of the territory, not even all nuclear power plants, large hydroelectric power plants and divisions of the Strategic Missile Forces are protected from air strikes. Take off your rose-colored glasses.
                      8. The comment was deleted.
                      9. The comment was deleted.
                      10. akarfoxhound
                        akarfoxhound 1 January 2022 08: 23
                        +6
                        Quote: Bongo

                        Vadim, we have really well covered air defense Moscow and partly St. Petersburg. As for the rest of the territory, not even all nuclear power plants, large hydroelectric power plants and divisions of the Strategic Missile Forces are protected from air strikes. Take off your rose-colored glasses.

                        In 2002, 180 GvIAP (MiG-31, Gromovo) was reduced, covering St. the other side of Ladoga for another 100 km and accelerated in 80. Of all the air defense fighter regiments that covered St. Petersburg, there remained Hotilovo (MiG-300) between St. Those. Peter is now really stupid no one to cover. Of the 177 air defense fighter regiments (full-blooded in 27 ae with 125 sides) located from St. I do not think for objective reasons).
                        And that's all, absolutely everything. The men serving in the cut-off scraps of fighter regiments from Monchegorsk to Kamchatka simply burst out, pretending to be a ubiquitous presence, not living at home.
                        And, please note, the maximum zeroing of the country's air defense system did not occur under EBN
                      11. Bongo
                        1 January 2022 11: 13
                        +4
                        Quote: akarfoxhound
                        And, please note, the maximum zeroing of the country's air defense system did not occur under EBN

                        You will not convey this to the supporters of the current current government. No. In terms of anti-aircraft cover for Moscow and St. Petersburg, I meant the air defense system. It's really good there.
                      12. Osipov9391
                        Osipov9391 6 January 2022 02: 13
                        +1
                        177 IAP in Lodeynoye Pole was also downsized in 2010.
                        In my Tver region, 611 in Bezhetsk on the Su-27 and the 28 regiment on the MiG-29 in Andreapol have been reduced. A significant part of the equipment has been cut, airfields have fallen into disrepair. There is no one to cover Moscow.
                        There are no air defense systems in my region. There is no radar field at low altitudes.
                        Kotlas and Talagi (MiG-31) do not exist either.
                        Happen that the impact of the CD from that direction will be powerful and unimpeded.
                      13. Vadim237
                        Vadim237 31 December 2021 18: 04
                        -5
                        And yes, the START 3 treaty seems to be about strategic nuclear weapons - and not about the tactical one, which is the B61 -12.
                      14. Bongo
                        1 January 2022 04: 25
                        +4
                        Quote: Vadim237
                        And yes, the START 3 treaty seems to be about strategic nuclear weapons - and not about the tactical one, which is the B61 -12.

                        Especially for you, in the next part of the cycle I will dwell in more detail on the bombs of the B61 family. But do not excuse me, I will quote your pearls.
                      15. The comment was deleted.
                      16. Bongo
                        1 January 2022 06: 30
                        +5
                        Quote: ja-ja-vw
                        Sergei ... it hardly helps. It is better for this chuchunrik: to isolate him from Russian TV for a year and to help him visit AT LEAST ONE enterprise of the military-industrial complex of “counterparties”.

                        Well, or he will study the element base used in our defense products ... request
                        Quote: ja-ja-vw
                        According to the article: I'm in shock (positive). Is it really HERE not only Ryabovs (many letters, duplicate paragraphs) and Skomorokhovs are still being printed?

                        For the authors you mentioned, this is work, for me gymnastics for brains and hobbies.
                        Quote: ja-ja-vw
                        You did not mention the landfill in Alaska
                        (and there they drop B61-Xx)

                        As far as I know, B61-12 (naturally without nuclear filling) was tested at a test site in New Mexico. Can you share the details about Alaska?
                      17. The comment was deleted.
                      18. Bongo
                        1 January 2022 06: 42
                        +6
                        Quote: ja-ja-vw
                        And you give a clear distinction between strategic and tactical?

                        I will try to cover this issue in the next publication.
                        Quote: ja-ja-vw
                        Maybe the processor is weak?

                        Quote: ja-ja-vw
                        I have a request: please do not grunt at the insurmountable air defense of Russia.
                        Not all mutants are like some.
                        However ... why am I throwing pearls in front of pigs?

                        But this is not worth it, do not humiliate yourself with rudeness in front of your opponent. I am sure you are quite capable of conducting a reasoned dialogue even with the most stupid pro-government trolls.
                        Quote: ja-ja-vw
                        Throw a complaint against me.
                        SKOMOROKHOV will perceive and process, along the way, get DOCUMENTAL confirmation from him

                        Even taking into account my past disagreements with Skomorokhov, rejection of some of his personal traits and manner of communication, I have to note that, in general, he copes with his work. Being a moderator of such a site in the current Russian realities is a very difficult job.
                        I urge you to forget about personal antipathies, to be correct in communication and mutually polite. Since we are here, you must follow the site rules.
                      19. Bongo
                        1 January 2022 04: 21
                        +4
                        Quote: ja-ja-vw
                        As I understand it, you forgot to take the professional in quotes?

                        Even with stupid people, if they are not frankly rude, I try to be polite
                        Quote: ja-ja-vw
                        Even the one who passed the exam documents: they will never give up cheap air bombs from Yabch.
                        Who will melt an ax into plowshares if it does not fall under the reduction agreement?

                        This is undeniable ... yes
                        Quote: ja-ja-vw
                        There are no stupid primates in the usa

                        I hope that there are really no such people among those who make the fateful decisions.
                      20. Vadim237
                        Vadim237 31 December 2021 17: 22
                        -9
                        In service with the Russian Armed Forces, such nuclear bombs are vryatli - all nuclear charges on new missiles are put at worst with controlled gliding bombs - so that it would certainly not enter the air defense zone.
                      21. Bongo
                        1 January 2022 04: 27
                        +5
                        Quote: Vadim237
                        In service with the Russian Armed Forces, such nuclear bombs are vryatli - all nuclear charges on new missiles are put at worst with controlled gliding bombs - so that it would certainly not enter the air defense zone.

                        Don't talk about something you don't know for sure, and you won't look stupid.
                        Okay, Su-24M and Su-34 formally solve tactical tasks, although the line between tactical and strategic tasks is very shaky. But Tu-23M3 are long-range bombers.
                    2. Toucan
                      Toucan 31 December 2021 01: 17
                      +4
                      Quote: Bongo
                      I always respected the opinion of professionals, or at least just literate people.

                      It doesn't matter that Vadik smacks nonsense, the main thing is that this nonsense squeals patriotically ... wassat
                      1. Vadim237
                        Vadim237 31 December 2021 17: 58
                        -8
                        Nonsense here is just people like you - if you had a head on your shoulders, you would ask yourself why they continue to modernize outdated nuclear bombs B 61 - the answer is simple, nothing new in terms of nuclear charges has been created in the United States, and there is no such production now to equip them the same AGM 158 and AGM-154 JSOW GBU 39 - so they are worn with the modernization of old nuclear charges.
                      2. The comment was deleted.
                      3. The comment was deleted.
                      4. The comment was deleted.
              3. yuriy55
                yuriy55 30 December 2021 14: 15
                -3
                Quote: Bongo
                How, by and large, is Rutskoi ... better than Yeltsin?


                Combat officer, Hero of the Soviet Union.
                1. akarfoxhound
                  akarfoxhound 1 January 2022 09: 17
                  +3
                  Those who served with him in Afghanistan and "at home" in Artsiz would put the definition of "military officer" and especially "GSS" in very expressive quotation marks, it is a pity there are no such in the spelling. A separate article for his "heroism" can be written
              4. bayard
                bayard 30 December 2021 17: 20
                +4
                Quote: Bongo
                By and large, the majority of the deputies and the leadership of the Supreme Council were indifferent to this issue.

                No, it was this question that blew up the situation then. And one should not equate the deputies of 1993 with the current ones, they were Soviet people and the report of the academicians simply shocked and outraged them. With that report, the initiative to impeach Yeltsin began.
                In general, the division of assets took place in a slightly different "department".
                Quote: Bongo
                Storage or operation, is it really all?

                Expiration date for regular use. Fission processes take place in the uranium charge, fission products and transuranium isotopes accumulate. As a result, after a while, the accumulation of such isotopes makes it impossible for the ammunition to be used in combat - it simply will not work normally, and the only way for it is processing and purification, which is a rather complicated procedure for radiochemical production.
                And this has nothing to do with the regular planned bulkheads of warheads with the replacement of electronic and mechanical components.
                The United States did not have radiochemical production for the production of weapons-grade uranium until 2019 - 2020. The last ammunition was produced at the end of 1991. The shelf life of the most advanced ammunition in terms of the state of the uranium core is 30 years.
                Therefore, only newly collected ammunition can certainly be considered combat-ready today, and there are very few of them.
                And this was exactly what the hearings in the US Congress were about, when Trump demanded more funding so as not to leave the United States without nuclear weapons at all.
                And the funds were allocated.
                Quote: Bongo
                Storage or operation

                Expired ammunition can be stored for a long time, just not for future use, but for future processing with a cleaning procedure.
                Quote: Bongo
                Extremely dangerous statements that do not correspond to reality.

                This is me about the changed balance of power. And it will take them at least ten years to restore the balance. So, in principle, yes - it can.
                And it also has a chance to reflect their weak response.
                But this does not remove from the balance of American allies - England and especially France, which later completed its test program and its arsenal in NATO is perhaps the youngest.
            2. zyablik.olga
              zyablik.olga 30 December 2021 13: 27
              +8
              Quote: bayard
              And the Russian Federation today may simply strike the United States with a preventive disarming strike and not receive an answer. Moreover, due to the loss of combat readiness of American ICBMs, the mines of the "Minutemans" will not have to be hit. But for command centers, administrative centers, naval base and airbases, industrial and energy centers, ammunition is enough.

              I don't know how old you are, but judging by the comments, you are not too young, and you probably have children and grandchildren. I read what you write, and my hair is on end. belay Do you really wish your children that they would see nuclear explosions over their heads? And this will probably be the easiest option for them, worse if they see explosions on the horizon ... sad
              1. KKND
                KKND 30 December 2021 17: 04
                +6
                Olga, this hurray-patriots Sergei their impassable stupidity (on purpose) troll. Their fairy tales are pouring in and it hurts them. They themselves understand what nonsense they are talking about.
              2. bayard
                bayard 30 December 2021 22: 00
                0
                Quote: zyablik.olga
                Do you really wish your children that they would see nuclear explosions over their heads?

                Alas, this is not in my competence, decisions are made by those who are now thundering into the drum of war. I just wrote that we are better than us - if a fight is inevitable. And it seems to be inevitable.
            3. KKND
              KKND 30 December 2021 17: 24
              +7
              Quote: bayard
              I didn’t talk about full zeroing. But all nuclear warheads collected at the end of 1991 have reached their maximum shelf life by now. It is the state of the uranium charge. This is physics.

              Can you tell us about the physics of the degradation process of Uranus-235 with a half-life of 700 million years?
              And also tell us, as a specialist, where Uranium-235 is used in modern nuclear weapons, since Plutonium-239 is used everywhere, basically.
            4. ja-ja-vw
              ja-ja-vw 30 December 2021 22: 11
              +4
              It is the state of the uranium charge.

              belay
              U235 has a half-life of 400 half-lives. Tortured to wait for Sikhism charges (or initiators)
              Almost 100% of U235 is Alpha decay.
              Shielded 100% by thick paper
              request
              You confuse with aiming and the secondary croc of plutonium balls
          2. Anzhey V.
            Anzhey V. 30 December 2021 13: 23
            +8
            Dear Sergei, have you read the article entitled "The Rotten US Nuclear Shield", since you decided to mention it in a negative context?)

            https://topwar.ru/181330-sgnivshij-jadernyj-schit-ameriki.html

            I am its author, and I can say that in its content it pursued only one goal - to show that there is no "decay" of the American nuclear industry. The first half of the article describes the problems that the United States faced in the early 2010s, the second - what is being done to solve them. Therefore, it is somewhat surprising for me to see her mention in the context of "cap-covering" materials ...
            1. Bongo
              30 December 2021 16: 44
              +9
              Andrey, I in no way tried to hurt you. But perhaps, in your publication, you did not correctly place the accents and were not quite specific?
              In connection with the above, one can say without any embellishment that today the American nuclear triad consists of components that are outdated not only morally, but also technically ... The nuclear shield is turning into decayed ...

              This is a quote from your publication.
              Moreover, your work is quoted by "not smart", overly patriotic people, citing it as an argument for the American "nuclear impotence".
              The topic for my publications I often draw from frankly idiotic comments on VO. It happened this time too. hi
              1. Anzhey V.
                Anzhey V. 30 December 2021 18: 05
                +6
                Moreover, your work is quoted by "not smart", overly patriotic people, citing it as an argument for the American "nuclear impotence".


                To be honest, it is very sad to hear this - I tried to give the most balanced analysis of the American nuclear arsenal, relying directly on sources from the United States, incl. to the US Department of Energy, which is in charge of the nuclear industry.

                Actually, the conclusions there were spelled out at the end, but it seems that the caper-like audience did not reach them, falling into ecstasy from the beginning of the article ...

                Talk about the "funeral" of overseas nuclear weapons can be called a premature decision: the Yankees have all the scientific and technological base both for preserving the current resources of the triad and for its rearmament


                And thanks for your material, it was very interesting)
                1. KKND
                  KKND 30 December 2021 18: 11
                  +2
                  Quote: Anjay V.
                  To be honest, it is very sad to hear this - I tried to give the most balanced analysis of the American nuclear arsenal, relying directly on sources from the United States, incl. to the US Department of Energy, which is in charge of the nuclear industry.

                  Doesn't it bother you that the Americans in their reports can drive away any "misconception", which is usually done in such sensitive areas as national security?
                  And your entire article with a probability of more than 99% is based on the American "disinformation".
                  Or did you check these data yourself? Have you personally seen everything with your own eyes and have their experts personally reported everything to you?
                  What is "weighted analysis"?
                2. Vadim237
                  Vadim237 31 December 2021 18: 08
                  -7
                  But the fact remains, according to the new program in the United States, new nuclear charges will begin to be produced at the end of this decade, and they will be for new strategic cruise missiles, but when new warheads and tactical nuclear charges begin to be made, it is unknown.
                  1. Bongo
                    1 January 2022 04: 33
                    +6
                    Quote: Vadim237
                    But the fact remains, according to the new program in the United States, new nuclear charges will begin to be produced at the end of this decade, and they will be for new strategic cruise missiles, but when new warheads and tactical nuclear charges begin to be made, it is unknown.

                    Have you read the text of this publication at all? Apparently not ... wassat Or what does not fit into certain cliches your brain does not perceive?
                    I'll repeat myself especially for you, it's not difficult for me:
                    in 2019, four new plutonium blocks were assembled at the production site of the Los Alamos laboratory, then in 2024 there should already be 10 ...
                    The creation of new plutonium assemblies is already underway. But even without new assemblies, the Americans are able to hold out for a long time on existing reserves.
            2. ja-ja-vw
              ja-ja-vw 31 December 2021 19: 15
              +2
              Quote: Anjay V.
              Have you read the article entitled "The Rotten Nuclear Shield"

              Excuse me, I'll stick it
              I just read it (didn’t have time to read).
              Let me chew you. No offence
              Quote: Anjay V.
              It just so happens that countries that have pioneered this or that type of weapon over time lose understanding of the concepts of its use.

              USA?
              “The United States may need to deploy a simple, low-power, and
              precise nuclear weapons for possible use against selected fortified targets such as underground biological weapons storage facilities, ”KBPayne et al., Rationale and Requirements for US Nuclear Forces, Technical report, National Institute for Public Policy (January 2001).
              The Alamos laboratory is actively working to shift the focus of the American arsenal towards lower-power barrel-type warheads based on highly enriched uranium.
              Balson "ate the dog" on an empirical formula for burying nuclear warheads with underground blasting into concrete (although London and he is British).
              As much as the Americans have gained in nuclear explosions with a camouflage effect, no one else has
              Quote: Anjay V.
              The production of nuclear weapons was discontinued in 1991 - yes, the most recent American warhead is already thirty years old!

              1. Plutonium charges just got better, they no longer swell from ammertium. Over the next 70 years, very high quality ammunition
              2. The Rocky Flats Plant closed in 1992 and the reason there is that they dirtied everything around and lied. The FBI conducted a special operation there to poke a muzzle.
              Plant "Pantex" worked in 2008 for sure.
              3.
              The US National Academy of Sciences prepared a report that analyzed the Department of Energy's plans to dispose of excess plutonium at the WIPP complex. In one of the chapters of the report, the authors cited data on the surplus plutonium stocks currently available in the United States.
              In the United States, surplus plutonium is understood as such plutonium for which there are no plans to use it in a particular program and which does not fall under any of the categories of national security reserves.
              The amount of excess plutonium officially declared in the USA is 61,5 tons.

              Quote: Anjay V.
              that today the American nuclear triad consists of components that are outdated not only morally, but also technically ... the shield turns to rotten...

              -nothing better than American guidance systems for ICBMs, no one created
              -LGM-30G, but at least 55 years will knock. is she on alert, is she fulfilling her goals and objectives? = yes
              Have the opponents achieved the parameters of their ICBMs comparable to it? = No
              (and the cost of "maintenance"? to maintain a zoo of governors, poplars, yars, stilettos, and one typical 30G? which is cheaper and where the probability of failure is less, you don't even need to be a "specialist"
              - have we or the Chinese achieved the parameters of the UGM-133A Trident II (D5)? = no!
              - warheads, nuclear warheads is a closed topic, but something tells me that their quality is much better than ours.
              Base? Yes, just compare the number of accidents with nuclear submarines with us and with them.
              Quote: Anjay V.
              the Yankees have all the scientific and technological base both for the preservation of the current resources of the triad and for its rearmament.

              I think the Japanese and Germans from WW2 remember that.

              Quote: Anjay V.
              I am its author

              Quote: Anjay V.
              Actually, the conclusions there were spelled out at the end, but it seems that the caper-like audience did not reach them, falling into ecstasy from the beginning of the article ...

              understood nothing.
              The article, it seems to me, was written on the basis of nonsense that a "specialist" about "rusty US nuclear shield" dashed off in "geoenergetics"
              The article is called
              Rotted US nuclear shield
              without the "?"
              Conclusion at the end
              In this regard, I think it would be quite reasonable to say that the global strategic situation will not change in any way: the policy of containment will not go anywhere, and the total collapse of the American nuclear arsenal is definitely postponed to the distant future.

              Throughout the article, you are proving that the Americans' nuclear shield has rotted, and then this is the conclusion!
              how is it correlated?
              And the statement is akin to "the earth revolves and will revolve around the sun for a long time to come." belay and who argued?
              hi
          3. Military77
            Military77 30 December 2021 15: 20
            +5
            Do not wishful thinking. no Sadly, the US strategic nuclear forces are far from being "zeroed" and are quite capable of causing unacceptable damage to any country.

            Nice article, but there are a number of questions:
            1. Where did the USA get Pu-239 of high purity, suitable for loading TN bombs, given that after 28-30 years, the TN charge from plutonium degrades to the point of complete impossibility to use it?
            2. In 1988, the Rocky Flats plant, which manufactured plutonium triggers (small nuclear weapons used to initiate a thermonuclear explosion), known as "plutonium buttons", was closed. As far as I understand, there is no other similar enterprise in the USA. Who makes them now?
            If the TN warheads were reequipped, conditionally, only last year, and before that 30 years they were only engaged in melting the warheads to clean them from radioisotopes, then at such a speed, updating 2700+ warheads will take another 15-30 years, if they do not sharply accelerate. From this, perhaps, the W76-2 appeared with a capacity of 5-6 kilotons, without a plutonium charge.
            1. KKND
              KKND 30 December 2021 17: 02
              +1
              Quote: Military77
              Where does the USA get Pu-239 of high purity, suitable for loading TN bombs, given that after 28-30 years, a TN charge from plutonium degrades to the point of being completely unusable?

              Can you link to the source of this amazing information? Because the half-life of PU-239 is over 24000 years.
              Quote: Military77
              From this, perhaps, the W76-2 appeared with a capacity of 5-6 kilotons, without a plutonium charge.

              Complete nonsense. Small charges are needed to lower the political threshold for the use of nuclear weapons.
              1. Bongo
                30 December 2021 17: 12
                +4
                Hi!
                Quote: KKND
                Complete nonsense. Small charges are needed to lower the political threshold for the use of nuclear weapons.

                In part, in this way, they are trying to compensate for the Russian superiority in terms of tactical nuclear weapons.
              2. Military77
                Military77 30 December 2021 17: 24
                +4
                Can you link to the source of this amazing information? Because the half-life of PU-239 is over 24000 years.

                And what does the half-life have to do with it? lol
                From here: https://geoenergetics.ru/2016/08/03/kak-rzha-sozhrala-amerikanskie-termoyadernye-aviabomby/
                Weapon-grade plutonium - it decays. Constant and unstoppable. The problem of the combat effectiveness of the "old" plutonium charges is that the concentration of Plutonium 239 decreases over time. Due to alpha decay (the nuclei of Plutonium-239 "lose" alpha particles, which are the nuclei of the Helium atom), an admixture of Uranium is formed instead 235. Accordingly, the critical mass is growing. For pure Plutonium 239 is 11kg (10cm sphere), for uranium - 47kg (17cm sphere). Uranium-235 also decays (this is the same as in the case of Plutonium-239, also alpha decay), polluting the plutonium sphere with Thorium-231 and Helium. An admixture of plutonium 241 (and it always exists, albeit a fraction of a percent) with a half-life of 14 years, also decays (in this case, beta decay is already taking place - Plutonium-241 "loses" an electron and neutrino), giving Americium 241, which further worsens the critical indicators (Americium-241 decays according to the alpha variant to Neptunium-237 and all that same Helium).

                Plutonium charges are aging. And, as it were, it is impossible to "update" them. Yes, theoretically, you can change the design of the initiator, melt 3 old balls, fuse 2 new ones from them ... Increasing the mass, taking into account the degradation of plutonium. However, "dirty" plutonium is unreliable. Even an enlarged "ball" may not reach a supercritical state during compression during an explosion ... And if, by some statistical whim, an increased content of Plutonium-240 is formed in the resulting ball (formed from 239 by the capture of a neutron), then on the contrary, it can bang right on factory. The critical value is 7% Plutonium-240, exceeding which can lead to an elegantly formulated "problem" - "premature detonation"
                1. KKND
                  KKND 30 December 2021 17: 43
                  -5
                  Quote: Military77
                  And what does the half-life have to do with it?

                  How do you understand the physics of the process? half-life is the transformation of atoms into other atoms and particles. What a stupid question? wassat
                  Either a link to the interest, or calculate yourself and post the calculations here on the forum, so as not to be known as a balobol. As a reminder, the burden of proof lies with the claimant. I, then, if the calculations are correct, I admit that I am wrong.
                  So how many percent of the atoms of the total Pu-239 in a charge will decay in 30 years, so that the charge becomes unusable? if it takes 24000 years for 100% of atoms to become another substance?
                  1. Military77
                    Military77 30 December 2021 18: 27
                    +8
                    How do you understand the physics of the process?

                    I understand perfectly, I will write it simplistically: the half-life is the time during which a radioactive substance naturally loses half its radioactivity. Thus, at the end of 9 half-lives, the radioactivity of the substance decreases 512 times, and 10 times in 1024.

                    if it takes 24000 years for 100% of atoms to become another substance?

                    This requires several million years and certain conditions.

                    Either a link to the interest, or calculate yourself and post the calculations here on the forum, so as not to be known as a balobol. As a reminder, the burden of proof lies with the claimant. I, then, if the calculations are correct, I admit that I am wrong.

                    Sorry, but based on your understanding of the physics of the process, I think this is inappropriate, as well as further discussions.
                    1. KKND
                      KKND 30 December 2021 18: 55
                      -3
                      Quote: Military77
                      Sorry, but based on your understanding of the physics of the process, I think this is inappropriate, as well as further discussions.

                      Well, I was mistaken with the half-life. I meant complete decay by half-life.
                      Nevertheless, if the half-life is 24000 years, i.e. 50%, then how many percent will decay if only 30 years pass, as you wrote? And why didn't you answer for so long? Have you been googling for a long time? I wrote that from memory and was mistaken.
                      Nevertheless, the link will be or the calculations will be that there is such a terrible thing in 30 years to happen?
                      Accordingly, the critical mass is growing. For pure Plutonium 239 is 11kg (10cm sphere), for uranium - 47kg (17cm sphere).

                      Here the critical mass does not grow but decreases. Critical mass of Plutonium. Error.
                      1. Motorist
                        Motorist 31 December 2021 16: 47
                        +3
                        Quote: KKND
                        Here the critical mass does not grow but decreases. Critical mass of Plutonium. Error.

                        The mass is growing, KKND. If I have fuel with a lower density and (or) specific heat of combustion, then the fuel rail required for the same power grows.

                        Happy New You! hi
                      2. KKND
                        KKND 31 December 2021 18: 43
                        +2
                        Quote: Motorist
                        The mass is growing, KKND.

                        Plutonium decays into other elements, its mass decreases. Or am I not understanding something?
                      3. Motorist
                        Motorist 31 December 2021 19: 39
                        +1
                        The quality of the mixture decreases, therefore it increases critical weight. Not the mass of the mixture.
                      4. KKND
                        KKND 31 December 2021 20: 04
                        -2
                        The critical mass increases when the mass rises rather than decreases. When the critical mass is reached, a chain reaction begins. If the mass decreases, there will be no chain reaction.
                      5. Motorist
                        Motorist 31 December 2021 20: 48
                        +5
                        Critical mass is not mass (sorry for the pun), but property. Like the autoignition temperature, for example. Pluto becomes smaller, it is replaced by other elements, and therefore the critical mass (as a property) of this mixture / alloy grows.
              3. Military77
                Military77 30 December 2021 17: 43
                +1
                Complete nonsense. Small charges are needed to lower the political threshold for the use of nuclear weapons.

                Those. Do you seriously think that the launched Trident-3 from the US submarine against the objects described in the doctrine of the use of nuclear weapons will not cause a response to all the nuclear potential of the Russian Federation? How does the system for the prevention of a nuclear attack know about the power of the charge?
                1. KKND
                  KKND 30 December 2021 17: 49
                  +3
                  Quote: Military77
                  Those. Do you seriously think that the launched Trident-3 from the US submarine against the objects described in the doctrine of the use of nuclear weapons will not cause a response to all the nuclear potential of the Russian Federation? How does the system for the prevention of a nuclear attack know about the power of the charge?

                  If the launch is a single, one missile, then more than 99% of the retaliatory strike by all strategic offensive arms will not follow. They will begin to understand, perhaps they will launch 1 rocket in response. There are usually no suicides and madmen in the highest military-political circles of countries.
                  1. The comment was deleted.
            2. ja-ja-vw
              ja-ja-vw 30 December 2021 23: 33
              +1
              1. They go through the old ones that they have worked out.
              28-30 years TY plutonium charge degrades to the point of complete impossibility to use it

              belay
              What a heresy: gunned plutonium, like brandy, longer aging, better quality.
              Get rid of nasty americium and other rubbish.
              Degradation of only guidance systems, automatic blasting and other machinery from the induced radiation and the energies passed through them.
              2. In 1992 it seems. They bought plutonium in the "new" Russia,
              The American rover knows this.
              Since 2016, Oak Ridge has been producing ..
              W76-2 appeared for a completely different reason
          4. Mister X
            Mister X 31 December 2021 15: 52
            +3
            hi
            Remembered anecdote on nuclear weapons
            There are many versions, I give a short one wink

            The third world war is in the yard.
            Nuclear strikes are shaking the Earth.
            The American president calls the Russian and says:
            - Russians, give up! We have 200 missiles, you have 150.
            - The Russians don't give up! - our president answers, and hangs up.
            Another week of mutual shelling. Call again:
            - Russians, give up! We have 100 missiles, you have 50.
            - The Russians don't give up! - our president answers, and hangs up.
            Another week of mutual shelling. Call again:
            - Russians, give up! We have 50 missiles, you have 20.
            - And we found a warehouse in Siberia, there are 200 more missiles.
            The American president hangs up, looks at the portrait of his predecessor, and says to himself:
            - He often told me that we would lose the war because of Russian negligence and carelessness ...
          5. Glagol1
            Glagol1 31 December 2021 19: 37
            -6
            Well, they will not repeat the Moon today, although in 1969 the technologies were much simpler.
          6. Stepan S
            Stepan S 2 January 2022 01: 36
            -3
            Do you seriously believe that the United States will not be able to repeat what was done in the 50-60s?

            Have they already flown to the moon again? Could you repeat it?
            1. zyablik.olga
              zyablik.olga 2 January 2022 04: 04
              +1
              Quote: Stepan S
              Have they already flown to the moon again? Could you repeat it?

              Was this a task for NASA? No.
        2. Arc grem
          Arc grem 2 January 2022 21: 18
          -1
          "window of opportunity" .. not to be missed ... press the button
      2. The comment was deleted.
    2. Rostislav Prokopenko
      Rostislav Prokopenko 31 December 2021 19: 05
      0
      Well, yes. Target designation is given accurately enough wink
      But not a word about peaceful nuclear energy and nuclear waste processing.
      In the following articles or mattress toppers are not interested in such questions?
  2. Cowbra
    Cowbra 30 December 2021 05: 52
    +8
    The United States has saved many billions of dollars by disposing of obsolete Cold War strategic carriers and warheads
    Vitrifying and burying is not recycling. And even more so in no "closed cycle" - no burial is included - the cycle immediately becomes open.
    Well, in general, you can remember that even the waste of American nuclear power plants is spun across the sea to France, where it is brought into a more or less digestible form - then it is spun back to bury it) And so since the time of President Carter, who banned recycling in the United States, fearing leaks from production ...
    1. zyablik.olga
      zyablik.olga 2 January 2022 04: 06
      +2
      Quote: Cowbra
      Vitrifying and burying is not recycling.

      You may not know, but we also "recycle" a significant part of the waste in this way.
  3. Mountain shooter
    Mountain shooter 30 December 2021 06: 08
    +1
    And no one doubted that the nuclear military industry in the United States would be supported and developed. In the huge US military budget, the cost of nuclear weapons is relatively small. Losing world leadership, striped ears will begin to "sharpen" their nuclear "fangs" ... If it is not very good with conventional weapons ...
    1. Aerodrome
      Aerodrome 30 December 2021 06: 15
      +1
      perhaps the difference does not matter for the "X" hour ... we do not care "to heaven ... but they will just die" (quote from one of the "greats")
      1. Toucan
        Toucan 30 December 2021 07: 03
        +3
        Quote: Aerodrome
        a quote from someone from the "great")

        Is that sarcasm about the "greats"?
        1. Uncle Vanya Susanin
          Uncle Vanya Susanin 30 December 2021 16: 51
          -1
          Is that sarcasm about the "greats"?

          Sarcasm or not, only our descendants can really give the answer to this, and possibly in a few generations!
        2. KKND
          KKND 30 December 2021 17: 06
          +2
          Quote: Tucan
          Is that sarcasm about the "greats"?

          If he sends us to heaven, he will definitely be remembered in history for a long time. wassat
          1. Serg Kam
            Serg Kam 1 January 2022 02: 37
            +1
            If he sends us to heaven, he will definitely be remembered in history for a long time.

            If he sends him to heaven with a "peaceful" atom in his arms, then there will be no one to remember
  4. rocket757
    rocket757 30 December 2021 06: 21
    +5
    You have to count everything, and put your finger to your nose ...
    the situation is such that militarily it is possible to be very formidable, but in the economic aspect to be a loser!
    Here, after all, how if the minke whales are not enough, after all, they can pull resources from allies ... we have to rely only on ourselves!
    Conclusion, it is necessary to work effectively YOURSELF, hope, more, no one else.
  5. Aaron Zawi
    Aaron Zawi 30 December 2021 06: 35
    +21
    Great article. The author is deeply grateful for the work.
    1. Bongo
      30 December 2021 09: 03
      +19
      Quote: Aaron Zawi
      Great article. The author is deeply grateful for the work.

      Aaron, thanks for the kind words! Glad you liked it! hi
  6. sergey_please
    sergey_please 30 December 2021 06: 38
    +12
    Very serious work. Thank you author.
  7. Lech from Android.
    Lech from Android. 30 December 2021 06: 46
    +7
    Excellent review ... thanks to Sergei for the interesting information about the state of nuclear weapons in the United States today ... I look forward to continuing.
    I would like to know the names of the leading scientific leaders of US nuclear laboratories ... how competent they are in this area, their experience and education. what
    1. Bongo
      30 December 2021 09: 08
      +14
      Hello!
      Quote: Lech from Android.
      Excellent review ... thanks to Sergei for the interesting information about the state of nuclear weapons in the United States today ... I look forward to continuing.

      drinks
      Quote: Lech from Android.
      I would like to know the names of the leading scientific leaders of US nuclear laboratories ... how competent they are in this area, their experience and education.

      I'm not sure if this will be of interest to the main part of the readers! If this is really important for you, then knowing the names of scientific organizations and research and industrial centers, you are quite able to independently find out who is in charge of them. As for the level of competence, this can hardly be established without personal communication.
      1. Ingvar 72
        Ingvar 72 30 December 2021 10: 30
        +8
        Quote: Bongo
        I'm not sure if this will be of interest to the main part of the readers!

        I don’t share your confidence, Sergei!
        Your articles are like an outlet in the escalated political confrontation in the VO. drinks
        1. Bongo
          30 December 2021 16: 33
          +6
          Hello, hello!
          Quote: Ingvar 72
          I don’t share your confidence, Sergei!

          In this case, I meant this:
          Quote: Lech from Android.
          I would like to know the names of the leading scientific leaders of US nuclear laboratories ... how competent they are in this area, their experience and education.
    2. ja-ja-vw
      ja-ja-vw 31 December 2021 00: 20
      +3
      I would like to know the names of the leading scientific leaders of the US nuclear laboratories.



      Are you seriously going to correspond with Hal Feyveson, Jeff Forden, Joshua Handler, Zia Mian, Greg Mello, Pavel Podvig, Sharon Wiener and David Wright?
      The first 2a by Hal Fayveson, Jeff Forden, Joshua Handler, Zia Miane, Greg Mello, Pavel Podvig, Sharon Wiener and David Wright. The first 2a from the aircraft, the rest were almost all, are on the objects described in the article.

      About ask? recourse
  8. dzvero
    dzvero 30 December 2021 08: 50
    +6
    A great start to a new cycle! Thanks to the author !!! I have questions, but I will not run in front of the locomotive - I will wait to continue smile
    Holiday greetings drinks
    1. Bongo
      30 December 2021 09: 10
      +9
      Quote: dzvero
      A great start to a new cycle! Thanks to the author !!! I have questions, but I will not run in front of the locomotive - I will wait to continue smile
      Holiday greetings drinks

      Hello! Happy New Year too! drinks
      The next part will be released in 2022. But, if something is not clear, do not hesitate and ask.
      1. dzvero
        dzvero 30 December 2021 10: 14
        +4
        Apparently, some degradation of the industry has taken place, but now the US is trying to catch up. Their love of scale is well known, so I'm curious how much is left for the nuclear test ban treaty. The model is good, but reality always strives to present some surprises ... even with the most beautiful models smile
  9. alstr
    alstr 30 December 2021 09: 24
    0
    It should be borne in mind that for about 20 years (from the beginning of the 90s to the end of the 2000s), a lot of research work was carried out by our scientists in the interests of the United States. On the one hand, it was cheaper, but on the other hand, it allowed us to get some closed information about our potential.

    From our side, it allowed us to preserve at least something of science. At the same time, unfortunately, the attraction of young people to science did not take place. And the old guard is already gone. When his father (he worked at the Khlopin Research Institute) was buried, none of his colleagues were left alive (even the only young employee who came to them in the 90s died), and there were no young people to replace them.
    So we have no ice with personnel either.

    But they also have a failure in scientific personnel, tk. almost all funding went to us.
    1. Bongo
      30 December 2021 09: 36
      +14
      Quote: alstr
      But they also have a failure in scientific personnel, tk. almost all funding went to us.

      Excuse me, you want to say that the American laboratories mentioned in this work, with a staff of up to 11 people in each, have been "poking their noses" all these years? No.
      As for the amount of funding, in the past, funds for nuclear research were allocated, of course, much less than in the past few years. Nevertheless, billions of dollars were spent annually for these purposes. I am extremely curious how much of this funding allocated by the US government in absolute terms went to the Russian nuclear research institutes?
      1. alstr
        alstr 30 December 2021 13: 24
        0
        This is approximately what happened. The scheme was something like this.
        Money was allocated on the topic. The lead performer was appointed - American.
        This comrade gave the topic to our institutes, which undertook to do it for an order of magnitude less money than in America (even taking into account the fact that ours are not fools either, but they were also planning to update the equipment). But at the expense of the salary, which we had a penny (if I remember correctly, my father received about 1-2 thousand dollars per stage (this is about half a year of work)). Compare that to a salary of tens of thousands of dollars in America.
        Then a report was written (with translation into English) and this report was submitted in America for the results of research. It was really so, tk. my father wrote such reports and then saw him in American documents. Only the title was changed.

        And the American put the difference in salaries (and not only salaries, since some of the source codes were cheaper then) into his pocket.
        So we think that from a group of 10 people the difference in salary alone will be about 1 million per year.
        1. Bongo
          30 December 2021 16: 32
          +5
          Quote: alstr
          And the American put the difference in salaries (and not only salaries, since some of the source codes were cheaper then) into his pocket.
          So we think that from a group of 10 people the difference in salary alone will be about 1 million per year.

          Even if this is so, where does this conclusion come from:
          Quote: alstr
          almost all funding went to us.

          Against the background of tens of billions allocated to American laboratories, this is a penny. In addition, I am sure that our specialists were not involved in defense programs for the United States. No.
          1. alstr
            alstr 30 December 2021 17: 51
            0
            It was different. Of course, they did not work directly, but are the technologies for cleaning radioactive waste a defense industry or not?

            Think about it.

            Father once showed that, based on the already open data, it is possible to determine with great accuracy the production volumes of weapons-grade uranium and plutonium.

            In general, a lot of information was given back then.
            1. zyablik.olga
              zyablik.olga 31 December 2021 05: 28
              +4
              Quote: alstr
              It was different. Of course, they did not work directly, but are the technologies for cleaning radioactive waste a defense industry or not?

              Of course not! No. How is this directly related to weapons programs?
        2. KKND
          KKND 30 December 2021 17: 33
          +4
          Quote: alstr
          This is approximately what happened. The scheme was something like this.

          Enough to tell fairy tales. Military secret, have you heard such a concept? A scientist will sit in the Russian Federation if the defense capability of foreign countries will be strengthened, as well as in other countries.
          1. alstr
            alstr 30 December 2021 17: 44
            +1
            Have you heard. But then it was (90s) in the order of things. Then the question was in general a question of survival, tk. funding for science was not given from the word at all.

            Everything went through a special department.
            And how many owls. secret publications were declassified - just horror.
            We declassified part of the material and recorded it in the report.
            1. KKND
              KKND 30 December 2021 18: 03
              +4
              Quote: alstr
              Have you heard. But then it was (90s) in the order of things. Then the question was in general a question of survival, tk. funding for science was not given from the word at all.

              Okay, so as not to be unfounded and not to discuss spherical horses in a vacuum, list specific US defense projects in which Russian scientists participated for money. This will not be difficult for you, you are in the subject, right?
              1. alstr
                alstr 30 December 2021 18: 23
                +3
                I'm not at all in the subject (this is about specific research). So - I heard something from my father.

                The only thing I know is that they developed technologies for processing radioactive waste from burial grounds in the United States.

                But there were many contracts from the United States. And not only in his group, but in other groups too.
                In fact, in the 90s, funding for the institute was more than half American (since all groups had 1-2 contracts with Americans).
    2. KKND
      KKND 30 December 2021 17: 11
      +3
      Quote: alstr
      It should be taken into account that for about 20 years (from the beginning of the 90s to the end of the 2000s), a lot of research work was carried out by our scientists in the interests of the United States.

      At MEPhI, a student will go to see the reactor and that's it, 5 years away from home. All serious scientists working in the defense industry are not allowed to travel abroad. soldier
      1. alstr
        alstr 30 December 2021 17: 46
        +2
        In fact, not everything turned out so badly after the collapse of the USSR.
        They received a passport, but only for business trips or with the consent of a special department, you can go somewhere. The passport was simply kept in a special department.
        And so yes, my father had a limitation period of 15 years.
  10. pytar
    pytar 30 December 2021 09: 47
    +11
    Cognitive, informative article! It breaks down some of the popular Russian-media myths about the "degradation of the American nuclear potential". Respect to the author! hi We look forward to continuing! good
  11. Dimka75
    Dimka75 30 December 2021 09: 52
    +11
    Thanks to Sergey for his work and enthusiasm!
    I am ready to endure 500 articles about "Ukraine" for the sake of 1 of his work.
    Thank you
  12. Liam
    Liam 30 December 2021 10: 12
    +6
    Excellent article
  13. merkava-2bet
    merkava-2bet 30 December 2021 11: 06
    +6
    Happy New Year Sergey, the topic you are covering is very dear to my heart, thank you.
  14. DrRey
    DrRey 30 December 2021 11: 47
    +7
    There is one moment that has caused the next emotions in the address of the reformers. At one time, we have ruined a huge number of research institutes under the pretext that there are no research institutes in the West, all science is in universities, etc. Then what are the scientific laboratories of the United States, with a workforce of 12000? I would like to quote the m / f "Alyosha Popovich and Tugarin the Serpent" - "Yes, put them on a count" of these reformers.
  15. Skipper
    Skipper 30 December 2021 14: 31
    -15
    yeah .. constantly repeats about the development of NUCLEAR CHARGES ... and what is the use of millions of nuclear charges if the delivery vehicles for these charges in the person of the Triden-2d5 SLBM are morally and technically outdated and their service life is extended several times. THE ROCKETS THEMSELVES as delivery vehicles have rotted and there is no replacement. Well the zealous is the same.
    1. Spring fluff
      Spring fluff 30 December 2021 15: 20
      +7
      Where do you get this nonsense?
      https://topwar.ru/187274-vms-ssha-proveli-ocherednoe-ispytanie-mezhkontinentalnoj-ballisticheskoj-rakety-trident-ii-d5le.html
    2. SovAr238A
      SovAr238A 30 December 2021 16: 38
      +4
      Quote: Skipper
      yeah .. constantly repeats about the development of NUCLEAR CHARGES ... and what is the use of millions of nuclear charges if the delivery vehicles for these charges in the person of the Triden-2d5 SLBM are morally and technically outdated and their service life is extended several times. THE ROCKETS THEMSELVES as delivery vehicles have rotted and there is no replacement. Well the zealous is the same.

      Oh and nonsense ...
      Even that unmorned Trident is much better technically and significantly surpasses the same Mace.
      And how old is Trident
      1. Zhevlonenko
        Zhevlonenko 2 January 2022 13: 18
        -2
        And what is the greater technical perfection of the trident, one may ask?
    3. Vadim237
      Vadim237 31 December 2021 18: 17
      -6
      Well, the Tridents are not yet outdated - even though they do not have a system for overcoming missile defense, but Russia also has a missile defense system only in Moscow, and in order to resist this, thousands of missiles are needed.
  16. Wildcat
    Wildcat 30 December 2021 15: 31
    +7
    hi
    Thank you for the article!
    For this I am even ready to tolerate another article on VO - "Why does Ukraine massively buy cucumbers ...". wassat

    At one time I tried to figure out the history of the US nuclear weapons, the only thing that happened was "The USA has been hiding data since the 40s of the 20th century, and the strangest thing is that they have been hiding money and production volumes of nuclear weapons."
    There are only expert assessments (especially regarding tactical nuclear weapons) and absolutely illogical methods of calculating nuclear weapons for treaties, for example: "one bomber - one charge", "B1 is not a strategic bomber."
    And a very interesting thing, like "return potential".

    I also tried to understand where the idea that "the US nuclear shield has rotted" is coming from. But this task turned out to be overwhelming for me.
    1. The comment was deleted.
      1. The comment was deleted.
    2. KKND
      KKND 30 December 2021 17: 29
      +7
      Quote: Wildcat
      I also tried to understand where the idea that "the US nuclear shield has rotted" is coming from. But this task turned out to be overwhelming for me.

      From the same source, information about irreversible fatigue in the B-1b glider, the unsuccessful F-35, which will not be adopted, the gentle radio-absorbing stealth coating, the uselessness of stealth, etc. is coming from. etc.
  17. Skipper
    Skipper 30 December 2021 16: 54
    -13
    Quote: SovAr238A
    Quote: Skipper
    yeah .. constantly repeats about the development of NUCLEAR CHARGES ... and what is the use of millions of nuclear charges if the delivery vehicles for these charges in the person of the Triden-2d5 SLBM are morally and technically outdated and their service life is extended several times. THE ROCKETS THEMSELVES as delivery vehicles have rotted and there is no replacement. Well the zealous is the same.

    Oh and nonsense ...
    Even that unmorned Trident is much better technically and significantly surpasses the same Mace.
    And how old is Trident

    Outperforms in what? In the range of the throwing weight and power of nuclear units? And what's the point of this if the efficiency of delivery is neglected or nullified by modern Russian missile defense and air defense systems of a country where all of their warheads can accidentally one or two reach the goal ... or even not one. But the Bulava, with its lower throw weight, has a delivery efficiency many times more efficient and its smaller warheads will pass through the amers' missile defense system much more efficiently. And in terms of range, the triden is even less because with the maximum load in blocks ... and if in the maximum range, then there is no more weight to be thrown than in a mace.
  18. Dzafdet
    Dzafdet 30 December 2021 17: 23
    0
    Again, the Americans are starting the nuclear race. It would be better if they were engaged in space together. And so this is a run to nowhere. Soon they will begin to launch nuclear warheads into space, and then everyone will get sick at once.
  19. Reader 2013
    Reader 2013 30 December 2021 17: 23
    0
    uh huh the CEO is on fire
    This is, as before, a joint venture between Renault and Rostec. The distribution of shares has not changed.

    Lada Auto Holding LLC was registered in Moscow in September 2021, according to the analytical system SPARK-Interfax. The authorized capital of the company is RUB 16 billion. General Director - Andrey Shpak.
  20. The comment was deleted.
  21. Barge_watchman
    Barge_watchman 31 December 2021 19: 43
    +5
    Thank you.
    a very "stylish" article on a very difficult topic.
    I was always dumbfounded - the nuclear shield has rotted, competencies have been lost, and reactors are put on submarines "disposable", with a service life of 40 years ...
    Write more, Sergey.
  22. akarfoxhound
    akarfoxhound 1 January 2022 07: 49
    +3
    Good article, everything is excellent, clearly on the shelves good
  23. Zhevlonenko
    Zhevlonenko 2 January 2022 13: 06
    -2
    Only now everything is aimed exclusively at maintenance and safety, I did not see something for the development of new ones, but fundamental research is present, but this is not quite right. Even disposal is primitive enough, pump it underground and bring it down. Somehow it does not fit with the amount of expenses. Yes, they rivet warheads for the B62-12, but this is a stone age, the means of counteraction are constantly being improved, and as time has shown, everything that is faster than 2-3 times the speed of sound causes difficulties for the American military-industrial complex. The same Trident is essentially a "stick" with a rather low chance of just at least flying, breaking all pro / air defense belts, plus electronic warfare. He doesn't even have the ability to defend himself with false targets.
  24. Ilgizl
    Ilgizl 3 January 2022 00: 17
    +1
    The article is extremely informative. But why should they fight, they stupidly buy whoever they need, as already happened in the 80-90s. Our foreign exchange reserves are in dollars and euros. We do not produce much on our own, from electronics to products we either buy, or foreign companies are the owners.
  25. The comment was deleted.
    1. Bongo
      3 January 2022 05: 09
      +3
      Quote: Lao Tzing
      article clearly paid to whitewash immoral politics

      wassat fool
      Can you tell me where to get the money?
      1. Lao tzing
        Lao tzing 3 January 2022 05: 25
        -4
        All the necessary information on payment can be found in the issues Solovyov LIVE and Besogon TV
        1. Bongo
          3 January 2022 05: 27
          +3
          Quote: Lao Tzing
          All the necessary information on payment can be found in the issues Solovyov LIVE and Besogon TV

          Thank you, apparently you know a lot about TV feces. wink
          I don’t watch Russian TV at all. No.
          1. Lao tzing
            Lao tzing 3 January 2022 05: 30
            -4
            And in vain wink they would recognize themselves as a family in one of the issues, there they talk and show a lot about traitors to the Motherland ... how does it feel to be a traitor?
            1. Bongo
              3 January 2022 05: 39
              +4
              Everyone judges by himself. lol Personally, I have no desire to delve into sewage. No.
  26. Yar_Vyatkin
    Yar_Vyatkin 3 January 2022 16: 03
    -3
    the author, before writing on such a complex (for him, of course) topic, should learn at least not to confuse indices ... And concepts. And then he has W88 with MX (which was never there) are put on the Minutemans (the W87s are put from the dead for a long time MX, more precisely, they were put), by the way, the question of disposal of the W78, which began several years ago, and soon there will be nothing to put on the remaining Minutemans , the author missed

    And he should also learn to distinguish between PRODUCING NEW CHARGES, which is NOT in the USA, and even cannot produce components (it is enough to read about the epic with plutonium cells, without which the extension of the time will soon become impossible), and carrying out SMALL upgrades, which include the long-suffering the B61-12 aerial bomb, the timing of which has repeatedly left to the right, and, despite the fact that one aerial bomb was collected last year, they will leave more than once. In general, the study of materiel is our everything, Mr. Linnik ....
    1. Bongo
      3 January 2022 16: 15
      +1
      Are you not the same Mr. Vyatkin who in his publications regularly mentions "Russophobes" and wrote about the "US nuclear point of no return." wassat If so, then you are not an authority for me. No.
      1. SavranP
        SavranP 5 January 2022 16: 16
        0
        The article is really informative, a lot of material has been collected and systematized. Thank you. But, probably, they really relate more to history and little to our time. The author promises a sequel, read it.
  27. Russophile
    Russophile 4 January 2022 11: 35
    0
    The article, without a dispute, is very good. And the author is in the subject, which pleases. But one should not underestimate the power of the US nuclear triad and the possibility of this state to increase this power if necessary.
    Well, the verification of the "performance" of warheads is carried out using non-nuclear explosions. As with them, so with us. There is plenty of information about this. Only the technologies are different. Ours is clear the stump is better. Why the amers have a headache and something shrinks at the fifth point.
    Speaking of technology.
    If anyone does not know, in the 90s, by order of the EBN on Novaya Zemlya, a joint test of nuclear weapons with amers was planned (bypassing the then moratorium on such tests). They really wanted to get to our technologies. They were even going to build a separate hotel for them at the test station. But, thank God, there were firm and decisive people who explained to EBNu (apparently caught the moment when he was sober) the catastrophic nature of such an event. Canceled. But can you imagine the level of betrayal in the then power, because someone suggested this idea to the president !!!
    Well, in 2006, before leaving Novaya Zemlya after demobilization, I asked my friends from the expedition of one of the nuclear centers: how long can I calmly retire before the start of our childish butting with ami? They replied that we have been doing them for 15 years, retired for pleasure.
    That is, the pindrs were only now able (?) To reach our then level. And something tells me that these years we have not stood still. Something like this.

    PS Why is the word pi.n.dosy being erased from the text? !! Such a good nickname for this chosen one of God.
  28. Face
    Face 4 January 2022 23: 22
    -2
    The listings and budgets are certainly impressive. Even more impressive are the Mexicans riveting (or disassembling?) Blanks on the floor of a garage.
    I admit that they can bang very powerfully. But how will it be delivered to a potential enemy?
  29. sergej987
    sergej987 9 February 2022 15: 20
    0
    Few specifics. Only budgets and past merits. The author does not say how old the freshest industrial block is in the United States. There is an atam industry, of course, but more to maintain the old backlog and the military atom, reactors for the fleet.