"Guardian" will replace "Militia". Will the world become safer from this?

An analysis of documents, press publications and speeches by various officials of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) after the organization’s session in Vilnius (July 2023) gives reason to believe that the leadership of the bloc has set a course for preparing a full-scale armed aggression against the union state of the Russian Federation and the Republic of Belarus.

In the summit documents, our country was once again called “the most significant and direct threat to the security of the alliance.” NATO is consistently lowering the threshold for the use of force and strengthening the nuclear component in military planning. The “collective West” led by the United States is not ready to put up with the formation of a multipolar world and intends to defend its hegemony by all available means, including military ones.

NATO Secretary General J. Stoltenberg advocates “the strategic defeat of Russia on the battlefield.”

Recently, demands from various representatives of the Western elite have become increasingly vocal regarding the infliction of a “strategic defeat of Russia on the battlefield”, the inadmissibility of a military defeat of the Kiev junta during a special military operation of the Russian Armed Forces to denazify and demilitarize the Ukrainian regime, which seized power during the 2014 military coup. in Ukraine.

Understanding full well that it is not possible to defeat a nuclear superpower, which is the Russian Federation, without a nuclear potential comparable or even superior to the strategic nuclear forces of the Russian Federation, the NATO bloc began feverishly to rearm with modern systems, including nuclear ones weapons.

“The United States must qualitatively and quantitatively increase its nuclear arsenal in order to simultaneously contain Russia and China,”

– this conclusion is contained in the 160-page report of the US Congress Special Commission on Strategic Issues. The document was submitted to Congress in October 2023. The authors of the document call existing plans to modernize the country’s nuclear potential, adopted in 2022, “necessary, but insufficient.” Let me remind you: the latest version of the document regulating the US nuclear doctrine - Nuclear Posture Review - was adopted by the Yankees in March 2022. NPR outlines a plan for the complete modernization of the American nuclear triad.

This year, the US Air Force SAC adopted the newest strategic bomber B-21 “Raider”. On June 4, 2022, the new SSNB-816 Columbia SSBN was laid down, which should become part of the combat-ready forces in 2031 fleet. In the same 2022, a decision was made to develop and adopt the promising LGM-35A ICBM of the Sentinel missile system.

Moreover, Washington is paying constant attention to the creation of a new ground-based component of the strategic nuclear forces. Work on the creation of a promising ICBM is under the control of Congress, officials of the presidential administration and the US Armed Forces.

According to the plan, the first 40 ICBMs of the Republic of Kazakhstan "Sentinel" should be on combat duty in 2029. In total, the Pentagon plans to purchase 659 such missiles, including 25 for testing.

To implement such grandiose plans, the US Department of Defense in September 2020 signed a $13,3 billion contract with the Northrop-Grumman Corporation for the full-scale development of the Sentinel missile system with the new LGM-35A ICBM.

According to the contract, the developer undertook to create, test and certify the product for nuclear safety within 8,5 years.

Conceptual drawing of the LGM-35A ICBM of the Sentinel missile system

This will be a 3-stage solid-propellant ICBM 18–19 m long, with a maximum body diameter of 1,95 m, weighing 43–45 tons. In this case, the standard deviation of the ICBM from the aiming point (RMSD) should be about 120–130 m or 2 times better than Minuteman 3. The maximum range of hitting a target with one BB will be 15 km. To destroy attack targets, the new Mk-000A warhead with W21-87 warheads will be used. The maximum number of warheads in a warhead is 1.

The new ICBM will receive a modernized warhead deployment stage, with equipment for rapid retargeting at newly identified attack targets. Sentinel will receive new effective means of countering enemy missile defense. ICBMs will be equipped with new sustainer stages. The casings of solid propellant jet engines (solid propellant motors) will be made of carbon fiber-based composite material. The thrust vector control of the solid propellant rocket engine is supposed to be carried out using new electromechanical drives.

The Sentinels are going to be deployed in upgraded silo launchers of the Minuteman-3 ICBMs. The former ICBM control centers will undergo refurbishment and modernization for use in the Sentinel Republic.

All this should ensure high reliability and low operating costs of the entire system, as well as the implementation of the necessary nuclear safety requirements when operating a new ICBM.

According to the developers, the modular design of the missile system will make it possible to quickly troubleshoot faults, replace outdated components, reduce maintenance costs and guarantee increased safety when inspecting various elements of the missile system.

The US Air Force command plans to adopt the first squadron (50 units) of the new LGM-35A ICBMs of the RK Sentinel in 2029. By the mid-30s, the Pentagon intends to equip all new ICBMs with Mk 21A warheads and deploy at least 400 missiles, thereby completing the rearmament of the Air Force to the new strategic missile system.

The new ICBMs are planned to be supplied to the following units:

– 90th ICBM Wing (AvB Warren, Wyoming);
– 91st ICBM Wing (AvB Minot, North Dakota);
– 341st ICBM Wing (AvB Malmstrom, Montana).

All are part of the U.S. Air Force Global Strike Command's 20th Air Force.

It is planned to remove all 35 units from service after the LGM-450A Sentinel ICBM is delivered to combat duty. ICBM LGM-30G "Minuteman-3". They were adopted back in 1970.

“Now,” Time magazine points out, “the entire fleet of Minuteman ICBMs has less processing power than the smartphone in your pocket.” This largely explains the problems with launches. Since 2011, 3 tests have been unsuccessful and one has been partially successful. Thus, on November 2, 2023, during the test launch of Minuteman-3 from the Western Missile Range, technical problems arose that caused it to deviate on course, which led to the elimination of the ICBM over the Pacific Ocean.

Conducting a routine inspection of the Minuteman ICBM in the mine control center

The Pentagon has been allocated considerable budgetary allocations to upgrade the ground components of American strategic nuclear forces. The total cost of development and modernization of various auxiliary systems, including silos, is about $96 billion.

Operating costs for placing the Sentinel missile system on combat duty and its maintenance (until 2075) are estimated at $264 billion.

In the 2024 fiscal year alone, it is planned to spend $56,5 billion on work to create the Sentinel missile system. And these means are already being used. Recently, reports have appeared in the press about successful tests of stage 1 and 2 propulsion systems, the creation of the Mk-21A warhead and warheads for it. There was a message about the development of a new telecommunications system, a communication and control system between the silos and launchers of the wings of ICBMs. They will widely use new products based on fiber optic components and computing systems using AI components.

At the same time, the progress of the program has shown that due to the lack of qualified personnel at the corporation's enterprises, delays in obtaining security clearances and the complexity of developing secure information systems of guaranteed durability, the transfer to the Air Force of all 400 new ICBMs is delayed by more than a year. This lag behind the work schedule was identified by a commission of the US Congress' Office of the Comptroller and Fiscal Administration.

As a result of the commission’s work, the management of the Northrop-Grumman corporation was forced to declare that it would be possible to deliver missiles, modernize 450 silos and more than 600 other facilities no earlier than April 2030 (originally planned for May 2029).

Due to the noted delay in the work schedule, the first flight tests of the new ICBM were postponed from 2023 to 2024–2025. But, despite the difficulties that have arisen, the management of the Northrop-Grumman Corporation intends to intensify work on the creation of a new Sentinel missile system with an LGM 35A ICBM and deliver all 659 products to the customer, as well as build and put into operation all the infrastructure and systems for reliable and uninterrupted functioning in peacetime and wartime of the updated ground component of the United States strategic nuclear forces.

Such large-scale preparations by the United States and NATO for aggression against Russia cause the population and leadership of our country to feel wary and strive to strengthen in every possible way the defense capability of the state and its Armed Forces. The adoption of new promising types of weapons and military equipment, including for the nuclear triad, and the maintenance of nuclear parity with the United States and NATO guarantee a crushing rebuff to any aggressor and peace on the planet.

Comments

[Victor Leningradets]

Analysis of documents, publications in the press and speeches of various officials of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) after the organization’s session in Vilnius (July 2023) gives reason to believe that the leadership of the bloc has set a course for preparing a full-scale armed aggression against the union state of the Russian Federation and the Republic of Belarus

Since the Strategic Nuclear Forces (SNF) are a FIRST STRIKE weapon (at the same time serving as a deterrent in peacetime), it is obvious that one must be prepared to forestall the enemy. And the possibility of preemption is determined solely by combat readiness and flight time, where the United States has a huge advantage over Russia.
In this regard, it is necessary to decide which of the strategic nuclear forces elements is subject to priority development:
- RKPSN, as well as strategic underwater drones and means of ensuring a breakthrough of the enemy’s anti-aircraft submarine for launching from its coastal zone;
- Strategic aviation with vehicles of unlimited flight duration equipped with hypersonic nuclear attack weapons;
- Means of attack from space and support of the orbital constellation.
It is also necessary to ensure the preemptive elimination of enemy nuclear attack weapons from the territory of Europe, Japan and South Korea in the event of a threat of high-level conflict.

[Shtyn dwarf]

Who told you about the “first strike”? Strategic nuclear forces are God's weapons so powerful that they will destroy all of humanity - there were corresponding studies in the USSR at one time. It seems like our scientist’s last name was Alexandrov, but this is not certain. So this is the meaning of strategic nuclear forces - so that the country that has it, and this is the United States and Russia, is taken into account; this is the essence of “containment”. They considered it - for example, they did not supply weapons to Ukraine. But by signing the “Moscow Declaration of 1994” this mechanism was turned off - and now the United States did not care about Russia and its interests. Therefore, competent political, psychological and informational use of strategic nuclear forces is much more important than its technical development - it is already developed several generations ahead.

[Shtyn dwarf]

...And one more thing - the United States will never strike Russia - they have 800 bases for this, including Poland and Romania. Therefore, in order to prevent this - there is no need to try to block an attack on the Russian Federation from third countries - it is necessary to create a decisive threat to the United States in response to any attack on us from any country.

[kor1vet1974]

The “collective West” is not ready to put up with the formation of a multipolar world

The collective West is one pole, but how many more poles are being formed? What if the world is multipolar?

[Boa kaa]

Quote: kor1vet1974

The collective West is one pole, but how many more poles are being formed? What if the world is multipolar?

Well, at least one center will form around China, and another probably around the League of Arab countries, when SA finally withdraws from the petro-dollar agreement with the States. We will be leaders in BRICS solely through our creativity and passion (believe me, such times will come!) Europe, maybe. will depict something, although it’s unlikely...
But the fact that the hegemon will not be able to rule the world as before is certain. By the way, Barack Obama was the first to publicly declare this...His idea of ​​​​forming a multipolar world did not immediately settle in the Yankees' brains...And then, when they heard the concentrated sniffling of the Hongfuzes climbing the world Olympus behind them, it became too late to drink Borjomi. Trump rushed, but the moment to suppress his opponent was missed. Now the Yankees are facing Thucydides' trap...
(With the PRC's steadily growing global influence, political scientist Graham Allison warned in the 2010s of the Thucydides Trap: analogous to Thucydides' idea that the Peloponnesian War was made inevitable by the great power Sparta's fear of conquering Athens, there is a threat of military conflict between world power USA and China)

[sergeyketonov]

Alexander. Good afternoon. Glad to see and read. Great article. The only thing I don’t agree with, or rather, I have doubts. Major General Vildanov is, of course, an authoritative expert, perhaps the most authoritative in our country, but his “vision of Sentinel” seems to me to be deeply mistaken. Well, for starters, the launch weight is 43-45 tons, that is, the size of the Topol-M, Yars, and the throwable weight, if you believe its calculations, is 6 warheads - W-87-1/Mk-21 is not less than 2800 kg. Considering that the W-87-1 YaZU is 100 kg heavier than the prototype, and naturally more powerful - 475 kt versus 300 kt. That is, the actual weight being thrown is even greater and much greater. Like the Trident-2, but it has a launch weight of 58 tons and the main fuel is class 1,1, which, according to the rules adopted in the United States, is prohibited from being used on ICBMs; there it is class 1,3. and it is 15-20% lower in calorie content. That is, the starting weight will be much greater than that of the Trident, at least 65-68 tons. The throwing weight of our Yars, for example, is 1250 kg (in a three-block version). And then there were already reports in the Amer press that 1-2 W-87-1/Mk-21 warheads were the Sentinel’s combat equipment, and this, together with the breeding unit, weighed 730 kg. Well, there is still a lot of time ahead, maybe something else will slip into Amer’s press, we’ll see, we’ll count.

[Boa kaa]

Quote from sergeyketonov

Major General Vildanov is, of course, an authoritative expert, perhaps the most authoritative in our country, but his “vision of Sentinel” seems to me to be deeply mistaken.

Sergey, good evening! Sorry, I was away, so I couldn’t answer right away. You correctly noted that in my opus I relied mainly on the calculations of a “military expert,” because fiction provides nothing other than rumors and media reprints. I also enjoyed reading your article from December 2023. In it you seriously argued that Sentinel’s starting weight would be 18500 kg (!) Even then I thought, but the MM-3 has 36030 kg!!! Won't it be enough? Therefore, relying on the authority and experience of Major General Vildanov, I considered 43-45t for the LGM-35A, taking into account composites and other know-how, quite acceptable.
Regarding the “thrown weight” (6 warheads - W-87-1/Mk-21) there will be 2190 kg, “carrots” (as they write - a descent module!) + platform, then, well, 2800 kg can be obtained. What's confusing? They will fly not 15000 km, but 8300! I think it's quite plausible. But for 65-68 tons silos are probably not suitable, because the new ICBM will be 1,5-1,6 times “larger”. And at the same time, the dimensions in meters (Senti/Mini): length - 18-19 / 18,3; hull diameter (midsection) - 1,95 / 1,68; range with one BB - 15000/14000 km. Well, where is the increase in dimensions by 1,5 - 1,6 times? But 36t to 43t, taking into account the heavier payload (propulsion stage + 6 BB) fits well into the technical approvals.
Now about the “let’s see”. The project is already becoming surrounded by scandal. the cost increased by 38% and has already exceeded 96 billion

the LGM-35A Sentinel program, which could potentially cost more than $125 billion. The US Air Force plans to approve a new cost and schedule for the LGM-35A Sentinel program by summer 2024

But this is not the main thing! A report from the Federation of American Scientists released this month said the main problem is developing new weapons. The Mk-21A BB will only be developed until mid-2026, will be tested from mid-2026 to 2030, and will begin production only from 2030 - no more than 80 units per year!

[bayard]

Good day Alexander!
It seems to me that the Americans, as always, are bluffing with the number or at least the power of the Sentinel BB, because there are technical limitations. If they really want to deploy 6 BB, then this will be a violation of the New START Treaty (which is already ending, and they are very interested in its extension). So most likely there will be one BB, with the possibility of placing one or two more in violation of the scope of the agreement. In addition, the range is 15 km. implies a much greater energy output of ICBMs than is possible in the given dimensions and weights. 000 blocks are possibly named in defiance of the new Chinese ICBM, which has exactly 6 BBs according to its staff... only it is 6 times heavier.
As for the current combat readiness of the US strategic nuclear forces, it is, without unnecessary pathos, depressing. The "Minutemen" can be considered not fully combat-ready, because they have degraded and miracles do not happen. If, during a mass launch, 5-10% of the AP reaches the target, this can be considered a miracle accomplished. But how many of the BBs that have arrived will be able to operate normally... I wouldn’t be at all confident about this. Those. the real potential of the Minutemen is very close to absolute zero.
"Trident-2" looks much more combat-ready, but... the age of these SLBMs is approximately the same as that of our liquid-fueled "Sineva", but they are solid fuel, and the TT degrades with age and an example of unsuccessful launches of the English "Trident-2" of the same age, raises serious doubts. However, in the USA, TTs could be reloaded in them... but the BBs themselves are degrading. And their shelf life is 30 years. And this period has already passed. During his cadence, Trump thundered with all the bells that the BB on all media needed to be changed... but there was nothing to do with it! They did launch a radiochemical plant through his efforts, but its productivity is extremely limited - something on the order of 30 BB per year. . In addition, even in its younger years, "Ohio" could not launch more than 4 SLBMs in one salvo (weakness of the hull), there are pauses of at least several hours. This is about their operational capabilities.
And today it is even more difficult to consider their strategic aviation as a serious factor. Some B-52s may not take off at all, and it’s difficult to make a voyage over the North Pole and shoot back the Kyrgyz Republic...it’s difficult. However, there is a B-1B with new stealthy, but not very long-range missiles. The B-2 KR does not pose any particular threat to us. The B-21 is not there yet, and when it is, it may be too late.
That is, the United States today is at the lowest level of its combat readiness for strategic nuclear forces. And until the end of the decade, this lower level will remain at approximately the same level. And this is our chance. Our golden chance. Because in nuclear weapons our superiority is literally total. Especially in new means, which are not even taken into account in the New START Treaty and are not regulated in any way.
Time for a Nuclear Ultimatum.
And it’s time for the United States to start crawling away and getting out of confrontation until this Ultimatum is publicly announced.

[Boa kaa]

Quote: bayard

Americans are bluffing as always

Colleague! You have a wonderful post that invites conversation and exchange. I put "+" with pleasure. But essentially the questions raised:
1. The United States is very conditionally complying with START-3. So, having 450 silos, they left 400 “hot”, and placed concrete slabs on top of the rest and filled them with sealant (concrete, one assumes). Nothing inside was touched. Their MM-2s have been dismantled piece by piece and stored in their arsenals! Collect, here's the 2nd echelon of ICBMs!
Tridents on Ohio are the most combat-ready and accurate American ICBMs. The cunning Yankees entered only 20 silos out of 24 silos on each SSBN. They simply welded the unqualified 4 shafts on top without dismantling anything inside! If the launch tube had been removed from the PAD, it would have been a different matter. But no. And our inspectors were not allowed to check the SSBNs under any pretext.
SAC. It’s more difficult to judge here, but all non-certified B-52s have been transferred to dry storage. Many are cannibalized to maintain the technical readiness of their flying counterparts, but untouched ones can easily be put into operation.
2. For Sinti, a range of 15000 km is given for 1 BB Mk-21/21A, respectively, with W87/W87-1 nuclear weapons, combat equipment in 2 variations - light: W-87 - m= 360 kg, Q=350 kt (they will stand until 2030, until they accept the Mk-21A BB) and heavy: W87-1, -- m= 365 kg, Q=475 kt, but with the Mk 21A BB (after October 2030).
And with combat equipment of 6 Mk 12A type BBs with W78 nuclear weapons, -- m= 300 kg, Q=335 kt. Sinti, like Trident-2 at max. loaded, will fly the same 8000 km. Which is quite enough for the European part of the Russian Federation. And with 1 AP, the TR-2 flies 11000 km.
3. Response to Chinese ICBM? Maybe. DF-41 is mobile, although heavy. But it carries up to 10 MIRV-type BBs for 12-13 thousand km.
4. The encapsulated fuel and oxidizer of our R-29 PMU2 does not degrade, unlike the mixed fuel for the Sinti solid propellant rocket engine.
5. Now the States are capable of producing 80 plutonium fuses: 50 - Livermore National. laboratory named after Lawrence and 30 at Los Alamos National. laboratories in New Mexico.
6. The Yankees launch SLBMs in batches of 4 units, not because the corps is weak, but because the replacement system does not have time to work out at the rate of SLBM production. The interval between SLBM launches = 20 seconds (we have 7-8 seconds), the interval between series is 20-25 minutes.
7. It is difficult to judge the state of the SAH. But the B-21 Ryder has already flown! The main thing here is our superiority in air-launched gas defenses.
8. The issue of the nuclear ultimatum is political. There is a separate conversation about him.

[sergeyketonov]

Alexander, the W-87-0 nuclear weapon in the Mk-21 warhead housing weighs “only” 265 kg. What are they going to do? The same as with the W-78, replacing the “sleeve” (the housing of the secondary module, which is made of lead and beryllium with a Uranium sleeve (from natural U238). This will turn the NAZ from a two-stage into a three-stage - from “fission” - “fusion” to - “fission” - “synthesis” - “fission”, in the W-78 language - primary module (nuclear fuse - plutonium hollow core - 4 kg in weight, boosted by a deuterium-tritium trigger) - 20-30 kt + secondary thermonuclear module with a power of 150 kt + tertiary module, the same sleeve made of natural Uranium gives 170 kt of power, at the output we get the calculated 350 kt with the weight of the nuclear weapon in the warhead body - 335 kg Roughly, of course, individually they will give less power, but together it will be approximately the same. Only this “sleeve” adds 100 kg of “extra” weight, so the W-87-1 in the warhead body is correct - 365 kg.

[sergeyketonov]

In fact, this “fission-synthesis-fission” scheme is quite conventionally exaggerated; if you look at it, then in both the primary and secondary modules both “fission” and “synthesis” reactions occur simultaneously, only in the primary module they begin by themselves earlier and a large proportion of the energy released falls on the “fission” reactions, and in the secondary module it is approximately equal to both “fission” and “fusion”, but in the tertiary module - all the energy released falls on the reaction of the “fission” of the nuclei of Uranus U238 by fast neutrons released from the reacted primary and secondary module.

[Boa kaa]

Quote from sergeyketonov

Uranium sleeve (from natural U238).

Vague doubts torment me ... (c)
Sergey, natural U-238 contains only 0,07% fissile material - U-235! When the plutonium trigger is detonated, do you think that U-238, having captured a neutron, will turn into PL-239 and will participate in a further reaction? But wouldn’t it happen that the fragments would simply scatter in such a short time and not take part in the reaction? Maybe there are serious “additives” of beryllium as a source of neutrons?
As for the rest, I agree.

[sergeyketonov]

The whole trick is that the isotopes U233 and U235, their nuclei, are fissioned from emitted “slow” neutrons, and in U238 the nuclei are fissioned from “fast” neutrons released from the primary and secondary modules as a result of the “fission” reactions U233 and U235 and “synthesis” of deuterium and tritium, therefore the isotopes U233 and U235 with an enrichment of 80-95% are used in primary and secondary modules, and U238 only in tertiary modules, because its nuclei are not fissile by slow neutrons. In the famous "Tsar Bomba" of 150 MT - 100 Mt was supposed to be produced by a sleeve of U238 by the "fission" reaction of fast neutrons, it was replaced with lead and the bomb became two-stage, the power dropped to 50 Mt (calculated). the real one is a little more - 57,5 Mt. That is, if it were on the UR-500 rocket, its power would be 150 Mt.

[Boa kaa]

Thank you, I remembered about the 233 and 235 isotopes and their interaction with fast neutrons. And then I was fixated on thermal ones.

[sergeyketonov]

There are a lot of myths on the Internet about “hafnium” and “cobalt” bombs and a lot of different nonsense, unfortunately, nothing has changed over the last 80 years, a nuclear fuse can only be made from three elements - U233, U235, Pu 239, for the first the critical mass for a spherical shape is 16 kg, the second is 48 kg, the third is 17 kg, this is for a spherical shape and without reflectors, with reflectors it is of course less, if, for example, the charge is cubic, then the critical mass will be greater, lithium deuteride is used in the secondary module - 6, in tertiary U238. And that’s it, all other elements of the periodic table in nuclear weapons are absolutely useless.

[Boa kaa]

Quote from sergeyketonov

a nuclear fuse can be made from only three elements - U233, U235, Pu 239

Sergey, don’t forget that the Yankees are at full speed and we are working on a laser fuse! The machine is still cumbersome, but science is moving forward. And we don’t know what will happen there in a couple of decades!

Quote from sergeyketonov

And that’s it, all other elements of the periodic table in nuclear weapons are absolutely useless.

AK Sakharov, apparently in vain, also pulled the cobalt casing onto the puff pastry! By the way, r/a contamination of the area is still used in the 3M29 product. Even the GDP did not mention this from the rostrum of the Federal Assembly of the country! And you say that all other elements are useless!

[sergeyketonov]

The laser fuse is a dead end, the idea has been around for many years, but it is not feasible.
You can pollute the territory with anything, even mercury, lead, bismuth, but cesium 137 will do, and at least Dust. It’s just not possible to extract the energy of an explosion from the same Cobalt.

[bayard]

Quote: Boa constrictor KAA

Colleague! You have a wonderful post that invites conversation and exchange.

Precisely for this purpose - to understand the true alignment and balance of forces, because times have come such that these forces will determine almost everything.
Fortunately for us, we are just finishing the rearmament of our strategic nuclear forces, and our potential (with the exception of Voevod) is very fresh and in good shape. In addition, in order to comply with the New START framework, our SLBMs carry a reduced ammunition load for warheads. And if we take into account that our long-range bombers are counted as one warhead, and they carry from 8 to 24 missile launchers, then the real potential of our single salvo can be approximately twice as large as the permitted 1550 nuclear warheads. Even without taking into account new types of media that are not covered by the treaty.
In addition, I think that we should not spend much money on the Minutemen’s positional areas, because despite their impressive numbers, there are only a few capable of harming us there and spending 400 nuclear weapons on them (minimum) is hardly rational. At the moment.
It is much more practical to concentrate the entire potential of the first (preemptive) strike on hitting the most valuable military, administrative, energy and logistics infrastructure. After all, in addition to its own territory, the United States also has about 800 foreign military bases, up to a third, and even half of them deserve the closest care in the very first hours of the war. . .
But . Possessing such weapons as "Poseidon" and ammunition similar to them in power and method of use, it is much more reliable and profitable for us to start with these trump cards, preserving almost the entire arsenal of strategic nuclear forces to finish off the surviving potential (bases in the interior of the United States and mountainous areas, where tidal waves will not reach) and ensuring stability in the World and our own security.
Regarding the naval component of the enemy’s strategic nuclear forces, it should be understood that recently the United States has been training an SLBM strike along a flat trajectory from a dagger distance. Those. they will graze somewhere in the Norwegian Sea east of England and in the Eastern Mediterranean. And also in the Pacific Ocean somewhere east of the Japanese Islands. Precisely to ensure a “quick disarming strike”. Therefore, to neutralize these submarines (and not only American, but also English (whatever they may be) and French, two bottom mines must be used to the trap and east of the British Isles, east of Japan (an unconditionally hostile state to us, which is legally with us to this day in a state of war) ... in the Western Atlantic, and in the Eastern Mediterranean, charges of slightly lower power can be used.
This is not “bloodthirstiness” at all, but a variant of the combat use of new weapons with guaranteed destruction of the enemy, to prevent one’s own death. After all, “Intentions are nothing. Possibility/Ability is everything.” We KNOW the enemy's intentions, but we HAVE Opportunities.
As for the European theater of operations, we will not need strategic strategic nuclear forces to ultimately contain them; tactical nuclear weapons and medium-range weapons will be sufficient.
As for the "Ultimatum", it must be public with an appeal to the peoples of the Enemy's countries - what awaits them all if they do not overthrow/destroy the elites ruling them, through the most democratic method of radical coercion, which brought them all to the brink of death. This Ultimatum has not yet been announced, but it is time for the Enemy to draw conclusions. Soon it will be too late.
Conclusions must be CORRECT.
The price of the new deceit will be TOO high.

[Boa kaa]

Quote: bayard

Conclusions must be CORRECT.

Colleague! Golden words, and most importantly, spoken at the right time! I am simply obliged to respond to the role of the author of the opus. So:
1. 24 strategic CRBDs are not hung on YES media. Maximum 12 (6 each on 2 drum launchers in the bomb bays of the Tu-160M), or 8 on the underwing pylons of the Tu-95 MS.
2. The Yankees plan to use the MM-3 position areas as “sponges” for receiving our warheads with ICBMs/SLBMs. At the same time, it has settled down: - in order to hit one silo, you need to use 2 medium-power SBPs, usually from 2 carriers. In total, 400 MM-3 will require 800 nuclear warheads. This is luxury!
3. The first, “disarming blow”! So its goal is not an industrial base, but the enemy’s nuclear forces and decision-making centers! The States have ICBMs, SSBNs, SACs, AVUs, tactical carriers from bases in Europe, and all this needs to be “reduced” to an acceptable size, the remnants of which can then be dealt with by our missile defense/air defense and air defense systems, and SSGNs for naval carriers of nuclear weapons.. I very much doubt that this is possible even for the States.
4. And the Yankees have military bases in Europe (6 on the territory of 5 states!), where B61-12 are stationed (now the more powerful B61-13). Well, why not a task for the Tu-160M?
5. Start with the application of 3M29 "reduction of States"? Well, it will wash away the Atlantic and T/O coasts from their industry. agglomerations, but nuclear forces will remain! ICBMs are located in the desert, central regions of the United States. Again, the strategic nuclear forces are deployed at sea... Therefore, you need to start with a “shot to the temple”, and not a sledgehammer to the feet! And this might be only APRC SN, SSGN SN, orbital constellation. and further according to the plan of the first strategic operation...VKS, Navy...
6. In general, I would start dismantling the States with a powerful blow with a GRAVITATIONAL nuclear warhead on the Yellowstone caldera... And then let them dig themselves out of the volcanic ash, even to the point of carrots! And of course, an EMP strike on all energy systems.
7. The SLBM strike along a flat trajectory was abandoned due to low accuracy. But an SLBM is a “scalpel” from their North Caucasus Military District at 90m. They are targeting our silos and anti-aircraft launchers of the Russian Armed Forces and types of armed forces.
8. The Yankees wanted to carry out a BGU, but they cannot provide the condition - to hit at least 93% of our strategic nuclear forces. And they leave 7% of our strategic nuclear forces for their missile defense.
8. We know approximately the ROP of the BS forces (SSBNs of the USA, England, France). But there are only a few boats there. The main ones are at their bases, so they will launch nuclear weapons from deployment routes. By the way, we also have such a used option for using the RPK CH.
9. Bottom nuclear warheads??? To boil the sea? and make fish soup from SSBNs!? Will they definitely be there at the time of the explosion?
10. Ultimatum? Yes, they will take the fool and be the first to strike with their strategic nuclear forces and tactical nuclear weapons from Europe. And then what? No, it won't work. It’s better to gently press on the bladder until you piss yourself! Then you can talk with flexible “partners”.
AHA.

[bayard]

Quote: Boa constrictor KAA

1. 24 strategic CRBDs are not hung on YES media. Maximum 12 (6 each on 2 drum launchers in the bomb bays of the Tu-160M), or 8 on the underwing pylons of the Tu-95 MS.

I meant the new, more compact X-50, of which there are exactly 160 on the Tu-24. fits on 4 drums, two in each bomb bay. In addition, these missile launchers will be able to be used by tactical bombers and MFIs. The same Su-34, but this is for the European theater of operations and the US military bases adjacent to the Russian Federation and their allies. Kh-50, "Dagger" on the MiG-31 are substitutes for MRBMs, which we needlessly abandoned. Today, MRBMs would be very useful to us. But it may not be evening yet.

Quote: Boa constrictor KAA

2. The Yankees plan to use the MM-3 position areas as “sponges” for receiving our warheads with ICBMs/SLBMs.

Why fall for this bait if the Minutemen are essentially unready for combat and are incapable of causing real harm? They will pose a danger only after the deployment of new ICBMs there, but this will not happen earlier than 2030. And if they survive until then, then by that time we will need to withdraw from the START Treaty and increase the number of strategic nuclear forces carriers at least twice. So is it worth spending time and resources if you can solve the issue “here and now”? When do we have a clear advantage in operational carriers and means of destruction?

Quote: Boa constrictor KAA

3. The first, “disarming blow”! So its goal is not an industrial base, but the enemy’s nuclear forces and decision-making centers!

Naval bases, air force bases, ships and submarines in bases, administrative, industrial and financial centers - all this is on the coast. To knock out all this potential with one blow is the main task of tidal waves. And at command centers and bases in the depths of the territory, work according to plan, but (as a consequence of the above) with a much smaller number of forces. Saving ICBMs and SLBMs for the future.

Quote: Boa constrictor KAA

4. And the Yankees have military bases in Europe (6 on the territory of 5 states!), where B61-12 are stationed (now the more powerful B61-13). Well, why not a task for the Tu-160M?

There’s more work here for the Kinzhals, Zircons and Iskander-Ms in the first wave, because while the missiles are flying, they can hit empty airfields. For them there is a place in the second wave.

Quote: Boa constrictor KAA

5. Start with the application of 3M29 "reduction of States"? Well, it will wash away the Atlantic and T/O coasts from their industry. agglomerations

The US naval base with 50 to 70% of all US ships and submarines located there. The rest is described above.

Quote: Boa constrictor KAA

ICBMs - in the desert, central regions of the USA

They do not pose a significant threat until the early 30s, and there is a separate decision on them.

Quote: Boa constrictor KAA

Again, strategic nuclear forces are deployed at sea...

We will have to chase after these, but surface forces are unlikely to come to our shores. The main concern is for submarines with cruise missiles on board. If they have nuclear warheads on them, they can spoil the blood. But this is a separate concern. The only people who will be against us will be those who find themselves at sea and will not be identified on the eve of the Resolution of the Issue of Global Containment (their terminology, but this will be clearer to them).

Quote: Boa constrictor KAA

Therefore, you need to start with a “shot to the temple”, and not a sledgehammer to the feet!

So pre-deployment ground mines and “Poseidons” are just that - a SLEDGEHAMMER TO THE TEMPLE.
You can, of course, shoot Zircons from a dagger-like distance, but how many of them are deployed now? But for the most important purposes it will definitely be enough.
The fact is that “A sledgehammer to the temple” (both) is a knockout from the first blow, after which there is only convulsions and agony.

[bayard]

Quote: Boa constrictor KAA

6. In general, I would start dismantling the States with a powerful GRAVITATIONAL nuclear warhead strike on the Yellowstone caldera... And then let them dig themselves out of the volcanic ash

Still there is such a miracle
The sea will swell violently
It will make noise, raise a howl
Alien will rush ashore
Will spill out in a noisy run
Will not stay on the shore...
NOTHING - for a thousand miles.
The King of the Sea will resolve the issue.

And from the ashes of Yellowstone, as it were, everyone in the Northern Hemisphere will not be able to bury themselves in the ashes. These are the caches of the English and Saxons in New Zealand, Australia and Antarctica. But we are still a Northern country. We need to be more careful towards the Planet - our Mother.

Quote: Boa constrictor KAA

The SLBM strike along a flat trajectory was abandoned due to low accuracy.

It's good if so. But how much did you train...

Quote: Boa constrictor KAA

SLBMs are a “scalpel” with their North North Caucasus at 90m. They are targeting our silos and anti-aircraft launchers of the Russian Armed Forces and types of armed forces.

That is why the most touching care should be shown for them.

Quote: Boa constrictor KAA

8. We know approximately the ROP of the BS forces (SSBNs of the USA, England, France). But there are only a few boats there. The main ones are at their bases, so they will launch nuclear weapons from deployment routes.

This is the benefit, this is the strength of the Sea King, that the entire naval potential located in the bases is neutralized with one blow. Incl. and the lion's share of strategic nuclear forces is immediately removed from the register.
And aircraft carriers with UDC, and most of the destroyers and remaining cruisers, and MAPL. And those left at sea, without control, supplies, “flag and homeland”... will they want to continue the banquet for themselves, or, like the German submariners in 1945, will they quietly and imperceptibly migrate to distant warm shores, for the sake of the survival of the crews?

Quote: Boa constrictor KAA

9. Bottom nuclear warheads??? To boil the sea? and make fish soup from SSBNs!?

Well ... Here it is, of course, you can launch “Poseidons” ahead of time so that they can quietly creep up... or you can deploy ammunition of the same power where necessary ahead of time and let them wait for the command... for “Global Nuclear Deterrence”. In touch-me-not mode, of course. And "Poseidons" will solve the problems of OPERATIONAL deployment. And applications.
And the process of “boiling” fish soup from SSBNs can be combined with the production of tidal waves.

Quote: Boa constrictor KAA

10. Ultimatum? Yes, they will take the fool and be the first to strike with their strategic nuclear forces and tactical nuclear weapons from Europe. And then what?

And what will they get? For us, such a blow would be “disarming,” but for them, it would be complete destruction. Guaranteed.
As an option for suicide?

Quote: Boa constrictor KAA

No, it won't work. It’s better to gently press on the bladder until you piss yourself! Then you can talk with flexible “partners”.

Well, why won't it work?
It'll do.
Here we are joking with you, and their comrades, the majors, have already peed themselves.
And we have already agreed with “accommodating partners” - in the early 70s. When they blew the war in Vietnam, an economic, military-political and social crisis began... when we caught them by the genitals with the “Moon Scam”... and all against the backdrop of our gaining Strategic Parity. Then they blew away the Cold War...they began to negotiate...They pleased Brezhnev with gifts...and how did it all end?
Cheated.
They threw it.
Just like recently with the Minsk agreements.
Not good .
Unreliable.
Irrational.
According to the laws of the 90s, what is supposed to be a scam? ... After all, our lads are exactly from there - from the 90s. ...And they threw them more than once... and not twice...

Quote: Boa constrictor KAA

put pressure on your bladder until you piss yourself!

With pleasure.

[Boa kaa]

Quote: bayard

The King of the Sea will resolve the issue.

I, as a sailor, would very much like it to be so. But there will be only 3-29 units of 32M36 products. For the States, even that “will not be enough!” (c). In addition, our strategic nuclear forces are based on the Strategic Missile Forces!!!
And this is probably correct, given our MIDGARDian position on planet Earth.
As for the rest, we can agree, even with reservations!
Sincerely, Boa.

[bayard]

Quote: Boa constrictor KAA

But there will be only 3-29 units of 32M36 products.

This is based on the number of places on standard media. But such devices can be used from other carriers... from some kind of seiner, even launching “from the pier”, even lowering them in containers to the bottom, or even using a version of an autonomous self-burrowing nuclear warhead of special power. And their coordinated use with more classical strategic nuclear forces will provide the synergy that will ensure a guaranteed result.

Quote: Boa constrictor KAA

given our MIDGARDian position on planet Earth.

That's right - we have practically no convenient access to the open ocean. Conventionally, only Kamchatka, but they also graze it. That is why the “knight’s move” is justified.

[sergeyketonov]

Alexander. Good afternoon. I just got to the computer. So, what confuses me about Vildanov’s numbers? The starting weight is 43-45 tons, which is unrealistically low for a throw weight of 2800, although in reality it is all 3200 kg, and this is the minimum for such a configuration. The fact is that the speed at the end of the OUT for ICBMs is not very different, that at a range, for example, 9000 km, this is 7 km per second, that at a range, say, 15000 km, this is 7,7 km per second. The MX has a starting weight of 86500 kg, a throw weight of 3950 kg. That is, Vildanov thinks that a rocket with the launch weight of the Topol can carry the load of the MX-a to an intercontinental range. It’s unlikely, in principle, you can calculate it, but I can say for sure that the intercontinental range will not be, it will be much less than 5500 km. And then, this configuration with six warheads is just his guess. There was no such information anywhere in the press. At first . in 2022 there was information with a load of one W-87/Mk-21, well, this is “Midgetman” in its purest form, then information recently appeared from the Federal Antimonopoly Service, both on their website and in the Bulletin of Atomic Scientists magazine, that there will be one or two W-87/Mk-21 warheads, and this together with the breeding unit is 730 kg, well, maybe if the warheads are reinforced to 475 kt, then plus another 200 kg, in any case, the starting weight is less than that of the Minuteman, well, 20 tons, well, maybe up to 22 tons, definitely no more. The first Minuteman weighed 29 tons with a load of 450-490 kg.

[Vladimirius]

there should be no doubt that a war with NATO will begin in the near future, they do not hide it, alas, but our military doctrine excludes a first or warning strike with nuclear weapons, so we will have to wait until they surround us with their nuclear weapons (again, they do not are hiding and even during the last exercises they practiced exactly this option, they do not need European territory, they need another large part of Russia - Siberia) and will deliver the maximum possible powerful blow at once and from everywhere and then calmly divide what is left

[staer-62]

I consider Europe the first, but not the main threat, because it is on our borders and has united to destroy Russia, as shown by the Northern Military District. The fighting in Ukraine revealed the insufficient power of Russia's conventional weapons against Western weapons, as a result we have heavy losses, at least two years of progress, our cities remain defenseless. Our poison forces have been constantly reduced and are designed only against the United States, without taking into account Europe. We destroyed all chemical weapons, unlike the West, we were deceived as always. I think we need to increase the amount of poison. weapons at an accelerated pace just yesterday, expand the production of chemical weapons and do not hesitate to use all this primarily against Europe. Now the West has every chance to destroy Russia, if only it had the desire or lack of it to reckon with its losses. By the way, the consequences of a nuclear war are greatly exaggerated, if used against densely populated cities, then yes, but what is two kilometers of complete destruction on the map of any country? This is the point like this. After six months, you can be at the epicenter of the explosion without protection. Let me remind you that the Northern Military District is the result of the actions of Europe, all our killed and maimed are Europe, all our killed children and women are Europe, the bombing of our cities is Europe, the destroyed Ukraine and all the killed Ukrainians are Europe. Europe has lost its right to exist and must be destroyed.

[Boa kaa]

Quote: staer-62

Our poison forces have been constantly reduced and are designed only against the United States, without taking into account Europe.

Our nuclear deterrent forces are distributed correctly: strategic nuclear forces - heavy ICBMs R-28, R-36M; YARS R-24M, R-100NUTTKH with 15YU71, part of R-30 with our APRC SN and KRBD from DA, KRBD with nuclear power plant 9M730 Burevestnik, as well as NPA 3M29 Poseidon - these are gifts for respected “partners” overseas.
But tactical nuclear weapons (tactical nuclear weapons), of which we have the “vast majority” (NATO experts believe that there are about 4500 units), are gifts for our European NATO brethren. We don’t even feel sorry for a nuclear safety and security system for them! They are so dear to us!

Quote: staer-62

The fighting in Ukraine revealed the insufficient power of Russia's conventional weapons against Western weapons

The North Military District, of course, revealed shortcomings in the training of forces, troops and military command and control bodies. But our weapons still turned out to be better than Western ones, which led them to a certain degree of confusion.

Quote: staer-62

Now the West has every chance to destroy Russia, if only it had the desire or lack of it to reckon with its losses.

Quite the opposite: there is a desire (and an undisguised and huge one at that!), but there are no opportunities! The Russian Armed Forces are objectively stronger than any NATO army. And we have nuclear weapons against the coalition. And the US and NATO leadership are well aware of this.

Quote: staer-62

By the way, the consequences of a nuclear war are greatly exaggerated,

Yes, my friend, you are a militarist! Unfortunately, not fully informed about the consequences of the effects of penetrating radiation on the genome of humans, animals, and plants! About induced radiation and its impact on living beings, about the fact that in addition to “pure” and neutron BP there are cobalt and teilur charges in the SBP...

Quote: staer-62

Europe has lost its right to exist and must be destroyed

Maybe not so bloodthirsty? Maybe we can try to resolve the matter peacefully? They themselves will bend and die from LGBT and transvisiters! with their 32 genders... But among them there are also quite decent and sensible people. What is their fault that you are in a bad mood and have cannibalistic tendencies!?
No, that won't work! /NO ICE, in a word!/

[ada]

Greetings!
Very interesting and extremely revealing, restrained. Thank you very much.
Not directly on topic, but indirectly I would like to draw your attention to situational signs:

Quote: Boa constrictor KAA

... Maybe we can try to resolve the matter peacefully? ...

- this is a wish or an earlier installation, but

Quote: Boa constrictor KAA

... They themselves will bend and die from LGBT and transvisiters! with their 32 genders... But among them there are also...

, these are already visible signs, that is, pronounced characteristic manifestations of some processes going on in society and they do not arise on their own, this is a directed cultivation that requires incredible and long-term efforts of significant in terms of productive capacity of organizational structures and government ones, including!
Here on the forum there are a number of interesting members with original thinking and one of them is a certain "Knell Wardenheart". He once touched upon one topic on the military-political situation in which I know the basis due to my professional training, but for many the current situation is not clear from the beginning and there is no structure in the country that explains this side of life on a fundamental basis, nor is there one in the education system - only scientific or law enforcement agencies. This is a real failure.
Why am I saying this? So, in order to try to explain to Knel and in a number of other discussions here on this topic, I took the risk of briefly showing the structure of NATO military planning in the East. SN, in particular the very basis of what was observed in the theater of operations, and from the results of this I realized that few people are interested in this due to elementary ignorance of conventional military processes - no one believes in them, and their manifestations are not caught. This is understandable - there is no preparation, but the manifestations of war are already visible and it can no longer be ignored.
Here, Knel, I spoke about the US-NATO long-term military planning system, and now I want to draw your attention to the visible fact that a number of plans are involved precisely by the US, since the US is also NATO, but the countries participating in the bloc are not necessarily NATO, and many decisions and planned activities (military, military-political or special (this is a department)) prepared by the United States or the World Bank (USA + World Bank) may not be communicated to the DL or the executors of these countries in full or may even be hidden ( covered by others) from them to use their potential “in the dark,” which is practiced in NATO. As you know, all military planning is prepared on the basis of special planning, which in the East. SN (in fact - geostrategic, for example) has the task of ensuring the implementation of the NATO-91 SC (no matter how it is renamed or disguised now) and nothing else can be done here - at the present time, in reality, only what has been prepared in the military-political In terms of plan, everything that the intelligence services and politicians, economists and industrialists of these countries tied to the NATO SC and the corresponding concepts of war in the USA itself (USA + WB) managed to create the appropriate situation for the activation of plans for the use of NATO Allied Forces and this is a real part of the war, this is exactly what how they look when implementing their tasks in MV is what reveals their entire essence.
Without going into consideration of the whole range of WWW goals for the USA and others and the tasks for achieving them, it is likely to determine with a sufficient degree of certainty for us the very fact of the implementation of these plans and their lack of alternatives, in particular, it is from your explanation to your opponent that the mechanisms have been launched have not had a reverse course for a long time, so the conclusion follows that everything will not work out “peacefully”, it is no longer working out, and based on some signs that were not there before, I can assume that the United States itself does not feel sorry for its territory, ambitions are visible A large enough community is stronger than fear.

[Boa kaa]

Quote: ada

but the manifestations of war are already evident and it can no longer be ignored.

Thank you for your positive assessment of the opus and thank you for your desire to contribute to the coverage of a broader problem - PREPARATIONS by NATO (USA + WB) to conduct full-scale databases against our country. A few words about your post.
1. Moral and psychological preparation of the population of NATO countries is currently underway to wage a conventional war against the Russian Federation + Belarus. At the same time, it is not said that there is a threat of escalation of the conflict on used equipment into a full-scale war, with the use of nuclear weapons: first - tactical nuclear weapons, and then ascending to strategic nuclear forces!
2. the problem is that previously our military science considered the stage of “duping the population and preparing world opinion” as the final stage, after carrying out material preparations for war (economy + infrastructure + arms and military equipment + military equipment + military resources). And here there is a parallel movement along the “component sections” of the bloc’s preparation for war. Moreover, in the first 3 elements they are clearly behind the “schedule”.
3. Considering that the West is falling into a crisis (and it is!), and remembering that the imperialists always got out of it with the help of WORLD WARS, there is a real threat of the outbreak of WWII!
4. The States are not ready for war - they did not have time to rearm their strategic nuclear forces with new systems: the Sentinel ICBM, the B-21A Rider SAC, the Navy with the Columbia SSBN. And the old systems are already falling apart. In addition, unlike the RF Armed Forces, they do not have state defense forces. Therefore, the best thing they could come up with was to arrange a bloodbath for the Russians in Ukraine, prolonging the conflict in every possible way (SVO). Next, they will try to internationalize the database in Ukraine at the expense of Poland, Romania and the MTR of England, Germany, and other satellites. To weaken the Russian Federation, conflicts can be organized along the borders of Russia: the Baltic states, Central Asia, Moldova - Transnistria, Armenia...
This, in my opinion, is an “oil painting” of the current situation in the country.
Sincerely, Boa.

[storm]

To destroy attack targets, the new Mk-21A warhead with W87-1 warheads will be used. The maximum number of warheads in a warhead is 6.

If the US plans to deploy up to 400 units. new ICBMs with 6 warheads, it is easy to assume that they are already planning a violation of the Strategic Arms Limitation Treaty allowing
700 deployed delivery vehicles and 1550 nuclear warheads.

In response to the US program, it is necessary to deploy at least 400 mine Yars and 200 Sarmats + a group of 200 mobile Yars.