Military Review

Does Russia have an antidote to US missile defense?

78


November 7 US 2014 conducted successful tests of the missile defense system (PRO) Aegis Ashore. Such a system will be deployed in Romania already in 2015 year. At the trials failed to knock down all 3 goal - short-range ballistic missile and 2 low-flying cruise missiles.

In light of the serious tensions US-Russia relations, the issue of the deployment of the US global missile defense system, including near the Russian borders, becomes more and more important degree.

It has already become clear that there will be no agreement on the “good” missile defense with the United States - more and more European countries agree to deploy elements of the American missile defense on their territory. For example, in August 2014 joined the project Denmark, which will equip the destroyer 2 with the Aegis system. I think that the situation will not surprise anyone if the missile defense elements are placed in Ukraine in the future, and SM-3 anti-missiles of the Block IB modification will be based somewhere in Kharkov, and later, by the 2020, and the Block IIB modification, capable of intercepting intercontinental ballistic missiles.

The issue of tactical and technical characteristics and problems of American and Russian missile defense systems have already been dealt with in another article (http://regnum.ru/news/polit/1670223.html). Now it will be discussed the possible ways of the Russian Armed Forces response to the unilateral US withdrawal from the treaty on the limitation of missile defense and the deployment of these systems right at our borders.

Really planned and implemented answers

1) Deployment of the Iskander-M operational tactical complexes in Kaliningrad.

These missiles, especially equipped with tactical nuclear warheads, guaranteed to neutralize the missile defense elements to be deployed in 2018 in Poland. When using the new cruise missile P-500, with an estimated range of about 2000km, almost the whole of Europe will be under the gun. In order to put additional pressure on the Europeans, we can publicly declare the supply of Iskander tactical nuclear warheads.

2) Creating more modern intercontinental ballistic missiles (ICBMs).

The process is in full swing - actively accepted into service the further development of missiles Topol-M - IDB yars, equipped with three warheads, instead of one of its predecessor. These mobile ICBMs have various anti-missile defense mechanisms, for example, are rapidly gaining speed, reducing the time of the active leg of the flight (while its engines are working and it is gaining altitude) when the rocket is most vulnerable to antimissiles. At the final stage of flight, the separated warheads carry out random deflection maneuvers. There is a new heavy liquid rocket “Sarmat” in development, which in 2018 will begin to replace the formidable predecessor - the ICBM P-36M, nicknamed by the Americans “Satan”.

3) The creation of medium-range missiles is prohibited by the START treaties.

However, presumably, the new Frontier ICBM, which is a modification of the Yars, is capable of operating both at medium (up to 5500 km) and at intercontinental distances, which makes it possible to take aim at the whole of Europe. Rocket R-500 "Iskander", equipped with a nuclear warhead can also be suitable for the role of medium-range missiles.

Available in stock "trumps" and the possibility of the most severe response

1) Setting into service of the orbital modification of the new Sarmat liquid-propellant ICBM.

The orbital modification differs from the conventional ICBM in that the warheads are put into low earth orbit and temporarily become its satellites. The mass of output combat units is noticeably less than that of a standard ICBM, but they can fly to the target from absolutely any direction, having made an arbitrary turn around the earth. The flight range of such a rocket is in no way limited, unlike conventional ICBMs. Accordingly, shafts with missiles will be placed in absolutely anywhere in the Russian Federation by the most inaccessible parts of the US missile defense (away from the seas and European countries). The possibility of reaching the target from unexpected directions will force the United States to deploy a much larger number of missile defense elements throughout the country, which will cost huge amounts of money that even Americans do not have now. It is worth noting that the orbital modifications of ICBMs are prohibited by the START treaties.

2) Space-based nuclear satellites weapons.

Technically, this task should not cause difficulties and will be very effective, since it completely eliminates the interception of ICBMs at the initial stage of the flight. However, the deployment of nuclear weapons in space is prohibited by the relevant treaty. To counter such a threat to the United States will have to invest heavily in creating sputnikov- "fighters" (it is worth noting that similar projects were developed earlier in the United States and the USSR).

Likely development of the situation: a policy of limited response or the path of "escalation"?

In fact, the Russian Federation has two options for a response to the further development of the US global missile defense system. The first path is a limited response policy. In essence, this is what is being done now. These include the above planned and implemented measures. As you can see, this path does not have the proper effect on Americans. Given the worsening relations, the rate of deployment of missile defense elements can only increase. It must be said that the missile defense created by the United States is still not very soon able to create a real threat to the nuclear deterrent forces of the Russian Federation, but such a day may come. The second way is the “escalation” policy. This path the USSR has once successfully successfully used against the United States by deploying missiles with nuclear weapons in Cuba. At that time, the ICBMs were poorly developed and were available in small numbers, and they took a very long time to prepare for launch. As a result, the United States, having deployed medium-range Jupiter missiles in Turkey, gained a strategic advantage - they could deliver a preemptive strike on the USSR, destroying all launch sites of ICBMs before they could be launched. In response, the USSR unexpectedly placed its medium-range missiles in Cuba, which caused the Caribbean Crisis. However, the escalation of the situation before the crisis resulted in detente as a result - the US removed the missiles from Turkey, and the USSR from Cuba. Attempts to negotiate with the Americans "in an amicable way" almost never led to results acceptable to the USSR and Russia, unlike the language of force.

Accordingly, in the case of the US global missile defense system, you can go a similar way. Guided by the fact that the Americans violated the treaty on the limitation of anti-missile defense (prohibiting the creation of more than two positioning areas), they themselves violated the conditions of strategic offensive arms, deployed a certain number of orbital modifications of ICBMs, and possibly also launched a number of satellites-warheads .

This, of course, will lead to an unprecedented surge of tension, but in fact the balance of strategic forces will be seriously disturbed - and this is clearly not in favor of the United States. Further, the situation can go in different ways:

1) The parties may well agree, as it once was in Cuba.

In response to the cessation of the development and further deployment of US missile defense, the Russian Federation removes from combat duty and conserves (does not allow for scrap, as in 1990-e!) Orbital modifications of ICBMs. Accordingly, the issue will be exhausted for a significant period of time.

2) The United States does not want to come to an agreement and falls for the same “bait” that the USSR got in the case of the American Star Wars program.

The states are beginning to spend huge amounts of money on deploying missile defense throughout their territory and all their allies. "Symmetrical" report to them will also be very expensive - in contrast to the Russian Federation, in the US a long time ago were not engaged in heavy ICBMs, and generally do not produce new missiles over 20 years. All this will be very inappropriate for Americans, given that the financial system of this country is now far from being in the best condition, there is an exorbitant national debt. In fact, a similar reason was one of those factors that “destroyed” the USSR.

3) Europeans refuse to deploy US missile defense elements.

The statement about the deployment of OTRK Iskander-M has already forced the Czech Republic to abandon the deployment of missile defense systems, as the country's leadership turned out to be adequate enough not to expose their country to a probable blow. The above measures, if properly filed (that no country that hosted the US missile defense system “sits out” in the event of a global war), should force some European states to be scared enough to refuse to cooperate with the US in missile defense issues.
Author:
Originator:
http://regnum.ru/news/polit/1864201.html
78 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. Igor39
    Igor39 15 November 2014 06: 23
    +4
    I wonder how Aegis will respond to the massive impact of missiles with multiple warheads.
    1. Andrey Yuryevich
      Andrey Yuryevich 15 November 2014 06: 26
      +13
      Quote: Igor39
      I wonder how Aegis will respond to the massive impact of missiles with multiple warheads.

      there is no one to react like that already! wink
      1. Rzhevsky
        Rzhevsky 15 November 2014 08: 22
        +1
        If you ask yourself the meaning of the attack, then I agree, there is no antidote!
        The question is why?
        1. Tommygun
          Tommygun 16 November 2014 14: 42
          0
          It is necessary to create a separate brigade of the Strategic Missile Forces special. appointment to them. cruiser "Varyag" laughing cat. in case of impossibility of our retaliatory strike organizes a series of nuclear explosions in our territory and will provide a world apocalypse in the form of a nuclear winter for a hundred years.
          These actions should be included in our military doctrine.
          This will be our asymmetric response, which will make the missile defense system simply useless.
          1. Shur
            Shur 16 November 2014 23: 41
            +2
            Why do we have, they have territory, and there are a lot of problems. For example, an underwater nuclear explosion at a certain point can cause not only tsunamis, but also earthquakes. And they have enough seismically active zones. These ghouls need an aspen stake under one place, nor do I understand why it is not there. On humanity, as you can see, you can only talk with people.
    2. GRAY
      GRAY 15 November 2014 08: 06
      +8
      Quote: Igor39
      I wonder how Aegis will respond to the massive impact of multiple warhead rockets

      There are still false goals ... the truth is that the warheads will separate after the passage of the European missile defense zone. In general, pin-ups are encircled from all sides: Denmark was pulled in, sprats were never opposed, South Korea in the east - rather, you need to worry about the initial part of the trajectory.
      1. Shur
        Shur 16 November 2014 23: 44
        +2
        More underwater missile carriers beautiful and different. And the king has a bomb under the shore.
    3. Rzhevsky
      Rzhevsky 15 November 2014 08: 15
      0
      Will not pay a salary to rocket operators :-) as an option, a financial response, tactics against the USSR, and modern events, what is already happening. There is nothing to answer adequately, and the adversary knows that!
      Another option is to use third forces, but this is a 100% conflict using nuclear weapons.


    4. Sargard A.
      Sargard A. 15 November 2014 09: 16
      0
      According to the proven technology, it will let them go to the goal to minimize damage to their own missiles.
    5. _my opinion
      _my opinion 15 November 2014 13: 04
      +1
      Igor39
      I wonder how Aegis will respond to the massive impact of missiles with multiple warheads.

      no way - before that, Khibina will calm her laughing
    6. SAXA.SHURA
      SAXA.SHURA 15 November 2014 17: 20
      -4
      Let this Ner Sisyan talk with Igor Korotchenko, he will quickly put his brains in his place.
      1. sergey261180
        sergey261180 15 November 2014 17: 42
        -1
        Wretched little article. About a nuclear submarine with cruise missiles and ballistic missiles did not say a word, but this is the surest antidote. No wonder the colonial administration cuts and writes them off so hard, but does not build anything new.
        1. Sivan
          Sivan 19 November 2014 00: 03
          0
          Doesn't build? And Borea and Ash?
    7. Army1
      Army1 15 November 2014 21: 11
      0
      I'm afraid the system is just nonsense, we are talking about MK 41 installations which can be poked everywhere and a lot and it is not clear what.
    8. Harin Oleg
      Harin Oleg 15 November 2014 21: 48
      +1
      Gentlemen, yes, through the North Pole, to mattresses, some shit can be thrown!
    9. FACKtoREAL
      FACKtoREAL 16 November 2014 10: 13
      0
      The interception is planned to be carried out on the flight path Before breeding blocks.
    10. voyaka uh
      voyaka uh 16 November 2014 18: 17
      +1
      No way. Aegis is not capable of intercepting ICBMs: neither monoblock,
      nor separable.
      It was made against medium-range ballistic missiles;
      Russia (by agreement), but which are full in China and
      third world countries.
  2. SPACE
    SPACE 15 November 2014 08: 02
    +28
    The main flight paths of ICBMs lie to the north and east, the question is what do they want to shoot down in Europe, and even placing the missile defense elements so close to the borders of the Russian Federation? The nuclear warheads will be detached altogether aside, the first to launch ICBMs at the ATU, they will also not be able to get their interceptors, either in range, speed, or time. Why then all this booth? Yes, they just don’t plan to shoot anything at all, but under the guise of a fake missile defense, they create an attack missile complex of tactical missiles, for the first disarming strike with a small nuclear charge at the mines, communication centers and control, just a screen to circumvent the INF Treaty. In general, they did not find anything better and more reliable than to return to the old doctrine of the 80 years to a limited nuclear war and Pershing. Suddenly, the country's political leadership, mine control centers with ICBMs are attacked and cut down from foreign territory. If they succeed in disarming Russia in this way, even partially, the rest is a matter of technology, economically and military blackmail and isolation, they’ll squeeze anyway ... But if not, then it’s not so bad for them, there will be no retaliatory strike, but they don’t give a damn about the problems of partially destroyed eastern Europe and especially Russia.
    1. coconut
      coconut 15 November 2014 08: 42
      +2
      Well, does the "payback" strategy still exist?
      1. ViktorKarelin
        ViktorKarelin 15 November 2014 10: 12
        +4
        The dead hand is called!
    2. Vita_vko
      Vita_vko 15 November 2014 09: 53
      +7
      Quote: SPACE
      they just don’t plan to shoot anything at all, but under the guise of a phony missile defense, they create an attack missile system of tactical missiles
      The creation of defensive systems is contrary to all American and NATO concepts. It is possible that some missile defense components will be deployed, but only in order to place powerful strike complexes under this umbrella.
      Therefore, the bet only on the improvement of Iskander-M and ICBMs is clearly insufficient. Even if the S-500 goes into operation along with Euro-missile defense, the costs of covering military bases on the meager territory of Europe will not be comparable with the costs of covering large cities in the European part of Russia, not to mention the rest of the territory. And the rearmament process itself will drag on for decades.
      Therefore, the only reasonable and adequate answer should be the creation of a continental missile defense system together with China, Iran, India and other interested countries. It is necessary to organize joint developments and create a single system of aerospace defense of the SCO countries. In addition, the creation of the SCO continental missile defense system will make it possible to make a serious technological breakthrough and combine the efforts of the military-industrial complex.
      1. SPACE
        SPACE 15 November 2014 11: 32
        +3
        Quote: Vita_vko
        Therefore, the only reasonable and adequate answer should be the creation of a continental missile defense system together with China, Iran, India and other interested countries.

        Yes, it is still necessary to get Chelomey's project "Taran" out of the archives, despite the inconsistency that something healthy is there. And on the basis of Borey and Bulava, create a universal missile system that will solve three tasks at once, the destruction of strategic delivery vehicles, missile defense functions, and provide an intercontinental nuclear strike.
    3. Ascetic
      Ascetic 15 November 2014 11: 52
      +6
      Quote: SPACE
      Yes, they just don’t plan to shoot anything at all, but under the guise of a fake missile defense, they create an attack missile complex of tactical missiles, for the first disarming strike with a small nuclear charge at the mines, communication centers and control, just a screen to circumvent the INF Treaty


      The SM-3 interceptor missiles have a range of not more than 500 km, so they can intercept medium and short range missiles located in the coastal zone. several ships are enough to block, for example, North Korea, which, due to its geographic location, cannot “hide away” nuclear missile launchers. The presence of ships with SM-3 missiles will force the enemy to place missiles inland, which is difficult for most compact states.
      So here lies the cunning ... Indeed, in the universal launch containers of the same Burke, it is possible to place not only anti-missiles but also offensive strike weapons. It is no accident that they are constantly increasing the number of these ships. After all, no one knows how many anti-missile missiles on Burke and how many Tomahawks in each case.
      In principle, it is theoretically possible to intercept a missile defense modification SM-3 block IIA with higher energy and characteristics from Trondheim from the destroyer URO along the Teykovo-North-East coast of the United States.



      This modification will pose a threat in the future, because it will work in this case by breeding steps, which glows with its engines, like a Christmas tree. Of course, there are a number of certain technical difficulties with prolongation time, information support, achieving the desired approach speed at the interception point, but in principle they can be overcome in the near future. Therefore, our VPO leadership and sets the task by 2020. to make it possible for new-generation missiles to overcome the existing and promising missile defense.
      1. Tektor
        Tektor 15 November 2014 13: 06
        +6
        It's strange, an article, it seems, about what we can oppose the SM-3 blockII, but apart from Iskander, nothing is named. At the moment, the SM-3 blockI SAM is capable of intercepting our 53T6 and 9M82M, but only in the final flight phase. In the future, with the development and adoption of the S-500 complex, we will be able to shoot down the SM-3 blockII, and in the entire range of its flight altitudes using the "bullet-bullet" method. In addition, it is possible to improve the KS-172 missile defense system to intercept the SM-3 at the time of launch while it has not yet gained altitude on a collision course (for this you need to be already at a high altitude and speed: as if, call fire on yourself), but out of reach SM-3.
        And our electronic warfare system can play a very important role, which may prevent SM-3 from launching at all: drown out their radar, communication system, distort the signal of the traffic police ...
        1. Shur
          Shur 16 November 2014 23: 58
          0
          And still a system capable of knocking down their satellites.
    4. _my opinion
      _my opinion 15 November 2014 13: 09
      +2
      Yes, Demyan, it’s just that it will not reach the majority of Europeans that the United States is hiding behind them and exposing them to a blow of retaliation.
      1. studentmati
        studentmati 16 November 2014 21: 15
        +1
        Quote: _my opinion
        Yes, Demyan, it’s just that it will not reach the majority of Europeans that the United States is hiding behind them and exposing them to a blow of retaliation.


        And moreover, at their expense! fool
        1. alexng
          alexng 16 May 2016 02: 43
          0
          You just have to assert at every corner that if at least one missile flies out of the missile defense launcher without warning and coordination with Russia, then immediately, without leaving the cashier, the first blow will be struck across the entire territory of Shakali, and then across Europe. It will be much more effective. Americans are cowards and only fight when they know they won't get anything for it. And you have to repeat it like a mantra. They don't understand otherwise. "Parasites" do not understand anything else, except the fear of their own death.
      2. Shur
        Shur 17 November 2014 00: 02
        +1
        They know of course, but what can they do? They are en masse controlled and sort of in a "union", but they don't solve nichrome. We need to conduct a broad anti-NATO campaign, this is not as senseless as it seems. To their dismay, there is an argument - do not stand on the road between two cars rushing to the meeting. Peace-world and other pacifism. We need a neutral mass in Europe. Let them be even more gay and so on, but only "peace-peace".
    5. Dormidont2
      Dormidont2 15 November 2014 13: 53
      +3
      Russia no one bothers to do the same as the Yankees, under the guise of air defense systems from 300-400 to create ground-to-ground strike systems that will instantly cover targets in the EU, South Korea, Japan, etc.
    6. Army1
      Army1 15 November 2014 21: 18
      +1
      Quote: SPACE
      The main flight paths of ICBMs lie to the north and east, the question is what do they want to shoot down in Europe, and even placing the missile defense elements so close to the borders of the Russian Federation? The nuclear warheads will be detached altogether aside, the first to launch ICBMs at the ATU, they will also not be able to get their interceptors, either in range, speed, or time. Why then all this booth? Yes, they just don’t plan to shoot anything at all, but under the guise of a fake missile defense, they create an attack missile complex of tactical missiles, for the first disarming strike with a small nuclear charge at the mines, communication centers and control, just a screen to circumvent the INF Treaty. In general, they did not find anything better and more reliable than to return to the old doctrine of the 80 years to a limited nuclear war and Pershing. Suddenly, the country's political leadership, mine control centers with ICBMs are attacked and cut down from foreign territory. If they succeed in disarming Russia in this way, even partially, the rest is a matter of technology, economically and military blackmail and isolation, they’ll squeeze anyway ... But if not, then it’s not so bad for them, there will be no retaliatory strike, but they don’t give a damn about the problems of partially destroyed eastern Europe and especially Russia.


      So I also thought about it, only that the USA got mini 533 mm ballistic missiles under the guise of sm missiles, I don’t like it, it’s very effective from ships as well. Do we have analogues?
    7. Shur
      Shur 16 November 2014 23: 53
      +1
      Eventually? With such a game, you need a trump card in the sleeve, or rather a charge under the sharper’s stool. And the less we know about this, the more reliable it will work. Then you will instantly disarm and respond completely disarm. The world is fragile, so fragile that there is very little left before its destruction. Earth is that, it will still rotate, but without us. All the same, this stupid direction of capitalism, it has no normal continuation. The biggest savage on the planet is the United States.
  3. turanchox
    turanchox 15 November 2014 08: 20
    +3
    from the very beginning it was clear that the euro-pro is the means of the first "decapitating" strike, the SM-3 will perfectly send the special ammunition to Moscow
    1. Kalmar
      Kalmar 15 November 2014 09: 14
      +2
      The SM-3 warhead weighs about 70kg. Not enough for a serious blow to the "ground".
      1. Wiruz
        Wiruz 15 November 2014 10: 13
        +9
        The SM-3 warhead weighs about 70kg. Not enough for a serious blow to the "ground".

        There is another matter. The Americans plan to deploy the SM-3 in the land-based runway Mk41. Where is the guarantee that in the cells will be precisely interceptor missiles, and not Tomahawks with a flight range of 2500 km. Moreover, this VPU was created specifically for cruise missiles. hi
        1. Kalmar
          Kalmar 15 November 2014 10: 36
          +5
          A very bad weapon of the first strike comes out of the Tomahawks: too much flying time. A flock of missiles will be spotted an hour or two before arrival, which leaves a lot of time for an answer.
          1. Dormidont2
            Dormidont2 15 November 2014 14: 05
            0
            it's not about axes, but about high-speed sm3 that can work on the ground
            1. Kalmar
              Kalmar 15 November 2014 18: 46
              +1
              Once again: the SM-3 warhead weighs garbage. Enough for a rural toilet, but hardly for a protected bunker or silos.
          2. Shur
            Shur 17 November 2014 00: 09
            0
            Yes, they are developing hypersonic missiles, just under the guise of missile defense put on duty.
  4. dimontmn
    dimontmn 15 November 2014 08: 57
    +1
    stupid cowboys understand only brute force language. Missiles - return to Cuba. + tack in Venezuela for strategists.
    1. Shur
      Shur 17 November 2014 00: 11
      0
      By the way, they wouldn’t hurt, it’s just that our oil workers are working, many different holes are being drilled.
  5. Sirocco
    Sirocco 15 November 2014 09: 02
    +10
    At the end of the article, it is said about this antidote, briefly and clearly, and at minimal cost.
    The above measures, if properly served (that no country which has hosted the US missile defense system “sit out” in the event of a global war) should make some European states scared enough to refuse to cooperate with the United States on missile defense.
    I think there are people in the EU who are still adequate, like De Gaulle.
    Two R-16U combat missiles were being prepared for the de Gaulle show ... And now a multi-ton huge hulk cuts through a dense curtain of clouds. With an interval of only a few minutes, the launch of the second rocket took place. During the launch, the President of France repeated admiringly: “Colossal! Colossal! " Excited, he turned to Brezhnev:

    “Is it true that these missiles are aimed at Paris?”

    - Aimed at where the troops of our potential adversaries are based, - without diplomatic tricks, Brezhnev answered.

    ... On Sunday, June 26, de Gaulle flew from Baikonur. And soon after these demonstrative launches of strategic missiles, General de Gaulle announced that France was leaving the NATO military organization, by April 1, 1967, all 29 foreign bases with 33 thousand soldiers and officers were being removed from its territory. NATO headquarters was also withdrawn from Paris.
    1. Kostyar
      Kostyar 15 November 2014 11: 08
      +4
      I agree with you completely!
      The very best option to show them that you can’t sit on the sidelines, neither on the other side of the ocean !!!
    2. Lukich
      Lukich 15 November 2014 12: 29
      +5
      Quote: Sirocco
      Two R-16U combat missiles were being prepared for the de Gaulle show ... And now a multi-ton huge hulk cuts through a dense curtain of clouds. With an interval of only a few minutes, the launch of the second rocket took place. During the launch, the President of France repeated admiringly: “Colossal! Colossal! " Excitedly, he turned to Brezhnev: “Is it true that these missiles are aimed at Paris?” “They are aimed at where the troops of our potential adversaries are based,” Brezhnev answered without diplomatic tricks .... On Sunday, June 26, de Gaulle flew from Baikonur . And soon after these demonstrative launches of strategic missiles, General de Gaulle announced that France was leaving the NATO military organization, by April 1, 1967, all 29 foreign bases with 33 thousand soldiers and officers were being removed from its territory. NATO headquarters was also withdrawn from Paris.

      he himself spoke with eyewitnesses of this event. the details are somewhat different, but the meaning is the same
    3. Alex
      Alex 15 November 2014 13: 38
      +1
      Quote: Sirocco
      I think there are people in the EU who are still adequate, like De Gaulle.

      Yes, de Gaulle was perhaps the only adequate leader in France. Apparently, for many years of communication with Angles and Amers, I learned their price in full. So he didn't want to expose the country to a nuclear strike. And the current Euro-connoisseurs, apparently, do not care about their countries, so they play these games. Well, the principle "will be enough for our age, and after us even a flood" was not born yesterday.
      1. saag
        saag 15 November 2014 15: 58
        0
        Quote: Alex
        Yes, de Gaulle was perhaps the only adequate leader of France

        The people who went through the war, now there are no such people in power, so there’s no need to talk about efficiency, decisiveness, responsibility, not a single first leader on Earth
  6. ava09
    ava09 15 November 2014 09: 09
    0
    So here he is - the path to the Apocalypse !!!
    1. dmit-xnumx
      dmit-xnumx 15 November 2014 11: 24
      0
      - Well, are there any other suggestions? Let us know if it does not.
  7. Kalmar
    Kalmar 15 November 2014 09: 19
    +1
    Sincerely amused by the idea of ​​ruining the American economy by an arms race. If their economy suffers, then ours is already half dead. So on this basis, you will not be especially messed with amers.

    Yes, and what kind of idea with Iskander with a launch range of 2000 km: has the agreement on the INF Treaty been canceled?
    1. Wiruz
      Wiruz 15 November 2014 10: 15
      +1
      Yes, and what kind of idea with Iskander with a launch range of 2000 km: has the agreement on the INF Treaty been canceled?

      Yeah just don't tell anyone bully laughing
      1. Kalmar
        Kalmar 15 November 2014 10: 38
        +3
        This, of course, is very touching, only our economy will not survive another arms race.
        1. 97110
          97110 15 November 2014 11: 19
          +2
          Quote: Kalmar
          our economy will not survive another arms race.
          Is everything okay without a race?
        2. Wiruz
          Wiruz 15 November 2014 11: 32
          +2
          only here our economy will not survive yet another arms race.

          The arms race cannot be stopped in any way. If you want, you don’t want, but tomorrow’s weapons must be assembled today.
          1. Kalmar
            Kalmar 15 November 2014 13: 58
            0
            Undoubtedly, we only need to understand what we are after. A full-fledged nuclear war is a collective suicide, no one will do it. As a result, there is probably no need to compete with the US missile defense system now, since there are many other directions for confrontation.
  8. gregor6549
    gregor6549 15 November 2014 09: 23
    +1
    Does Russia have an antidote to US missile defense? The question is certainly interesting, but the answer to it can be obtained only after the start of the 3rd World War. The truth is, who will be able to receive it and realize the question is even more interesting. All the same, the current fabrications about who, whom and what will defeat nothing more than "shaking the air", especially if these "air" are shaken by numerous "experts" of the sofa
    1. new communist
      new communist 15 November 2014 11: 38
      -3
      But why Russia and China need the antidote from missile defense, our task is to take revenge, and for this, 300 vigorous strikes against Amer’s cities are enough. And I see the sensible analysis and scenario of the 3rd world as follows (http://rollm.livejournal.com/)
  9. s1н7т
    s1н7т 15 November 2014 10: 04
    0
    Of course, the Russian Federation has an antidote to any intrigues of the SGA - this is the Second Socialist Revolution! laughing drinks
    1. 97110
      97110 15 November 2014 11: 24
      0
      Quote: c1n7
      there is an antidote
      And pin-dos will give us time until the age of 29, so that we can crush the counter, evaluate the remnants of the economy and, having mobilized these remnants, have we created anything to fight the world bourgeoisie? Is your employer ready for a second socialist revolution?
      1. s1н7т
        s1н7т 15 November 2014 15: 50
        +1
        Quote: 97110
        Quote: c1n7
        there is an antidote
        And pin-dos will give us time until the age of 29, so that we can crush the counter, evaluate the remnants of the economy and, having mobilized these remnants, have we created anything to fight the world bourgeoisie? Is your employer ready for a second socialist revolution?

        So the Bolsheviks once in 7 years created a fundamentally new state, having defeated the Civil and dispersed the intervention of all kinds of pin dos, our generation is absolutely nothing ?!
        What does the employer's opinion have to do with it? Are you so dependent on the money he pays you that you are unable to think for yourself? The Pepsi Generation, obviously. And about the "fight against the world bourgeoisie" is you from ignorance of history, I guess.
        1. Shur
          Shur 17 November 2014 00: 14
          0
          Then there was a resource in the form of the Russian people, and now? Russian is now anything but a united people. We are all covered up in Russians and so on.
          1. Aland
            Aland 19 March 2015 00: 42
            0
            You are wrong. The Russian people, as they were then, are so now and will always be.
            At first glance it seems that it is fragmented.
            Compared with small nations, for example, from the Caucasus
            this is also not true, we do not need someone to prove something, we know who
            we. And it’s worth it to unite along the void, otherwise many people don’t have welding
            stomach will be and we still live with them.
            Russians unite in a single fist at key moments in history
            a small example of the Crimea, but this is not a fist so a prototype.
            And at such moments, the Russians always have a leader
            how can God not remember the leader is
            apparently soon our turn will come.
  10. 31rus
    31rus 15 November 2014 10: 09
    0
    The main mistake is to consider this separately, this is not correct, about it is necessary, just to reduce the damage from a retaliatory strike, so that one cannot do with Iskander, a set of measures is needed, preferably on new principles, so that no contracts fall under any agreements, making "dual-use" weapons, Europe is one thing, but creating a threat to the United States itself, this is another, for example, they placed a pro in Romania, received Iskanders in the South Military District and a brigade of poplars in Siberia, the answer should be in the United States and tangible
  11. Isum
    Isum 15 November 2014 10: 14
    +4
    A bit of humor about the Kaliningrad Iskander.
  12. pahom54
    pahom54 15 November 2014 10: 23
    +1
    It seems to me that the author’s proposed mobile space-based option will mean that both countries — the United States and Russia — have passed the point of no return.
    Points of no return to the world. Similar technical capabilities existed both in the USSR and in Russia, back in the late 80s, and the USSR was much ahead of the USA ... Then, put your modules into space, the result would be such that it would be possible, the USSR would exist to this day ... However, neither Gorbachev, nor even EBN did not take this step, but now it’s too late ...
    So you really need to get out of stupid treaties and, along with strategic ones, develop tactical and operational tactical weapons that can reach and destroy the so-called missile defense bases, wherever they are.

    And let not only the presidents of countries that have allowed foreign bases in their territories know this, but also the population of these countries ... Let them know that they themselves made the hostages !!!
    1. Shur
      Shur 17 November 2014 00: 30
      +1
      Yes, this is partly true, but it is not us, but the Americans who are striving for non-return. Since there is such a state of affairs, it is only a matter of time before they cross the line. In fact, the same mericos themselves are no less susceptible to such a "sudden blow". The very idea of ​​a "surprise strike" already poses an unequivocal threat to Russia. That is, it is tantamount to a threat - "I will kill you anyway." In fact, the very essence of this is an ultimatum. This is how terrorists talk. Even without going into any assessments, this is already a "red line". For the very implementation of this program, which is tantamount to the bombing of a building by terrorists, they should already formulate an answer today. The answer is that if you do not abandon this program, then Russia reserves the right to counter the terrorist country by all available means in order to protect itself from an obvious threat. And in order not to shake the air in vain, real projects are needed, the essence of which is to put an end to any US gestures by creating a situation of a "mined continent". But how and how and how, it is for the scientists.
  13. new communist
    new communist 15 November 2014 10: 46
    +1
    The states are beginning to spend huge amounts of money on deploying missile defense throughout their territory and among all their allies. The "symmetric" report will also be very expensive for them - in contrast to the Russian Federation, in the USA for a very long time they did not engage in heavy ICBMs, and indeed did not produce new missiles for more than 20 years .---- Why do they need the Amer, they will launch the first nuclear blow to Russia and China. And then the amers will not have the task of preserving the United States as a state, just preserving the future cent of power, and for this it is necessary to save the army and police, and workers and engineers, and this can be easily solved by the competent evacuation of these categories of people, which, taking into account the first strike easy to implement.
  14. African
    African 15 November 2014 11: 19
    0
    Refusal of Europeans to deploy missile defense elements of the United States. The statement on the deployment of Iskander-M OTRK has already forced the Czech Republic to abandon the deployment of missile defense systems, as the country's leadership was adequate enough not to expose its country to a possible strike. The above measures, if properly served (that no country which has hosted the US missile defense system “sit out” in the event of a global war) should make some European states scared enough to refuse to cooperate with the United States on missile defense.
  15. Ze Kot
    Ze Kot 15 November 2014 11: 24
    0
    So there is an agreement on the non-deployment of weapons in outer space. If you deal with Star Wars again, then in general the finish will be.
  16. The Art of War
    The Art of War 15 November 2014 12: 11
    0
    Soon they will run with white and blue flags, like a professor and a pimple, and will bring a lot of evidence that we can not resist the United States missile defense. Which site then is topwar.ru, and not topwar.com or topwar..co.il
  17. mpa945
    mpa945 15 November 2014 12: 36
    +4
    The "switch" of Igida, as well as the rest of the high-precision and "not very" US weapons, is in space. Includes satellites (including commercial) for lighting, communications, and global positioning.
    IMHO: we need a system that is guaranteed to in a reasonable time cause such damage to the satellite constellation of the SGA and their allies, which will exclude its existence as a system.
    Result - The Pentacon is a high-tech garbage dump, and even conventional weapons are largely neutralized (until the supply of paper cards and curvimeters is established ...).
    1. sharp-lad
      sharp-lad 16 November 2014 00: 33
      0
      There are Soviet developments on this topic, documentation, and even fighter satellite launches were carried out!
  18. bmv04636
    bmv04636 15 November 2014 12: 36
    0
    well, if the euro collective farm about the one delivered by the "light elves" burns down first together with the population of euro collective farmers, but they could have survived if they had not been the bedding of the light elves
  19. Mister22408
    Mister22408 15 November 2014 13: 23
    +2
    Quote: Wiruz
    The SM-3 warhead weighs about 70kg. Not enough for a serious blow to the "ground".

    There is another matter. The Americans plan to deploy the SM-3 in the land-based runway Mk41. Where is the guarantee that in the cells will be precisely interceptor missiles, and not Tomahawks with a flight range of 2500 km. Moreover, this VPU was created specifically for cruise missiles. hi

    SM-3, in block 4 modification - can be used as a full-fledged ballistic missile. Warhead 70 kg - for Americans it corresponds to ... (many) kT. With simultaneous launch ... Distance to Moscow - allows. A full-fledged weapon of the first strike. True, we still have a "... Hand" :-) So "mustache" :-)
    1. Kalmar
      Kalmar 15 November 2014 13: 51
      +1
      Warhead 70 kg - in Americans, it corresponds to ... (a lot) kT.

      You can’t put a lot of CT in 70kg, especially if you need a penetrating version (the goal will be protected underground bunkers and all that). Very stupid cracker is obtained.
  20. VNP1958PVN
    VNP1958PVN 15 November 2014 13: 36
    0
    The above measures, if properly served (that no country which has hosted the US missile defense system “sit out” in the event of a global war) should make some European states scared enough to refuse to cooperate with the United States on missile defense.
    Duck USA they really allow? request
  21. Ima tsoh
    Ima tsoh 15 November 2014 13: 51
    +1
    At this stage, the West and the United States have a real geographical advantage. And these animals - hyenas are terribly afraid of death. But Russia has a guaranteed final argument - everyone will disappear. Therefore, I think Russia should disperse its capabilities around the world. Culturally and politically, the countries of the West and the United States will collapse over time. And Russia with its values ​​will save the planet from disasters. All world politics says who is strong and rules. In animals who are strong, he survives. Unfortunately, people's morality does not mean anything.
  22. Ivan 63
    Ivan 63 15 November 2014 13: 53
    0
    The only antidote is the elimination of the fifth column and the unity of the nation.
    1. Kalmar
      Kalmar 15 November 2014 14: 07
      +2
      Unfortunately, the main fifth column is sitting in the Kremlin and will not allow itself to be liquidated just like that.
  23. srha
    srha 15 November 2014 15: 29
    0
    The US global missile defense system can cause significant damage by preparing its satellite constellation for deactivation at the touch of a button in a briefcase, for an amount hundreds of times smaller than its deployment. True, high-altitude thermonuclear explosions will make it cheaper, but their effect is temporary and, by definition, do not allow you to play, bargain - return, deactivate again ...
  24. Havoc
    Havoc 15 November 2014 15: 56
    0
    Back in the early sixties, Academician Sakharov proposed an effective strike on the United States, i.e. laying thermonuclear mines along the coast of the United States, and simultaneously undermining them at hour X, which 2-3 submarines can successfully do. After this, a wave forms that will reach almost the interior of the United States, not to mention the cities located on the coast, they are guaranteed to be washed away.
  25. Technical engineer
    Technical engineer 15 November 2014 15: 56
    0
    Incorrect name and general message. A relevant article would be "Does the American missile defense system have the means against Russian missiles equipped with means of overcoming missile defense?"
  26. ruslan207
    ruslan207 15 November 2014 16: 40
    0
    Real nonsense and where will the radioactive cloud go?
    For example, on an ally of Russia, Belarus or the European part of Russia
    1. bmv04636
      bmv04636 15 November 2014 17: 18
      0
      well, if it’s going to be said tokaya booze, cut the last cucumber and do not forget about the ammunition of a volume explosion
  27. bmv04636
    bmv04636 15 November 2014 16: 49
    0
    Designed for the Russian army, a new 220 mm caliber multiple launch rocket system passed state tests, said Nikolai Makarovets, director general of the Splav NPO.
    Who knows what it is about
  28. SAXA.SHURA
    SAXA.SHURA 15 November 2014 17: 16
    0
    Quote: Rzhevsky
    . To answer

    If you have nothing to answer, cover yourself with a white sheet and crawl into the cemetery.
  29. martin.do
    martin.do 15 November 2014 18: 16
    0
    Yes, they are not childishly afraid laughing Already Reigen scared Star Wars winked Then they scared us with neutron bombs. Now they invented a new hawk. And their stealth turned out to be a flying pan. laughing I'm already trembling ALL WENT TO DIG THE OCOP soldier
  30. TOR2
    TOR2 15 November 2014 19: 24
    +1
    The antidote to the "aegis" has long existed. Only to translate into reality what has long been conceived. It is not difficult to create a microwave generator on a railway base, even in the shortest possible time. This thing will weigh less than a BZHRK rocket, so a lot will be easier. Whatever speed the SM-3 has, the microwave radiation will overtake it in the upper atmosphere. http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=z70jLXDEL-w#t=2018
  31. Throw
    Throw 15 November 2014 19: 40
    +4
    The antidote is contained in the system of strategic nuclear forces, which was laid down in the USSR.
    Such properties of strategic missiles as individual breeding of blocks, maneuvering, false targets, etc. are important, but secondary in overcoming missile defense.
    The main factor in the ABM breakthrough is the NUMBER of the guided blocks and their carriers. Modern and even far-reaching missile defense systems are fundamentally incapable of repelling a massive strike. This was proved back in the middle of the last century by our scientists. And it was "forgotten" at the end of the century by the "perestroika leadership", allegedly afraid of the "Star Wars" program (SDI).
    Any missile defense / air defense system has a limited number of tracking and target designation channels, which can be increased to a certain limit, otherwise radio-electronic means will begin to interfere with one’s own work. The computational power of information processing is also limited. Intercepting several missile defense targets will work out with a probability close to 100%, a massive volley of missiles will cause an overload of the system in geometric dependence on the number of targets.
    And this is just the beginning, then, with the real work of missile defense, when the destruction of targets begins, in the air and near space there will be such a porridge of blocks, missiles, their debris, false targets, and their debris that all ballistic computers in the world go crazy in an attempt to produce though would be target selection. Blocks fly in a "mess" on their own inertial guidance and the external "mess" does not affect them.

    Therefore, all attempts to reduce the number of carriers and nuclear warheads, and other "peaceful" initiatives of politicians and others should be treated as sabotage and undermining the main factor of the effectiveness of strategic missile weapons.
    soldier
  32. The comment was deleted.
  33. Kezhmar
    Kezhmar 15 November 2014 21: 11
    +2
    Quote: sergey261180
    Wretched little article. About a nuclear submarine with cruise missiles and ballistic missiles did not say a word, but this is the surest antidote. No wonder the colonial administration cuts and writes them off so hard, but does not build anything new.

    Sergei, why are you doing that. Everything is getting better, the shitty period is over. The main thing is to believe in yourself! Holding an assault rifle with an empty magazine in your hands, you can take a small group of the enemy. The main thing here is not to scratch.
  34. Straight
    Straight 15 November 2014 21: 11
    -2
    There is no antidote against the first nuclear strike! This is confirmed by the history of conventional wars, and even more so, nuclear missile weapons, this law is strengthened many times over. In order for us to win or at least not to lose in a future global conflict, we must, I think, put on intelligence. Create a powerful nuclear warning intelligence, not so much technical as conventional, like Richard Sorge, and adopt a military doctrine that in case of confirmation of the final decision of the United States and its allies to attack Russia (for example, it will be reliably known from several sources hour X or "in the coming hours") to be the FIRST to deliver a preemptive global nuclear strike. We can no longer afford to give them the initiative, especially since their total potential is higher than ours. So in street fights it is usually the one who first hit and won ...
  35. denyss84
    denyss84 15 November 2014 22: 35
    0
    Can't you just create "invisible" nuclear submarines that can then launch missiles from anywhere? (I'm not a military man) or can the Americans track them?
  36. Throw
    Throw 15 November 2014 23: 12
    +1
    But this is an IDEA! laughing))))
  37. Boezvn
    Boezvn 16 November 2014 13: 05
    +1
    urgently launch satellites and hang over America, even if they bring them down they will fall on their territory)))
  38. Bersaglieri
    Bersaglieri 16 November 2014 14: 46
    +1
    The main antidote against any missile defense system is the number of blocks in the salvo (actually BB and false targets).
    Any system can be "satiated".
  39. studentmati
    studentmati 16 November 2014 21: 00
    0
    The orbital modification differs from the usual ICBM in that warheads are lowered into the earth’s orbit and temporarily become its satellites

    good Asymmetry! good
    1. Bersaglieri
      Bersaglieri 17 November 2014 11: 13
      0
      R36orb was on alert in the 70s and early 80s. Well forgotten old :)
  40. Shur
    Shur 17 November 2014 00: 47
    0
    Everything can end like this "in 1991, at a representative scientific meeting in Baku, then Corresponding Member of the USSR Academy of Sciences, Head of the Department of Experimental Geophysics of the Institute of Physics of the Earth Alexei Nikolaev for the first time openly made a statement that the effect of underground nuclear explosions on earthquakes is obvious from the view of Soviet scientists.The devastating earthquakes of 1976 and 1984 in the Gazli settlement of gas workers (Uzbekistan) had a pronounced man-made character.seismologists proved that the nature of these earthquakes in the four-point zone had an artificial origin.First, they occurred two weeks after the nuclear explosions in Semipalatinsk.Secondly, for a long time no one paid attention to the giant voids that arose in the ground during gas production just under the village.these two technogenic factors eventually led to a tragedy, which, apparently, repeated itself later in Neftegorsk on Sakhalin.
    at the end of World War II, a certain scientific author, whose name could no longer be restored, suggested that the leadership of our country bombard Fujiyama with powerful bombs to cause a strong earthquake in the territory hostile to the Soviet Union of Japan. this original idea was never realized, but for a long time later it excited the minds of peace-loving party rulers.
    After testing the USSR in 1961, a goal on the new earth of the world's most powerful nuclear warhead, equivalent to fifty million tons of TNT, the idea of ​​creating tectonic weapons again gained relevance. Through the efforts of the KGB, Nikita Khrushchev caught a glimpse of one scientific and technical compilation with a report from the commander of an American submarine stating that his submarine had been devastated by the shock wave from some Soviet explosion. The report also suggested that underwater explosions of several thermonuclear charges off the coast of the United States could lead to flooding of a large part of the American continent, the damage would be the same as when a dozen giant tsunamis land. The General Secretary of the Central Committee of the CPSU ordered that a detailed study be made of such an opportunity.
    In this project, in particular, in the study of options for the delivery of thermonuclear superbombs to the US coast, Academician Andrei Sakharov took part. In the course of theoretical calculations, it turned out that the large extent and insignificant depth of the continental shelf does not allow tsunamis to be caused off the coast of the North American continent. As a result, the Siberian branch of the Academy of Sciences through the Ministry of Defense asked the leadership of the Central Committee of the Communist Party of the Soviet Union to stop this unpromising work.
    the attractiveness of the idea of ​​increasing the effectiveness of atomic weapons by accompanying earthquakes somewhat faded when the problem of the shortage of warheads was solved by the end of the 70s. in this regard, the military set a more difficult task for scientists: geophysical weapons should be fundamentally different from nuclear weapons and their impact must necessarily be hidden in any given point on the planet, that is, they should not succumb to any existing control methods. "
  41. Bator79
    Bator79 11 December 2014 19: 34
    0
    do not forget that missile defense is also air defense ... that is, if something our Air Force will get sooooo serious problems