Military Review

Quickly fail

93
The power of non-nuclear cruise missiles is illusory


Recently, in the open press, the topic of non-nuclear disarmament of strategic nuclear forces (SNF) has been actively discussed. The idea is this: the United States is simultaneously developing systems of rapid global strike (BSU) and missile defense, which form an integrated offensive-defensive potential. In the foreseeable future, it is possible that high-precision offensive weapons systems will be capable of delivering a disarming strike to the strategic nuclear forces of the Russian Federation without the involvement of nuclear forces and assets, and the missiles (warheads) that survived after it will destroy anti-missiles.

In the first comments on BSU, it was prudent to note that the declared goals of protection against terrorists weapons mass destruction and malicious states of the “axis of evil” are only a temporary cover for the more promising targets of a non-nuclear global strike. Later, there were allegations of directing and declared by the leadership of the United States BSU on the implementation of a disarming and decapitating non-nuclear strike against the Russian Federation with references to the studies of foreign experts. It was stated about the need to immediately take the most urgent measures to parry the BSU.

Arguments for competent

The reasoning is as follows. The possibility of defeating typical SNF facilities with non-nuclear high-precision cruise missiles (KR) has been established - the US already has a significant number of such missiles and is building it up, hypersonic missiles are expected to emerge - there is a real threat to disarming the SNF with only non-nuclear high-precision systems. It is easy to see that in the given chain of facts and effects there is no crucial element for the conclusion - assessment of the capabilities of high-precision non-nuclear weapons to disable not single typical objects, but in general, the Strategic Nuclear Forces as a unique strategic system of a global nature, taking into account all essential features inherent in it properties and relationships.

“At a meeting at the Pentagon about the overrun of precision weapons, those present said that technological superiority loses its value if the enemy has minimal intelligence.”
Without such an analysis, the statement about the possibility of non-nuclear disarmament of the strategic nuclear forces is simply groundlessly postulated, and not justified. The supportive counterarguments of domestic specialists by supporters of such disarmament are ignored, hushed up, as if they do not exist.

In 2009, employees of the Federal State Institution “2 Central Research Institute of the Ministry of Defense of Russia” analyzed in detail the factors limiting the possibility of using non-nuclear weapons in the Strategic Nuclear Forces in the pages of the Airspace Defense magazine. In 2013, other specialists of the same organization already turned the attention of the readers of the newspaper “Military-Industrial Courier” to an increase in the charge of the Kyrgyz Republic, the complication of the organization of a strike by non-nuclear weapons on the strategic nuclear forces and the difficulty of monitoring its results.

In the speeches of scientists of the Russian Academy of Sciences and specialists of the National Research University of the Ministry of Defense of Russia it was noted that high-precision weapons in the future will increasingly affect the strategic balance and the BSU system will be able to threaten our strategic facilities. At the same time, the theoretical ability to disarm the SNF only on the basis of high-precision weapons, without the use of nuclear weapons by the aggressor, was categorically rejected for the following reasons:

- the damaging abilities of nuclear and non-nuclear weapons when striking highly protected point objects are incomparable, which leads to significant costumes of non-nuclear means;
- possible interference with the guidance systems of the Kyrgyz Republic will further increase the necessary outfits for the destruction of the SNF facilities and will require massaging of the emergency forces and their carriers in the groups of the aggressor;
- to plan such a strike at the same time on several hundreds of targets located on the vast territory of Russia is extremely difficult;
- follow-up monitoring of the results of non-nuclear strike strikes on the strategic nuclear forces is necessary;
- the operation on the use of the WTO against strategic nuclear forces would not have been packed in one strike and, consequently, in one day;
- It takes a long time to prepare such an operation and create an appropriate grouping. This training cannot be hidden and the other side will have time to transfer its nuclear forces and equipment, missile attack warning systems (MNS) and control them into increased combat readiness.


These postulates of opponents of the concept of non-nuclear disarmament are in the nature of qualitative conclusions of the strategic level. They are designed for those who are interested in an objective response and are competent enough to independently carry out very simple calculations and assess the persuasiveness of the arguments presented. The following are examples of similar calculations that have not previously been published. We realize that the newspaper is not the best place for calculations, but we believe that the need to specify at least some aspects of the topic is quite overdue, and we hope for the understanding of readers.

The task


The settlement procedure provides an approximate assessment of the quantities of required orders of non-nuclear weapons to destroy the most representative SNF facilities, a subsequent assessment of the possibility of implementing calculated orders to destroy these facilities during the time determined by their combat readiness (the requirement of a short disarming strike) with a final assessment of the possibility of covert strikes.

The position areas (PR) of the stationary missile complexes (RK), where the main potential of the Strategic Missile Forces is located, are selected as the most representative objects of the SNF. According to the open press (MIC, No. 28, 2014, No. 6, 2015), it is conditionally assumed that by the year 2020, the stationary RC will have 180 intercontinental ballistic missiles (30 in Kozelsk, Dombarovsky, Uzhur and 90 in Tatischev) .

Back in 2009, Major General Vladimir Belous argued that in order to remove a stationary ICBM, it was necessary to ensure penetration of the armored roof of a silo launcher (silo) through the action of a powerful charge. Thus, the calculation of the polygon dressing at the silos is reduced to determining the number of missiles needed for a direct hit of at least one of them into the roof of a structure with a given probability with known accuracy of the spacecraft.

The diameter of the roof of the silo is six meters. CR indicators: accuracy (circular probable deviation, KVO) - 3, 5, 8, 10 meters, reliability (total probability of serviceability by the moment of impact on the roof) - 0,9, given probability of hitting the mine - no less than 0,95.

Reliability of the Kyrgyz Republic (0,9) is taken in view of the labor data “Military art in local wars and armed conflicts” (A. V. Usikov et al., “Voenizdat”, 2008). According to US independent experts, in the operation “Desert Fox” (1998 year, 415 launches of the Kyrgyz sea and air basing) to 20 percent of the Kyrgyz Republic did not reach their goals, and about 10 percent before the launch turned out to be technically faulty. Therefore, the adopted value underestimates the requirements for the KR along with in the interests of supporters of non-nuclear disarmament. The same can be said about the given probability of hitting a mine.

Currently, a significant portion of deployed SLCMs are represented by Tomahawks, which were put into service in 1993. They have a range of approximately 1800 kilometers and KVO 10 – 15 meters. Such CRs cannot be used for attacks on silos. To develop more advanced missiles and equip the US Navy in the required quantity requires considerable time. But being guided by the most difficult option, we will carry out further calculations for hypothetical SLCMs, whose QUO is three meters, and no interference is put to target systems of the spacecraft in a positional area.

90 silos in five minutes


How could the calculated outfits of non-nuclear cruise missiles be used to destroy stationary RK, taking into account the combat readiness of the complexes, that is, within the allowable time, before the launch of the ICBM? This question is key, since the process of defeating an ICBM by cruise missiles is fundamentally different from a ballistic defeat. If the latter can theoretically attack all silos in a positional area at the same time, then the CD is only sequential, in turn. During this time period, part of the ICBMs can start if their launches begin from the moment they strike the first silo silo. Determine the time of readiness of the ICBM.

1 December 2008, Commander of the Strategic Missile Forces Colonel-General Nikolai Solovtsov said that after receiving the approval of the Supreme Commander, the time to complete the task of launching missiles would not exceed two or three minutes. Major-General Pavel Zolotarev, Deputy Director of the Institute of the USA and Canada, RAS, who had previously dealt with nuclear planning issues in the Security Council of the Russian Federation, argued that in order to implement a reciprocal strike, the order to launch an ICBM should arrive about five minutes before the approach of the enemy’s military units. Let us take a large value for analysis (5 minutes) and forget for a while that during the specified interval, part of the ICBM can start for the reason indicated above.

Consider the attack of cruise missiles in the position region of Tatishchevo (90 silo). It is assumed that the defeat of the mines is carried out consistently in depth PR. For an effective attack, it is necessary that the boundaries of the area cross the 450 cruise missiles and hit all the 90 silos in five minutes. For clarity, a theoretical version of the formalized scheme of the position area and impact on it is proposed.

The silos are strictly orderly - nine ranks of 10 silos with intervals and 10 kilometers, the depth is 80 kilometers. When attacking from one direction and speed 800 kilometers per hour, the KR will fly this distance in six minutes. Therefore, for an attack of each silo with a full polygon outfit in no more than five minutes, the aggressor must form two phalanxes of the Kyrgyz Republic for 225 missiles simultaneously attacking the OL from opposite sides and having a depth of two minutes (27 km) each at a speed of RS equal to 800 kilometers per hour. Front phalanx - 90 kilometers. To verify this by simple calculations is not difficult. That is, the density of missile strikes from one direction should be 112,5 CU / min, and the total - 225 CU / min. If the time of the readiness of the ICBMs for launching is taken to be equal to three minutes, then all the CUs should line up in two lines of 225 missiles and simultaneously cross the boundaries of the PR.

To assess the possibility of implementing these requests to the short duration of the strike, we turn to the experience of military conflicts. In the operation “Allied Force” against Yugoslavia, 1999 KR (and not 90) was used in the first massed rocket and air strike (MRA) in 450. The depth of the KR echelon is 40 minutes (rather than two), the density of the raid on the entire front of the strike is 2,25 CR / min (and not 225). In the second MRAU, 133 KR was applied, the depth of the echelon is the same, the density of the raid is 3,32 KR / min. In 2003, in Iraq, the first air offensive operation took 500 cruise missiles, but in two days (and not in two minutes), in two MRAUs and with a significant number of selective strikes.

In our opinion, the fulfillment of the requirement to create two phalanges (not even a rank) of cruise missiles with calculated parameters, taking into account the experience of combat participation of the Kyrgyz Republic in the foreseeable period is extremely doubtful, even if there is a three-meter SLCM with the QUO, 0,9 reliability and in the absence of interference area. For ALCMs, among which there are samples with a QUO of three to five meters, the creation of such constructions seems even more unrealistic due to the movement of carriers. In addition, if we accept that the strike on the first silo is similar to the command for launching ICBMs, then part of the ICBMs during the strike will start as noted above. Otherwise, with the assumed probability of defeating the silo (0,95), the average number of undestructed ICBMs in the OL Tatishchevo OL will be 4,5 units. In a specific (and only) implementation of a disarming strike, the number of such missiles may be much larger.

The accuracy of the guidance of the CD, as any technical characteristic, is not strictly fixed, but is within certain limits, increasing the outfits of the CD relative to the nominal value. The cumulative use in PR of fumes (aerosols) against systems such as “Digismek”, electronic interference to Navstar navigation systems, altimeter CR expands this range, forcing the enemy to increase the outfits of the KR, without removing to an acceptable level the uncertainty fraught with catastrophic damage to the aggressor. It is known that in the 2003 year at a meeting at the Pentagon about the overrun of precision weapons, those present said that technological superiority loses its significance if the enemy has minimal ingenuity.

The answer is inevitable


Let us evaluate the possibility of a covert withdrawal by the enemy of the construction of the CU with the specified parameters on the boundaries of the PR Tatischevo. The approximate number of cells of the Mk-41 launchers on the Orly Burk destroyers is 90, on the Ticonderox cruisers 120. Assuming that about 70 percent of the cells were used for the CD (the rest are occupied by missile defense, air defense, anti-ship missiles), we get that the aggressor will need to enter seven destroyers or six cruisers into the Black Sea to deliver the 450 missiles. In terms of their composition, these groups are unthinkable for peacetime and, in our opinion, cannot be created secretly from all the existing intelligence systems of the Russian Federation in a threatened period.

Quickly fail


Consequently, the forces of the Navy and Air Defense of the Russian Federation remain at the highest degree of readiness and cannot fail to detect a massive launch by the aggressor 450 KR. The distance from the Black Sea coast to the OL Tatishchevo is about 1000 kilometers or 75 minutes of a cruise missile flying at a speed of 800 kilometers per hour. All this time, the "parade" systems of the Kyrgyz Republic will be subjected to at least fighter attacks, which will increase the number of survivors of the strategic rocket launchers. Simultaneously, the fighters will be the reference points for the information system. The strategic and military-political leadership of the Russian Federation will be presented with a picture of the movement of a massive raid in the direction of the largest strategic position area in Russia. Therefore, long before the emergence of hypothetical phalanges (ranks) to the borders of the area, all ICBMs start from it (and even have time to hit US cities). Thus, the question of whether the ICBM launches will begin after the first strike at the silo is removed automatically. Taking into account the considered aspects of non-nuclear disarmament, the analysis of the features of the destruction of other objects of the strategic nuclear forces can be considered redundant. The composition of the SNF given in the article is conditional, but its possible downward change will not make fundamental changes in the possibilities of implementing both short-term and non-nuclear strike secrecy.

A nuclear response to a non-nuclear strike against the SNF should not be doubted, since it is enshrined in all Military Doctrines, beginning with the 1993 adopted in November.

The set of factors demonstrated and left beyond the framework of the analysis that act when a potential aggressor solves a problem that threatens the very existence of the United States makes it possible to assign the concept of non-nuclear disarmament of the Russian Strategic Nuclear Forces to a theoretical area that diffusely overlaps with the realm of science fiction, but not to ideas that are important for the practice of military construction .

The main threat to the strategic nuclear forces were and will remain nuclear weapons of an aerospace attack. Non-nuclear missiles can complement them and influence the strategic balance, destroying not silos, but, for example, elements of strategic airfields aviation, bases of nuclear submarines with ballistic missiles. They can also be used to destroy the Krona facilities at permanent deployment points of mobile missiles (assuming that some missiles can remain in these facilities when dispersed), mobile missiles at field positions, bridges, etc.

Thus, when solving the tasks of participation in strategic nuclear deterrence, the aerospace defense of the SNF must be created primarily to combat nuclear attack weapons.
Author:
Originator:
http://vpk-news.ru/articles/27617
93 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must to register.

I have an account? Sign in

  1. mig31
    mig31 23 October 2015 14: 34 New
    +9
    Политическое маневрирование в СЯС равносильно мыльному пузырю - да лопнет ,но только над очередным Договором, жить то хочется всему миру,и госдеп в очередной раз попытается набрать очки как "миротворец". Только не в этот раз ему достанутся лавры победителя,сейчас ПУТИН на коне ,и Россия правит бал, так что янки проиграли эту партию в чистую.....
    1. Andrea
      Andrea 23 October 2015 14: 58 New
      +8
      Quote: mig31
      the Yankees lost this game clean .....
      Не будем заваливать их шапками,хотя на мой взгляд их новая доктрина-очередное "разводилово на бабло".Все они в здравом уме и прекрасно понимают,что ракеты шахтного базирования теперь не основа СЯС.Остальное необходимо сначала засечь,потом умудриться достать.Очевидно они считают противника идиотами,который не догадается уничтожить средства ПРО перед ответкой.
      That's how it is ... in short.
      1. Gani
        Gani 23 October 2015 15: 15 New
        +4
        good afternoon! I’m constantly surprised by the hypothesis that iskander or calibers can be a normal response to missile defense.
        Obviously, they consider the enemy idiots who will not guess to destroy missile defense systems before otvetka.
        how - can this be done before otvetka ?? if during the time while these OTRKs hit their missile defense targets, most of the Nuclear Ballistic Missiles will already find their targets or will be developed by this missile defense itself.
        It is unlikely that events will develop like this: at first the BSU received non-nuclear weapons, then they considered the remnants of the strategic nuclear forces, then they waited 40-150 minutes until the calibers reached their targets, then they were convinced of the destruction of the anti-missile system and after that they kicked off the strategic nuclear forces
        1. Andrea
          Andrea 23 October 2015 15: 37 New
          +2
          Quote: Gani
          while the calibers reach the targets
          We will not develop counter-doctrines, for this there are more competent people.
          A strike on missile defense can be carried out in parallel with the strategic nuclear forces. To find out what is struck, what is not, of course, there will be no time.
          1. The comment was deleted.
          2. maxcor1974
            maxcor1974 23 October 2015 18: 17 New
            +4
            Всё правильно, к тому моменту весь мир в "труху" будет. Искандеры нужны что бы сфинктеры европейских "друзей" не расслаблялись...
        2. boroda64
          boroda64 24 October 2015 02: 24 New
          0
          .
          - and who told you
          - what are the tasks of calibers ..?
      2. The comment was deleted.
      3. bulvas
        bulvas 23 October 2015 15: 43 New
        +6
        Quote: Andrea
        Obviously they consider the enemy idiots


        Yes, not your adversary, but your voters, taxpayers and allies

        Like, here we are so cool, trust us and give us your money, we will defeat any bad guy
      4. Boa kaa
        Boa kaa 23 October 2015 19: 01 New
        +4
        Quote: Andrea
        mine-based missiles are no longer the basis of strategic nuclear forces.
        Да, наши видимо переходят к мобильному базированию наземных МБР. Всего порядка 160 ШПУ, плюс 85 -- двойного (шахтно-мобильного), итого: 245 ШПУ. А вот янкесы наоборот, основой своих СЯС к 2018г собираются сделать МБР "Минитмэн-3" шахтного базирования (400-450 ШПУ).
        "Каждая из сторон самостоятельно определяет состав и структуру своих СНВ. К 2018-му США планируют иметь развернутыми 400 ШПУ МБР, 12 ПЛАРБ с 240 БРПЛ (количество ракетных шахт на каждой лодке намечено сократить с 24 до 20 штук) и 60 ТБ (16 В-2А и 44 В-52Н) – всего 700 единиц развернутых МБР, БРПЛ и тяжелых бомбардировщиков". http://vpk-news.ru/articles/17453
        Quote: Andrea
        destroy anti-missile defense facilities before otvetka.

        Quote: Andrea
        A missile strike can be carried out simultaneously with strategic nuclear forces
        Of course, the best option is the physical destruction of the missile defense system. But there are very effective means of electronic warfare and electromagnetic radiation, which act, unlike the Iskander (5-7 min), Caliber (10-15 min) - instantly! It will be difficult to issue a control center for anti-missiles on the white screen of the VIKO radar or the burned-out block of the VZOI.
        By the way, the enemy’s massive use of electronic warfare is one of the first intelligence signs of preparing nuclear weapons.
      5. Observer2014
        Observer2014 23 October 2015 19: 51 New
        +1
        Quickly fail
        Да это уже все давно поняли!Всё класс.Ещё "сармат" с 36 боеголовками принять в ближайшие 5 лет и УСЁ!Приплыли.Партнёры !!!! загибайтесь.
  2. marlin1203
    marlin1203 23 October 2015 14: 34 New
    +9
    The massive use of cruise missiles is a very expensive pleasure. Only Americans can afford it, and then not for long. They are designed to hit the most important targets. And even then ... in the conditions of the current air defense system, a subsonic even low-flying missile is a completely amazed target.
    1. arane
      arane 23 October 2015 14: 43 New
      +2
      Quote: marlin1203
      The massive use of cruise missiles is a very expensive pleasure. Only Americans can afford it, and then not for long. They are designed to hit the most important targets. And even then ... in the conditions of the current air defense system, a subsonic even low-flying missile is a completely amazed target.

      Оно конечно так, но этот сценарий не предусматривает учёт финансовой составляющей! По типу "пан или пропал".
      If it doesn’t work, the money will no longer be needed, if it works, there will be a new world.

      There is one way to neutralize the threat, but radical! Bookmark mega-charges at settlement points on the territory of the Russian Federation, the activation of which will lead to the guaranteed destruction of the planet! I would go for it
      1. Albert1988
        Albert1988 23 October 2015 15: 08 New
        +4
        Quote: arane
        Bookmark mega-charges at settlement points on the territory of the Russian Federation, the activation of which will lead to the guaranteed destruction of the planet!

        Destroying the planet in what sense? to pieces to pieces? Such charges are not yet expected (in many respects, fortunately). It is much better to strengthen the protection of the covers of missile silos, this time, and place a layered air defense system two times, which will bring down these missiles not only on approach to the base, but also on the way through our territory (they will have to fly miles of kilometers over our land). And in order to make it easier to shoot down air defense, patrolling several AWACS planes is enough over the area (they will notice a low-flying target well).
        1. arane
          arane 23 October 2015 15: 33 New
          +1
          Quote: Albert1988
          Quote: arane
          Bookmark mega-charges at settlement points on the territory of the Russian Federation, the activation of which will lead to the guaranteed destruction of the planet!

          Destroying the planet in what sense? to pieces to pieces? Such charges are not yet expected (in many respects, fortunately). It is much better to strengthen the protection of the covers of missile silos, this time, and place a layered air defense system two times, which will bring down these missiles not only on approach to the base, but also on the way through our territory (they will have to fly miles of kilometers over our land). And in order to make it easier to shoot down air defense, patrolling several AWACS planes is enough over the area (they will notice a low-flying target well).


          Maybe in pieces, maybe just a cataclysm with the sterilization of the planet. We'll see how it goes.
          This is in case of guaranteed unrequited destruction of us, if that happens.
          In principle, I am trying to lead to the idea that the destruction of Russia as a state should be a variant of suicide for the aggressor

          What you have listed from the necessary events, of course, yes, and much more! If we do not give them reason to doubt the answer, then my option will not be needed
          1. Albert1988
            Albert1988 23 October 2015 16: 57 New
            0
            Quote: arane
            If we do not give them reason to doubt the answer, then my option will not be needed

            In view of modern technologies, to prevent them from doubting our inevitable answer is a more realistic option. It is not for nothing that we began to build a network of radars throughout the country and actively develop new air defense systems capable of shooting down hypersonic targets as well. Yes, and their own hypersonic missiles are also developing))).
        2. bayard
          bayard 24 October 2015 01: 28 New
          0
          Aircraft DRLO can be kept only in a threatened period, it will be much more efficient (and more economical) to keep DRLO airships (or balloons) over positional areas. It is the airships that will ensure constant radar duty in position areas and missile-hazardous directions. Aircraft are few, expensive, and have limited duty hours.
      2. Boa kaa
        Boa kaa 23 October 2015 19: 13 New
        +7
        Quote: arane
        Bookmark mega-charges at settlement points on the territory of the Russian Federation, the activation of which will lead to the guaranteed destruction of the planet!
        Glory, did you serve in the Navy at the BRANDER?
        The idea is not accepted. We do not need suicides. I would have understood if I had offered to strike at the Yellowstone Cardillera so that the states were covered with volcanic ash. So no! I definitely want to undermine myself!
        wink I would like to ask: are you not an saboteur sent to our website for an hour? bully
        1. max702
          max702 23 October 2015 21: 39 New
          0
          Quote: Boa constrictor KAA
          Yellowstone Cardillera so that the states are covered in volcanic ash.

          Well, Duc in this case is enough for everyone .. and don’t even doubt it! Until civil thermonuclear fusion is developed and implemented on an industrial scale, human civilization stands on the knuckle of dominoes ... the slightest movement and everything will fall ... don’t believe it? Well, take a look at the VIRTUAL financial crises. How long do they bring troubles? A little before the war with the use of nuclear weapons it does not reach, and current world events are on the way to this, and something serious in the form of a big meteorite or an eruption of a supervolcano will throw civilization at least into the Middle Ages, or rather into the Stone Age .. so there is no need for Yellustone , with the world bourgeoisie at least there is a chance to wrestle ..
    2. afdjhbn67
      afdjhbn67 23 October 2015 14: 52 New
      +2
      Quote: marlin1203
      . in the conditions of the current air defense system, even a low-flying missile, a subsonic missile, is a completely amazed target.

      Еще в советское время ракетоопасные направления перекрывали пара бойцов со "стрелой", так сказать последний рубеж ПРО
      1. Azitral
        Azitral 23 October 2015 18: 12 New
        +3
        They did that in Iraq, and with success. Naturally, no one advertised this success. The forces were too unequal.
        А по поводу "гиперзвуковых блоков" для обезоруживающего глобального удара, я, на месте наших военных вообще особо не парился бы. Причины:
        1) Вариант с "обычным" ГПВРД: его придется запускать со скоростного носителя. Т.е. - сверхзвуковой бомбардировщик или та же баллистическая ракета. Прикинули, сколько того и другого понадобится для "разоружения" ДОПОЛНИТЕЛЬНО? При том, что надежно работающих блоков с ГПВРД у США попросту нет (у нас - тоже). Сколько там времени прошло от прототипа "Ф-35" до записка в серию? Запуск в серию блоков с ГПВРД более трудоемок на порядок.
        2) Многорежимный ГПВРД: его просто нет в природе. Когда будет, то окажется на порядок дороже "простого" ГПВРД.
        Гиперзвуковые блоки с ГПВРД - очередные "звездные войны", США их попросту не потянут, ни тезнологически, ни финансово, ни организационно.
  3. Maksus
    Maksus 23 October 2015 14: 34 New
    10
    It seems to me that the preparation of our ICBMs for launch will begin at the stage of the advance of the American fleets to our shores, and launch immediately after the launch of the Kyrgyz Republic, and how then will this strike be considered disarming? Or do we have no intelligence, overseas detection stations, patrol aircraft? And most importantly - the political will to use weapons? Explain to me stupid.
    1. Boa kaa
      Boa kaa 23 October 2015 19: 47 New
      +4
      Quote: Maksus
      the preparation of our ICBMs for launch will begin even at the stage of advancement of the American fleets to our shores ...

      Are you denying the combat alert system of the Strategic Missile Forces, rpkSN, YES at airfields and in the air? And this is in peacetime. Try to imagine what will happen with the introduction of BG MILITARY DANGER!
      The second one. The Amov fleet does not need to deploy anywhere. Those who are already in peacetime are in the RBD in a state of readiness to use weapons with a signal (order) to use them. Similarly with us.
      Quote: Maksus
      and launch (ICBM) immediately after launching the Kyrgyz Republic, and how then will this strike be considered disarming?

      Вообще-то КР призваны "расчистить" путь МБР первого эшелона. Вот они-то придут с ПЛАРБ, находящихся в Норвежском море или у берегов Камчатки...Они наносят "контрсиловой" удар по нашим МБР, аэродромам и базам РПКСН.
      А вот ответ нашими МБР -- будет ответно-встречным. Но, как сказал В.В.Путин: "еще 50 лет назад ленинградская улица научила меня одному правилу: если драка неизбежна, бить нужно ПЕРВЫМ!"
      I believe the President knows what he’s talking about ...
      After this statement of GDP, many in the West tensed and picked up their bellies, in which they sadly rumbled ...
      Quote: Maksus
      Or do we have ... no political will to use weapons?
      Calm down, we all have ...
      But, I propose to see what a real willpower looks like !!!
  4. afdjhbn67
    afdjhbn67 23 October 2015 14: 37 New
    15
    With all this, one must not forget about weapons no less terrible and more effective than strategic nuclear forces - national traitors like ebna and humpback ..
    1. win
      win 23 October 2015 14: 56 New
      +9
      national traitors like ebna and humpback ..


      Как только я заикнулся про "дерьмовый"(в смысле облитый или обмазанный) памятник ЕБН, то стали меня минусовать.
      1. afdjhbn67
        afdjhbn67 23 October 2015 15: 03 New
        +6
        Quote: Siegen
        EBN monument, they began to minus me.

        This is probably because they wrote with a capital letter about ebna .. laughing fuck he is fuck ...
        Keep compensation laughing
      2. ivan bogomolov
        ivan bogomolov 23 October 2015 15: 07 New
        +3
        EBNata are still alive ..))) wassat
        1. afdjhbn67
          afdjhbn67 23 October 2015 15: 13 New
          0
          Quote: ivan bogomolov
          EBNata are still alive ..)))

          Unfortunately yes .. moreover .. am
      3. The comment was deleted.
  5. NordUral
    NordUral 23 October 2015 14: 38 New
    +5
    It seems to me that with a sudden attack on Russia, and only this can be considered so far (by the way, China also should not be ruled out), only the emphasis is on a non-nuclear beginning. But in fact there will be warheads of several kilotons, or even more. Who will check later - astronauts-astronauts-tyconauts in orbit?
    1. Thronekeeper
      Thronekeeper 23 October 2015 14: 54 New
      +2
      Что там проверять? Массированная атака КР - равна ядерному нападению. Тобишь СБЧ на оных подразумевается по умолчанию. В ответ пойдут межконтинентальные статеги. Потому что КР летит несколько часов, а "Воевода" 12мин. Реактивные брёвна не в состоянии пробить объектовую ПРО. Это оружие против городов в войне сверхдержав. Так что и аэродромы поразить нереально, если пара панцирей стоит. И конвенциональными БЧ эффекта добиться - утопия.
      1. Boa kaa
        Boa kaa 23 October 2015 21: 39 New
        +1
        Quote: Thronekeeper
        КР летит несколько часов, а "Воевода" 12мин.
        Why so long? KR fly even a few minutes, if with a B-52N, but on purpose near the border of the Russian Federation (From Estonian airspace and along Peter! —Mak Kane’s dream!)
        А чего так "скоро" тяжелая Р-36М будет делать у НАТОвцев? Через 12 мин она еще будет на восходящей ветви траектории на пути к Вашингтону!
        Quote: Thronekeeper
        Jet logs are not able to break through the missile defense.
        "Бревна" -- точно! А вот LRASM, выполненная по технологии Стелс...да прикрытая РЭБ после огневого воздействия по элементам системы ПРО/ПВО -- может даже очень быть! Поэтому расслабляться не советую -- жизненно противопоказано!
        Quote: Thronekeeper
        So it’s unrealistic to hit airfields if a pair of shells is standing. And the conventional warhead effect to achieve - utopia.

        Buddy Yes you are fantastic! Sorry not scientific ... Utopia, you say? Oh well...
        Airfields are the most vulnerable target for cassette PSUs in concrete-piercing execution ... But the shells are good ... if they see the target ... and if it unexpectedly emerges due to the radio horizon like a hell out of a snuffbox ...
        That 2 Shell is obviously not enough!
    2. Boa kaa
      Boa kaa 23 October 2015 19: 58 New
      +1
      Quote: NordUral
      with a sudden blow to Russia, but only this can be seen so far
      Система СПРН, боевого дежурства компонентов СЯС, дублирования и разнесения КСБУ исключают (на современном этапе) "внезапный удар".
      Но он возможен, если появятся ГЗО и ЯО на околоземных орбитах. Вот за этим мы внимательно наблюдаем (и не только!), а так же "эффективно противодействуем"...
  6. EvgNik
    EvgNik 23 October 2015 14: 40 New
    10
    ""The nuclear response to a non-nuclear strike on strategic nuclear forces should not be doubted, since it is enshrined in all military doctrines, beginning with the one adopted in November 1993""
    What can be doubts? There is no time to think - what flies there, the answer should be in full.
  7. Armored optimist
    Armored optimist 23 October 2015 14: 46 New
    +2
    Автор статьи, мне кажется, профессионально ближе к ракетчикам, чем к ПВО. Он оценивает "прореживание" атакующих КР только истребителями, но на их пути будет и не один С-300 или С-400.
    1. TT62
      TT62 23 October 2015 15: 19 New
      +3
      S-300 or S-400 is hardly worth participating in this, spending bk for such purposes. But short-range air defense systems and for quite coping with thinning
      1. Armored optimist
        Armored optimist 23 October 2015 15: 24 New
        +2
        ZRS-300 was created as a system designed to deal primarily with the Kyrgyz Republic. To do this, a NVO was introduced into its composition - a low-altitude detector (it is on my profile picture), for this, all locators climbed towers 40m high.
    2. Bongo
      Bongo 23 October 2015 15: 37 New
      +1
      Quote: armored optimist
      Автор статьи, мне кажется, профессионально ближе к ракетчикам, чем к ПВО. Он оценивает "прореживание" атакующих КР только истребителями, но на их пути будет и не один С-300 или С-400.

      Only Moscow and Peter are adequately covered by medium and long-range air defense systems crying Some missile divisions of the Strategic Missile Forces do not have anti-aircraft cover.
      1. Armored optimist
        Armored optimist 23 October 2015 16: 15 New
        +1
        The second S-400 plant is under construction
      2. Boa kaa
        Boa kaa 23 October 2015 21: 50 New
        +1
        Quote: Bongo
        Some missile divisions of the Strategic Missile Forces do not have anti-aircraft cover.
        Do not have such an anti-aircraft cover. These are probably PGRK divisions. But in the battle formations of even a tank division there are air defense systems. So, without air defense there are no marching and battle formations of troops.
        1. Bongo
          Bongo 24 October 2015 01: 43 New
          +2
          Quote: Boa constrictor KAA
          Do not have such an anti-aircraft cover. These are probably PGRK divisions. But in the battle formations of even a tank division there are air defense systems. So, without air defense there are no marching and battle formations of troops.

          Dear Alexander, please do not confuse the military air defense and air defense forces of the airborne forces (air force-air defense).

          As a rule, the air defense systems of the ground forces do not have constant combat duty; they have different missions and armaments from the air force-air defense. Unfortunately, this is not only about mobile soil complexes, which by the way spend most of their time in places of deployment. Unfortunately, silos are also not covered.

          In the photo, the deployment area of ​​the Kozelsk missile division. In addition to the Kozel missile division’s ICBM, the Shaykovka airfield is located to the north, on which the Tu-22M3 missile carriers are based.


          All positions of air defense systems shown in red are currently liquidated and there are no longer long-range and medium-range air defense systems (air defense systems) of this region. Whereas the old S-75 and S-200 air defense systems covering this region, which is vital for the country's security, were liquidated in the early to mid-90-x, the collapse of the S-300P air defense systems occurred relatively recently.
      3. NIKNN
        NIKNN 24 October 2015 09: 58 New
        +3
        Yes you what? In the states of any unit of the Strategic Missile Forces there is air defense, even a single poplar, when entering route +, involves larger connections in the area + aviation ...
        1. zyablik.olga
          zyablik.olga 24 October 2015 12: 12 New
          +2
          Quote: NIKNN
          Yes you what? In the states of any unit of the Strategic Missile Forces there is air defense,

          Really? wassat By air defense you probably mean DShK and MANPADS?
  8. ASG7
    ASG7 23 October 2015 14: 48 New
    +4
    One gets the feeling that the United States is trying to hide the loss of nuclear technology (well, or its strong backlog) behind the screen of a lightning-fast non-nuclear strike. Well, they don’t believe in fact that after a non-nuclear strike they will not receive a nuclear one in return.
    1. Albert1988
      Albert1988 23 October 2015 15: 13 New
      +4
      Quote: ASG7
      One gets the feeling that the United States is trying to hide the loss of nuclear technology (well, or its strong backlog) behind the screen of a lightning-fast non-nuclear strike.

      Скорее они хотят создать ещё один политический инструмент давления, судите сами: по ядерному оружию у нас хоть с некоторым натягом, но паритет, значит пугать Россию ядрёной дубинкой, всё равно что грозить ежу голой пятой точкой. А тут у них появляется ещё один глобальный "инструмент", которым можно с гордостью помахивать перед нашим носом, можно гонять к нашим берегам эсминцы с этими пресловутыми КР, трепать нам нервы и т.д. так что тут больше чистой политики, чем реальных планов нападения, как я думаю.
      1. ASG7
        ASG7 23 October 2015 15: 43 New
        +5
        I agree with you, but this is all a peacock strategy for its satellites. Russia, then what’s the matter, with what sword they’ll come to it, enemies will be robbed to the fullest, up to the nuclear one. Or someone thinks, for example, that they say if enemies will advance to Smolensk without nuclear weapons. will Russia act proportionally?
        1. Albert1988
          Albert1988 23 October 2015 17: 02 New
          0
          Quote: ASG7
          Or someone thinks, for example, that they say if enemies will advance to Smolensk without nuclear weapons. will Russia act proportionally?

          Ви таки не поверите - но именно так они и думают! Весь расчёт этого "БыГыУ" и строится на том, что мол они как подойдут к нашим границам, как шмальнут 100500 ракет, обычных, не ядерных, а мы будем бегать кругами и кричать - "ааа, что делать, что делать?!!", и ответить МБРами с ядрёными БЧ не решимся...

          Meanwhile, Amer’s leaders are dangerous - with their stupidity of hopelessness ...
          1. ASG7
            ASG7 23 October 2015 17: 11 New
            +3
            So this is the essence of it, that when there are no eggs, they begin to shake their fists. hi
            1. mav1971
              mav1971 23 October 2015 19: 18 New
              +1
              Quote: ASG7
              So this is the essence of it, that when there are no eggs, they begin to shake their fists. hi


              And when are there eggs?
              1. ASG7
                ASG7 23 October 2015 20: 38 New
                +1
                Then they agree on the basis of mutual respect, understanding what power they have and what its use can lead to.
              2. The comment was deleted.
          2. The comment was deleted.
  9. Old warrior
    Old warrior 23 October 2015 14: 49 New
    +1
    Do not be afraid!
    As long as we have at least one RS-24 on duty (it is also SS-22, it is also SATAN)., The Americans will only yap in our direction.
    For they know that with the first launch of this log, the entire mattress air defense will be zilch. laughing
    1. Boa kaa
      Boa kaa 23 October 2015 22: 08 New
      +1
      Quote: Old Warrior
      at least one RS-24 (aka SS-22, aka SATAN).

      Немного не так: РС-24 -- это "Ярс",
      Сатана -- это Воевода (РС-36), точнее Р-36М УТТХ и Р-36М2 («Воевода" SS-18 Satana). РС-22B, более известна как SS-24 «Scalpel» («Скальпель»), SS-22 (SCALEBOARD) -- это 9К76 Темп-С, снята с вооружения (1989г). hi
    2. Thronekeeper
      Thronekeeper 24 October 2015 11: 36 New
      0
      Р-36М2 NATO code name SS-18 "Satan"
  10. smershxnumx
    smershxnumx 23 October 2015 14: 52 New
    +2
    Автору - большое спасибо за статью! Заслуженный "плюс"!
  11. win
    win 23 October 2015 14: 52 New
    +3
    technological superiority loses its importance if the adversary has minimal ingenuity ”

    Oh, about the ingenuity of the Russian (former Soviet) people do not occupy.
    Needle for invention is cunning.
  12. bashmak
    bashmak 23 October 2015 14: 56 New
    -12
    SNF, KR, silos, ICBMs of the Strategic Missile Forces, Republic of Kazakhstan, QUO-GUYS. WHAT IS IT ABOUT? MILITARY REVIEW-IN THE RUSSIAN LANGUAGE, AND IN THE RUSSIAN LANGUAGE THESE WORDS ARE NOT! ROGNM B !!!
    1. arane
      arane 23 October 2015 15: 13 New
      +5
      Quote: bashmak
      SNF, KR, silos, ICBMs of the Strategic Missile Forces, Republic of Kazakhstan, QUO-GUYS. WHAT IS IT ABOUT? MILITARY REVIEW-IN THE RUSSIAN LANGUAGE, AND IN THE RUSSIAN LANGUAGE THESE WORDS ARE NOT! ROGNM B !!!

      You are simply not in the subject. There are a lot of military men, everything is clear
      1. bashmak
        bashmak 23 October 2015 15: 55 New
        +2
        Although I AM NOT MILITARY, ALREADY 40 YEARS BUT I AM IN THE TOPIC! YOU WRITE THAT HERE A LOT OF MILITARY .... BUT THERE ARE SANITARY ACCESSORIES, TOKARI, HOUSEWORKS! NEED RESPECT FOR THE AUDIENCE! And FOR EXACTLY MILITARY SPECIALISTS AND OVERVIEWERS, THERE ARE ACCORDING TO THE SITES WHERE THE MOST OF US WILL BE EXACTLY NOT IN THE TOPIC!
        1. Bongo
          Bongo 23 October 2015 16: 01 New
          +6
          Quote: bashmak
          Although I AM NOT MILITARY, ALREADY 40 YEARS BUT I AM IN THE TOPIC!

          Calm please stop Есть общеизвестные и общепринятые аббревиатуры, согласитесь писать каждый раз "зенитно-ракетный комплекс" вместо вместо ЗРК или "ракетные войска стратегического назначения" вместо РВСН не слишком удобно. Если сантехникам и домохозяйка эти темы действительно интересны, как например моей подруге, то никаких трудностей у них это не вызовет. hi
        2. mav1971
          mav1971 23 October 2015 19: 25 New
          +3
          Quote: bashmak
          Although I AM NOT MILITARY, ALREADY 40 YEARS BUT I AM IN THE TOPIC! YOU WRITE THAT HERE A LOT OF MILITARY .... BUT THERE ARE SANITARY ACCESSORIES, TOKARI, HOUSEWORKS! NEED RESPECT FOR THE AUDIENCE! And FOR EXACTLY MILITARY SPECIALISTS AND OVERVIEWERS, THERE ARE ACCORDING TO THE SITES WHERE THE MOST OF US WILL BE EXACTLY NOT IN THE TOPIC!


          Respected.
          Writing on the Internet in CAPITAL and CAPITAL letters is strongly discouraged.
          It means screaming, tantrum, etc.
          Вам наверняка напишут "спокойнее", "не надо кричать" и т.д.
          Ignore the unwritten rules of communication on the Internet is not worth it. Show your disregarding attitude consciously. after prompts and warnings - even more so.
          1. The comment was deleted.
    2. Tanysh
      Tanysh 23 October 2015 15: 33 New
      +3
      In the text, the abbreviations are deciphered
      1. bashmak
        bashmak 23 October 2015 16: 00 New
        -4
        I WANTED TO READ FRESH MILITARY NEWS, COMMENTS -A HERE ABBREVIATIONS TO DECODE NECESSARIES. Directly a quiz is a field of miracles.
    3. rubidiy
      rubidiy 23 October 2015 17: 19 New
      +6
      Strategic Nuclear Forces - Strategic Nuclear Forces
      KR - cruise missile
      ICBMs - intercontinental ballistic missiles
      Strategic Missile Forces - Strategic Missile Forces
      CVO - Circular Probable Deviation
      not so hot what complex abbreviations. hi
    4. Terrible ensign
      Terrible ensign 23 October 2015 18: 32 New
      +1
      Learn the materiel! ..
  13. Mama_Cholli
    Mama_Cholli 23 October 2015 14: 59 New
    +2
    It’s interesting, but how do they respond to the idea of ​​undermining ICBMs on their territory?
    Will they then be able to stroke their black / white babies over their curly heads?

    pisi:
    Хотя зная наших потенциальных партнеров (по их делам) можно быть уверенными, что при любой возможности безнаказанности "демократы" с удовольствием бы нас уже уничтожили.
  14. kartalovkolya
    kartalovkolya 23 October 2015 15: 00 New
    +2
    Подводя итоги и без "шапко-закидательства" следует простой вывод:(что уже не раз было при любой агрессии в отношении России) "...гладко было на бумаге,да забыли про овраги,а по ним ходить...",война господа хорошие дело хлопотное и со многими неизвестными,а тут еще и "смекалка" у нас Русских как всегда включается мгновенно,особенно в критических ситуациях. Так что заканчивайте с этими глупыми планами,с русскими они не проходят,не верите спросите у Буонопартия или вот еще у Адольфа Шикельгрубера! Ведь забыли неблагодарные сво- ло- чи , что вы все, без исключения (и САСШ в том числе), своей независимостью обязаны Матушке России!
    1. Boa kaa
      Boa kaa 23 October 2015 22: 13 New
      +3
      Quote: kartalovkolya
      war gentlemen good troublesome business and with many unknown
      War is a BAD, terrible, bloody, destructive thing! With the death of people and civilizations (Indians, for example).
      And no other way! IMHO!
  15. 31rus
    31rus 23 October 2015 15: 00 New
    +2
    For me, this question is generally strange, but what difference does it make that flies, swims, eats, as soon as it becomes a threat, measures must be taken and I am sure it is, only a fool can make plans and hope for something, retribution will pass implacably
  16. Gani
    Gani 23 October 2015 15: 01 New
    +2
    brr ... broke his head, but informative ...
    very similar to the truth at the moment, BUT
    progress does not stand still both in terms of the development of missile defense and in terms of offensive potential, for example. projects of kinetic weapons launched from orbit - once there was an article on testing (or designing) in VO I don’t remember request ) США спутника "роняющего" в гравитационный колодец на заданные координаты вольфрамовые стержни
  17. revnagan
    revnagan 23 October 2015 15: 12 New
    +1
    Гладко на бумаге...Только вот вспомним не такую уж далёкую Русско-Японскую войну.Там тоже русские адмиралы считали,что у япов с внезапностью ничего не получится.А Пёрл-Харбор?Американцы были уверены,что им ничего не угрожает-ни ПЛ(малая глубина),ни торпеды самолёто-торпедоносцев,ни бомбы япов,неспосбные пробить броню линкоров.И ?Так что тут уместно вспомнить слова Нобеля-отца,обращённые к своим сыновьям:"Пока вы сидите и изобретаете замок,где уже сидит жулик и изобретает к нему ключ."
    1. Mama_Cholli
      Mama_Cholli 23 October 2015 15: 57 New
      0
      Quote: revnagan
      Гладко на бумаге...Только вот вспомним не такую уж далёкую Русско-Японскую войну.Там тоже русские адмиралы считали,что у япов с внезапностью ничего не получится.А Пёрл-Харбор?Американцы были уверены,что им ничего не угрожает-ни ПЛ(малая глубина),ни торпеды самолёто-торпедоносцев,ни бомбы япов,неспосбные пробить броню линкоров.И ?Так что тут уместно вспомнить слова Нобеля-отца,обращённые к своим сыновьям:"Пока вы сидите и изобретаете замок,где уже сидит жулик и изобретает к нему ключ."

      I agree with you, but not with Nobel. )))
      The greatest stupidity would be the invention of the castle in the absence (invention / manufacture) of a key to it. Apparently the meaning of the phrase should be of the type: picks the master key. (on a tricky one with a reverse thread bolt).
      ))
  18. ivan bogomolov
    ivan bogomolov 23 October 2015 15: 16 New
    0
    They have everything, and they will print the machinery and equipment and dough as much as you want, but you can’t understand what to sleep at the post, well-fed and fat cats slept through our Caspian gifts.

    Keep your head cold, your stomach hungry, and your feet warm. Kutuzov Mikhail Illarionovich
    1. am808s
      am808s 23 October 2015 18: 42 New
      0
      Keep your head cold, your stomach hungry, and your feet warm. Kutuzov Mikhail Illarionovich Kutuzov could only repeat this, but Ibn Sina said this
  19. Denis DV
    Denis DV 23 October 2015 15: 18 New
    +4
    Excellent article +, authors well done, dispensed with accessible information, without juggling trumps and rabbits from a cylinder hi
  20. Bully
    Bully 23 October 2015 15: 19 New
    +1
    Beyond normal logic. It’s crazy to strike at the enemy with non-nuclear weapons, knowing at 100% that missiles with nuclear warheads will fly in response. The blow in this situation will be delivered by the tomahawks with the YaBCh, everything else is a very harmful illusion, which aims to relax and misinform us.
    1. mav1971
      mav1971 23 October 2015 20: 09 New
      0
      Quote: Bully
      Beyond normal logic. It’s crazy to strike at the enemy with non-nuclear weapons, knowing at 100% that missiles with nuclear warheads will fly in response. The blow in this situation will be delivered by the tomahawks with the YaBCh, everything else is a very harmful illusion, which aims to relax and misinform us.


      US Department of Defense concept "Prompt Global Strike - PGS" - learn ..
  21. Fokiigor
    Fokiigor 23 October 2015 15: 23 New
    -4
    Берём преамбулу и вывод данной статьи - реферат первокурсника на тему "Нас всех убьют", тупо, без грамотно, полный бред.
    1. Boa kaa
      Boa kaa 23 October 2015 22: 28 New
      +1
      Quote: Fokiigor
      stupidly without competently complete nonsense.

      When you learn to correctly spell the word UNLIMITED, then it will definitely be sharp, and with meaning! laughing
      Learn the Russian language, wise guy, before speaking derogatoryly about the work of people who have analyzed the material, and not stupidly copied it from a neighboring site! am
      Good luck.
  22. Alexander S.
    Alexander S. 23 October 2015 15: 30 New
    +1
    The only chance for Americans is hypersound. But it still needs to be invented .. sanded ... done a few hundred or thousands (no matter) sooo expensive pieces ... and yet we are not sitting idly by. But all this does not stand in comparison with human psychology. After all, who knows what will cross their heads ... or our traitors.
  23. Kalmar
    Kalmar 23 October 2015 16: 24 New
    +3
    Не покинет меня ощущение, что автор что-то напутал. Неужели американцы и впрямь планировали "Томагавками" разоружать наши СЯС? Это же очевиднейшая ересь, ибо:
    1. On silos accounted for only part of the strategic nuclear forces; mobile launchers and SSBNs carry enough charges to make it seem little to anyone;
    2. Многие ШПУ находятся в глубине континента, где "Томагавк" до них банально не дотянется;
    3. Nobody canceled the air defense: you just need to send an unrealistic amount of missile defense so that the required number is guaranteed to reach the target;
    4. The Kyrgyz Republic has a very large approach time - 2-3 hours. I just can’t imagine how 10 of thousands of missiles can hang unnoticed in our airspace for so long. And the very fact of the launch is unlikely to remain outlined. After that, it will be possible to calmly launch ICBMs, and let the KR poke into empty mines.

    Какими бы тупыми мы наших западных "партнеров" не считали, настолько тупыми и наивными они уж точно не являются.
    1. mav1971
      mav1971 23 October 2015 20: 10 New
      0
      Quote: Kalmar
      Не покинет меня ощущение, что автор что-то напутал. Неужели американцы и впрямь планировали "Томагавками" разоружать наши СЯС?



      US Department of Defense Concept “Non-nuclear Fast Global Strike” (Prompt Global Strike - PGS)
      1. Kalmar
        Kalmar 23 October 2015 23: 13 New
        0
        US Department of Defense Concept “Non-nuclear Fast Global Strike” (Prompt Global Strike - PGS)

        Confused. The essence of PGS is the possibility of delivering a non-nuclear strike at any point in the plan as soon as possible (about an hour). The key point is speed: there was a threat - it was quickly suppressed, a kind of quick reaction force.

        As a means of a first strike on a nuclear power, this concept, as I understand it, is not considered, including for the reasons described above. On the other hand, the components of the PGS system are planned to be used in a nuclear conflict, but only in addition to nuclear weapons.
  24. Vlad5307
    Vlad5307 23 October 2015 17: 00 New
    +1
    These calculations are given for relatively low-speed missile systems, and if we calculate similarly to repel an attack with hypersonic missiles, which is now concentrated on the technological idea of ​​the SGA. It is necessary to prepare an answer specifically for such BSUs, and not rely on the old developments of the Kyrgyz Republic and their long approach time, etc. Also, a massive attack of the Kyrgyz Republic can be accompanied by massive attacks of the enemy air force, and in this component they also have great superiority. And we must take into account that the space component of the defense of the Russian Federation will be simultaneously attacked. And given that the Russian Federation is surrounded around the entire perimeter by their bases, i.e. many areas of BSU. The analysis must be carried out in a comprehensive manner, and not pulling out a separate direction - this can lead to incorrect conclusions in the defense strategy.
    Пример вроде убедителен, но только в реалиях сегодняшнего дня, а как будет завтра, если РФ проиграет в гиперзвуковых технологиях. Против войны надо бороться всем миром, тогда один "хулиган", даже очень сильный, не рискнет ее развязать! hi
    1. SPACE
      SPACE 23 October 2015 17: 37 New
      +1
      Everything that is indicated in the article was quoted here in the comments in 13, although it was also known in 90-X.
      Quote: Vlad5307
      but only in the realities of today, and what will happen tomorrow if the Russian Federation loses in hypersonic technology.

      There are no realities of today and tomorrow will not be, everything is as old as the world, there are simply those who were born in 90 and only know this world, since 80x after the crisis of deploying medium-range ballistic missiles (pioneer and perching) and signing the INF Treaty, the Americans took up a new strategy of mutual reduction of strategic weapons with the simultaneous development of missile defense and the possibility of a massive preemptive strike of the Kyrgyz Republic in non-nuclear equipment. To what else did the USSR respond by linking to the doctrine of retaliatory strike, the massive use of cruise missiles. Launch a tomahawk, get a mace. So since then, according to the laws of physics, there have never been and never will be advantages of hypersonic missiles over a nuclear warhead flying from orbit at a speed of 7 km / s.
  25. sa-ag
    sa-ag 23 October 2015 17: 32 New
    0
    Some kind of simple arrangement turns out, like they will launch cruise missiles, and we will defeat them with air defense systems, remember the Iraqi companies, where are the B-52 with electronic warfare equipment, where are the Growlers, who will create such a situation in front of you before launching missiles?
  26. 31rus
    31rus 23 October 2015 19: 41 New
    0
    Тут вопрос ПРО ,как наступательного оружия ,если взять и этот расклад,то получаем ,именно КР "отвлекают",наши силы ПВО ,совместно с ударами ракет с баз ПРО и завершают удар именно ЯО,все это с концинтрированно по времени и распределенно по эшелонам,далее вступает в действие именно система про, такая стратегия имеет место
    1. Kalmar
      Kalmar 23 October 2015 23: 33 New
      0
      именно КР "отвлекают",наши силы ПВО

      Уже ж обсуждалось: КР слишком медленные. Как следствие, они не столько отвлекают, сколько заранее предупреждают, что атака началась. И дают тем самым достаточно времени для ответно-встречного ядерного удара. Ну а после масштабного обмена МБРами "Томагавки" уже мало на что влияют.
  27. Old26
    Old26 23 October 2015 19: 53 New
    +2
    Quote: Old Warrior
    Do not be afraid!
    As long as we have at least one RS-24 on duty (it is also SS-22, it is also SATAN)., The Americans will only yap in our direction.
    For they know that with the first launch of this log, the entire mattress air defense will be zilch. laughing

    Oh well. Damn - you know the materiel on minus one.
    REMEMBER, and better RECORD, maybe a long time will remain in memory
    1. PC-24 - is not VOEVODA
    2. VOEVODA - this PC-20
    3. SS-22 - this rocket "Темп-С" (modification with a range of about 900 km). Not modified called SS-12. Destroyed under the INF Treaty in 1987
    4. VOEVODA - this SS-18

    And one more detail, if you ever mention Satanand VOIVODE - то лучше не стоит. Потому что у наших "заклятых друзей" под названием SATAN there is a whole family of our missiles: R-36M, R-36M UTTH, R-36M2.
    The name is VOEVODA we have only one of these missiles - R-36M2
    1. Kalmar
      Kalmar 23 October 2015 23: 16 New
      +1
      4. VOEVODA - this is SS-18

      I beg your pardon for boring, but then not SS-18, but SS-18: the bourgeois classification is :)
  28. Old26
    Old26 23 October 2015 20: 03 New
    +1
    Quote: SPACE
    There are no realities of today and tomorrow will not be, everything is as old as the world, there are simply those who were born in 90 and only know this world, since 80x after the crisis of deploying medium-range ballistic missiles (pioneer and perching) and signing the INF Treaty, the Americans took up a new strategy of mutual reduction of strategic weapons with the simultaneous development of missile defense and the possibility of a massive preemptive strike of the Kyrgyz Republic in non-nuclear equipment. To what else did the USSR respond by linking to the doctrine of retaliatory strike, the massive use of cruise missiles. Launch a tomahawk, get a mace. So since then, according to the laws of physics, there have never been and never will be advantages of hypersonic missiles over a nuclear warhead flying from orbit at a speed of 7 km / s.

    Something you, Demyan, all mixed in one bottle.
    The Americans, as you say, embarked on a new strategic arms reduction strategy much earlier. The first treaty is OSV-1, or as it is also called, the Interim Agreement was signed in 1972, at the same time as the ABM agreement. The second - OSV-2 - in 1979. And the INF Treaty - only in 1987.

    Развитие ПРО у них началось в начале 2000-х, ранее ничего такого у них не было. Более того, система "Сейфгард" у них была законсервирована, в то время как наша А-35/35М/135 продолжала моденрнизироваться.
    Удар неядерными КР стал актуальным после начала 90-х, когда они впервые были массировано применены в Ираке в ходе первой войны. Концепция ОВУ у нас была почти с самого начала, задолго до подписания договоров по сокращению. А концепция БГУ начала разрабатываться в те же 2000-е, когда стало ясно, что для быстрого реагирования КР не подходят. Отправной точкой считаю ту самую операцию, когда "шедшие" два часа КР "не застали" на месте Бен Ладена

    So now the talk about the massive use of the Kyrgyz Republic is so far only talk and this strategy can be applied either to countries without nuclear weapons, or to those with very little potential ...
  29. The comment was deleted.
  30. xin-l
    xin-l 23 October 2015 20: 04 New
    0
    On the whole, as a woman who was not well-versed in such high abbreviations, she realized that they would not succeed in fitting up a group of destroyers with the necessary armament for us, and they won’t be able to get an instant strike either because the conflicts in Yugoslavia and Iraq showed that it wasn’t even for minutes, but rather for a day. In short, theory is far from what practice is. And there is only the danger of a space strike. But while this is somewhat illusory, although what they say about it is somehow alarming. And it seems that the American had a plan for a global strike, including through the Arctic, as far as I understood this is one of the least protected areas, which is probably why Shoigu equips this area with bases unless of course we assume that we will find a new platform for rivalry in that very place. All the same, resources are resources. There is something to ponder. And it’s so good that our nuclear weapons are almost one hundred percent guarantee that you will not be banged in our best of worlds. To live with wolves as they say. Agree with the strong.
  31. Old26
    Old26 23 October 2015 20: 05 New
    +1
    Quote: bashmak
    SNF, KR, silos, ICBMs of the Strategic Missile Forces, Republic of Kazakhstan, QUO-GUYS. WHAT IS IT ABOUT? MILITARY REVIEW-IN THE RUSSIAN LANGUAGE, AND IN THE RUSSIAN LANGUAGE THESE WORDS ARE NOT! ROGNM B !!!

    Stupid. No wonder they picked up the cons. Standard abbreviations applied in practice
  32. Concealer
    Concealer 23 October 2015 20: 33 New
    0
    I have always said that ICBMs on NRE are the best solution against any BSU doctrine.
    The weapon of the apocalypse is the best weapon of nuclear deterrence in the absence of a missile defense treaty.
    And if the weapon of the apocalypse, then why trifle?
    And the NRE is very useful in industrial space exploration.
  33. Indifferent
    Indifferent 23 October 2015 21: 06 New
    +2
    Finally, the authors wrote really what and how could happen in a massive strike of cruise missiles. And then our old pensioners - generals with bulging eyes in fear, tired of listening!
    We graduated from two academies, but did not learn to count. Here they at least sensibly wrote what and how!
    And then like children. Thousands of missiles will fly to the Russian Federation, and we will sit and wait for it to fall on our heads. The authors cite the Black Sea as an example. And from the Atlantic or from the Mediterranean, these missiles will fly much longer. During this time, the United States simply may cease to exist!
    As the nuclear forces were the most advanced and efficient (for both sides), they remained!
  34. DobryAAH
    DobryAAH 23 October 2015 23: 00 New
    0
    American missile defense is simply cutting the budget, but it is dangerous because it creates the illusion of the possibility of repulsing the strike. CRs can be used and then they will chatter that this is a non-nuclear strike so that the strategic nuclear forces will not receive an answer. Here's how our S-500s will solve the task of defeating warheads in space? Something tells me that this is a difficult task. Therefore, if all of a sudden our people at least drop TNW, then Europe will be in ruin. I already said that I expect a conflict with the West within 10 years.
  35. cherkas.oe
    cherkas.oe 23 October 2015 23: 23 New
    +1
    Quote: rubidiy
    Strategic Nuclear Forces - Strategic Nuclear Forces
    KR - cruise missile
    ICBMs - intercontinental ballistic missiles
    Strategic Missile Forces - Strategic Missile Forces
    CVO - Circular Probable Deviation
    not so hot what complex abbreviations. hi

    Just like Makarenko. Patiently, in detail, on the topic. good drinks
  36. sisa29
    sisa29 24 October 2015 02: 59 New
    0
    Friends! I think it’s not there that we are trying to find a threat, missiles are all that way to the public, so that the new allies respect and regularly yap. The main danger, as usual, is not noticeable. This is an attempt to flog the country from the inside. This training and the life of the golden youth in their countries, as a result of the loyalty of the Papa. The accounts and real estate of our elta in the countries under their supervision. All sorts of grandees to drain the intellect from the country. Purchase of accessible media for instilling in the young generation their values ​​(house 2) and fooling. There are many more examples of the sabotage war that is going on. But all this will work at hour X when we have another Nikolay 2 or Gorbachev. Russia lost all wars only because of internal problems. But to risk launching some missiles in order to get it back, no, they won’t do it, they will wait, they will drag their rat cubs at us and grin, watching how he puffs up trying to bite us or at least yap louder to get a handout. Although of course we don’t have Atomic weapons, we were crushed for a long time without cunning. But thanks to Stalin and Beria, for a long time there are no survivors, and still thanks to the shield they built, we are fighting.
    1. DobryAAH
      DobryAAH 24 October 2015 12: 21 New
      0
      They don’t have time for long operations, the economy is stalling, and Russia is also a hindrance to their global plans.
    2. The comment was deleted.
  37. slizhov
    slizhov 24 October 2015 08: 26 New
    0
    all this and there is no reason to doubt it ...
  38. Earnest
    Earnest 24 October 2015 10: 13 New
    +1
    Quote: Kalmar
    Не покинет меня ощущение, что автор что-то напутал. Неужели американцы и впрямь планировали "Томагавками" разоружать наши СЯС? Это же очевиднейшая ересь, ибо:
    1. On silos accounted for only part of the strategic nuclear forces; mobile launchers and SSBNs carry enough charges to make it seem little to anyone;
    2. Многие ШПУ находятся в глубине континента, где "Томагавк" до них банально не дотянется;
    3. Nobody canceled the air defense: you just need to send an unrealistic amount of missile defense so that the required number is guaranteed to reach the target;
    4. The Kyrgyz Republic has a very large approach time - 2-3 hours. I just can’t imagine how 10 of thousands of missiles can hang unnoticed in our airspace for so long. And the very fact of the launch is unlikely to remain outlined. After that, it will be possible to calmly launch ICBMs, and let the KR poke into empty mines.
    Какими бы тупыми мы наших западных "партнеров" не считали, настолько тупыми и наивными они уж точно не являются.

    О сокращении ПВО... Экс-начштаба 13 рд 31 РА мне рассказывал байку, как в 90-х их комдив г/м-р Виговский достучался до Генштаба с просьбой развернуть второй полк ПВО на С-300, а то один действующий полк всю дивизию не прикрывает. В Генштабе сказали :"О! У нас есть ещё полк на С-300?", - и сократили ДЕЙСТВУЮЩИЙ.
    А сама стратегия основана на "запирающем ударе", ракетчики в теме, о чём я, и может быть реализована при условии привлечения в первом ударе по нам баллистических ракет с АПЛ из акватории Северного ледовитого океана (подлетное время в любую точку РФ не более 9 минут). Но эта картинка красивой теории разрушается выходом на боевое патрулирование наших АПЛ, наземных мобильных комплексов, стратегических бомбардировщиков и ракетоносцев. А ещё с нетерпением ждём воссоздания БЖРК. soldier
    1. Kalmar
      Kalmar 24 October 2015 12: 31 New
      0
      А сама стратегия основана на "запирающем ударе", ракетчики в теме, о чём я, и может быть реализована при условии привлечения в первом ударе по нам баллистических ракет с АПЛ из акватории Северного ледовитого океана

      Well this is unsportsmanlike. It was a matter of a non-nuclear strike, allegedly disarming the enemy without sliding into a large-scale nuclear conflict and all that. And if ICBMs immediately go into business, then I don’t see much point in attracting non-nuclear CDs; except for some minor infrastructure facilities.
    2. Oleko
      Oleko 24 October 2015 15: 16 New
      0
      Может быть не БЖРК,а РКЖБ ? Ракетный комплекс железнодорожного базирования? Или это какая-то новая аббревиатура, которая к ж/д не имеет никакого отношения? Впервые с РКЖБ я столкнулся, будучи курсантом ЛВИКА им. Можайского. 1972 год. Курс молодого бойца перед принятием присяги. Нам показали плакаты с РТ-23 ("Скальпель", иногда слышу "Стилет")и вагон, где находилась пусковая установка, замаскированный под рефрижератор. Показали, как можно отличить "рефрижератор" РКЖБ: там были пиропатроны, которые отстреливали крышу вагона, сейчас их нет. Грузовой выгон насыпного типа(щебень, песок, уголь и т.п) "выдерживает" 26 тонн. Вес "рефрижератора" - 140 т. Можно представить, что происходило с ж/д полотном после прохода РКЖБ). Тогда рельсы укладывались на деревянные шпалы, пропитанные креозотом. Естественно, полотно приходило в негодность. Пошла перешивка на бетонные шпалы.
      Разное приходилось читать о РКЖБ. Даже за "рюмкой чая" спорил с моим приятелем, полковником КГБ (2 ГУ КГБ, собственная служба безопасности в прошлом, выведен из состава действуюшего резерва по причине инсульта)о том, что нужны новые РКЖБ. Есть приятная весть, что новые РКЖБ находятся в состоянии НИОКР, близких к завершению.
    3. The comment was deleted.
  39. Old26
    Old26 24 October 2015 10: 16 New
    +1
    Quote: Kalmar
    I beg your pardon for boring, but then not SS-18, but SS-18: the bourgeois classification is :)

    Of course. Just the author of the post wrote SS- .. and I repeated after him good And then he has three different missiles in one bottle: RS-24 = SS-22 = SATAN
  40. Dragon-y
    Dragon-y 24 October 2015 10: 54 New
    0
    Oh, by the way, in the article, not a word about the BZHRK ... or did I miss?
  41. Oleko
    Oleko 24 October 2015 14: 02 New
    0
    The S-350 Vityaz air defense system is intended for the defense of administrative, industrial and military installations against massive attacks by modern and promising air attack weapons. It is capable of simultaneously reflecting the attacks of various air attack weapons around the entire range of altitudes of their flight - from extremely small to large. The S-350 can operate autonomously, as well as as part of air defense groups under control from higher command posts. The combat work of the system is carried out completely automatically - the combat calculation provides only preparation for work and monitors the course of hostilities.



    Among other performance characteristics, it can be noted that the maximum number of simultaneously fired targets is 16 aerodynamic and 12 ballistic targets of air destruction, which interfere at ranges of up to 60 kilometers and over the ceiling of 30 kilometers. Any low-flying target "clings" to the complex almost on the ground, ten meters from the surface, which allows you to effectively shoot down cruise missiles and helicopters. At the same time, the maximum number of simultaneously guided missiles is 32 pieces, which makes it possible to shoot down all enemy objects flying in the air in a radius of more than one hundred kilometers with one complex.


  42. Old26
    Old26 24 October 2015 22: 28 New
    0
    Quote: Oleko
    Maybe not BZHRK, and RKZHB? Rail-based missile system? Or is it some kind of new abbreviation that has nothing to do with railway?

    I have never heard such a reduction - RKZHB. Only BZHRK - military railway complex. And that is what the abbreviation refers to the railway. And about everything else

    Quote: Oleko
    Впервые с РКЖБ я столкнулся, будучи курсантом ЛВИКА им. Можайского. 1972 год. Курс молодого бойца перед принятием присяги. Нам показали плакаты с РТ-23 ("Скальпель", иногда слышу "Стилет")и вагон, где находилась пусковая установка, замаскированный под рефрижератор

    Я конечно понимаю, что возраст у вас уже под/за 60, что-то могли забыть, как например Натовские обозначения. "Скальпель" и "Стилет" - это разные ракеты. Но это не так важно. А вот насчет того, что вы видели в 1972 году пусковую от RT-23- this alas it cannot be. Perhaps you saw a poster of another complex, but not the RT-23 or RT-23UTTX.
    1. Oleko
      Oleko 24 October 2015 23: 32 New
      0
      Вы правы. И относительно БЖРК и РТ-23. Очень признателен за разъяснение. Видимо, за давностью всё смешалось. Я отучился в Можайке семестр и ушёл. Дослуживал на Красносельском НИПе. КПТРЛ "Куб". Затем рабочие и инженерные специальности. Но "общий курс летательных аппаратов" помню хорошо. Удачи.
    2. The comment was deleted.
  43. Old26
    Old26 25 October 2015 00: 04 New
    0
    Quote: Oleko
    Вы правы. И относительно БЖРК и РТ-23. Очень признателен за разъяснение. Видимо, за давностью всё смешалось. Я отучился в Можайке семестр и ушёл. Дослуживал на Красносельском НИПе. КПТРЛ "Куб". Затем рабочие и инженерные специальности. Но "общий курс летательных аппаратов" помню хорошо. Удачи

    Nothing wrong. It’s just that the work on the RT-23 complex began in the years 76 and 79, and on the RT-23UTTX, in 83. So we saw some of the early variants of the BZHRK - possibly with the RT-21
    1. Oleko
      Oleko 25 October 2015 01: 01 New
      0
      Apparently, yes. An early option. Especially shooting roof. Now it is being raised with the simultaneous closure of the contact wire to the ground
    2. Oleko
      Oleko 25 October 2015 01: 01 New
      0
      Apparently, yes. An early option. Especially shooting roof. Now it is being raised with the simultaneous closure of the contact wire to the ground
  44. podgornovea
    podgornovea 26 October 2015 11: 02 New
    +1
    And how much does air defense need for a ballistic missile position area?
    Если обнаружен массированный пуск по целям на территории России крылатых, баллистических ракет то разбираться куда они летят нет смысла - надо выводить ракеты из шахт за подлетное время и по целям.И не надеяться что эти крылатые ракеты летят "всего лишь" для того что-бы уничтожить наши электростанции,заводы пункты управления и связи и т.д. К моменту подлета шахты должны быть пусты, тогда и ПВО позиционных районов не потребуется. А вот средства раннего обнаружения пусков очень даже.