Quickly fail

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.
Ctrl Enter

Noticed a mistake Highlight text and press. Ctrl + Enter

93 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must to register.

I have an account? Sign in

  1. mig31 23 October 2015 14: 34 New
    • 9
    • 0
    +9
    Political maneuvering in strategic nuclear forces is equivalent to a soap bubble - let it burst, but only over the next Treaty, the whole world wants to live, and the State Department will once again try to score points as a “peacemaker”. But not this time he will get the winner’s laurels, now PUTIN is on the horse, and Russia rules the ball, so the Yankees lost this game clean .....
    1. Andrea 23 October 2015 14: 58 New
      • 8
      • 0
      +8
      Quote: mig31
      the Yankees lost this game clean .....
      We won’t overwhelm them with hats, although in my opinion their new doctrine is another “thrown into the loot.” They are all sane and well aware that mine-based missiles are no longer the basis of the strategic nuclear forces. The rest must first be detected, then managed to get it. Obviously they consider the enemy idiots who will not guess to destroy missile defense systems before otvetka.
      That's how it is ... in short.
      1. Gani 23 October 2015 15: 15 New
        • 4
        • 0
        +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 23 October 2015 15: 37 New
          • 2
          • 0
          +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 23 October 2015 18: 17 New
            • 4
            • 0
            +4
            Everything is correct, by that moment the whole world will be in “trash”. Iskanders are needed so that the sphincters of European "friends" do not relax ...
        2. boroda64 24 October 2015 02: 24 New
          • 0
          • 0
          0
          .
          - and who told you
          - what are the tasks of calibers ..?
      2. The comment was deleted.
      3. bulvas 23 October 2015 15: 43 New
        • 6
        • 0
        +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 23 October 2015 19: 01 New
        • 4
        • 0
        +4
        Quote: Andrea
        mine-based missiles are no longer the basis of strategic nuclear forces.
        Yes, ours apparently are moving to mobile-based land-based ICBMs. A total of about 160 silos, plus 85 - double (mine-mobile), total: 245 silos. But the Yankees, on the contrary, are going to make silo-based ICBMs Minitman-2018 (3-400 silos) the basis of their strategic nuclear forces by 450.
        “Each side independently determines the composition and structure of its strategic offensive arms. By 2018, the US plans to have 400 silos of ICBMs, 12 SSBNs with 240 SLBMs deployed (the number of missile silos on each boat is planned to be reduced from 24 to 20 units) and 60 TB (16 V -2A and 44 B-52N) - a total of 700 units of deployed ICBMs, SLBMs and heavy bombers. " 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 23 October 2015 19: 51 New
        • 1
        • 0
        +1
        Quickly fail
        Yes, everyone already understood this for a long time! All the class. Another “Sarmatian” with 36 warheads to accept in the next 5 years and USE! They sailed. Partners !!!! bend over.
  2. marlin1203 23 October 2015 14: 34 New
    • 9
    • 0
    +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 23 October 2015 14: 43 New
      • 2
      • 0
      +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.

      Of course it is, but this scenario does not provide for accounting for the financial component! By type of "pan or gone."
      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 23 October 2015 15: 08 New
        • 4
        • 0
        +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 23 October 2015 15: 33 New
          • 1
          • 0
          +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 23 October 2015 16: 57 New
            • 0
            • 0
            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 24 October 2015 01: 28 New
          • 0
          • 0
          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 23 October 2015 19: 13 New
        • 7
        • 0
        +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 23 October 2015 21: 39 New
          • 0
          • 0
          0
          Quote: BoA 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 23 October 2015 14: 52 New
      • 2
      • 0
      +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.

      Back in Soviet times, a pair of fighters with an "arrow" blocked the missile-dangerous directions, the last line of missile defense, so to speak
      1. Azitral 23 October 2015 18: 12 New
        • 3
        • 0
        +3
        They did that in Iraq, and with success. Naturally, no one advertised this success. The forces were too unequal.
        And as for the "hypersonic blocks" for a disarming global strike, I, on the site of our military, would not have been soared at all. Causes:
        1) Option with a "normal" scramjet: it will have to be launched from high-speed media. Those. - a supersonic bomber or the same ballistic missile. Estimated how much of both will be needed for "disarmament" in addition? Despite the fact that the United States simply does not have reliably working blocks with a scramjet (we also have it). How much time has passed from the prototype "F-35" to the note in the series? Running a series of blocks with a scramjet is more time-consuming.
        2) Multi-mode scramjet: it simply does not exist in nature. When it is, it will turn out to be an order of magnitude more expensive than a “simple” scramjet engine.
        The hypersonic blocks with the scramjet are another "star wars", the United States simply will not pull them, either theologically, financially or organizationally.
  3. Maksus 23 October 2015 14: 34 New
    • 10
    • 0
    +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 23 October 2015 19: 47 New
      • 4
      • 0
      +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?

      In fact, the Kyrgyz Republic is called upon to "clear" the path of first-tier ICBMs. Here they come from SSBNs located in the Norwegian Sea or off the coast of Kamchatka ... They strike a "counter-force" strike on our ICBMs, airfields and bases of the SSBN.
      But the answer by our ICBMs will be reciprocal. But, as Vladimir Putin said: “50 years ago, Leningradskaya Street taught me one rule: if a fight is inevitable, you need to beat FIRST!”
      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 23 October 2015 14: 37 New
    • 15
    • 0
    +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
      • 0
      +9
      national traitors like ebna and humpback ..


      As soon as I hinted about the "crappy" (in the sense of doused or coated) EBN monument, they began to minus me.
      1. afdjhbn67 23 October 2015 15: 03 New
        • 6
        • 0
        +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 23 October 2015 15: 07 New
        • 3
        • 0
        +3
        EBNata are still alive ..))) wassat
        1. afdjhbn67 23 October 2015 15: 13 New
          • 0
          • 0
          0
          Quote: ivan bogomolov
          EBNata are still alive ..)))

          Unfortunately yes .. moreover .. am
      3. The comment was deleted.
  5. NordUral 23 October 2015 14: 38 New
    • 5
    • 0
    +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 23 October 2015 14: 54 New
      • 2
      • 0
      +2
      What is there to check? Massive attack of the Kyrgyz Republic - equal to a nuclear attack. Tobish NBC on these is implied by default. Intercontinental statues will go in response. Because the Kyrgyz Republic flies for several hours, and the "Governor" is 12 minutes. Jet logs are not able to break through the missile defense. This is a weapon against cities in a superpower war. So it’s unrealistic to hit airfields if a pair of shells is standing. And the conventional warhead effect to achieve - utopia.
      1. Boa kaa 23 October 2015 21: 39 New
        • 1
        • 0
        +1
        Quote: Thronekeeper
        KR flies a few hours, and the "Governor" 12min.
        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!)
        And why so "soon" heavy R-36M will do with the NATO? In 12 minutes she will still be on the ascending branch of the trajectory on her way to Washington!
        Quote: Thronekeeper
        Jet logs are not able to break through the missile defense.
        "Logs" - for sure! But the LRASM, made using the Stealth technology ... yes, covered by electronic warfare after the fire on elements of the missile defense / air defense system - it can even be very! Therefore, I do not advise you to relax - it is vitally contraindicated!
        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 23 October 2015 19: 58 New
      • 1
      • 0
      +1
      Quote: NordUral
      with a sudden blow to Russia, but only this can be seen so far
      The system of SPRN, combat alert components of the strategic nuclear forces, duplication and separation of the KSSU exclude (at the present stage) a “sudden strike”.
      But it is possible if GBOs and nuclear weapons appear in near-Earth orbits. Here we are closely observing this (and not only!), And also "effectively counteracting" ...
  6. EvgNik 23 October 2015 14: 40 New
    • 10
    • 0
    +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 23 October 2015 14: 46 New
    • 2
    • 0
    +2
    The author of the article, it seems to me, is professionally closer to missile defense than to air defense. He estimates the "thinning" of attacking KR only by fighters, but there will be more than one C-300 or C-400 on their way.
    1. TT62 23 October 2015 15: 19 New
      • 3
      • 0
      +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 23 October 2015 15: 24 New
        • 2
        • 0
        +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 23 October 2015 15: 37 New
      • 1
      • 0
      +1
      Quote: armored optimist
      The author of the article, it seems to me, is professionally closer to missile defense than to air defense. He estimates the "thinning" of attacking KR only by fighters, but there will be more than one C-300 or C-400 on their way.

      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 23 October 2015 16: 15 New
        • 1
        • 0
        +1
        The second S-400 plant is under construction
      2. Boa kaa 23 October 2015 21: 50 New
        • 1
        • 0
        +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 24 October 2015 01: 43 New
          • 2
          • 0
          +2
          Quote: BoA 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 24 October 2015 09: 58 New
        • 3
        • 0
        +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 24 October 2015 12: 12 New
          • 2
          • 0
          +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 23 October 2015 14: 48 New
    • 4
    • 0
    +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 23 October 2015 15: 13 New
      • 4
      • 0
      +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.

      Rather, they want to create another political tool of pressure, judge for yourselves: for nuclear weapons we have at least some interference, but parity means scaring Russia with a nuclear club, all the same, threatening the hedgehog with a bare fifth point. And then they have one more global “tool”, which we can proudly wave in front of our noses, we can drive destroyers with these notorious missiles to our shores, wring our nerves, etc. so there’s more pure politics than real attack plans, I think.
      1. ASG7 23 October 2015 15: 43 New
        • 5
        • 0
        +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 23 October 2015 17: 02 New
          • 0
          • 0
          0
          Quote: ASG7
          Or someone thinks, for example, that they say if enemies will advance to Smolensk without nuclear weapons. will Russia act proportionally?

          You don’t believe it, but that's exactly what they think! The whole calculation of this “ByGyU” is based on the fact that they say how they approach our borders, how they mock 100500 missiles, conventional, non-nuclear, and we will run in circles and shout - "aah, what to do, what to do? !!" , and we will not dare to respond with ICBMs with vigorous warheads ...

          Meanwhile, Amer’s leaders are dangerous - with their stupidity of hopelessness ...
          1. ASG7 23 October 2015 17: 11 New
            • 3
            • 0
            +3
            So this is the essence of it, that when there are no eggs, they begin to shake their fists. hi
            1. mav1971 23 October 2015 19: 18 New
              • 1
              • 0
              +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 23 October 2015 20: 38 New
                • 1
                • 0
                +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 23 October 2015 14: 49 New
    • 1
    • 0
    +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 23 October 2015 22: 08 New
      • 1
      • 0
      +1
      Quote: Old Warrior
      at least one RS-24 (aka SS-22, aka SATAN).

      A bit wrong: the RS-24 is the Yars,
      Satan is the Voivode (RS-36), more precisely the R-36M UTTH and R-36M2 (Voivoda SS-18 Satana). The RS-22B, better known as the SS-24 “Scalpel” (“Scalpel”), SS -22 (SCALEBOARD) - this is 9K76 Temp-S, withdrawn from service (1989). hi
    2. Thronekeeper 24 October 2015 11: 36 New
      • 0
      • 0
      0
      R-36M2 NATO code name SS-18 "Satan"
  10. smershxnumx 23 October 2015 14: 52 New
    • 2
    • 0
    +2
    Thanks to the author for the article! Deserved plus!
  11. win
    win 23 October 2015 14: 52 New
    • 3
    • 0
    +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 23 October 2015 14: 56 New
    • -12
    • 0
    -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 23 October 2015 15: 13 New
      • 5
      • 0
      +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 23 October 2015 15: 55 New
        • 2
        • 0
        +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 23 October 2015 16: 01 New
          • 6
          • 0
          +6
          Quote: bashmak
          Although I AM NOT MILITARY, ALREADY 40 YEARS BUT I AM IN THE TOPIC!

          Calm please stop There are well-known and generally accepted abbreviations, agree to write each time the "anti-aircraft missile system" instead of instead of air defense systems or the "strategic missile forces" instead of the Strategic Missile Forces. If plumbers and a housewife are really interested in these topics, such as for example my friend, then this will not cause any difficulties for them. hi
        2. mav1971 23 October 2015 19: 25 New
          • 3
          • 0
          +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.
          You will probably write "calmer", "no need to shout", etc.
          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 23 October 2015 15: 33 New
      • 3
      • 0
      +3
      In the text, the abbreviations are deciphered
      1. bashmak 23 October 2015 16: 00 New
        • -4
        • 0
        -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 23 October 2015 17: 19 New
      • 6
      • 0
      +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 23 October 2015 18: 32 New
      • 1
      • 0
      +1
      Learn the materiel! ..
  13. Mama_Cholli 23 October 2015 14: 59 New
    • 2
    • 0
    +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:
    Although, knowing our potential partners (in their affairs), you can be sure that, with any possibility of impunity, the "democrats" would have gladly destroyed us.
  14. kartalovkolya 23 October 2015 15: 00 New
    • 2
    • 0
    +2
    Summing up, and without "cap-and-shoot," a simple conclusion follows: (which was more than once with any aggression against Russia) "... it was smooth on paper, but forgot about the ravines, and walk on them ...", the war gentlemen, good business is troublesome and with many unknowns, and here also the "ingenuity" of Russians in our country as always turns on instantly, especially in critical situations. So end with these stupid plans, they do not work with the Russians, do not believe me, ask the Buonopartia or here is Adolf Schickelgruber! After all, you forgot the thankless words that you all, without exception (and the USA including), owe your independence to Mother Russia!
    1. Boa kaa 23 October 2015 22: 13 New
      • 3
      • 0
      +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 23 October 2015 15: 00 New
    • 2
    • 0
    +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 23 October 2015 15: 01 New
    • 2
    • 0
    +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 ) US satellite "dropping" into the gravity well at the given coordinates of the tungsten rods
  17. revnagan 23 October 2015 15: 12 New
    • 1
    • 0
    +1
    Smoothly on paper ... Just remember the not-so-distant Russo-Japanese War. There, too, the Russian admirals believed that the Yapes would not succeed with surprise. And Pearl Harbor? The Americans were sure that they were not in danger, not a submarine (shallow depth), neither torpedo aircraft torpedoes, nor Yap bombs, unsafe to break through the armor of battleships. And? So it’s appropriate to recall the words of Nobel’s father addressed to his sons: “While you are sitting and inventing a castle where a crook and invents a key to him. "
    1. Mama_Cholli 23 October 2015 15: 57 New
      • 0
      • 0
      0
      Quote: revnagan
      Smoothly on paper ... Just remember the not-so-distant Russo-Japanese War. There, too, the Russian admirals believed that the Yapes would not succeed with surprise. And Pearl Harbor? The Americans were sure that they were not in danger, not a submarine (shallow depth), neither torpedo aircraft torpedoes, nor Yap bombs, unsafe to break through the armor of battleships. And? So it’s appropriate to recall the words of Nobel’s father addressed to his sons: “While you are sitting and inventing a castle where a crook and invents a key to him. "

      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 23 October 2015 15: 16 New
    • 0
    • 0
    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 23 October 2015 18: 42 New
      • 0
      • 0
      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 23 October 2015 15: 18 New
    • 4
    • 0
    +4
    Excellent article +, authors well done, dispensed with accessible information, without juggling trumps and rabbits from a cylinder hi
  20. Bully 23 October 2015 15: 19 New
    • 1
    • 0
    +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 23 October 2015 20: 09 New
      • 0
      • 0
      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 23 October 2015 15: 23 New
    • -4
    • 0
    -4
    We take the preamble and the conclusion of this article - a freshman essay on the topic "They will kill us all", stupidly, without competently, complete nonsense.
    1. Boa kaa 23 October 2015 22: 28 New
      • 1
      • 0
      +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. 23 October 2015 15: 30 New
    • 1
    • 0
    +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 23 October 2015 16: 24 New
    • 3
    • 0
    +3
    The feeling that the author has messed up something does not leave me. Did the Americans really plan with the Tomahawks to disarm our strategic nuclear forces? This is the most obvious heresy, for:
    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. Many silos are located in the depths of the continent, where the Tomahawk will not reach for them trite;
    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.

    No matter how stupid our Western "partners" are, we are certainly not stupid and naive.
    1. mav1971 23 October 2015 20: 10 New
      • 0
      • 0
      0
      Quote: Kalmar
      The feeling that the author has messed up something does not leave me. Did the Americans really plan with the Tomahawks to disarm our strategic nuclear forces?



      US Department of Defense Concept “Non-nuclear Fast Global Strike” (Prompt Global Strike - PGS)
      1. Kalmar 23 October 2015 23: 13 New
        • 0
        • 0
        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 23 October 2015 17: 00 New
    • 1
    • 0
    +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.
    The example seems to be convincing, but only in the realities of today, and what will happen tomorrow if the Russian Federation loses in hypersonic technologies. It is necessary to fight the war with the whole world, then one "bully", even a very strong one, will not risk unleashing it! hi
    1. SPACE 23 October 2015 17: 37 New
      • 1
      • 0
      +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 23 October 2015 17: 32 New
    • 0
    • 0
    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 23 October 2015 19: 41 New
    • 0
    • 0
    0
    Here the issue of missile defense as an offensive weapon, if we take this alignment, we get exactly the KR "distract", our air defense forces, together with missile strikes from missile defense bases and complete the strike precisely nuclear weapons, all this with a time-focused and distributed echelons , then the pro system comes into effect, such a strategy takes place
    1. Kalmar 23 October 2015 23: 33 New
      • 0
      • 0
      0
      it is the Kyrgyz Republic that "distracts" our air defense forces

      Already discussed: CR is too slow. As a result, they are not so much distracting as they warn in advance that the attack has begun. And thus they give enough time for a retaliatory nuclear strike. Well, after a large-scale exchange of ICBMs, the Tomahawks have little effect.
  27. Old26 23 October 2015 19: 53 New
    • 2
    • 0
    +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 Temp-S (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 - it’s better not worth it. Because our "sworn friends" called 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 23 October 2015 23: 16 New
      • 1
      • 0
      +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 23 October 2015 20: 03 New
    • 1
    • 0
    +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.

    They began developing missile defense in the early 2000s, previously they had nothing of the kind. Moreover, their Safegard system was mothballed, while our A-35 / 35M / 135 continued to be modernized.
    The non-nuclear strike of the Kyrgyz Republic became relevant after the beginning of the 90s, when they were first massively used in Iraq during the first war. We had the concept of OVD almost from the very beginning, long before the signing of reduction agreements. And the concept of BSU began to be developed in the same 2000s, when it became clear that the Kyrgyz Republic is not suitable for a quick response. The starting point, I think, is the very operation when the “marching” two hours of the Kyrgyz Republic “didn’t find” in place of Bin Laden

    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 23 October 2015 20: 04 New
    • 0
    • 0
    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 23 October 2015 20: 05 New
    • 1
    • 0
    +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 23 October 2015 20: 33 New
    • 0
    • 0
    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 23 October 2015 21: 06 New
    • 2
    • 0
    +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 23 October 2015 23: 00 New
    • 0
    • 0
    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 23 October 2015 23: 23 New
    • 1
    • 0
    +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 24 October 2015 02: 59 New
    • 0
    • 0
    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 24 October 2015 12: 21 New
      • 0
      • 0
      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 24 October 2015 08: 26 New
    • 0
    • 0
    0
    all this and there is no reason to doubt it ...
  38. Earnest 24 October 2015 10: 13 New
    • 1
    • 0
    +1
    Quote: Kalmar
    The feeling that the author has messed up something does not leave me. Did the Americans really plan with the Tomahawks to disarm our strategic nuclear forces? This is the most obvious heresy, for:
    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. Many silos are located in the depths of the continent, where the Tomahawk will not reach for them trite;
    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.
    No matter how stupid our Western "partners" are, we are certainly not stupid and naive.

    About the reduction of air defense ... Former headquarters of 13 rd 31 RA told me the bike how in the 90's their commander Mr. Vigovsky reached the General Staff with a request to deploy a second air defense regiment to C-300, or even one operating regiment the division does not cover. At the General Staff they said: “Oh! Do we still have a regiment at C-300?”, And the CURRENT was reduced.
    And the strategy itself is based on a “blocking strike”, rockets in the subject, which I’m talking about, can be implemented if ballistic missiles with nuclear submarines from the Arctic Ocean are attracted to us in the first strike (flight time to anywhere in the Russian Federation no more than 9 minutes ) But this picture of a beautiful theory is being destroyed by access to the combat patrol of our nuclear submarines, ground mobile systems, strategic bombers and missile carriers. And we look forward to the reconstruction of the BZHRK. soldier
    1. Kalmar 24 October 2015 12: 31 New
      • 0
      • 0
      0
      And the strategy itself is based on a “blocking strike”, rockets in the subject, which I’m talking about, can be implemented if ballistic missiles with nuclear submarines from the Arctic Ocean are attracted to us in the first strike

      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 24 October 2015 15: 16 New
      • 0
      • 0
      0
      Maybe not BZHRK, and RKZHB? Rail-based missile system? Or is it some kind of new abbreviation that has nothing to do with railway? For the first time I encountered RKZHB, being a cadet of the LVIKA named after Mozhaysky. 1972 year. Course of a young fighter before taking the oath. We were shown posters with RT-23 ("Scalpel", sometimes I hear "Stiletto") and the car, where there was a launcher disguised as a refrigerator. They showed how it is possible to distinguish the "refrigerator" of the RCW: there were squibs that shot the roof of the car, now they are not there. Bulk type cargo pasture (crushed stone, sand, coal, etc.) "withstands" 26 tons. The weight of the "refrigerator" is 140 tons. One can imagine what happened to the railway track after the passage of the Russian Railways). Then the rails were laid on wooden sleepers, impregnated with creosote. Naturally, the canvas fell into disrepair. Rebinding on concrete sleepers has gone.
      Miscellaneous had to read about the RCW. He even argued over a “glass of tea” with my friend, the KGB colonel (2 GU KGB, his own security service in the past, withdrawn from the existing reserve due to a stroke) about the need for new FCL. There is good news that the new RCSC are in a state of R&D, close to completion.
    3. The comment was deleted.
  39. Old26 24 October 2015 10: 16 New
    • 1
    • 0
    +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 24 October 2015 10: 54 New
    • 0
    • 0
    0
    Oh, by the way, in the article, not a word about the BZHRK ... or did I miss?
  41. Oleko 24 October 2015 14: 02 New
    • 0
    • 0
    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 24 October 2015 22: 28 New
    • 0
    • 0
    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
    For the first time I encountered RKZHB, being a cadet of the LVIKA named after Mozhaysky. 1972 year. Course of a young fighter before taking the oath. We were shown posters with RT-23 ("Scalpel", sometimes I hear "Stiletto") and the car, where there was a launcher disguised as a refrigerator

    Of course, I understand that your age is already under / for 60, they could forget something, such as NATO designations. Scalpel and Stiletto are different rockets. But this is not so important. And as for what you saw in 1972, the launcher from 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 24 October 2015 23: 32 New
      • 0
      • 0
      0
      You're right. And regarding BZHRK and RT-23. Very grateful for the clarification. Apparently, everything was mixed up after the prescription. I graduated from Mozhaik semester and left. He served at the Krasnoselsky NPC. CPTRL "Cube". Then the workers and engineering specialties. But I remember well the “general course of aircraft”. Good luck.
    2. The comment was deleted.
  43. Old26 25 October 2015 00: 04 New
    • 0
    • 0
    0
    Quote: Oleko
    You're right. And regarding BZHRK and RT-23. Very grateful for the clarification. Apparently, everything was mixed up after the prescription. I graduated from Mozhaik semester and left. He served at the Krasnoselsky NPC. CPTRL "Cube". Then the workers and engineering specialties. But I remember well the “general course of aircraft”. Good luck

    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 25 October 2015 01: 01 New
      • 0
      • 0
      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 25 October 2015 01: 01 New
      • 0
      • 0
      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 26 October 2015 11: 02 New
    • 1
    • 0
    +1
    And how much does air defense need for a ballistic missile position area?
    If a massive launch on cruise missiles, ballistic missiles on targets in Russia is detected, then there’s no sense figuring out where they fly — you need to get the missiles out of the mines during the flight time and on targets. And do not hope that these cruise missiles fly “just” in order to destroy our power plants, factories, control points and communications, etc. By the time of the approach, the mines should be empty, then air defense of positional areas will not be required. But the means of early detection of launches is very even.