Military Review

Caribbean script. Part 1

173



At present, Russian-American relations are at the lowest level in the last 25 years. Major politicians and prominent public figures began talking about the start of the new “Cold War”, and the military does not rule out the occurrence of various kinds of incidents between the Russian Aerospace Forces and the US Air Force and Russian and American special forces in Syria. All this is happening against the background of the extremely militant rhetoric of some politicians, both in our country and in the West. Irresponsible statements warm up the degree of political tension and contribute to “hurray-patriotic” sentiments among the part of the townsfolk. Unfortunately, this is also reflected on the Military Review website. But our countries once were already one step away from the “nuclear apocalypse,” and only the restraint of the leaders of the USSR and the USA avoided the start of a full-scale suicidal conflict.

At the start of the 60, the United States deployed 60 medium-range ballistic missiles (PGMD) PGM-17 Thor in the UK. The Torahs in the UK were followed by PGM-45 Jupiter 19 missiles in Turkey and Italy. The Thor and Jupiter missiles could deliver a W49 1,44 Mt warhead to the 2400 km range. The advantage of "Jupiter" was its mobility. Unlike the Torah, which started from a stationary position, the Jupiter could be launched from a mobile launching pad, which increased the survivability of the missile system.

In 1962, the Americans had a significant advantage in strategic nuclear forces (SNF). At that time, there were about 3000 warheads on strategic carriers in the United States, and about 500 in the USSR. By the beginning of 1962, the United States Air Force and Navy, taking into account tactical carriers deployed in Europe and Asia, had more than 1300 bombers in service. The strategic and tactical American and British bombers stationed in Europe had a short flying time. Fuel supply aboard US strategic aircraft aviation and refueling in the air allowed them to carry out combat patrols with thermonuclear bombs on board along the borders of the USSR. In addition, the US strategic nuclear forces included 183 SM-65 Atlas and HGM-25A Titan ICBMs and 144 UGM-27 Polaris ballistic missile submarines (SLBMs) ​​in nine nuclear submarines with ballistic missile submarines of the George Washington and Ethan Allen type.

The Soviet Union had the opportunity to deliver warheads around 400 to the United States mainly with the help of strategic bombers and the P-7 and P-16 ICBMs, which required lengthy preparation for the launch and the high cost of building launch complexes. The economic opportunities of the Soviet Union, which suffered enormous human and material losses in the war, did not allow us to achieve parity with the United States in the field of strategic weapons at the beginning of the 60s.

Placing the BRSD "Thor" and "Jupiter" in Europe provided Washington with a number of serious advantages in the event of a nuclear conflict. The flight time of the American missiles launched from the territory of England, Italy and Turkey was 10-15 minutes, and their number in 1962 was quite enough to destroy the positions of the few Soviet ICBMs, strategic bombers' airfields, communications centers and radar warning systems for rocket attack. In addition, by deploying its nuclear attack forces in Europe, the United States reduced the number of Soviet nuclear charges in a retaliatory strike on its territory and reduced its own losses.

Caribbean script. Part 1

Starting position MRSM PGM-19 Jupiter


For the Soviet Union, the American MRBG posed a deadly threat. The USA, having placed rockets in Europe, radically changed the balance of forces of the first strike in their favor. The USSR urgently needed adequate responses to restore balance. By that time, the Soviet strategic submarine fleet was under construction and was not yet a significant force. Diesel submarines with submarine-launched submarines 629 did not carry a big threat to the United States: while on combat patrols, they could hit targets in Western Europe and American bases in the Pacific. By October, the 1962 of the Soviet Navy had five nuclear-powered ships, 658, but they were significantly inferior to the American SSBNs in terms of the number and range of missile launches.

The USSR was a vital bridgehead, from which the Soviet MRBM P-12 and P-14 could create a similar threat to the United States, thereby restoring the status quo of the possibility of causing "unacceptable damage" to a potential enemy. The only place at that time where it was possible to place Soviet medium-range missiles was Cuba. The combat radius of the P-12 (2000 km) and P-14 (4000 km) missiles made it possible to threaten a large part of the US territory, especially its south-eastern regions with numerous large cities and industrial centers, on the “Island of Freedom”. But for the realization of these plans, it was necessary to have Cuba friendly for the USSR and to protect it from the threat of overthrowing F. Castro by the United States. After the defeat of a counter-revolutionary naval assault formed by Cuban émigrés on Playa Chiron, the economic blockade of the “Island of Freedom” began, and there was a constant risk of invasion of the American troops directly. In order to strengthen the defense of the island in April 1962, it was decided to send to Cuba 4 air defense systems С-75, 10 IL-28, 4 launchers of anti-aircraft missiles П-15. By October 22, a group of 40 thousands of Soviet troops was deployed on Cuban territory, headed by Army General I.A. Pliev. The main strike force of the Soviet contingent were 42 ballistic missiles P-12 with a range of up to 2000 km. They had 36 thermonuclear warheads with a power of 1 Mt. However, the missiles were not on alert. The P-12s themselves were stored in open areas or in hangars. Warheads - separate from the rockets in the caves at a distance of a kilometer from the launch positions. It took 3 hours to dock the warhead to the missile, and 15 minutes to bring the missile to combat readiness.


BRSD P-12 on the launch pad


In addition to ballistic missiles, IL-28 bombers, FKR-1 front-line cruise missiles, Luna tactical missiles, MiG-21-F-13, S-75 air defense systems, anti-aircraft guns and missile boats of pr.183R were deployed on Liberty Island. as well as motorized rifle and tank parts. Due to the imposed blockade, it was not possible to deliver all the equipment and weapons. So, for example, Soviet ships with the R-14 BRDS under threat of use weapons from the warships of the US Navy were forced to turn back. At the same time, the nuclear warheads for the P-14 and the personnel of the missile battalions were already in Cuba. The P-14 missiles had a launch range of up to 4500 km and would have swept most of the United States, up to the west coast.


The radii of destruction of the Soviet missiles and Il-28 bombers, a large radius - BRSD R-14 (not located in Cuba).

The P-12 missiles launched from Cuba were capable of striking targets in the United States before the Washington-Dallas line, and presented a threat to the United States that was similar to the one created for the USSR by American missiles deployed in Europe. The appearance of Soviet ballistic missiles in Cuba was a shock for the Americans. Of course, they knew that Soviet transports delivered equipment and weapons to the island, but after 14 on October 1962, the reconnaissance U-2, piloted by Major Richard Heyzer, crossed all of Cuba from south to north, it became known about Soviet missiles on the island. In spite of the fact that necessary measures were taken to camouflage the missile sites, the safety of storing missiles and warheads, the prepared missile positions and the stored missiles were easily read on aerial photographs. The fact of the delivery of missiles to Cuba caused the ire of the American leadership, since Soviet official representatives did not make an official statement about this in the relevant international organizations. At the same time, American missiles in Turkey were placed openly, and the USSR government was notified of this in advance. This circumstance played an important role in the escalation of the Soviet-American crisis.


The layout of the Soviet military units in Cuba


After the Soviet missiles in Cuba were discovered, by Kennedy's orders, reconnaissance flights increased from two a month to six a day. This, of course, contributed to the exacerbation of the situation, especially since supersonic tactical aircraft which flew at low altitude began to be involved in conducting reconnaissance. At the end of October, a pair of MiG-21 fighters attempted to intercept and land the American reconnaissance aircraft RF-101 at their airfield, but he managed to escape.

October 19 during the next flight of the U-2, several more trained missile positions were discovered, Il-28 bombers at the airfield off the northern coast of Cuba and the FKR-1 front-line cruise missiles located on launchers on the east coast of Cuba.



October 22 President Kennedy addressed the nation on television, announcing the presence of Soviet missiles in Cuba. He also warned that the armed forces were “ready for any development of events” and condemned the USSR for “secrecy and misrepresentation”. The flywheel of confrontation continued to unwind, the US Congress recommended the president to use force to eliminate the missile threat. Top American military leadership has proposed to launch a military operation against Cuba. The generals were hurrying the president to order the strike, because they feared that when the USSR deployed all the missiles, it would be too late.



October 24 from 10 in the morning the Americans imposed a complete naval blockade of the "Island of Freedom". Officially, it was called the “quarantine of the island of Cuba,” since the blockade meant an automatic declaration of war. The US Navy demanded that all ships entering the Cuban ports stop and present the cargo for inspection. In the event of a refusal to allow an inspection team on board, the ship was to be arrested and escorted to the American port under escort. In addition to the "blockade", preparations began for the beginning of a possible invasion of the island. A tank and five infantry divisions were redeployed to the southwest United States. Strategic bombers B-47 and B-52 conducted constant patrols in the air, tactical aircraft were deployed at civilian airfields in Florida, 180 US Navy warships were pulled to Cuba.

In response, the Armed Forces of the USSR and the Warsaw Pact countries were put on high alert. This meant the abolition of all vacations and layoffs, as well as the withdrawal of a part of the troops with equipment and weapons beyond the boundaries of their permanent locations. Combat aircraft were dispersed over alternate aerodromes, warships entered the sea. Most of the Soviet atomic and diesel submarines in a state of combat readiness, after loading torpedoes and missiles with “special” combat units, advanced to the areas of combat patrol. At that time in the USSR as part of fleet there were 25 diesel and nuclear submarines with ballistic missiles and 16 boats with cruise missiles designed to destroy coastal targets.

By 24 in October, the situation worsened, the brother of the American President Robert Kennedy at a meeting with the Soviet ambassador Dobrynin during a discussion of the blockade of Cuba said: “I don’t know what this will all end, but we intend to stop your ships. In response, Khrushchev in his letter called quarantine "an act of aggression, pushing mankind to the abyss of a world nuclear missile war." He warned Kennedy that "the captains of Soviet ships would not comply with the requirements of the US Navy," and that "if the United States does not stop its piracy, the USSR government will take any measures to ensure the safety of ships."

25 October, the US president ordered to increase the combat readiness of the Armed Forces to the level of DEFCON-2 (eng. DEFense readiness CONdition - readiness of defense). This level precedes maximum alert. The first level declaration meant readiness for a nuclear strike. At that moment, mankind was closer than ever to the beginning of a full-scale conflict between the USSR and the USA. And do not show the leaders of the great powers of restraint, the case could end in mutual destruction.

At that moment, the situation in Cuba was tense to the limit, the command of the Soviet contingent on the island and the Cuban leadership were waiting for the start of a US invasion or a large-scale air strike. On October 27, a U-75 Major Rudolf Anderson was shot down by a C-2 anti-aircraft missile in Cuban airspace during a regular reconnaissance flight. On the same day, two US Navy photo reconnaissance aircraft RF-8A were fired upon by anti-aircraft artillery during a low-altitude reconnaissance flight. One plane was damaged, but managed to reach its airfield.

Let's imagine the darkest scenario. What would happen if President Kennedy’s nerves didn’t stand, and he would be led by the military? Taking into account the fact that at that time the American intelligence already knew about the presence of Luna tactical missiles with nuclear warheads in the composition of the Soviet troops in Cuba, there was no talk of an amphibious operation. To eliminate the "Soviet missile threat" would be involved aviation. The first strike involved tactical and carrier-based aircraft operating at low altitudes, while nuclear bombs were not used. The missile positions of the 79 and 181 missile regiments, as well as airfields, were subjected to intensive bombardment. The MiG-21 fighters, the C-75 air defense missile system and anti-aircraft artillery, which had time to rise into the air, put up fierce resistance, but the forces were clearly not equal. At the cost of losing about two dozen combat aircraft, the Americans manage to destroy all Soviet P-12 missiles, Il-28 bombers, radar, most of the fighters and destroy the runways of the main airfields. After tactical aviation, the B-47 and B-52 bombers come into play, which “clear” the area with massive areal strikes. However, part of the tactical "Moon" and the FKR-1 cruise missiles, hidden in the jungle, survived, which subsequently became an unpleasant surprise for the Americans.



The entire air operation, taking into account the actions of strategic bombers, took three hours, after which the Chief of Staff of the US Air Force, General LeMay, reported to the President that the Cuban missile threat had been completely eliminated. Simultaneously with the anti-submarine forces of the US Navy in the Caribbean after establishing acoustic contact, three Soviet diesel submarines were sunk as the commander of the American fleet decided they were a threat and several ships of the Soviet merchant fleet were arrested. American troops around the world are on high alert, including medium-range ballistic missiles in Europe.

The Soviet leadership, having received news from Cuba and intelligence information about preparations for the launch in Turkey of the Jupiter MRSD, regards this as the beginning of a full-scale aggression against the USSR and decides to launch a preemptive strike. Approximately 100 of the Soviet Р-12 and Р-14 missiles in the morning of October 28 are attacking famous deployment sites of the Jupiter MRSD in Italy and Turkey and Thor in the UK. More than 80 nuclear warheads explode over the proposed deployment areas of US missiles and the US and British strategic bomber bases. Wanting to get by with “little blood” and limit the zone of combat operations, the Soviet leadership does not give the order to start attacking objects in the United States, while the Soviet ICBMs and strategic bombers remain on their bases.



For technical reasons, not all medium-range Soviet missiles reached their goals, in addition, part of the “Jupiter” was taken out of the limits of American missile bases and avoided destruction. Approximately 20 "Jupiter" from mobile launchers and 10 "Thors" from the Fleetwell base in Scotland were launched in response, the decision was made by the US Air Force Command in Europe. The positions of the 43 th rocket army in Ukraine are subjected to nuclear strikes. As a result of this attack, about a third of Soviet medium-range ballistic missiles were destroyed. However, there are still about 100 MRBGs in the USSR, which can be quickly prepared for launch, most of which are Р-5М and Р-12. As soon as they are ready, these missiles are launched at naval bases, large airfields, and known places of NATO troop congestion. The surviving P-14 missiles launched from positions in Ukraine destroyed several cities in the UK, including London and Liverpool. The P-12 50 th rocket army deployed in the Baltic States hit the RAF airbase in the UK with the 2,3 megaton thermonuclear warheads and the US submarine Holy Loch Scotland. The destruction of the Holy Loch base makes it impossible for American SSBNs operating in the North Atlantic to replenish their ammunition and carry out the necessary maintenance. As a result of the explosion of a torpedo with a nuclear warhead, fired from a Soviet submarine pr.NUMX, secretly penetrated into the Sea of ​​Marmara, the coastal part of Istanbul was severely damaged. The blows of nuclear torpedoes from the Black Sea destroyed the Turkish naval bases Sinop and Samsun. In addition, Soviet rocket diesel submarines pr. 613, front-line cruise missiles FKR-629 and operational-tactical P-1 deployed in the GGV are connected to the attacks. The launches of the front-line cruise missiles on targets in Germany destroyed the shipyards in Hamburg, the Spandal air base and Geilenkirchen. The warheads of the missiles launched from the Soviet missile boat, disabled American radar anti-ship warning system AN / FSP-11 and the runway at the Thule airbase in Greenland. The following were destroyed: Amsterdam, Bonn, Cologne, Frankfurt, Stuttgart, Paris, Dunkirk, Dieppe, Rome, Milan, Turin. Especially got to Paris because of the NATO headquarters located there, the city center was turned into ruins as a result of the explosions of the two P-49 warheads.

MTR-1 Honest John, MGR-3 Little John, MGM-5 Corporal and CG MGM-13 Mace with response bases in Germany and France and nuclear bombs from tactical aircraft destroyed the GGV headquarters in Wünsdorf, headquarters of the Southern Group of Forces in Budapest , the headquarters of the Northern Group of Forces in Legnitz, the headquarters of the 16 Air Force in Woltersdorf and the airfields of Wittstock, Grossenhain and Rechlin.

At the first stage of military operations with the use of nuclear weapons in the European theater of operations as a result of a preemptive attack and the withdrawal of some of their forces from attack, the Soviet Union managed to minimize its own losses. At the same time, it was not possible to solve the problem of the complete destruction of American MRBRs in Europe and to avoid reciprocal launches. The losses of the parties during the exchange of nuclear strikes exceeded 4 million people killed and about 11 million - wounded, burned and received high doses of radiation. Huge territories as a result of nuclear explosions turned into a zone of continuous destruction.

After news of the attack on US missile positions in Europe, all of the top US military and civilian leaders are urgently evacuated from Washington and after three hours they are going to an emergency meeting in a secret atomic shelter carved out of Mount Weather near the town of Berryville (Va.). After a brief discussion of the situation, John F. Kennedy orders the nuclear bombardment of the USSR by all available means.

Having received the order of the president, the command of the US Navy from a special communication station in Norfolk transmits a low-frequency coded signal with the command to launch missiles to submarines in combat positions. In preparation for launching the A1 Polaris SLBM and checking missiles, it goes from 15 to 30 minutes. After that, the SSBN 598 "George Washington", SSBN 599 "Patrick Henry" and SSBN 601 "Robert E. Lee" submarines in the North Atlantic give 16 rocket volleys. For each target was launched two missiles with 600 CT warheads. At the level of technical reliability of 0,8 missiles, this ensures the destruction of the target with a high degree of probability. The bases of the Northern and Baltic fleets in Gremikha, Vidyaevo, Polyarny, Baltiysk, the cities of Arkhangelsk, Severomorsk, Murmansk, Severodvinsk, Olenye, Bykhov, Lakhta and Luostari airfields, as well as facilities in the Baltic, Leningrad and Kaliningrad regions are subjected to nuclear strikes.

SSBN 608 Ethan Allen and SSBN 600 Theodore Roosevelt SSBNs launch rockets from the Mediterranean. The purpose of these missiles become objects of Crimea and on the Black Sea coast. First of all, the Black Sea Fleet sites in Sevastopol, facilities in Balaklava, Novorossiysk, Odessa, Guards, Belbek and Saki air bases are affected.

As of mid-October 1962, the US Navy had four Eten Allen-type SSBNs with A2 Polaris with a launch range of 2800 km. It can be assumed that by the beginning of the conflict there were two boats of this type on combat duty, their missiles already allowed to hit targets deep in the territory of the USSR. In addition, the Polaris A2 was the first missile on which the means to overcome missile defense were installed.


Launch of the Regulus cruise missile from the US diesel-electric submarines


The American SSG-574 "Greyback" and SSG-577 "Grauler", ascending to the trap of the Aleutian Islands, launch SSM-N-8A Regulus cruise missiles in the fleet in Vilyuchinsk. The SSGN-587 “Khalibat”, in turn, launches the CD on the Pacific Fleet bases in Primorye. The boat itself was unlucky, she was caught in the surface position and sunk by anti-submarine aircraft Be-6.

Some of the cruise missiles were shot down by C-75 and fighters, but they had broken through with more than enough to make objects in Kamchatka and Primorsky Krai unsuitable for further use. Nuclear strikes A-3 and A-5 are bombing the coastal regions of the USSR in the Far East. The ports of Vanino, Kholmsk, Nakhodka, the city of Komsomolsk-on-Amur, Yuzhno-Sakhalinsk, Ussuriysk, Spassk-Dalniy were badly damaged. The impact of American cruise missiles on Vladivostok and the attempt to break through the deck bombers are reflected by air defense weapons. Unable to break through to the city, an American bomber drops an atomic bomb at an air defense position on Russky Island. Link Skywatch tried to strike at Khabarovsk, but was shot down by fighters.


American deck bomber A-3 "Skywatch" takes off from an aircraft carrier


In response to Alaska and American facilities in Asia and within reach, P-5M and P-12 and P-14 45-rocket division located in Primorye fall. The Kadena and Atsugi airbases, the Yokosuka and Sasebo naval bases, the parking of the ships and the airfields on the island of Guam are subjected to atomic strikes. Several warheads of Soviet MRBDs succeed in knocking down American long-range air defense systems MIM-14 Nike-Hercules. Most of the missiles of this type of anti-aircraft missiles, which are at the disposal of the US Army, were completed with a nuclear warhead. Nike-Hercules had certain anti-missile capabilities, the real probability of defeating an ICBM warhead was 0,1, in other words, the 10-th anti-aircraft missiles could repel an attack of a single ballistic missile.

After the first nuclear explosions thundered, preparations began for the launch of an ICBM. But if the Soviet leadership initially refrained from nuclear bombardment of the continental territory of the United States, the Americans were not tormented by doubts. In the afternoon of October 28 1965 of the year for half an hour on the territory of the Soviet Union launched the 72 ICBM of the mine-based SM-65F Atlas. Following the mine Atlases, as soon as they are ready, they launch SM-65E Atlas ICBMs stored horizontally in protected sarcophagi and HGM-25A Titan stored in mines, but requiring longer preparation for launch and radio command control in the upper stage. In general, more than 150 rockets will be launched from the United States within two hours.


Launch of the Titan ICBM


Their goals are mainly large administrative and industrial centers of the USSR, long-range aviation airfields, naval bases and positions of Soviet ICBMs. Several missiles exploded at the start, another part left the trajectory due to malfunctions, but more than 70% of the warheads were delivered to the intended targets. The 2-4 MBR is aimed at each target, depending on the degree of importance. One of the priorities is Moscow. The Kremlin and the city center are completely destroyed by the explosions of four 4,45 Mt warheads. The Baikonur cosmodrome was covered and destroyed together with the P-7 and P-16 ICBMs that are about to be launched. Objects of the Soviet nuclear industry are subjected to nuclear strikes. The underground complex "Arzamas-16" received serious damage as a result of the explosions of two 3,75-megaton warheads of ICBM "Titan", put on the contact blasting at the surface.

After the first wave of ballistic missiles, the B-47, B-52 and B-58 bombers invade the airspace of the USSR, their actions cover the EW EB-47E aircraft. In total, before the outbreak of hostilities in the Royal Air Force of Great Britain and the United States Air Force, there were more than 2000 long-range bombers, of which about the 300 aircraft took part in the first raid. The Americans are actively using the AGM-28 Hound Dog aircraft cruise missiles, which disperse the forces of Soviet air defense, which, in addition to the bombers, has to fight with them. At that time, there were more than 500 cruise missiles in the US Air Force; in the first attack, around 150 was used.

Participating in the bombing of the USSR aircraft could be much more, but almost all British long-range bombers and part of the US destroyed at the bases of the RAF as a result of the preemptive Soviet strike with medium-range missiles and the actions of missile submarines. Many airplanes caught in a nuclear attack in the air have nowhere to return and they make forced landings on unsuitable for receiving heavy vehicles, or their pilots are thrown out by parachute after the production of fuel.

The breakthrough of American bombers is also facilitated by the ionization of the atmosphere after numerous nuclear explosions, the surviving Soviet ground-based radars often due to interference simply did not see aerial targets. In addition, the relatively poor SAM covered only Moscow. However, multichannel C-25 turned out to be practically useless. American intelligence was well-informed about their capabilities, and one B-52 and two B-47, accidentally invading the Moscow air defense zone, became victims of the stationary complexes. In 1962, the basis of the fighter aircraft in the USSR was the MiG-17, MiG-19 and Yak-25, by that time these aircraft did not fully meet modern requirements, and the new supersonic MiG-21 and Su-9 were still a little bit. Only four years have passed since the C-75 air defense system was adopted, and the industry has not yet had time to build them in sufficient quantities, and 85, 100, 130-mm anti-aircraft guns, even with radar-controlled gun stations, proved to be ineffective against reactive strategic bombers. Soviet air defense destroys up to a third of the invading bombers and half the cruise missiles. Soviet pilots, shooting ammunition, often go to the ram, but they are not able to stop all the bombers.

In total, as a result of strikes by ICBMs and long-range bombers, more than 150 Soviet strategic facilities, including nuclear facilities, naval bases, long-range aviation aerodromes, defense enterprises, large power plants and command centers, were completely destroyed or permanently damaged. In addition to Moscow, Leningrad, Minsk, Baku, Kiev, Nikolaev, Almaty, Gorky, Kuibyshev, Sverdlovsk, Chelyabinsk, Novosibirsk, Irkutsk, Chita, Vladivostok and a number of other cities were completely destroyed. Objects in the countries of the Eastern Bloc are also bombed. Although the evacuation of the population was announced in advance, many do not have time to hide in shelters or leave the city limits. As a result of nuclear missile attacks and bombing in the Soviet Union and the Warsaw Pact countries, more than 9 million people died, another 20 million suffered to one degree or another. The number of destroyed industrial enterprises, military and civilian objects exceeds that for the entire Second World War.

In October, the 1965 of the year in the USSR, the launch sites were 25 MBR P-7 and P-16. These missiles required a fairly long preparation for launch. Despite the fact that they began to be prepared almost simultaneously with the receipt of an order to strike at the MRBD, the Soviet response to the United States was delayed. About a quarter of the Soviet missiles were destroyed at the launch sites, and only the 16 P-16 and 3 P-7 were able to launch. By virtue of the large QUO, Soviet missiles carrying 3-6 Mt thermonuclear warheads were aimed at major cities and air bases where strategic bombers were stationed. From 19 goal launched missiles reaches 16. Two warheads shot down by concentrated volleys of Nike-Hercules anti-aircraft with nuclear warheads.



Now it is the turn of Americans to know all the horrors of nuclear war. In New York alone, more than half a million people have been killed by explosions of two warheads. Are destroyed Washington and San Francisco. For a short period of time, thermonuclear strikes are almost simultaneously carried out on the strategic aviation command air bases: Altus, Grissom, Griffis, MacConnel, Offut, Fairfield-Swisson, and Francis Warren. According to the results of rocket attacks, the destruction at these air bases reach 80%. Due to the partial dispersal of aircraft on secondary airfields, it is possible to somewhat reduce the damage, but about 30% of long-range bombers are lost. Due to the destruction and radioactive contamination of storage facilities with nuclear bombs and cruise missiles, the usable American nuclear arsenal that is usable for further use is significantly reduced.

After the attack of the ICBMs, the FKR-1 cruise missiles hid in the Cuban jungle and were written off by the Americans were taken into account. In the direction of Florida, with a small interval, eight missiles were launched. Before launching the CD to the US coast, tactical "Luna" will be the first to start. Having flown about 30 km, the rocket falls into the sea in the area patrolled by American warships and its nuclear warhead is activated. In this case, two American destroyers were destroyed, and several more warships were damaged. But, most importantly, American radars that monitor the airspace over Cuba are disabled by an electromagnetic pulse, and the curtain impermeable to radiation from radars does not allow to detect and intercept cruise missiles flying at a subsonic speed at an altitude of 600-1200 meters. Their targets are Key West, Opa Loska, Miami and Palm Beach. In response, the American tactical and carrier-based aircraft once again bombed the intended locations for cruise missile launchers, and the B-47 bombers dropped several nuclear bombs on Havana and the deployment sites of Soviet military units.

Soon, three P-13 missiles with submarines Ave. 658, which was at the beginning of the crisis on combat patrols in the Pacific Ocean, destroyed the city and the large naval base of San Diego. After the launch of the missiles, the boat itself was discovered and sunk by US anti-submarine forces. But at the cost of her death, she destroyed two American aircraft carriers, three dozen major combat and landing ships, and naval aircraft near 60.

To be continued ...

Based on:
//militera.lib.ru/research/orlov_as1/06.html
//alternathistory.com/karibskii-armageddon-chast-i
//alternathistory.com/sootnoshenie-yadernykh-sil-ovd-nato-na-moment-karibskogo-krizisa
Author:
173 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must sign in.
  1. Waltasar
    Waltasar 5 July 2016 06: 21
    +29
    Something like the literature of the genre of alternative history. But it is easy to read, I look forward to continuing.
    1. Bongo
      5 July 2016 06: 26
      +14
      Quote: Waltasar
      Something like the literature of the genre of alternative history. But it is easy to read, I look forward to continuing.

      This is one of the possible scenarios, i.e. - alternative history. To be continued this week. hi
      1. Amurets
        Amurets 5 July 2016 07: 35
        +5
        Quote: Bongo
        This is one of the possible scenarios, i.e. - alternative history. To be continued this week.

        Hello Sergey! Thank you. Interesting. In April 2013, in the PM magazine there was an article "Batteries for the Cuban Missile Crisis". But this is an April Fool's joke of the magazine. And here is how submarines broke through to Cuba here .html
        By the way, in confirmation of your words. Admiral Lyabedzka has confirmation that Project 629 missile carriers came out. He commanded one of them. Lebedko. "On all oceans of the planet." The article is interesting. Thanks.
      2. Leto
        Leto 5 July 2016 07: 53
        +2
        Quote: Bongo
        This is one of the possible scenarios, i.e. - alternative history. To be continued this week.

        Sergey, what caused the temporary jumps? The action begins in October 1962., But the continuation:
        In October 1965, in the USSR, there were 25 ICBMs R-7 and R-16 at launching sites. These missiles required quite a long preparation for launch. Despite the fact that they began to be prepared almost simultaneously with the receipt of an order to strike an ASB, the Soviet response in the United States followed with a delay.

        If in October the Americans dealt a hypothetical strike by ICBMs on strategic facilities including Baikonur and Plesetskiy, then where could they start in 1965. R-7 and R-16 when the industry is in ruins and it would be impossible to restore launch complexes?
        Yes, and the Americans would not have expected after striking at their bases in Europe and Turkey, they would have immediately kicked the whole arsenal.
        1. Bongo
          5 July 2016 08: 00
          +8
          Quote: Leto
          Sergey, what caused the temporary jumps? The action begins in October 1962., But the continuation:

          A typo, that is, my cant, thanks for noticing.
          Quote: Leto
          If in October the Americans dealt a hypothetical strike by ICBMs on strategic facilities including Baikonur and Plesetskiy, then where could they start in 1965. R-7 and R-16 when the industry is in ruins and it would be impossible to restore launch complexes?

          Baikonur was indeed "destroyed", but with Plesetsk it is not so simple, the positions there were spread over a large territory and could have survived. In addition, the P-16s were still deployed near Nizhny Tagil.
          1. Leto
            Leto 5 July 2016 08: 14
            +3
            Quote: Bongo
            but with Plesetsk it’s not so simple

            What's not easy, Penkovsky leaked all the information on Plesetsk and Baikonur.
            And in Tagil R-16 only in 1963. deployed.
            1. Bongo
              5 July 2016 08: 40
              +9
              Quote: Leto
              What's not easy, Penkovsky leaked all the information on Plesetsk and Baikonur.
              And in Tagil R-16 only in 1963. deployed.

              The installation on the P-16 database was severely delayed by the October 24 disaster of October 1960 at the Baikonur training ground. If not for it, then by October 1962, these missiles could well have participated in the war. In general, I wrote all this as an artistic story - this is my first experience in this genre. Do not judge strictly... smile
              1. oborzevatel
                oborzevatel 5 July 2016 09: 44
                +5
                Quote: Bongo
                In general, I wrote all this as an artistic story - this is my first experience in this genre. Do not judge strictly...

                Sergey and forum users!
                You do not blame me, but this script is already described in sufficient detail in these books:
                Kontrovsky Vladimir, Gribanov Roman: End of the World for an encore
                (A naval officer, John F. Kennedy, died on August 2, 1943, when his torpedo boat was rammed by a Japanese destroyer. In 1961, Barry Goldwater, the Mad Dog, became US President, and in 1962, the Caribbean crisis escalated into a world nuclear war ...)
                (can be read and downloaded here: http://flibusta.is/b/326170)

                And here too:
                Gribanov Roman Borisovich: Price error -1
                (Altistory. Sidewalk to "The End of the World for an encore" by Vladimir Ilyich Kontrovsky, eternal memory to him.)
                (you can read and download here: http://samlib.ru/g/gribanow_r_b/1.shtml)
                Gribanov Roman Borisovich: Fights of local importance (Error price -2)
                (This is the second part-continuation of "Error Prices" in full)
                (can be read here: http://samlib.ru/g/gribanow_r_b/2.shtml)
                The third part is still being written.

                It is written beautifully.
                And do not consider this a rebuke. You also have a good syllable. But there - in great detail, in the form of a work of art.
            2. Rus2012
              Rus2012 5 July 2016 13: 22
              +5
              Quote: Leto
              And in Tagil R-16 only in 1963. deployed.

              In Tagil, 63m has already been completed with the commissioning of mines, they began with "ground" since 1961!
              Himself "Tagilian", so I know the topic!
              1. Amurets
                Amurets 5 July 2016 14: 12
                +3
                Quote: Rus2012

                In Tagil, 63m has already been completed with the commissioning of mines, they began with "ground" since 1961!
                Himself "Tagilian", so I know the topic!

                According to the recollections of one of the mine builders, on the site of the current Vostochny cosmodrome, in 1965 the construction of a silo between the cities of Shimanovsk and Svobodny began. Our work was facilitated by the fact that not far from the construction of new positions, there was a missile division with ground launchers. These memoirs were published. in the early 90s, when the dismantling of mine equipment began. I have already given a link to this division.
      3. Rus2012
        Rus2012 5 July 2016 09: 33
        +10
        Quote: Bongo
        This is one of the possible scenarios, i.e. - alternative history. To be continued this week.

        /// inaccuracies, inaccuracies, gnawing !!!

        It took 3 hours to dock a warhead to a rocket, and 15 minutes to bring a rocket into combat readiness.

        This is not true!!!!
        Docking the warhead to the P-12 takes 5 minutes!
        About 3,5 hours TO START FROM the "STANDBY READY" state !!!
        AND Roughly 1,5-2 hours from the readiness "INCREASED" - in which there were ALL UNIT (division) of the Strategic Missile Forces in Cuba!

        In October, the 1965 of the year in the USSR, the launch sites were 25 MBR P-7 and P-16. These missiles required a fairly long preparation for launch. Despite the fact that they began to be prepared almost simultaneously with the receipt of an order to strike at the MRBD, the Soviet response to the United States was delayed. About a quarter of the Soviet missiles were destroyed at the launch sites, and only the 16 P-16 and 3 P-7 were able to launch. By virtue of the large QUO, Soviet missiles carrying 3-6 Mt thermonuclear warheads were aimed at major cities and air bases where strategic bombers were stationed. From 19 goal launched missiles reaches 16. Two warheads shot down by concentrated volleys of Nike-Hercules anti-aircraft with nuclear warheads.


        Firstly, ANYTHING WOULD NOT BE DOWN! FOR THERE WASN'T SUCH OPPORTUNITIES IN THE USA !!!
        Secondly, the experience of TWO YEARS operation of the P-16, and the 50-year-old P-7 - showed - 90% reliability of the P-16 and almost 98-99% P-7!
        Thirdly, by the time of the US aggression in Cuba - ALL SOVIET Strategic Missile Forces - were in "HIGHER" readiness - with docked warheads, R-7 prepared for refueling. So, not a single Yankee missile would have time to destroy "on the table"!
        Their 25 - 23-22 would achieve their goals!

        In addition,
        about 300-400 R-5M, R-12, R-14 - with a 90% probability they would strike at Europe, the US Azit bases and Aleska (from Chukotka) ... He also remained in the "Increased" state. In addition, according to the recollections of the veteran missile men, some of the missiles were already on the table !!!
        1. Rus2012
          Rus2012 5 July 2016 09: 50
          +7
          Also,
          in Cuba there were up to 80 nuclear warheads AND NUCLEAR BOMB for FKR-1 and PKR-1, Luna, S-75, Il-28A. Little known fact! KR-1 range - 120 km, "touches" the US coastal strip. Pliev had the RIGHT to apply EVERYTHING - in the event of "US aggression, even by conventional means" ... WE DRAW CONCLUSIONS ...
          1. Rus2012
            Rus2012 5 July 2016 10: 07
            +5
            also in doubt, about -
            part of the "Jupiters" was withdrawn from the boundaries of American missile bases and escaped destruction. Approximately 20 Jupiters with Mobile Launchers and


            From Wiki -
            The Jupiter was a single-stage liquid rocket, with a single engine running on kerosene and liquid oxygen.

            An important advantage of the Jupiter rocket was at least relative, mobility. Unlike Thor, which started only from pre-prepared positions, Jupiter was launched from a mobile launcher. The Jupiter missile battery included three war missiles and consisted of approximately 20 heavy trucks, including tanks with kerosene and liquid oxygen.

            The rocket was transported horizontally in a special machine. Arriving at the deployment site, the battery mounted the rockets vertically and erected a “canopy” of aluminum sheets around the base of each rocket, covering the personnel working on preparation for launch and allowing the missiles to be serviced under any weather conditions. After installation, the rocket required approximately 15 minutes to refuel and was then ready to launch.


            Now imagine a transport convoy 20 heavy trucks including kerosene and liquid oxygen tanks on the clogged roads of the "pre-war period". After all, THEY WERE NOT MOVED IN ADVANCE to field positional areas. And ALL PERMANENT POSITIONS with the crews on duty - were known to the General Staff and the headquarters of the Strategic Missile Forces!
            1. Operator
              Operator 5 July 2016 11: 47
              +14
              The author of the article set himself the goal of showing the complete unwillingness of the USSR to fight the United States in October 1962. Hence the disinformation about the allegedly long preparation of Soviet nuclear forces for striking at the national territory of the United States and at targets in NATO countries.

              In fact, by the time the USA declared war - the beginning of the military blockade of the island of Cuba - all components of the strategic nuclear forces of the USSR (ICBMs, RSD, OTRK, submarines with cruise missiles on board, strategic bombers, front-line bombers) were ready for use (from one hour) and less depending on the type of weapon).

              Therefore, a nuclear attack on the United States, Western Europe, Japan and South Korea would have been dealt by all the available potential even before American nuclear charges hit its places of basing.

              Particularly "touches" the author's attempt to minimize the damage from hitting New York in the Manhattan area of ​​the R-7 ICBM warhead (8K71, put on alert in December 1959, only five launch complexes) weighing 3,7 tons and with a capacity of 3 Mt. This is quite enough to dust Washington and the most populous business centers in the cities of New York, Chicago, San Francisco and Los Angeles (total losses of up to 10 million people).

              Whoever doesn’t know, the down-cities of these megalopolises are ultra-compact buildings with skyscrapers, but the suburbs are entirely made up of 2-3 floor buildings.

              Nuclear strikes on Western Europe, Japan and South Korea with medium-range missiles, tactical and short-range missiles, as well as air bombs dropped from strategic and front-line bombers would increase Western casualties to 100 million people.

              After that, the indestructible and legendary Soviet army of the 1962 model of the year, deployed to wartime states (25 million people, of which a large number of front-line soldiers with experience in the WWII), equipped with tens of thousands of tanks, self-propelled guns and armored personnel carriers, would have rushed to Western Europe, sweeping away everything on its way - every soldier would have died in the rear after a massive NATO nuclear attack.

              To understand the transience of hostilities in Europe, it is useful to recall how far the advanced units of the Soviet Army, located on the territory of the German Democratic Republic, from the Atlantic coast of Germany were 300 km

              At the same time, a Soviet expeditionary force of several million people would occupy Turkey (subjected to nuclear attacks), Iran, Iraq, Saudi Arabia and other countries of the Persian Gulf, taking under the full control of the USSR the only oil and gas production area of ​​world significance not exposed to nuclear attacks

              The third world war of the 1962 model of the year would definitely lead to the accession to the socialist camp of Western Europe, the Middle East, South Korea and Japan (China would have a hand in it), India, Indonesia, Pakistan, Afghanistan and the rest of Asia, Australia and Oceania.

              At the same time, there was also a non-nuclear scenario for the development of a military conflict between the USA and the USSR - the exchange of Cuba for West Berlin, brought to the attention of the US President, who had previously declared himself a "Berliner."

              Having assessed the possible outcome of two scenarios for the continuation of hostilities, the US government agreed to a peace on Soviet terms - the bilateral withdrawal of medium-range missiles from Turkey and Cuba.

              So the anti-Soviet message of this article is clearly not in cash.
              1. cap
                cap 5 July 2016 12: 44
                +9
                Quote: Operator
                So the anti-Soviet message of this article is clearly not in cash.


                This is the most important thing you noticed.
                In the event of an attack on Cuba, according to the script, only one coal remained from the States.
                I read it with interest. Fantastic. As a script for a computer game. Author urgently poison a patent application.
                Veteran of the Strategic Rocket Forces. hi
                1. Operator
                  Operator 5 July 2016 12: 55
                  +2
                  Unfortunately, in the 1962 year, coal would have remained only from the down town of four US cities and from its capital.

                  But this would be enough to expand the borders of the USSR from the English Channel in the west to Honshu in the east and from Spitsbergen in the north to the Strait of Babel-Mandeb in the south.

                  In this territory, unaffected places and natural resources (especially oil and gas) would have sufficed for the resettlement of 200 million Soviet people who survived after TMV.

                  And for the subsequent carbonization of North America, the scientific and technological potential previously developed by the USSR in the field of nuclear missile weapons was intended.
                  1. Operator
                    Operator 5 July 2016 14: 07
                    +1
                    The amendment is plus 25-32 down town and million-plus cities throughout the United States, given the intercontinental P-16 missiles with 3-Mt nuclear charge.

                    The carbonization of the 1962 sample of the year, however.

                    And most importantly, this was known to the US leadership through the Colonel of the GRU of the General Staff of the USSR Armed Forces Penkovsky. Adventurers, damn it am
                    1. Operator
                      Operator 5 July 2016 16: 03
                      +2
                      Another amendment - the composition of the strategic nuclear forces of the USSR for October 1962 included:
                      - 5 launch positions of ICBM R-7 with 3-mt warheads;
                      - 32 ground and mine launch positions of ICBM R-16 with 3-mt warheads;
                      - 90 intercontinental M-4 bombers with 50-MT bombs and X-20 cruise missiles with 3-MT warheads;
                      - 32 3M intercontinental bombers with 50-MT bombs and X-20 cruise missiles with 3-MT warheads;
                      - 400 intercontinental Tu-95 bombers with 50-MT bombs and X-20 cruise missiles with 3-MT warheads.

                      Total 659 intercontinental nuclear weapons carriers.
                      Just for the complete carbonation of all of North America am
                      1. Rus2012
                        Rus2012 5 July 2016 17: 34
                        +3
                        Quote: Operator
                        - 5 launch positions of ICBM R-7 with 3-mt warheads;
                        - 32 ground and mine launch positions of ICBM R-16 with 3-mt warheads;

                        ... there were clarifications, there were "light" and "heavy" warheads:
                        P-7 - 3-5mT
                        P-16 - 8Ф115 - 3 Mt and 8Ф116 - 6 Mt.
                      2. Operator
                        Operator 5 July 2016 17: 42
                        +2
                        I made a conditional emphasis on mild NJB, bearing in mind the illustration of the minimum level of damage to the enemy achieved in 1962.

                        You are right - in reality, both light and heavy nuclear warheads would be used depending on the distance between the launch point of a particular missile and its target on the North American continent.
            2. Rus2012
              Rus2012 5 July 2016 12: 47
              +2
              Quote: Operator
              The author of the article set himself the goal of showing the complete unwillingness of the USSR to fight the United States in October 1962.

              ... well, the answer is softer: a too lightweight assessment of the capabilities of the USSR. As well as a weak assessment of the DECISION of the armed forces of the USSR.

              Then at the head of the USSR Armed Forces were "front-line soldiers" - military officers and generals who had gone through the crucible of war. Pliev alone is worth something. He was in command of the GSVK. You should not underestimate the capabilities of the GSVK. It seems that if D. Kenedy had given the order to start the operation, after a few minutes, the GSVK would have already known about this and, accordingly, made a decision:
              - about the start of the "Start immediately" operation for the R-12 - docking of the warhead, installation on the launcher and refueling.
              - preparation for the take-off of fighter aircraft towards air groups
              - taking on escort of US ships with PCRs (range up to 120km).
              1. Operator
                Operator 5 July 2016 13: 10
                +1
                I do not agree - SSAC was just a political tool to put pressure on the United States in terms of compliance in the issue of eliminating RSD in Turkey.

                The main factors for the conclusion of peace on Soviet conditions in the Caribbean military conflict were:
                - SNF of the Soviet Union, located on national territory and in Eastern Europe;
                - The 25 millionth Soviet Army, ready to scale the situation of May 1945 of the whole Eurasia.
        2. Amurets
          Amurets 5 July 2016 11: 35
          +5
          Quote: Rus2012
          S-75,

          Will I have a question?
          << After the successful completion of the tests, the V-760 (15D) missile with a special warhead for the S-75M system was adopted by the Decree of May 15, 1964 N421-166 and the Order of the USSR Ministry of Defense N0066 1964. According to its characteristics, it practically corresponded to B -755, differing from it in the greater minimum height of the affected area, adopted on the basis of the safety conditions of the covered objects. In 1964, 75D (V-15) missiles with a special warhead were supplied for the S-760M complex, which could also be used in complexes of later modifications. >> How could the V-760 missile be used if it did not pass the tests?
          1. Rus2012
            Rus2012 5 July 2016 11: 51
            +5
            Quote: Amurets
            How could they use the B-760 missile if it did not pass the test?

            ... Let's start with the fact that the S-25 "Berkut" air defense system already had a special unit.
            And in Cuba there was a lot of things undocumented and passed all stages of testing and duly adopted into service. After all, the GSVK was equipped in the "highest" category ...
            1. Rus2012
              Rus2012 5 July 2016 12: 57
              +4
              ;))))))))))))))))))
              about how liberophiles like the capabilities of our air defense at that time -
              About S-25 "Berkut"
              Probably the first time this question (on the arming of a special combat unit) K. P. Kazakov, the commander of the 1th Air Defense Army, officially raised it in December 1954. He also proposed (obviously after consultations with scientists) a solution option - the installation of a small nuclear warhead on missiles. This proposal quickly found understanding in the government, and by a resolution of the Council of Ministers of 22 on March 1955, Minsredmash committed to create a special charge for B-300 missiles, and OKB-301 MAP to develop a new missile for it based on a 207A missile.

              The creation of a special charge in the MSM was entrusted to KB-25 under the guidance of the famous designer of armored vehicles of the Great Patriotic War N.L.Dukhov. The special charge received the name C2. The missile for its installation in OKB-301 received the factory designation 215.

              In developing the special charge and rocket 215, special attention was paid to the safety of their use. The main thing - it was necessary to guarantee the impossibility of undermining the special charge on the ground or in the flight of a rocket at low altitudes in order to ensure the safety of the launch sites of the SAM itself and personnel. To solve this problem, duplication of the main missile control systems and its guidance channels at the B-200 station was used, as well as some other measures.

              In 1955, OKB-301 developed a preliminary design of the 215 rocket, completed the development of working drawings and began to manufacture experimental flight products. The B-200 station and ground equipment of the C range were modified to launch 215 missiles in May 1956, and their factory tests began on June 22.

              By the end of the year, the training ground was prepared for full-scale tests of a missile with a special charge. 3 December 1956 the Commander-in-Chief of the Air Defense Forces S. S. Biryuzov reported to the Minister of Defense G.K. Zhukov about the readiness in the second half of December for field tests of the 215 missile. A special government decree allowed them.

              And so on 19 of January 1957 the "main experiment" took place. Two IL-28 target aircraft entered the guidance station area. The leader walked at an altitude of 10,5 km, the leader led somewhat lower and at some distance from the leader. Target aircraft entered the zone and were captured by the B-200 station. The guidance of the 215 rocket was carried out on the first aircraft, but with a shift to the side of its course on the 700 m. The launch, flight of the rocket and its detonation occurred normally, and a large fireball appeared in the sky. The lead plane caught fire and began to fall down. Slave was hit by a shock wave and falling apart, fell after him. On the ground, their remains continued to burn.

              So for the first time in history, one anti-aircraft guided missile shot down two target aircraft, and even at such a considerable distance from each other. The success was complete. 215 rocket tests on this were completed.

              Government Decree of February 15 1957 g. From the III quarter of 1957 g. mass production of 215 rockets began. By order of the Minister of Defense from 22 on July 1957, the name of the 215 missile was changed to 207Т. The 25 system in 1957 was prepared for the reception and operation of 207T missiles and thereby solved the most important task of protecting Moscow from massive air raids by the enemy.


              Do you all think that under these conditions there WERE or NON-SCALE special warhead for C-75?
              About 15 Д (В-760) - it is well known.
              After all, only a very small circle of "deaf and dumb" could know about this? ;)))
      4. GAF
        GAF 5 July 2016 13: 03
        +4
        "In addition, according to the recollections of rocket veterans, some of the missiles were already on the table !!!"
        Yes, it was.
        He served in the naval aviation. "Lucky", they detained demobilization in 1963 for six months. Tu-16 with cruise missiles and nuclear warhead. Area of ​​the Soviet Gavan. One squadron at launch positions, ready to take off. In it, the crews are on duty in shifts in aircraft with external sources connected to start the engines. The launch range of the KR is 500 km. In the final section - homing and anti-aircraft maneuvering. Main targets: carrier formations and Japan.
    2. Vadim237
      Vadim237 5 July 2016 14: 07
      -5
      If this had actually happened, the United States would have destroyed the USSR, since they had many times more delivery vehicles and thermonuclear charges themselves.
      1. Vadim237
        Vadim237 5 July 2016 16: 27
        -5
        And I must admit that the AGM-28 Hound Dog cruise missile, of which there were more than 500 then, was far ahead of its time.
      2. Kurasava
        Kurasava 5 July 2016 17: 43
        +1
        How many times is it "times"? And it is necessary to write the United States would have destroyed and not destroyed ....... And what prevented the United States from having such a clear (at times) advantage not to take and defeat the USSR, probably their natural philanthropy?
        1. Vadim237
          Vadim237 6 July 2016 01: 15
          +1
          “And what prevented the United States from having such a clear (at times) advantage not to take and defeat the USSR” - Then we had fun in the balance from such a development of events and we were just incredibly lucky that none of this happened.
      3. Zulu_S
        Zulu_S 6 July 2016 12: 04
        +1
        There is such a concept: "guaranteed unacceptable damage."
  2. Mister X
    Mister X 5 July 2016 11: 52
    +9
    Quote: Waltasar
    Something like the literature of the genre of alternative history.

    And I remembered the joke of the Cold War times:
    ...
    US President Jimmy Carter is dreaming of a militaristic dream.
    And he dreams that America declared war on the USSR.
    Sits at the nuclear panel Carter and presses one button after another.
    And at the other end of the world, Brezhnev is sitting at the same console and also presses buttons.
    And the missiles with nuclear warheads are flying both ways, turning huge cities into ruins.
    So they pushed the buttons until Carter had two warheads left, and Brezhnev didn’t have one.
    Then Carter calls the Kremlin and says:
    - Well, Leon, lost the war? We are waiting for your unconditional surrender!
    “Wait, Jimmy,” replies Brezhnev. - I need only half an hour. I will call the ministers, we will confer, and then I will call you back.
    In the White House, a ball on the occasion of the victory.
    All the ladies in white, men - in tails.
    The bell rings from the Kremlin.
    Carter picks up the phone.
    “Jimmy,” he hears the voice of Brezhnev, “a drunken ensign was brought to me and he says that ten more missiles were found in the mines near Arkhangelsk.”
    So there will be no surrender. Give up yourself!
    Carter hangs up and says:
    - Gentlemen, I have always said that Russian disorder will destroy America!
    And then the US president woke up in a cold sweat ...
    1. Operator
      Operator 5 July 2016 12: 57
      +2
      It’s sometimes more beneficial to chew than to write.
  3. NIKNN
    NIKNN 5 July 2016 16: 20
    +6
    I agree. Thank you for the article Sergey!
    The approaches to solving the problems encountered by the leadership are remote.
    In fact, at the moment, a similar threat has developed at our borders now. Our parliamentarians are not that they do not vote for acceptable measures (right up to a nuclear war?), But they don’t do anything at all. It may be worthwhile to show our resolve, because then the threat of war decreased significantly. And the words about the adoption of (alternative, symmetric, asymmetric) measures, these are only words on them which already in my opinion lie.
  • AID.S
    AID.S 5 July 2016 06: 44
    0
    Pumping up?
    1. Bongo
      5 July 2016 06: 45
      +1
      Quote: AID.S
      Pumping up?

      In what sense? what
      1. Army soldier2
        Army soldier2 5 July 2016 09: 02
        +6
        In the sense of an alternative story.
        Operation Anadyr is a unique and unique operation in the world. Maybe you should write about it? Or about General of the Army Gribkov, the main developer?
        1. AID.S
          AID.S 6 July 2016 12: 30
          +1
          Exactly. It is better to remind how it was, not how it could have become (this problem was sorted out then). And we are "pumping" in the sense of a recent article about "Chinese aggression".
      2. The comment was deleted.
  • Razvedka_Boem
    Razvedka_Boem 5 July 2016 06: 51
    +1
    There are enough works in the alternative genre in the Internet .. And many are much more interesting than this opus ..)
    1. Bongo
      5 July 2016 06: 53
      +2
      Quote: Razvedka_Boem
      There are enough works in the alternative genre in the Internet .. And many are much more interesting than this opus ..)

      The taste and color ... request Are there any claims to the technical side?
      1. Razvedka_Boem
        Razvedka_Boem 5 July 2016 07: 22
        +1
        No. But in reality, there would be a human factor that most often turns things around differently.
      2. Rus2012
        Rus2012 6 July 2016 14: 06
        +3
        Quote: Bongo
        Are there any claims to the technical side?

        ... in his comments he already opposed a little, both in terms of technology and the possible actions of the Soviet side ...

        At one time, this topic was thoroughly discussed at the specialized missile forums. Namely -
        - the composition of the GSVK and Strategic Missile Forces forces at that time (equipment, capabilities, probability of failures).
        - "the human factor" or the climate in the GSPC and among the l / s of the Strategic Missile Forces (determination, firmness - in the execution of ANY ORDER ... and let it be)

        There were many memoirs of veterans and heated debate at odds. Especially with the fact that memory, alas, a thing is not constant and subjective.
        By the way, "probable partners" also came "from that side".

        But, to our great regret, little remained of those discussions, for the forums "collapsed" and "lost". M. b. by chance, maybe someone "tried" :(
        A little bit left here -
        http://www.russianarms.ru/

        For the future -
        The author has done a great job that I would like to "polish and edit" with the involvement of those involved. It is also desirable that participants from the "other side" also join.
        Then you can really recreate an alternative history of this topic with a high degree of certainty of possible events ...
        In the meantime, as a first approximation, with the indicated shortcomings, it will come down as a basis.
  • igorka357
    igorka357 5 July 2016 07: 11
    +2
    I want to write too much in response to the article, but I won’t do it! An article in the style of Tom Clancy ... To predict the situation in a nuclear war at least a little, you need to at least sit at the headquarters of the Moscow Region, and at least know a little about the plans oncoming, or preemptive strike! Everything else is fantastic and fiction! But I read it with pleasure and a smile!
    1. Bongo
      5 July 2016 07: 36
      +3
      Quote: igorka357
      To predict the situation in a nuclear war at least a little, you need to at least sit at the headquarters of the Moscow Region, and at least know a little about the plans for a retaliatory counter-strike, or a preventive strike! Everything else is fantastic and fiction! But I read it with pleasure and a smile!

      You are partly right, I have not been sitting at headquarters for a long time. But in the 1962 year, there could be no talk of a reciprocal strike. This publication attempts to analyze the possible course of hostilities in accordance with the then realities and the then balance of forces.
      1. Aleksander
        Aleksander 5 July 2016 08: 34
        +4
        Quote: Bongo
        But in the 1962 year, there couldn’t be any talk of a reciprocal strike


        It is precisely for this reason that the Soviet leadership, I think, would have hit simultaneously in Europe and the USA to avoid the deliberate destruction of a significant part their ballistic missiles in the case of the transfer of the initiative of the first strike by US ICBMs: after all, Soviet ICBMs were already much smaller than those of the West.
      2. The comment was deleted.
      3. Rus2012
        Rus2012 5 July 2016 13: 18
        +5
        Quote: Bongo
        in accordance with the then realities and the then balance of power.

        /// you are right, the balance of power in the SNA of the USSR was clearly small: 25-32 launcher ICBM first strike, approx. 300-400 RSD, approx. 500 intercontinental bombers.

        But, the picture began to turn out different:
        - the armada of attacking bombers in Cuba is met by a small IA and anti-aircraft missile defense. Even if the use of special warheads for aviation is excluded because of the controversial availability.
        But, this serves as a signal for Pliev - to hit immediately with EVERYTHING AVAILABLE: FCR-1, RCC ...
        On the RSD missiles - preparations for launch have been going on for a long time ... and from the beginning of the fall of the first bombs on Cuban territory - "the set of the launch scheme" begins. 7-12 minutes - and the R-12 went !. Let a dozen out of 24.

        The first nuclear detonation of warheads in the Western Hemisphere and - a signal to the Soviet RSD and ICBMs on the continent - to "start immediately". By that time, they are already partly also "on the table".
        KBU at that time was absent as a class ...
        1. Kurasava
          Kurasava 5 July 2016 17: 48
          +1
          What is KBU?
          1. Rus2012
            Rus2012 5 July 2016 18: 16
            +2
            Quote: Kurasava
            What is KBU?

            code blocking devices
  • Titsen
    Titsen 5 July 2016 07: 12
    +5
    Quote: Waltasar
    Something like the literature of the genre of alternative history. But it is easy to read, I look forward to continuing.


    I totally agree.

    Article plus - I love science fiction very much.

    But the article has a deep thought. which makes one think about the future - "Currently, Russian-American relations are at their lowest level in the last 25 years."
  • vietnam7
    vietnam7 5 July 2016 07: 25
    +7
    Right back in childhood, Tom Clancy remembered. Something new on VO. Sergei, let this now rarely sound from the bosses, more often from the readers - thanks for the work!
    When is the sequel?
    1. Bongo
      5 July 2016 07: 33
      +4
      Quote: vietnam7
      Right back in childhood, Tom Clancy remembered. Something new on VO. Sergei, let this now rarely sound from the bosses, more often from the readers - thanks for the work!
      drinks
      Quote: vietnam7
      When is the sequel?

      Today I plan to finish.
      1. Vadim237
        Vadim237 5 July 2016 14: 17
        -1
        We are waiting for a story of similar alternative events in the future.
  • Leto
    Leto 5 July 2016 08: 00
    -3
    These are sad "if only", the USSR had no chance in 1962. did not have. They knew ALL the strategic objects of the USSR, they had a complete picture of the state of the USSR Armed Forces thanks to the data received from Penkovsky, and therefore there could be no retaliatory strike.
    1. Bongo
      5 July 2016 08: 04
      +3
      Quote: Leto
      These are sad "if only", the USSR had no chance in 1962. did not have. They knew ALL the strategic objects of the USSR, they had a complete picture of the state of the USSR Armed Forces thanks to the data received from Penkovsky, and therefore there could be no retaliatory strike.

      that is why in this reality the Soviet leadership gives the order to deliver the first blow.
      1. Leto
        Leto 5 July 2016 08: 13
        -4
        Quote: Bongo
        that is why in this reality the Soviet leadership gives the order to deliver the first blow.

        Than? The royal seven of which were two or three? R-16, which got on the database only in 1963? I mean a blow to the United States, to sense bombing Europe if the main enemy is overseas and he is neither cold nor hot from it.
        1. Amurets
          Amurets 5 July 2016 08: 57
          +8
          Quote: Leto

          Than? The royal seven of which were two or three? R-16, which got on the database only in 1963? I mean a blow to the United States, to sense bombing Europe if the main enemy is overseas and he is neither cold nor hot from it.

          I have already written about the book, "On all the oceans of the planet." V.G. Lebedko writes that the Americans discovered less than half of the submarines that went out into the ocean. They did not find a single missile carrier of the 629 project. And they cannot be compared with the American George Washington, but still they posed a threat to the United States. At the same time, M-4 and 3M bombers were concentrated at the Seryshevo and Belonogovo airfields, in the Amur region. In the book by S. Moroz Myasishchev "3M / M-4", there is how to prepare pilots for a raid on the United States. And there are photographs of crews who were going to fly out and have already received secret briefcases. Serious porridge was brewed. And pay attention to the 27th division of the Strategic Missile Forces. R-16 missiles began to arrive in this division in 1962.
          1. Leto
            Leto 5 July 2016 09: 37
            -2
            Quote: Amurets
            but still they posed a threat to the United States

            Theoretically, yes. The coast. Range of 600 km. and the enemy’s presence of anti-aircraft missile systems did not allow them to approach close to the coast, not to mention that the launch was carried out from the surface and the missile was launched not from the mine, but from the launch pad. The probability that the enemy did not notice how the submarine surfaced near its shores and began to roll out a missile from the mine to launch it, of course.
            Quote: Amurets
            At the same time, the M-4 and 3M bombers were concentrated at the airfields of Seryshevo and Belonogovo, in the Amur Region.

            Well, you shouldn’t rely on anyone. Having no fighter cover, they had no chance to break through US air defense.
            Quote: Amurets
            And pay attention to the 27th division of the Strategic Missile Forces. R-16 missiles in this division began to arrive in 1962.

            Searched, found that by the end of 1962. there were three regiments in the division, each regiment had two silos R-16, i.e. for 1962 maximum 6 silos. The first R-16s received 8 and 42 missile divisions, three regiments of 2 silos. It turns out at best 12 R-16 missiles in varying degrees of readiness.
            1. Amurets
              Amurets 5 July 2016 11: 23
              +3
              Quote: Leto

              Searched, found that by the end of 1962. there were three regiments in the division, each regiment had two silos R-16, i.e. for 1962 maximum 6 silos. The first R-16s received 8 and 42 missile divisions, three regiments of 2 silos. It turns out at best 12 R-16 missiles in varying degrees of readiness.

              The Americans were very painful that they didn’t have an ocean barrier, and arguing about who would have won that war was simply not ethical. It was just that at the time of the SDI, scientists thought that there wouldn’t be any winners back then, just Khrushchev, as an experienced cheater, he played in psychology. The same A. Sakharov warned about the Nuclear winter. Therefore, the article is interesting, but the results of the war cannot be calculated on any computer.
              1. Leto
                Leto 5 July 2016 13: 14
                +3
                Quote: Amurets
                The same A. Sakharov warned of a nuclear winter.

                The theory of nuclear winter was born in the 80s and Sakharov has nothing to do with it. Well, in the sense, they have to do with it as the creator of the means for its organization, but Moiseev and Alexandrov made mathematical calculations. In 1962 neither Khrushchev nor Kennedy, nor their many advisers (especially with a crinkle from a cap) did not predict those catastrophic consequences for the earth from a nuclear war.
                1. Operator
                  Operator 5 July 2016 13: 25
                  -2
                  Enough to circulate the propaganda ravings of Gorbachev’s entourage about the so-called nuclear winter (shielding sunlight with dust and soot from nuclear explosions).

                  Now the Internet is full of information that the amount of dust and soot emitted into the atmosphere during each of the largest volcanic eruptions in modern Earth history was an order of magnitude or more greater than the aerosol volume during the explosion of all 60000 nuclear charges that were in service with the USSR and the USA at the end of 1980- x years.

                  In 1962, the number of nuclear charges in the two countries amounted to several thousand units.
                2. Amurets
                  Amurets 5 July 2016 13: 59
                  +1
                  Quote: Leto
                  Well, in the sense, they have to do with it as the creator of the means for its organization, but Moiseev and Alexandrov made mathematical calculations. In 1962 neither Khrushchev nor Kennedy, nor their many advisers (especially with a crinkle from a cap) did not predict those catastrophic consequences for the earth from a nuclear war.

                  Something like this. The idea was expressed by Sakharov when testing the Sloika in 1953. But he did not expect such consequences either. And this is a reference to the Tsar Bomba, when there were already suspicions that it would not end well. But otherwise you are right.
                  http://www.nationalsecurity.ru/maps/nuclear/004.htm
              2. Vadim237
                Vadim237 5 July 2016 16: 16
                -6
                Would the United States be winners, nuclear winter as a physical phenomenon is impossible.
                1. Kurasava
                  Kurasava 5 July 2016 18: 11
                  0
                  Can you justify your theory somehow? Where such confidence?
                  1. Vadim237
                    Vadim237 5 July 2016 22: 42
                    +1
                    Everything is from the same place - practice shows that in children the cooling down to minus 50 caused soot to enter the stratosphere — 150 million tons of soot somewhere, but such phenomena have already occurred on the earth more than once — hundreds of times larger than in the calculations of scientists — dreamers and not what winter they didn’t bring with a temperature drop of several tens of degrees, the maximum temperature drop was 6 degrees, which is very small for frosts and glaciers. So it was with the eruption of the volcano Tambora, Hatepe, Krakatau, etc., as well as the fires of oil storages and wells in the Persian Gulf - then 150 million cubic meters of oil products burned and the most recent example, fires in Russia in 2010, burned out in three months according to the most conservative estimates 97 million cubic meters of wood, this is equivalent to the energy released during the explosion of 354 megatons, and the area of ​​fires over the summer was more than two million hectares and soot - such huge volumes, into the upper layers of the atmosphere at least some significant decrease temperature did not lead. I searched everywhere for calculations - precisely with formulas about the theory of Nuclear Winter, as they thought they started with, but I didn’t find anything and the conclusion suggests itself - we have many scientists who love to embellish reality.
                2. Corsair
                  Corsair 11 July 2016 11: 29
                  0
                  Quote: Vadim237
                  Would the United States be winners, nuclear winter as a physical phenomenon is impossible.

                  what And why exactly the United States - they have almost the entire population and main industry located on the coast, even a quarter of the missiles that reached the target would cause enormous damage. As for the means of delivery, it seems to me that the United States has not all been so cloudless in this regard, few people know about the readiness of their strategic nuclear forces and their full working capacity.
                  As for the nuclear winter, one grandmother really said here, but there are some climatic laws and natural phenomena (elemental), point and large-scale air heating in the atmosphere can cause the formation of spontaneous cyclones and anticyclones, tornadoes, etc.
            2. Rus2012
              Rus2012 5 July 2016 12: 31
              +1
              Quote: Leto
              The first P-16 received 8 and 42 missile divisions, three regiments for 2 silos. It turns out at best 12 missiles R-16 in varying degrees of readiness.

              ...this is not true!
              See below, I wrote -
              The R-16 missile was adopted and by that moment carried a database in many regiments. So by November 1 1961. the first three missile regiments (3 regiment x2PU = 6PU) in the city of Nizhny Tagil and the village of Yurya, Kirov Region were prepared for interception ... The number 32PU of R-16 missiles for October 1962 is a real figure.
              From Wiki -
              By the time of the Caribbean crisis, the number of ICBMs of the USSR reached 75 units, but at the same time no more than 25 could be launched.


              At that time, the construction of launchers and the commissioning of regiments was at an accelerated pace!
              By October 1962, at least 32 PU R-16 were already ready. Fully P-16 were deployed to the 1965-year - 186 - launchers, both ground and silos.
              1. Leto
                Leto 5 July 2016 13: 03
                -2
                Quote: Rus2012
                By October 1962, at least 32 R-16 launchers were already ready.

                Read the story at http://rvsn.info. There, of course, everything is foggy written, but there is nothing about 32 silos. In August 1961 42 RD received only one missile and in September equipment for two BSPs. Given that in 1962. there were only three missile regiments, then the maximum could be 6 silos. Where did you get 32?
                I remind you that only one George Washington carried 16! ICBMs, and there were FIVE! Plus four Iten Alenov, 154 ICBMs only on SSBNs! And to them are Jupiters, Atlases, Titans ...

                What is 6 P-16 for a country like the USA? Smoke in one place, they can’t even undermine combat efficiency.
                1. Rus2012
                  Rus2012 5 July 2016 13: 27
                  +3
                  Quote: Leto
                  Where did you get 32?

                  Yokorno Babai!
                  Is Vicki lying too?
                  75MBR to the circle of the USSR in October 1962year. Of these - 25MBR - first strike

                  Once again I repeat - then the commissioning of the PU - went at an accelerated pace! by 1965, all 186 PU R-16 were introduced.
                  If on 1October 1961 there was an 3 regiment of about a dozen divisions of the Strategic Missile Forces, then after 3 a year ALL DIVISIONS stood on the database!
                  1. Leto
                    Leto 5 July 2016 13: 46
                    0
                    Quote: Rus2012
                    Is Vicki lying too?

                    Well, the link to Wikipedia has long been despised and considered a bad manners, for me the official site of the Strategic Missile Forces is worthy of more trust.
                    Quote: Rus2012
                    Once again I repeat - then the commissioning of the PU - went at an accelerated pace!

                    Well, let's say 32 P-16. Now convince yourself that these missiles are enough to destroy the United States.
                    1. Rus2012
                      Rus2012 5 July 2016 17: 22
                      +3
                      Quote: Leto
                      Well, let's say 32 P-16. Now convince yourself that these missiles are enough to destroy the United States.

                      /// Did I say that enough?

                      A dozen P-12 for 1mT from Cuba, plus 25 - ICBMs for 3-5mT for the main goals of the United States: NY, Los Angeles, San Francisco, Texas ... and so on. would constitute unacceptable damage. Do not find?
                      1. Rus2012
                        Rus2012 5 July 2016 18: 12
                        +3
                        Quote: Rus2012
                        would constitute unacceptable damage.


                        ... I, like other former missile officers, am outraged by the belittling and even denial by some "couch ..." of the capabilities of the Strategic Missile Forces in 1962.

                        Strategic Rocket Forces in October 1962 could do a lot of things -
                        - from three dozen ICBMs of the first strike with the P-16, P-7
                        - OK. 400 RSD P-5, P-12, P-14
                        could "smash" the main goals of the United States in North America, and ALL of Europe and Asia with US bases and more or less valuable objects of these satellite countries!

                        Here are the capabilities of only the N-Tagil division -
                        BSP-1, 2 NPU with P-16 are ready and on the database with 01.11.61
                        BSP-3, 2 NPU with P-16 are ready and on the database with 10.01.62
                        BSP-2, 2 NPU with P-16 are ready and on the database with 01.11.61
                        BSP-5, 2 NPU with P-16 are ready and on the database with 12.02.62
                        BSP-23, 2 NPU with P-16 are ready and on the database with 02.10.62
                        TOTAL: 10 ICBM - First Launch

                        And there were not one or two such divisions.

                        At least read literature, for example, veterans of Plesetsk, Chertok ...
                2. Amurets
                  Amurets 6 July 2016 01: 36
                  +1
                  Quote: Leto
                  Plus four Iten Alenov,

                  Iten Allen only passed tests and crew co-ordination. See the history of the nuclear submarines.
              2. The comment was deleted.
              3. Vadim237
                Vadim237 5 July 2016 16: 41
                -1
                And even at that time there were already ICBMs R 9A.
              4. Vadim237
                Vadim237 5 July 2016 16: 42
                -1
                And even at that time there were already ICBMs R 9A.
        2. Rus2012
          Rus2012 5 July 2016 12: 33
          +3
          Quote: Leto
          Than? The royal seven of which were two or three?

          4 launch stations P-7: 2 in Plesetsk, 2 in Tyuratam. The rockets were already on the tables.
  • Alex_T
    Alex_T 5 July 2016 09: 34
    +7
    A very colorful Armageddian. Author plus! Only in my opinion, everything will be launched immediately at the enemy in order to increase the chance of breaking through their strike and reduce losses from a retaliatory strike.
  • AUL
    AUL 5 July 2016 09: 47
    +4
    I recall now how, during the Caribbean crisis, products were swept away in stores, especially salt, matches and soap. Now I can’t understand how the information about the situation leaked to the people (it was in '62, and without any Internet), but the panic was noticeable.
    1. Amurets
      Amurets 5 July 2016 11: 48
      +2
      Quote: AUL
      I recall now how, during the Caribbean crisis, products were swept away in stores, especially salt, matches and soap. Now I can’t understand how the information about the situation leaked to the people (it was in '62, and without any Internet), but the panic was noticeable.

      For that there were "Voice of America" ​​and other radio stations broadcasting to the USSR. Moreover, jamming was not always carried out. In the Far East, it seems to me, the Japanese EN-ECH-KEY was not jammed at all.
  • oking
    oking 5 July 2016 11: 22
    -8
    Quote: Sergey Linnik
    The Soviet Union was able to deliver about 400 warheads to the United States mainly with the help of strategic bombers and ICBMs R-7 and R-16, which required lengthy preparations for launch and the high cost of building launch complexes.

    He did not have the USSR until 1963. no way to deliver warheads to the United States. Only theoretical. Bombers could fly only under a lucky star. And while the royal rocket would take off, the war would have ended.
    The situation changed only in 1963, when the 8K-64 Yangel missile (aka R-16 or SS-7 Saddler according to NATO classification) was put on the database. From this moment on, the world remembered that in a far and cold corner of the world there is such a country as the USSR.
    PS. R-16 did not require long preparation and costly launch complexes.
    1. Rus2012
      Rus2012 5 July 2016 12: 26
      +5
      Quote: oking
      The situation changed only in 1963 when the Yangel rocket 8К-64 (aka P-16 or SS-7 Saddler) was put on the database

      The R-16 missile was adopted and by that moment carried a database in many regiments. So by November 1 1961. the first three missile regiments ( 3Shelf x2PU = 6PU ) in the city of Nizhny Tagil and the village of Yurya, Kirov Region, they were prepared for taking up combat duty ... The figure 32PU of R-16 missiles for October 1962 is a real figure.
      From Wiki -
      By the time of the Caribbean crisis, the number of ICBMs of the USSR reached 75 units, but at the same time no more than 25 could be launched.
    2. Aleksander
      Aleksander 5 July 2016 15: 47
      +1
      Quote: oking
      I did not have the USSR until 1963. no capabilities US warhead delivery


      Cuba delivered very quickly and reliably, as clearly stated in the article
      ..
      1. oking
        oking 6 July 2016 15: 10
        -3
        Quote: Aleksander
        Cuba very quickly and reliably delivered

        What and where did Cuba deliver if there were no nuclear weapons there?
        Quote: Aleksander
        clearly stated in the article

        You never know what is indicated in the article.
    3. Aleksander
      Aleksander 5 July 2016 15: 47
      +1
      Quote: oking
      I did not have the USSR until 1963. no capabilities US warhead delivery


      Cuba delivered very quickly and reliably, as clearly stated in the article
      ..
    4. Kurasava
      Kurasava 5 July 2016 18: 15
      0
      You need to be more attentive and read the comments of people taking part in the discussion.
      1. oking
        oking 6 July 2016 15: 12
        -2
        Quote: Kurasava
        host

        Literacy must be tightened. And give advice only where they need it.
  • andrew42
    andrew42 5 July 2016 12: 27
    +1
    Well, the author painted the novel with a sequel. In reality, both sides would beat everyone that is, and immediately. At the counters. Fear is the basic instinct.
    1. Waltasar
      Waltasar 5 July 2016 13: 53
      +3
      It is in modern realities that there is a possibility that while the rockets on one side have not yet reached the second, it already launches its hello back.
      On the technological base of that time, the exchange of blows should be delayed.
  • lukewarm
    lukewarm 5 July 2016 13: 08
    0
    Cool reading matter. Plus by inertia. Then I read the sources ... Alternative history, militer (well, that's at least something). It is interesting to read, but to draw some conclusions and build today on this basis ... Alas. Or maybe it was necessary then to shy away. "We will definitely bang! The whole world is in dust!" © Wild ensign
  • Robert Nevsky
    Robert Nevsky 5 July 2016 16: 40
    -1
    An article in the anti-Russian spirit.
    1. Vadim237
      Vadim237 5 July 2016 17: 03
      0
      No, that would be true, in such a conflict the alignment would not be in our favor - the United States had the largest and most powerful fleet, and its nuclear arsenal was six times higher than ours - 30000 charges against 5000 from the USSR, and in terms of total megaton so generally 20 times.
      1. Kurasava
        Kurasava 5 July 2016 18: 18
        +2
        Where did Vadik come from? Any specifics you can offer? You have all the comments that the USSR would have lost the war because here ........ they have 300 bombs and we have 200 ......... somewhere I heard this already oh yes Napoleon and Hitler also had to win because all the advantages were on their side.
        1. Vadim237
          Vadim237 6 July 2016 00: 27
          0
          The side with the largest number of carriers and nuclear charges will win in the new won - let's compare the number of carriers in the USA and the USSR for 1965
          USA

          BRDS
          PGM-19 Jupiter 100 pcs



          PGM-17 Thor 60 pcs
          ICBMs
          SM-65 Atlas 129 pcs
          LGM-30 Minuteman 1,2 800 pcs - 3 warheads each
          HGM-25 Titan I 54 pcs
          AGM-28 Hound Dog strategic cruise missile 722 pcs
          Bombers
          B 52 744 pcs
          B 47 2041 pcs
          Nuclear submarines with ICBMs
          George Washington "5pcs on each 16 PU Polaris A1
          “Ethan Allen” 5pcs on each 16 PU Polaris A1 A2
          Lafayette 9 pcs on each 16 pu Polaris A2
          James Madison "10 pcs on each 16 pu Polaris A3
        2. Vadim237
          Vadim237 6 July 2016 01: 03
          0
          The USSR
          BRDS
          R 5M 29 pcs
          R 11M 400 pcs
          R 14 18 pc
          R 12 2000 pc
          ICBMs
          R 7 30 pc
          R 9 234 pc
          Bombers
          3M 90 pcs
          Tu 95 pcs
          Tu 4 1200
          Tu 16 1500
          Cruise missile X 20 2414 pcs
          Nuclear submarines with ICBMs
          629 24 pcs each 3 ICBM R13
          658 8 pieces each of 3 ICBMs R 13, R 21.
          As we can see from all this, the alignment was significantly not in favor of the USSR, against our armada of bombers, the US Air Force could oppose 1000 air-to-air missiles with a nuclear warhead AIR-2 "Genie, as well as 13000 MIM-3 Nike-Ajax air defense missiles, and the appearance of the LGM-30 "Minuteman" missiles with multiple warheads brought to zero the entire missile defense system of the USSR, and in this connection it was necessary to create a new early warning system.
          1. Kurasava
            Kurasava 6 July 2016 19: 10
            +2
            Once again, I repeat to you, pay attention to the fate of Napoleon and Hitler then for them there were also "modern wars" and in theory those who had more guns, cavalry / tanks, cannons, planes should have won. The story of Vadik is a lantern that shines on us from the past to the future, and so the Americans took this into account. And from where your information you have not answered. Sources, sources ... And most importantly, you forget that what we are discussing here is precisely that the USSR, after the amers attack on Cuba, beats everything that is in Europe and the United States, so multiply the numerous initial potential of the enemy by zero.
    2. zyablik.olga
      zyablik.olga 10 July 2016 12: 35
      +3
      Quote: Robert Nevsky
      An article in the anti-Russian spirit.

      What did you find anti-Russian? Normal publication in the genre of alternative history.
  • The comment was deleted.
  • Kurasava
    Kurasava 5 July 2016 18: 37
    +5
    Dear Kamarads. Firstly, I wanted to say thank you to the author, it’s written not badly (I don’t know how hehehehe) it is interesting to know of course how it will end (whether ours will win). And the second - it also seems to me that the Soviet command would have hit as soon as it could and would have beaten both Europe and the United States, especially since the amers at that time had an advantage in ICBMs, the fact that the commander of the Cuban group had carte blanche for the use of nuclear weapons. And if the Americans were confident in their strength and knew for sure that they (even at the cost of heavy losses) would definitely and forever eliminate the Soviet / Russian / Communist "threat", they would give the order to "kill the Russians." It is known that the Americans did not know for certain how many missiles the USSR had and how many submarines with nuclear weapons, and most importantly where they were in 1962. They didn’t even know everything about Cuba, although it was under their noses, what can we say about the world's oceans and the entire territory of the USSR. So they counted, thought and realized that the game was not worth the candle.
  • Evgenijus
    Evgenijus 5 July 2016 19: 03
    +12
    As a variant of a war romance - normal. In reality, no one knows how events would unfold. Everything in this story is robotic. In fact, the war of those times would have been protracted and terrible in consequences. The human factor would fully work (both in the upper headquarters, more precisely in command posts), and in the lower echelons - on the launchers. Suffice it to say that the R-12 missile complexes had not one missile and a warhead on each launcher, but two. There was such a concept - "second salvo". For this salvo, each starting battery had a second set of ground cable network (the first was burned at launch). Naturally, after a retaliatory strike against the regiment's positional area, not all starting batteries will be combat-ready, but only a few (there were 8 launchers in the regiment, and 4 launchers in each battalion). The divisions are separated from each other at a considerable distance. At the divisional headquarters (command post), after assessing the situation, a plan was developed to transfer the surviving equipment and ammunition to those launchers, the likelihood of a repeated launch from which was higher. The routes of such a castling were selected in advance, taking into account the carrying capacity of bridges, roads, the time of transfer of equipment and personnel, mainly specialists of starting batteries. All this would take place under the conditions of a tight limit of information, for most of the communication channels would be destroyed. I am writing about all this as a person who actually participated in such calculations of event scenarios.
  • Tsoy
    Tsoy 5 July 2016 19: 03
    +5
    Author plus is written interesting. Read without interruption. Let there be relaxation somewhere for one or the other, but in general, an excellent example of a doomsday scenario. The only thing...

    Leningrad, Minsk, Baku, Kiev, Nikolaev, Almaty, Gorky, Kuibyshev, Sverdlovsk, Chelyabinsk, Novosibirsk, Irkutsk, Chita, Vladivostok and several other cities were completely destroyed.


    Irkutsk for what? crying

    I understand now that I definitely don’t live in the case of an hour. Here, on the one hand, Angarsk with the world's largest industrial complex, a refinery, chemical. industry and other things. On the other hand, the military unit of the Strategic Missile Forces with poplars. And next to it is also the Sukhoi aircraft factory ... but in 60-s, then for what? laughing success with the continuation ...
    1. zyablik.olga
      zyablik.olga 10 July 2016 12: 40
      +4
      Quote: Choi
      Irkutsk for what?

      In Irkutsk, the Il-50 bombers were built at the aircraft factory in 28, and the Yak-60 bomber and fighter modifications were built at 28. So the author was not mistaken, this city would be among the priority goals.
    2. corporal
      corporal 11 July 2016 14: 52
      0
      Quote: Choi
      Here, on the one hand, Angarsk with the world's largest production complex, oil refinery, chemical. industry and so on. On the other hand, the military unit of the Strategic Missile Forces with poplars.

      And Shelekhov with an aluminum plant.
  • Ajevgenij
    Ajevgenij 5 July 2016 19: 36
    +3
    An interesting scenario. I read it with pleasure. It would be interesting to look at the option of developing a large-scale war with the massive use of nuclear weapons for the year 1996-98. Did anyone make fantasies and prejudices on this subject?
  • demiurg
    demiurg 5 July 2016 20: 35
    0
    With what enthusiasm the people consider the losses, there are 30 million, there are 50 million. Avenger troops for the burnt cities ... How easy and simple. There are those who remember how old women cry when looking at the yellowed funeral?
    And you do not want to imagine your children receiving 5-7 lethal doses of radiation, with burnt eyes? Dreamers Cueva.
  • voyaka uh
    voyaka uh 5 July 2016 22: 21
    +1
    In the early 60s, the first series of Soviet ICBMs were very problematic
    quality. It’s not very clear whether the Soviet leadership was deliberately bluffing,
    putting such raw products on alert (to gain time by frightening
    Americans), or Khrushchev and the Politburo were led by generals and designers.
    Indeed, for the accepted acceptance development of such a value was given by "Leninki" (big money
    at that time), and fired for disruption of state tasks.
    For example, reliable electronic timers in hydrogen warheads of ICBMs made
    only in the late 60s. That is, in 1962 there was a high probability that the flight
    to New York, the warhead would make a "puff" of uranium fuse and scatter
    radioactive dust above the city. It’s also unpleasant, but skyscrapers wouldn’t fall from this.

    In general, the material is very interesting, thanks to the author.
    1. Rus2012
      Rus2012 6 July 2016 01: 09
      +1
      Quote: voyaka uh
      That is, in 1962 there was a high probability

      Operations "Rose" (R-12) and "Tulip" (R-14) in 1961-62 with real detonation of warheads, including universal 8f115 and 8f116 - to 8k65 and 8k64 - 100% confirmed the reliability of all nuclear weapons!

      The P-12 launches within the framework of Operation Rosa were carried out by the 181th Regiment of the Belokorovichi Division of the 43th Vinnytsia Army of the Strategic Missile Forces. From a position east of Vorkuta on the N-Earth.

      The Tulip operation was carried out by the personnel of the 344th missile regiment of the 29th missile division (regiment commander Colonel S.G. Chistyakov, chief of the RTB colonel engineer A.V. Zavyalov), in September 1962 from Krasnoyarsk Territory also on N-Earth .
  • Old26
    Old26 5 July 2016 23: 12
    +5
    Sergei! Roughnesses are certainly there, but they are not significant. This is still a work of art, not a timing of the conflict.
    What caught my eye.
    1.
    42 combat missiles and 36 warheads to them.

    24 launchers, 36 combat missiles were delivered to Cuba. 6 are educational (sometimes they say false for some reason).
    2.
    The Navy of the USSR has 5 nuclear submarines of project 658.

    Nominally it was 5. Combat-ready - 3. The infamous K-19 "Hiroshima" was incapable of combat, the K-33 was being upgraded for the D-4 complex. K-55 in August came out of repair, and K-16 in January 1963 began to be repaired. It is only known for certain that the K-40 loaded ammunition, went to sea and awaited an order to use nuclear weapons. That is, in practice, we can talk about three boats: K16, K-40 and K-55
    3.
    The R-12s of the 50th Missile Army, stationed in the Baltic States, delivered 2,3-mt charges on ...

    Product 8F126 - "heavy" warhead for the R-12, with a capacity of 2,3 mt was put into service in 1963. Prior to this, the R-12 was equipped with "light" warheads with a capacity of 1 mt ("Product 49")

    Quote: Rus2012
    This is not true!!!!
    Docking the warhead to the P-12 takes 5 minutes!
    About 3,5 hours TO START FROM the "STANDBY READY" state !!!
    AND Roughly 1,5-2 hours from the readiness "INCREASED" - in which there were ALL UNIT (division) of the Strategic Missile Forces in Cuba!

    From state of readiness # 1 (full) start time - 20 minutes. The "product" is already on the table, filled with ... well, etc.

    Quote: Rus2012
    Firstly, ANYTHING WOULD NOT BE DOWN! FOR THERE WASN'T SUCH OPPORTUNITIES IN THE USA !!!
    Secondly, the experience of TWO YEARS operation of the P-16, and the 50-year-old P-7 - showed - 90% reliability of the P-16 and almost 98-99% P-7!
    Thirdly, by the time of the US aggression in Cuba - ALL SOVIET Strategic Missile Forces - were in "HIGHER" readiness - with docked warheads, R-7 prepared for refueling. So, not a single Yankee missile would have time to destroy "on the table"!
    Their 25 - 23-22 would achieve their goals!

    The issue is controversial. The air defense of the American continent was equipped, incl. and complexes "Nike-Hercules", which were aimed to shoot down the BG. How many would have been shot down is another question. But not 2.
    R-7 could be prepared for refueling. But the refueling R-7 process is quite long
  • Old26
    Old26 5 July 2016 23: 24
    +2
    Quote: Operator
    Another amendment - the composition of the strategic nuclear forces of the USSR for October 1962 included:
    - 5 launch positions of ICBM R-7 with 3-mt warheads;
    - 32 ground and mine launch positions of ICBM R-16 with 3-mt warheads;
    - 90 intercontinental M-4 bombers with 50-MT bombs and X-20 cruise missiles with 3-MT warheads;
    - 32 3M intercontinental bombers with 50-MT bombs and X-20 cruise missiles with 3-MT warheads;
    - 400 intercontinental Tu-95 bombers with 50-MT bombs and X-20 cruise missiles with 3-MT warheads.

    You, as always, in your role. Figures far from reality
    1. Really 5 launchers for R-7. But they are no longer P-7 (8K71) с 3 mt warhead and R-7A (8K74) с 1,3 mt warhead. They were adopted by 1960-1961 and replaced the R-7

    2. Only 32 ground Launcher ICBM R-16. Mine was deployed later, in 1963

    3. Never been in the USSR NINETY bombers M-4. They were released THIRTY TWO. You mixed up with 3M. It really was NINETY bombers 3M.
    Total cars M-4 and 3M Was built 123. But NOT ALL THEY were atomic bombers. In 1962, the USSR was FIFTY EIGHT "atomic" bombers M-4 and 3M. They are NEVER did not carry 50 mt bombs. Such a bomb was generally made in ONE INSTANCEcarried by the converted TU-95 and in which it did not fit.
    NEVER Myasishchev’s cars did not carry missiles X-20. There were plans, but not a single car with X-20 did not have.

    4. Until 1963, the number of "atomic" bombers TU-95 NEVER did not reach the figure 400. They were of order Eighty.
    Was released 31 TU-95 and 19 TU-95M bomber... They were modified into "atomic", but not all, but of the order 40 cars (options TU-95A and TU-95MA).
    By this time it was released 40 cars TU-95K and in 1962 production began TU-95KD. Until 1965, according to various estimates, from 20 to 25 TU-95KD vehicles were produced.

    All these cars DO NOT CARE 50 mt bombs. And X-20 missiles could only carry about 40 vehicles (ammunition - 80 X-20 missiles)

    Quote: Rus2012
    4 launch stations P-7: 2 in Plesetsk, 2 in Tyuratam. The rockets were already on the tables.

    Yet it seems 5. Three in Plesetsk and two in Baikonur.

    Quote: Vadim237
    And even at that time there were already ICBMs R 9A.

    Did not have. The first were put on duty in 1963 in the amount of 2, EMNIP
    1. Operator
      Operator 6 July 2016 00: 16
      0
      What does an atomic / non-nuclear strategic bomber mean?

      Nevertheless, let us calculate your minimalist version of the composition of the Soviet strategic nuclear forces for October 1962:
      5 Р-7А + 32 Р-16 + 58 М-4 and 3М + 40 ТУ-95А and ТУ-95МА + 40 ТУ-95К = 175 missile and aircraft carriers capable of delivering at least one nuclear charge from 1,3 to 6 megatons to anywhere in the United States.

      175 of American downtown metropolitan cities and million-plus cities - what the doctor ordered am
      1. voyaka uh
        voyaka uh 6 July 2016 09: 36
        +2
        "175 missile and aircraft carriers capable of delivering anywhere in the United States
        at least one nuclear charge with a capacity from 1,3 to 6 "////

        Aviation can be immediately discarded. A few bombers would not be allowed to break through
        to the United States under any circumstances. At most, bombers could bang cities in Europe.
        Missile hits reduce boldly three times. Some would not have flown, some would not have hit, and some warheads would not have worked.
        In 62, the USSR could destroy 3-4 large cities in the USA. Which is also significant damage.
        (American bombers wouldn’t have broken through either - there were air defense interceptors,
        and their missiles would not all work normally).
        1. Operator
          Operator 6 July 2016 14: 21
          0
          It is only in your country that missiles do not reach Israel - in the Strategic Missile Forces of the USSR already in the 1960, all warheads always flew where they needed to and exploded where needed (see comment RuS2012).

          Moreover, as I already said, 10 of the 37 warheads of Soviet ICBMs would be aimed at suppressing North American air defense, therefore we exclude the threat to Soviet strategic bombers from anti-aircraft missiles.

          Moreover, the almost simultaneous detonation of 32 nuclear charges over the US territory from 1 to 6 megatons would completely disable all radars, radio stations and power lines, which would significantly disorganize air defense aviation control.

          Strategic bombers themselves, in addition to nuclear bombs, could carry X-20 cruise missiles with a range of 600 km and a megaton-class nuclear warhead. These missiles could well be used to clear the flight paths of bombers from enemy fighters in the air and at airfields.

          The combat mission of the Soviet strategic bombers in 1962 was one-way (they had nowhere to return - most Soviet airfields would destroy NATO forces). Therefore, bombers at maximum flight range would be able to achieve any goal on the North American continent.

          I focus on the assessment of thermonuclear charges of the megaton class, which were at the disposal of the USSR at that time and appearing in most analytical materials about the Caribbean military conflict - 300 units. This is a value that can actually carbonize the United States.

          In general, at that time there were about 6000 units of nuclear and thermonuclear weapons of various classes in the arsenal of the USSR - it was enough to go to the English Channel and Bab el-Mandeba and neutralize South Korea and Japan.

          With such a development of the situation, the US had no sense in striking the territory of the USSR - this territory would smoothly move to Europe and the Middle East (long live the Jewish-Palestinian Soviet Socialist Republic of the 1962 model of the year) laughing

          Therefore, Kennedy concluded a peace agreement on Soviet terms.
          1. voyaka uh
            voyaka uh 6 July 2016 15: 11
            +1
            "already in the 1960s, all warheads always flew where necessary and exploded where necessary" ///

            I know. On paper, in beautiful reports for the Kremlin. But in practice, then Pomors, Yakuts and Chukchi for another decade
            collected fragments of missiles all over the immense North of the USSR.
            There were even funny pads: observers in Kamchatka reported an exact hit on the training ground, and from the base they were surprised to say that the launch was canceled laughing .
    2. Vadim237
      Vadim237 6 July 2016 01: 07
      0
      We have military operations - according to the author they are developing in 1965.
    3. Rus2012
      Rus2012 6 July 2016 01: 18
      0
      Quote: Old26
      Yet it seems 5. Three in Plesetsk and two in Baikonur.

      ... then 3 in the north and one in Tyuratam. There was a "Martian" rocket on one SS (according to Chertok, see memoirs). Which they wanted to remove and re-equip. But, the order to cancel the readiness came earlier ...
  • Operator
    Operator 5 July 2016 23: 53
    0
    The MIM-14 Nike-Hercules ADMS began to be deployed from the 1958 year, and by the 1964 year, the 164 batteries were deployed. Assuming a uniform process, by October 1962, about 100 batteries were put into operation.

    Nike-Hercules anti-aircraft missiles had a range of 140 km and a height of 45 km. Radio command missile guidance system. Nuclear warhead with a power of 40 CT (due to the low accuracy of radar determination of coordinates of air targets).

    Due to the complete dependence of the Nike-Hercules air defense capabilities on the functioning of ground-based detection and targeting radars, as well as radio command guidance, these air defense systems were easily neutralized by high-altitude detonation of leading nuclear weapons of ICBMs or X-20 cruise missiles (with which all were armed) Soviet strategic bombers, in addition to nuclear bombs).

    A typical Soviet nuclear charge with a power of 3 mt using EMI guaranteed to disable all Nike-Hercules air defense systems located within the radio horizon: at a height of detonation of 10000 meters (cruise missile) - within a radius of 430 km, at a height of detonation of 40000 meters (warhead ICBM) - within a radius of 860 km.

    According to the estimate, in the first echelon it was required to allocate 10 ICBM warheads in order to neutralize all the SAM batteries in a strip of 1200 width and 12000 km length.

    Therefore, the Nike-Hercules air defense systems were absolutely unsuitable for protection against a massive missile and aircraft nuclear strike of the Soviet strategic nuclear forces of the 1962 model of the year.
  • Lyubopyatov
    Lyubopyatov 5 July 2016 23: 54
    -3
    Is this a historical article - or a computer game? Gambling is not mine. And here is what hooked:
    "... was not yet a significant force." Significant - read here: serious.
    Significance and significant - a foundling word from the Jewish "linguists", "language reformers". With this word, they replaced the multicolored primordial Russian words: essential, important, serious, significant, weighty ... etc. These foundlings in dictionaries have been silently dozing since the beginning of the 30s of the last century, and sounded only from the rostrum of Gorbachev's congresses of "people's deputies of the USSR" - when the Trotskyists and reformers were completely insolent and morose.
  • Cat man null
    Cat man null 6 July 2016 01: 33
    +2
    Quote: Vadim237
    "And what prevented the United States from not taking and defeating the USSR, which had such a clear (at times) advantage" - Then we have fun in the balance from such a development of events and we are just incredibly lucky that nothing That did not happen

    - have fun hung
    - nothing nothing
  • Old26
    Old26 6 July 2016 08: 45
    +4
    Quote: Operator
    What does an atomic / non-nuclear strategic bomber mean?

    And that’s what it means. Not all strategic bombers were designed to carry out atomic missions. In the USSR, this amount was approximately the same. 80 TU-95 and 58 M-4/3M. Each of the TU could carry 2 charges, each M - 4 charges. That is, respectively 160 and 232 charge. Total 392. Sometimes there are numbers for the period of conflict 412 charges on bombers. It is theoretically possible that at the time of the conflict 10 (?) TU-95KD.

    The Americans accordingly had at that time 880 V-47, 76 V-58, 639 V-52. Of which atomic were respectively 675, 76 and 555. They could carry 2920 bombs и 184 Hound Dog missiles

    Quote: Operator
    Nevertheless, let us calculate your minimalist version of the composition of the Soviet strategic nuclear forces for October 1962:
    5 Р-7А + 32 Р-16 + 58 М-4 and 3М + 40 ТУ-95А and ТУ-95МА + 40 ТУ-95К = 175 missile and aircraft carriers capable of delivering at least one nuclear charge from 1,3 to 6 megatons to anywhere in the United States. 175 American downtown metropolitan cities and millionaires - what the doctor ordered am


    A bold enough statement. You can almost 100% agree with the R-16, In a relationship R-7A - I think 50 \ 50. The refueling time there was so long (at that time) that the products simply might not have time to take off.

    In relation to bombers - with bО40 TU-95K could reach the target with the highest degree of probability, having not 2 but 1 rocket X-20 (he had an intercontinental radius with a load of about 5 tons). "Clean" bombers could hardly pass the continent's air defense system. If they did, then only a few. Total Xnumx goals РјРѕРіР »Ryo theoretically hit X-20. In reality, their number would be much smaller.
    Guidance system - inertial + radio command. KVO at X-20 is about 2-5 km. In addition, not many millionaires will be in their reach. So 40 goals is a theoretical maximum. In reality, much less.

    Quote: Vadim237
    We have military operations - according to the author they are developing in 1965.

    The author almost at the very beginning of the discussion said that this was a typo. Year - 1962

    Quote: Rus2012
    ... then 3 in the north and one in Tyuratam. There was a "Martian" rocket on one SS (according to Chertok, see memoirs). Which they wanted to remove and re-equip. But, the order to cancel the readiness came earlier ...

    Damn, I forgot about the Martian ... I repent. Tables 5, and in readiness 4.
    1. Rus2012
      Rus2012 6 July 2016 14: 28
      0
      Quote: Old26
      With regard to bombers, 40 TU-95Ks could reach the target with a high degree of probability, having not 2, but 1 X-20 missile each (it had an intercontinental radius with a load of about 5 tons). "Clean" bombers could hardly pass the continent's air defense system. If they did, then only a few. A total of 40 targets could theoretically hit the X-20. In reality, their number would be much smaller.

      ... about YES, "atomic colonels" (nuclear weapons carriers) and the achievability of targets in the United States would strongly depend on the effectiveness of ICBM and IRBM strikes (from Cuba) ...
      For example, the NORAD system, the continental air defense system of the United States, was created against the Soviet DA - it was vertically hierarchized, the blow and defeat of the upper headquarters / NODES OF MANAGEMENT - completely displays the WHOLE SYSTEM.
      If peripheral nodes are destroyed, the SYSTEM will work partially. Against ICBMs - it was defenseless and ineffective on 99%!
      Details - https://topwar.ru/23459-nebesnyy-schit-chuzhoy-otchizny-voennaya-politika-sverhd
      erzhav-v-dni-karibskogo-krizisa.html
  • Old26
    Old26 6 July 2016 08: 51
    +4
    Quote: Operator
    Due to the complete dependence of the Nike-Hercules air defense capabilities on the functioning of ground-based detection and targeting radars, as well as radio command guidance, these air defense systems were easily neutralized by high-altitude detonation of leading nuclear weapons of ICBMs or X-20 cruise missiles (with which all were armed) Soviet strategic bombers, in addition to nuclear bombs).

    High-altitude bombings at that minimum of nuclear charges of ICBMs? For priority purposes would not be enough. And then spend on the radar position. X-20 - they had to reach the target and shoot at it. In addition, the X-20s were not in service with all Soviet strategic bombers, but only 40 Tu-95Ks. And not as an addition to nuclear bombs, but either-or. TU-95K did not carry nuclear bombs simultaneously with the X-20.

    Quote: Operator
    A typical Soviet nuclear charge with a power of 3 mt using EMI guaranteed to disable all Nike-Hercules air defense systems located within the radio horizon: at a height of detonation of 10000 meters (cruise missile) - within a radius of 430 km, at a height of detonation of 40000 meters (warhead ICBM) - within a radius of 860 km.

    He can and did withdraw, but given the shortage of nuclear warheads that could "reach" the United States, this was at least a waste that would disrupt the solution of the main task.

    Quote: Operator
    According to the estimate, in the first echelon it was required to allocate 10 ICBM warheads in order to neutralize all the SAM batteries in a strip of 1200 width and 12000 km length.

    Therefore, the Nike-Hercules air defense systems were absolutely unsuitable for protection against a massive missile and aircraft nuclear strike of the Soviet strategic nuclear forces of the 1962 model of the year.

    Highlight 10 ICBM warheads and stay with 25-27 heads to solve the problem of destruction? Proceeding from this logic, the Soviet air defense could not have operated in such a conflict either. For the Americans, in addition to 184 Hound Dogs, on the B-52 had 213 ICBMs and 150 SLBMs. Of the more than 500 warheads, they could allocate 10% for such needs. It is stupid to hope for just such an option for neutralizing air defense, especially in 1962.
    1. Operator
      Operator 6 July 2016 14: 36
      -3
      10 anti-aircraft missile warheads were needed not only to guarantee the suppression of the Nike-Hercules (there was a non-zero possibility of intercepting individual warheads at a volley of anti-aircraft missiles from the 40-kt BCH), but also to clear the flight paths of Soviet strategic bombers flying up to America after 10 Chesov after a nuclear missile strike.

      Although it is possible that the X-20 cruise missiles aboard the bombers themselves would be able to cope with this.

      In general, the consumption of 10 from 300 megaton-class nuclear charges is not critical for the carbonation of North America.
  • Zulu_S
    Zulu_S 6 July 2016 11: 54
    +3
    Thank you, Sergey. A very topical article. I do not know whether the USSR leadership expressed concern about the deployment in the West. Europe and Turkey missile systems Tor and Titan, but in response they would probably receive: "These missile systems are not aimed at the Soviet Union, are not an offensive weapon, and do not pose a threat to its national security." Further - according to your scenario ... The rake is scattered. It remains to step on them. I look forward to continuing. Interesting. Are there no options for our days?
  • Old26
    Old26 6 July 2016 14: 22
    +4
    Quote: Zulu_S
    I do not know if the USSR leadership expressed concern about the placement in the West. Europe and Turkey of the Tor and Titan missile systems, but in response they would probably receive: "These missile systems are not aimed at the Soviet Union, are not offensive weapons, and do not pose a threat to its national security."

    Actually, if you look at the chronology of placement decisions and the chronology of the placement itself, the situation will be somewhat different. The decision to place missiles outside the national territory was made in 1952. And accepted by the Soviet Union. The Cuban Missile Crisis is the culmination of everything. But it is not customary to discuss this ... The easiest way (including from a political point of view) is to assume that the Soviet Union deployed in Cuba in response to the deployment of American troops in Europe
  • Bersaglieri
    Bersaglieri 6 July 2016 17: 47
    +1
    Vladimir Kontrovsky, "End of the World for an encore"
    http://www.e-reading.club/book.php?book=1018473
  • Old26
    Old26 6 July 2016 18: 16
    +4
    Quote: Operator
    10 anti-aircraft missile warheads were needed not only to guarantee the suppression of the Nike-Hercules (there was a non-zero possibility of intercepting individual warheads at a volley of anti-aircraft missiles from the 40-kt BCH), but also to clear the flight paths of Soviet strategic bombers flying up to America after 10 Chesov after a nuclear missile strike.

    Andrew! A little higher comrade Rus2012 wrote about a strict hierarchization of the continent's air defense control system. And he absolutely correctly noted the senselessness of striking the lower levels. It was necessary to break the "top", that is, the combat operational center of the joint air defense command of the continent, and not "Hit the sparrows with a cannon" trying to suppress the interceptor radar with nuclear explosions. The entire structure of the Sage air defense system was built according to the district principle. Each area is the zone of responsibility of an air defense division (air division). Each district was divided into 5 more sectors. In addition to the many times mentioned Nike-Hercules with a range of 140 km (about 134 batteries at the time of the crisis), the air defense system also included long-range interceptors Bomark (8 bases in the USA, 2 in Canada) with ranges of 360-450 km at Model A and 640-800 km for Model B. A total of 190 launchers with Model A and 281 with Model B were deployed. In addition, 69 interceptor squadrons were deployed at the time of the crisis. Moreover, the heavy long-range F-101B "Voodoo" were deployed in the amount of about 1200 .. Its range is 4800 km. And you propose to "blind" the radar so that the bombers pass. The Sage air defense system had about 190 primary and 200 auxiliary detection radars. And you propose to disable the interceptor guidance radars. In addition, the NORAD operational center coordinated not only the activities of the air defense system, but also had access to the US Strategic Air Command's early warning radar and could attract fighter squadrons of the Air Force and the Navy. Do you want
    Quote: Operator
    10 anti-aircraft missile warheads were needed not only to guarantee the suppression of the Nike-Hercules (there was a non-zero possibility of intercepting individual warheads at a volley of anti-aircraft missiles from the 40-kt BCH), but also to clear the flight paths of Soviet strategic bombers flying up to America after 10 Chesov after a nuclear missile strike.
    1. Operator
      Operator 6 July 2016 18: 57
      0
      The bombing of the bombers would occur after the operation of 56 nuclear warheads of missiles with capacities from 1 to 6 megatons each (taking into account the RSD deployed in Cuba).

      Hundreds of thermonuclear explosions with a total capacity of 150 megatons is the end of the entire radar system, communications and control, as well as power transmission, transport and much more in North America. After this small armageddon there was no talk of any centralized control of the air defense systems and fighter aircraft.

      A separate question is what would happen to the on-board electronics of fighters after exposure to electromagnetic radiation from ten high-altitude nuclear explosions in a circle with a diameter of 1720 km each, especially over the areas of concentration of air defense forces.

      PS Trim the sturgeon - F-101 of all models A, B, and C produced only 807 pieces.
  • Old26
    Old26 6 July 2016 21: 08
    +5
    No guys. Will you ever bring me to a heart attack. What do you Vadim, that Andrei (Operator). Instead of writing Sergey Linnik, you should write an alternative technotriller. I wish you there turned around. For one, Soviet bombers carry 50 mt bombs, and their number is several times higher than the number of strategists that the USSR has always had. You sometimes operate with data of the total amount, without hesitation when this quantity was.

    Once again, you’ll have to disassemble your mistakes.
    Quote: Vadim237
    BRDS
    PGM-19 Jupiter 100 pcs
    PGM-17 Thor 60 pcs

    It is probably very difficult to look at least in the same Vic (this is the easiest) when these missiles were withdrawn from service? But in vain. If you looked, you would know that they were removed from service in 1963 and therefore in 1965 they could not physically be

    Quote: Vadim237

    ICBMs
    SM-65 Atlas 129 pcs
    LGM-30 Minuteman 1,2 800 pcs - 3 warheads each
    HGM-25 Titan I 54 pcs

    The Atlas was removed from service in 1963. It can't be in 1965
    The Titan I was decommissioned in 1964. In 1965, the Titan-II was in service.
    There really were 800 "Minutemans". But only "Minuteman-I". Deployment of Minuteman II began in 1966. In addition, both "Minuteman-1" and "Minuteman-2" were carried on the same warhead. And only on "Minuteman-3" there was a MIRV

    Quote: Vadim237
    AGM-28 Hound Dog strategic cruise missile 722 pcs
    Bombers
    B 52 744 pcs
    B 47 2041 pcs

    722 Hound Dog missiles were actually produced. But in 1965, only 542 were in service. Further. Not all of the 744 B-52s could be carriers of nuclear weapons. The B-52A had already been decommissioned, 28 B-52B vehicles were converted into reconnaissance vehicles. Modification C and some of the vehicles of modification D were upgraded into carriers of non-nuclear weapons. The Vietnam War began and atomic bombers were not needed there.
    Not specified B-58. There were 93 at that time, including in the version of the bomber 80
    The number 2041 for the B-47 bomber can be dropped from your count. Of this number, 290 vehicles were used as reconnaissance vehicles, another 203 suffered an accident (in 57-58, 49 vehicles crashed). By 1965, 114 B-47s remained in the Air Force, incl. in the version of the "atomic" bomber -45. In 1966 they were all written off.

    Quote: Vadim237
    Nuclear submarines with ICBMs
    George Washington "5pcs on each 16 PU Polaris A1
    “Ethan Allen” 5pcs on each 16 PU Polaris A1 A2
    Lafayette 9 pcs on each 16 pu Polaris A2
    James Madison "10 pcs on each 16 pu Polaris A3

    Everything is correct regarding the number of boats. Only "Polarisov A-1" for 1965 was gone
  • Cat man null
    Cat man null 6 July 2016 21: 32
    +5
    Quote: Old26
    No guys. Will you ever bring me to a heart attack. What are you Vadim that Andrew

    Vladimir, hi

    - take it easy yes
    - easier - you spit on them ... saliva laughing
    - Vadim is a terrible person. He has a personal anti-nuclear shelter, and he is not afraid of a nuclear winter (since it cannot be)
    - The operator gives the impression of a kid who has mastered the terminology (as it seems to him), and has not yet played enough "tanks". Maybe I'm wrong .. but, IMHO, not much.

    So - no info ... ugh ... infuso ... ugh !!!

    Well, you get the point.

    I myself have never been a pilot, nor a rocketer, but I always read your comments carefully and with pleasure. Health to you, and good luck yes
    1. Mordvin 3
      Mordvin 3 6 July 2016 21: 52
      +5
      They forgot about his gas masks. Oh, and why didn’t I, in my time, put down a couple of chemical protection suits, a couple of gas masks, and first-aid kits? Short-sighted, however. Right now I would put all this on myself, put an alarming suitcase next to me, and the keys to the basement. And do not care what is happening in the world. laughing
      1. Cat man null
        Cat man null 6 July 2016 21: 57
        +4
        Quote: Mordvin 3
        Forgot about his gas masks

        - I remember. Well I said - he was born in him laughing

        I was more amused by Vadimov's statement that "in our Studencheskaya" (or somewhere in that area) "in the event of a nuclear strike, only the glass will fly out and the doors will rise" ..

        I neigh for half an hour later, like a horse laughing
        1. Mordvin 3
          Mordvin 3 6 July 2016 22: 47
          +6
          Quote: Cat Man Null
          I neigh for half an hour later, like a horse

          What to laugh? Vadim is a child prodigy. In his 27 years, he calculated all the zones of probable damage-infection. And I did not get a girlfriend. What if, along with her, in the basement will be crowded? winked
          1. Cat man null
            Cat man null 6 July 2016 23: 55
            +4
            Quote: Mordvin 3
            Vadim - Child Prodigy

            Underwood (c) L. Kassil "Three countries that are not on the map"
      2. Evgenijus
        Evgenijus 7 July 2016 11: 50
        +6
        Dear Mordvin 3!
        I am not writing at the peak of criticism of your statement, but simply informing. When I was in the starting battery, we had an experiment. All of us (officers and personnel) were planted after a conditional rocket launch into concrete shelters near the launch pad. All of us in rubber and gas masks were housed in this concrete barrel, covered with earth for half a meter, on bunks. The gas masks were removed. We sit, we poison jokes. An hour passes, we can't get out - the instructors locked us, only the TAI-43 phone is available. We remembered the FVU, the eldest of us appointed a turn to turn the handle of this device, clean air went down our legs. Another three or four hours pass, the phone does not answer (like an atomic fire upstairs). Most of the soldiers and sergeants are already lying there, breathing heavily. An hour later, some officers also disconnect. The officer on duty at the FVU also went limp. There was complete silence and darkness. Moving my legs with difficulty, in the dark I reached the source of oxygen, woke up the attendant. It got a little easier. But my strength was also running out. I raised the officer on the "twist". Two hours you could "live". Time crept like a dead man in a cemetery, the phone died. But that's not all! The main thing was ahead. At one point, the people stirred and revived (but not all). A fetid gas crept through the hideout. In the dark (and the rechargeable flashlights had already died) they began to look for the source of the poison. It was a small door to a closet. The stench came from there! It turns out that one of the young warriors went there for his stomach problems. It was something! The entire hideout has experienced the properties of hydrogen sulphide or something even more smelly. I don’t write further, there they already go in the description of "hazing relationships" ... Our torment ended almost in a day. So shake your mustache about your "well-being" with an alarming suitcase
      3. The comment was deleted.
  • Old26
    Old26 6 July 2016 22: 11
    +3
    Quote: Operator
    PS Trim the sturgeon - F-101 of all models A, B, and C produced only 807 pieces.

    Thank you for your comment. What does it mean to rush to write. I'll even say more. Fewer Voodoo interceptors were built. 556 units... The number of 1200 is of course not written correctly. This is as far as I remember the total number of interceptors involved in the defense. Including Delta Degger and Delta Dart.

    Quote: Operator
    Hundreds of thermonuclear explosions with a total capacity of 150 megatons is the end of the entire radar system, communications and control, as well as power transmission, transport and much more in North America. After this small armageddon there was no talk of any centralized control of the air defense systems and fighter aircraft.

    Do not extrapolate the situation with explosions in space and explosions in the atmosphere. Based on this logic, both in the USSR and the USA everything failed in a more or less powerful explosion. So no, and power lines in one taken area were not covered, and locators were restored ... So a small Armageddon would not work. Otherwise, either side could start a nuclear war without fear that there would be an answer. But they didn’t start. Knowing full well that the air defense will also meet them, and the aircraft will be guided
    1. Operator
      Operator 6 July 2016 23: 54
      0
      The scenarios of the Caribbean military conflict that I described assume 10 high-altitude air nuclear explosions (power 6 Mt, altitude 40 km) and 46 ground-based nuclear explosions (power from 1 to 6 Mt, altitude 1 km), and almost simultaneously.

      Such a scenario, of course, did not play in reality. But the US leadership, having received information from its agent Penkovsky about the number of Soviet strategic m-charge carriers, clearly took it into account and could come from the catastrophic consequences for the ABM system of simultaneously detonating 56 megaton-class nuclear warheads, not to mention the size of the civilian losses in this case the population in 46 downtowns and million-plus cities is no less than 50 million people, plus tens of millions in the event of a breakthrough of at least part of Soviet bombers.

      It is intimidation that is the most important damaging factor in nuclear weapons that paralyze the will of the enemy. In this sense, publicly playing nuclear conflict scenarios is very useful for everyone.

      With the exception of boobies.
  • Old26
    Old26 6 July 2016 22: 50
    +3
    Quote: Vadim237
    The USSR
    BRDS
    R 5M 29 pcs
    R 11M 400 pcs
    R 14 18 pc
    R 12 2000 pc

    Something you took up arsenals, you operate with the number of issued. And they have to shoot somewhere. They won't shoot themselves. And why on earth did the R-11M suddenly become a medium-range missile? Then why did you not count all their "Sergeants", "Pershing" in the number of Americans? P-14 by 1965 was deployed not 18, but practically the maximum, that is, about 100. P-12 deployed about 600, I don’t remember exactly. Again, almost the maximum

    Quote: Vadim237
    The USSR
    ICBMs
    R 7 30 pc
    R 9 234 pc

    Oh well, what really was 30 R-7? And this is having 6 starts? And as many as 239 R-9s, of which about 75-80 were produced, and EMNIP 29 was deployed. And where did you divide R-16? By 1965 there were already more than one and a half hundred of them.

    Quote: Vadim237
    The USSR
    Bombers
    3M 90 pcs
    Tu 95 pcs
    Tu 4 1200
    Tu 16 1500

    What, TU-4 in 1965 was in service with 1200? And where did you divide the M-4?

    Quote: Vadim237
    The USSR
    Cruise missile X 20 2414 pcs

    And carriers of 65 pieces

    Quote: Vadim237
    Nuclear submarines with ICBMs
    629 24 pcs each 3 ICBM R13
    658 8 pieces each of 3 ICBMs R 13, R 21.

    Was the 629th project already nuclear by 1965 ??

    Quote: Vadim237
    As we can see from all this, the alignment was significantly not in favor of the USSR, against our armada of bombers, the US Air Force could oppose 1000 air-to-air missiles with a nuclear warhead AIR-2 "Genie, as well as 13000 MIM-3 Nike-Ajax air defense missiles, and the appearance of the LGM-30 "Minuteman" missiles with multiple warheads brought to zero the entire missile defense system of the USSR, and in this connection it was necessary to create a new early warning system.

    You forgot to mention over 25000 Nike Hercules. And the appearance in 65 of the Minutemans-3 with MIRV - frankly amused. In 1966, only the one-piece MINITMAN-2 was delivered ....
  • Lexa-149
    Lexa-149 6 July 2016 23: 52
    +4
    Impressive!
    It was interesting to read both the article and the comments! Thank you all very much! good
  • Old26
    Old26 7 July 2016 10: 41
    +4
    Quote: Operator
    The scenarios of the Caribbean military conflict that I described assume 10 high-altitude air nuclear explosions (power 6 Mt, altitude 40 km) and 46 ground-based nuclear explosions (power from 1 to 6 Mt, altitude 1 km), and almost simultaneously.

    Such a scenario, of course, did not play in reality. But the US leadership, having received information from its agent Penkovsky about the number of Soviet strategic m-charge carriers, clearly took it into account and could come from the catastrophic consequences for the ABM system of simultaneously detonating 56 megaton-class nuclear warheads, not to mention the size of the civilian losses in this case the population in 46 downtowns and million-plus cities is no less than 50 million people, plus tens of millions in the event of a breakthrough of at least part of Soviet bombers.

    It is intimidation that is the most important damaging factor in nuclear weapons that paralyze the will of the enemy. In this sense, publicly playing nuclear conflict scenarios is very useful for everyone.

    With the exception of boobies.

    Andrei, I certainly understand that giving up your own script is always difficult, but it seems to me that you simply do not take into account some factors in your constructions.

    Taking as a basis for your constructions the consequences of explosions of charges in space for the civilian sector of the economy, you transfer all this from civilian soil to military. Yes, in the United States there were problems with the energy supply of cities, and certain control systems failed. But you automatically transfer all this to military systems that have much higher security than conventional civilian systems. None of the military control systems, radar, and other operational efficiency was lost and quickly recovered. Otherwise, if that were so, the Americans would have limited themselves to one explosion.

    It had no particular consequences for military systems. Read (on the network is) the memory of test participants on project K. Very interesting. And a direct participant in these events writes that The "Dnestr" / "Dnepr" type early warning radars recovered their operability approximately 10-12 minutes after the nuclear explosion. And radio communication in the test area was restored quite quickly. But in your constructions, the entire control system fails once and for all after the explosion.

    Of course, if the object is in close proximity to the nuclear explosive, then its electronics will burn out irrevocably. But you have nuclear high-altitude explosions. And the same x-ray and gamma radiation that can affect the electronics has the property of attenuation. You have 10 explosions that make electronics dead in a strip of 1200 km per 12000 km.
  • Old26
    Old26 7 July 2016 10: 45
    +4
    I will continue

    You also forget that the US air defense system is stretched over a vast area of ​​approximately 5,5 to 5,5 thousand kilometers. And this is without taking into account the aviation of the Air Force and the Navy. And everything is simple for you. Thundered 10 high-altitude explosions, permanently disabled all electronics throughout the United States and Canada, and all. After 10 hours, Soviet bombers will hit 46 cities ... As it turns out, everything is simple.

    No longer exist three lines of defense: long-range fighter-interceptors, long-range unmanned interceptors, short-range defense line - air defense systems of the "Nike" type.
    There are no realities in the air force aviation and aircraft carriers that can meet Soviet bombers far from the coast. You have none of this. Panacea - 10 aerial nuclear explosions.

    You write that such a scenario was not considered. Yes, due to its futility.

    As the comrade wrote correctly Rus 2012 the architecture of the US air defense system is strictly hierarchical. And in order to disorganize the air defense work, it is necessary to hit not the lower cells of the structure, trying to disable the electronics (there will be no withdrawal - there will be a temporary hindrance to the work), but to destroy the "top", the center coordinating all this.

    Americans in their operational plan SIOP-62 indicate that the objectives are:
    - striking at control points
    - striking at strategic forces (ICBM, aviation, fleet bases)
    - striking at air defense forces and means located in the flight range of US bombers.


    Notice. Not incapacitation by blinding a radar with high-altitude nuclear explosives, but PHYSICAL DESTRUCTION these forces and means. That is, they do not blow up YaBZ at an altitude of 40 km in order to "blind" and disable the early warning radar or the air defense radar, but their PHYSICAL DESTRUCTION. Not incapacitation of the air defense aviation control system - but PHYSICAL DESTRUCTION and control systems, and air defense itself.
    And from where 56 charges. In addition, the simultaneous explosion, or almost simultaneous of all these charges is impossible purely technically.
    1. Operator
      Operator 7 July 2016 12: 25
      0
      56 charges on the BR (10 high in the first strike, 46 ground in the second) - this is taking into account the RSD in Cuba. These attacks, including those for a long time, incapacitate the US civilian infrastructure, which was partially tied to the centralized management of the air defense system.

      The third strike is delivered by strategic bombers (when flying one way). Approximately 400 aircraft participate in the raid, including 144 with nuclear bombs, 256 with X-20 cruise missiles with nuclear warheads.

      When approaching a distance of 600 km to the next air defense region (ground-based targets for nuclear bombardment are located inside it), several X-20s with corner reflectors (simulating the EPR of a strategic bomber) are launched toward it, which are ahead of 10-15 minutes (160-200 km of a bomber’s summer) fly up into the missile defense area and explode there, striking with the help of electromagnetic radiation radars and electronics of air defense systems and fighters. After that, the bombers enter the former air defense region and drop nuclear bombs on targets.

      The fighters of the 1962 model were unable to prevent massive attacks by strategic bombers equipped for self-defense with cruise missiles with nuclear warheads - the range of the then air-to-air missiles was too small.

      To counter this tactic, the then air defense system did not require centralization, but rather decentralization in the form of, for example, equipping air defense systems and fighters with optical location stations. But television sets, night vision devices, or thermal imagers were not installed, and the lasers were in their infancy.

      I understand the reason for your disagreement with this scenario - after all, we have all been taught from childhood about the benefits of centralizing the management of any facility, including the country's air defense system. This is all so - but in order to disable protected centralized management facilities, one must have an excess of carriers and charges, which the USSR did not have in 1962.

      In addition to destroying control centers, air defense systems and aircraft at aerodromes, there is a much simpler method of neutralizing air defense for a time sufficient to strike stationary targets - blinding radars (see the Israeli Air Force operation in the Bekaa Valley 20 years later).

      The same thing, but with the use of more effective means (nuclear warheads of cruise missiles), the Air Force DBA of the USSR in 1962 over the territory of the United States would be produced.
  • Fuzeler
    Fuzeler 7 July 2016 16: 14
    +1
    The end of any nuclear war would be the same: the warring parties would all the same sit at the negotiating table, but not in order to discuss territories or reparations, but in order to understand how to live, in a new world, on poisoned land.
  • Old26
    Old26 7 July 2016 19: 34
    +3
    Quote: Operator
    56 charges on the BR (10 high in the first strike, 46 ground in the second) - this is taking into account the RSD in Cuba. These attacks, including those for a long time, incapacitate the US civilian infrastructure, which was partially tied to the centralized management of the air defense system.

    In order to have such numbers, it is necessary, at a minimum, to have such a quantity of nuclear charges on missiles. But he is not.
    The 24 missiles deployed in Cuba are unlikely to be able to take off. 50%, that is, 10-12 is the maximum. And where will they strike? For real goals or will radars blind without touching anything else? They can and will bring out civilian infrastructure, military - I doubt very much. But the very first launches from Cuba of this dozen missiles will lead to the fact that the United States will launch about 2 hundred ICBMs and 1,5 hundred SLBMs. Plus the same 1,5 hundreds of infantry fighting vehicles in Europe? Not to mention, more than 1300 strategic bombers from various bases around the world will fly into the air. And what then will your blinding give? The second strike is 46 charges. Whence, if the number of R-16s on the database at that time was 32, and R-7 was equal to 5. The rest were probably teleported from the arsenals of 12 GUs to the United States?

    Quote: Operator
    The third strike is delivered by strategic bombers (when flying one way). Approximately 400 aircraft participate in the raid, including 144 with nuclear bombs, 256 with X-20 cruise missiles with nuclear warheads.

    And where will you have 400 aircraft during the Caribbean crisis? Teleport from the future? I repeat (Vadim already said, I will repeat to you). At the time of the crisis, the USSR produced:
    32 M-4 bombers
    80 3M bombers
    31 Tu-95 bomber
    19 Tu-95M bombers
    40 bombers TU-95K


    In 1962, the production of Tu-95KD bombers was launched, which lasted until 1965 and, according to various estimates, was produced during these years. from 20 to 25 cars.

    Even if you do not take into account that not all of the bombers were nuclear, their total number is 202. Well maybe still a couple of Tu-95KD. Where did you get about 400?

    If we take into account that at that time, the Myasishevsky machines equipped for carrying nuclear weapons were in the amount of 58, and there were 80 Tupolev ones (40 models 95A and 95MA, 40 models 95K), it becomes clear that not your mythical ones could be with the bombs 144 machines, but only 98. In doing so they would carry 58x4 bombs + 40x2 bombs. A plus 40 carried 1 cr X-20. That is, total 352 charge. No 256 bombers with X-20 missiles in this reality there was not and could not be.
    1. The comment was deleted.
    2. Operator
      Operator 7 July 2016 20: 37
      0
      I can be mistaken, but as far as I remember, by October 1962 in the USSR Air Force there were about 400 strategic bombers Tupolev and Myasishchev, how many of them are atomic and how many X-20 cruise missiles can carry - I don’t know. In the calculation of intercontinental and medium-range missiles, we converge (except for the unpreparedness for the start of the nth number).

      But this is not the point - if the Caribbean conflict escalated to the stage of nuclear exchange on the US national territory, they would be hit from 100 to 300 targets (depending on the calculation method). Virtually all targets would be downtown and million-plus cities (due to the large missile and missile bombs). The maximum damage only from fifty missile warheads (before the dispersal of the population) could amount to 50 million people.

      For a country that last fought with a foreign state on its territory in 1812 and got used to the absence of civilian casualties and infrastructure, this would be a national catastrophe.

      In documentaries, employees of the Soviet embassy in Mexico City like to recall the many kilometers of caravans of cars with US citizens that rushed to Mexico after the US president declared war - a military blockade ("quarantine") of the SSVC. Much larger caravans of cars rushed from the south to the north of the United States, but our diplomats were not allowed there.

      Now let's look at the USSR. As I understand it, the Soviet leadership, before embarking on the Cuban deblockade or other retaliatory measures, brought the entire Armed Forces to a higher degree of readiness. I was ready to implement a plan for the mass mobilization of the trained contingent in order to form a second echelon of the armed forces, as well as the withdrawal of the male population from cities - risk zones. Since I already worked in the Soviet era, we clearly knew the method and area of ​​evacuation, as well as the procedure for drafting into the army on the spot.

      Warehouses and landfills were crammed with small arms, mortars, artillery, ammunition, communications and food for about 20 million people. Plus the n-th number of tanks, plus a million cars from the national economy.

      As far as I understand in the civil defense of the USSR, simultaneously with the removal of the male military-trained population from the cities, the remaining urban population would move to the countryside in a planned manner. There would be enough food stocks for six months (the harvest has just ended).

      Thus, over the course of a week, the vast majority of the population of the USSR with the simultaneous formation of the second echelon of the Soviet Army would be removed from under the influence of light radiation, shock wave and penetrating radiation.

      The first echelon - the personnel army in Eastern Europe, plus reserves transferred over the course of the week from the western regions of the USSR (in the amount of 5 million people) were aimed at dropping out of the attack to the west. There was nothing to stop NATO’s cadre of a trained Soviet army with WWII experience, armed to the teeth with tanks, artillery, armored personnel carriers, front-line aviation and tactical nuclear weapons (6000 charges) - ATGMs and attack helicopters were absent as a class.

      The only option is to bomb Germany, Denmark, and Benelux, where the vanguard of the SA would break into the first day. It would raise the hand of the NATO command to destroy their own peoples with nuclear weapons - a question. I think not.
      1. Operator
        Operator 7 July 2016 20: 38
        +1
        Extension

        Therefore, all + 100500 nuclear charges of the United States, Britain and, possibly, France would have fallen on Soviet empty missile and air bases (rockets and planes have already taken off), Soviet military facilities in Eastern Europe (from where all troops went west) and on the territory of the USSR ( the troops would be dispersed in the area where we were inundated), as well as in empty Soviet cities (from where the entire population was evacuated).

        As a result, the United States would have suffered unacceptable damage on its territory, completely destroyed the American expeditionary force in Western Europe and the transition to the full control of the USSR of the entire European subcontinent (plus the Middle East, Japan and South Korea).

        Thus, starting a nuclear war in 1962 was unprofitable for the USA.

        The second scenario - the seizure of Cuba using conventional weapons against the SSAC, was fraught for the United States with the capture of West Berlin by the Soviet Army.

        Wherever you throw - everywhere a wedge. The Caribbean military conflict ended with the signing of a peace agreement, military losses were only on the American side - one U-2 reconnaissance aircraft.
    3. Rus2012
      Rus2012 7 July 2016 20: 39
      +1
      Quote: Old26
      50%, that is, 10-12 - maximum. And where will they strike? For real goals or will radars blind without touching anything else? They can and will bring out civilian infrastructure, military - I doubt very much. But the very first launches from Cuba of this dozen missiles will lead to the fact that the United States will launch approximately 2 hundreds of ICBMs and 1,5 hundreds of SLBMs. Plus, the same 1,5 hundreds of BRDS in Europe? I'm not saying that more than 1300 strategic bombers from various bases around the world will fly into the air. And what then will your blinding give? The second hit is 46 charges. Where, if the number of P-16 on the database at that time was equal to 32, and P-7 - was equal to 5.


      Dear colleague, I will have a slightly different interpretation, sorry ...
      10-12 detonations of 1mT warhead 8F12N (in such a case) within half an hour (maximum an hour) after the start of the US air attack on Cuba (after takeoff and the first air battles on the distant approaches to the border) - would plunge into deep "shock and awe "ALL THEIR political and state system. After all, they did not expect this by any means. And never have their territory been subjected to any blow, all the more so terrifyingly unexpectedly crushing.

      All this would have caused "discord and vacillation", at least for hours and up to half a day ...

      And during this time - the continental ICBMs of the USSR - would also strike.
      After all, the first nuclear explosions in the Western Hemisphere would be a signal "to start" for the Strategic Missile Forces (the clock is running - and nothing and no one can stop the course of the logic of this action: negotiations are no longer possible, the military operates according to the established algorithm ...)

      The triggering mechanism of ALL THIS could be - President Kennedy's authorization of an air strike on Cuba. If negotiations with N. Khrushchev dragged on, or they did not exist at all, then there would be such an algorithm: by the time President Kenedy signed the ill-fated order (instructions, directives ... no matter what the name is), all the regiments of the Strategic Missile Forces in Cuba had quietly risen would be ready to "Full" (No. 1). Accordingly, start in 20 minutes after the command "Start". The launch command could have followed after the GGSK command realized the inevitability of a collision with the US Armed Forces:
      - in the air armada US aviation approaching the border. The delay of the order could only happen until the first bombs fell - this is the deadline.
      The US aviation had only 20 minutes (the sequence diagram of the launch scheme) to destroy the calculations prepared for launch and already "gaining launch schemes".

      Considering the work of the Air Force, air defense missiles of the GSVK, anti-aircraft artillery covering the Armed Forces of Cuba, as well as the factor that not ALL P-12 POSITIONS WERE DISCOVERED AND DISCOVERED ("false" positions were prepared up to three per one real) ... that a maximum of up to HALF of the prepared missiles will take off ...

      I intentionally do not take into account that the C-75 complex could have special warheads, this issue at one time, during discussions in relevant forums, remained open. No one was able to either confirm or reasonably reject the presence / absence of special combat units for the C-75.
      Although the compiled list according to the nomenclature of SBCHs on the FKR-1, the calculations of "Sopka", Luna ... remained unallocated for the total number of imported ones.
      1. Operator
        Operator 7 July 2016 21: 03
        +1
        The situation was even more advantageous for the GSVK - the Americans would never have struck the Soviet troops in Cuba without preparing for the first or retaliatory (which is unlikely) strike in Europe.

        The forces of the American Expeditionary Corps also included infantry units, which were not so quickly withdrawn into the field. Moreover, the withdrawal of only American units to positions would cause outrage and sabotage from the European governments of their military bodies. So, it was necessary to involve the political and military bodies of NATO, and this is confusion and vacillation, since the Western Europeans were well aware on whose territory the hostilities would be launched.

        GSVK and the USSR as a whole would then have a week-long head start for mobilization and preparatory activities.

        In the unlikely event of an American attack from a quarry, only strategic nuclear forces without the deployment of NATO troops in Western Europe, 6000 Soviet tactical nuclear weapons would have fallen on US military bases from Bonn to London, after which the SA would still have rushed to Western Europe, where they would have met it as a liberator from treacherous American occupiers.

        The exchange option was much more likely - the US army invades Cuba, captivates the Soviet military contingent, destroy missiles and planes (provided that the SSVK was ordered to provide minimal resistance). At the same time, the SA invades West Berlin, captivates the American, British and French military contingents and reunites the two parts of Berlin.

        The USSR would have gained political gain.
        1. Rus2012
          Rus2012 7 July 2016 21: 14
          +1
          Quote: Operator
          The exchange option was much more likely - the US army invades Cuba, captivates the Soviet military contingent, destroy missiles and planes (provided that the SSVK was ordered to provide minimal resistance). At the same time, the SA invades West Berlin, captivates the American, British and French military contingents and reunites the two parts of Berlin.


          This is exactly from the section of unrealizable fantasy -
          Quote: Operator
          provided that GSVK is ordered to provide minimal resistance


          Imagine a situation:
          Pliev reports to Moscow - "the enemy is advancing, accept measures on the mainland... "At the same time, he subconsciously prepares to fight and die (like the crew of Varyag, Sailors, Gastello ... there are many examples): he gives Orders to regiments of the Strategic Missile Forces, Air Force, air defense missiles ...

          And here he comes from Moscow, even just - "don't fall for provocations" - in his understanding, this is tantamount to betrayal.
          Pliev would have definitely put fat on this ... and acted independently and according to circumstances. It’s all the same to him to die ... it’s better with music ...
          Moreover, the vast majority of his army thought and acted that way.
          1. Operator
            Operator 7 July 2016 21: 29
            +1
            A radiogram to Pliev from Moscow could look like this:

            "Congratulations on the liberation of West Berlin from the American occupation. Ensure the withdrawal of troops to the places of deployment and the transfer of military equipment and weapons to representatives of the US Army, with the exception of nuclear charges. In case of attempts to seize the latter, ensure their detonation. charges. "

            The USSR would be held hostage by a disarmed contingent of American troops in West Berlin.
  • Old26
    Old26 7 July 2016 19: 40
    +4
    CONTINUED
    Quote: Operator
    When approaching a distance of 600 km to the next air defense region (ground-based targets for nuclear bombardment are located inside it), several X-20s with corner reflectors (simulating the EPR of a strategic bomber) are launched toward it, which are ahead of 10-15 minutes (160-200 km of a bomber’s summer) fly up into the missile defense area and explode there, striking with the help of electromagnetic radiation radars and electronics of air defense systems and fighters. After that, the bombers enter the former air defense region and drop nuclear bombs on targets.

    I'm afraid to upset you, but ...
    The shortest way to the North American continent is through the North Pole. The first area that bombers will have to overcome is the Canada area. 2000 km only continental Canada and 1500 km of island. Plus wide this area about 5000 km... The main direction to the north is covered by fighter-interceptors "Voodoo" (long line of defense) with a range of 4800 km, 57 launchers "Bomark" (middle line of defense) with a range of 650-800 km depending on flight speed. And finally, the neighbor is light interceptor fighters. And note that they:
    V-1 is equipped with air-to-air missiles with nuclear warheads. AND
    Secondly, from the flank it is supported by the Alaska air defense region.

    Moreover, both in that and in another region air defense divisions (according to the state terminology) of air divisions are based.
    To hit the radars, blinding them, the aircraft need to go deeper into Canada at least 1000-1500 km. Will someone let them do it?

    Judging by your calculations, you are equipping the TU-95 aircraft not only with the X-20 cruise missile, but also with nuclear bombs. Get it out of your head. Not only will he have an 11-ton fool under the fuselage, but you also want to place bombs there. I'm afraid to upset you again. TU-95K could carry bombs only a missile.

    Well, and with the speeds you have, not everything grows together. A distance of 600 km X-20 will pass in 10 minutes, TU - in 40 minutes. so the rocket will not get ahead of it by 10-15, but by 30 minutes. And interestingly it turns out. The entire air defense system is knocked out by nuclear charges, and everything is in order in the technical specifications. And the radar works, and navigation, and communications ...

    Quote: Operator
    The fighters of the 1962 model were unable to prevent massive attacks by strategic bombers equipped for self-defense with cruise missiles with nuclear warheads - the range of the then air-to-air missiles was too small.

    Is the X-20 rocket self-defense for bombers? A massive plaque. I repeat again. The Soviet Union could exhibit a total of bombers, including 200 non-nuclear bombers. While the air defense of the continent - EIGHT AIR DIVISIONSnot counting the attracted forces of the Air Force and Navy
    Plus 411 Bomark long-range launching interceptors, plus air defense systems with Nike-type missiles, plus everything to the last detail ....
  • Old26
    Old26 7 July 2016 19: 42
    +4
    CONTINUED
    Quote: Operator
    To counter this tactic, the then air defense system did not require centralization, but rather decentralization in the form of, for example, equipping air defense systems and fighters with optical location stations. But television sets, night vision devices, or thermal imagers were not installed, and the lasers were in their infancy.

    I understand the reason for your disagreement with this scenario - after all, we have all been taught from childhood about the benefits of centralizing the management of any facility, including the country's air defense system.

    Centralization is always beneficial in that it allows maneuvering by forces and means, transferring them to the desired site. Of course, if you do not bring it to the point of absurdity

    Quote: Operator
    In addition to destroying control centers, air defense systems and aircraft at aerodromes, there is a much simpler method of neutralizing air defense for a time sufficient to strike stationary targets - blinding radars (see the Israeli Air Force operation in the Bekaa Valley 20 years later).

    The same thing, but with the use of more effective means (nuclear warheads of cruise missiles), the Air Force DBA of the USSR in 1962 over the territory of the United States would be produced.

    You confuse two different places in length, in terms of the means used. Radars blinded by nuclear explosives will recover. In the Bekaa Valley, the Israelis simply jammed the enemy’s RES, preventing them from using the available funds. The same thing happened during the Gulf War, when American aircraft jammed Iraq’s radar. But in both cases, they were used on a very limited area of ​​the fron, and not on the theater, several thousand kilometers long.
    1. Operator
      Operator 7 July 2016 21: 15
      0
      Air defense fighters fly out to intercept hundreds of heavy bombers (whether or not equipped with bombs or cruise missiles) with entire divisions. These American divisions, which were lifted into the air, would have been hit by supersonic cruise missiles with 6-mt warheads. Moreover, at a short distance from the aircraft, so that not only radars, but other on-board electronics break down, as well as the effect of light radiation and a shock wave.

      After the planes were neutralized, the next strike with cruise missiles would be launched against air defense radars in the form of high-altitude nuclear explosions with the generation of electromagnetic radiation (bombers are protected by temporarily shutting them down for the duration of the explosion). Air defense radars could not be turned off, since only in the 1962 year they were tied to the guidance of Nike anti-aircraft missiles, which did not have a GPS from the word at all.

      Eight air defense divisions are extinguished by eight X-20 cruise missiles with 6-mt warheads each.
  • Old26
    Old26 8 July 2016 21: 34
    +4
    Quote: Operator
    I could be wrong, but as far as I remember, by October 1962, there were about 400 strategic bombers Tupolev and Myasishchev in the USSR Air Force

    About 140.

    Quote: Operator
    But this is not the point - in the event of the escalation of the Caribbean military conflict to the stage of nuclear exchange on the US national territory, 100 to 300 targets would be hit

    Much less. Even with a 100% launch of ICBMs, this is about 35-37. If only everyone had time to take off. Plus, even if not 50, but 75 percent of the MRBM in Cuba - another 18. Total 55. The probability of hitting targets by bombers is extremely low. For the raid, 2 regiments of TU-95 and 3M were prepared, in which 2 squadrons were involved. So count it. An air regiment of strategists - a maximum of 24-25 aircraft in 3 squadrons. That is, in total in the "massive" raid it was planned to use about 64 machines ...

    Quote: Operator
    For a country that last fought with a foreign state on its territory in 1812 and got used to the absence of civilian casualties and infrastructure, this would be a national catastrophe.

    This would be a national disaster for any country, including and for the USSR.

    Quote: Operator
    As far as I understand in the civil defense of the USSR, simultaneously with the removal of the male military-trained population from the cities, the remaining urban population would move to the countryside in a planned manner. There would be enough food stocks for six months (the harvest has just ended).

    Did you participate in real GO exercises? And I had the opportunity to participate in such a teaching in EMNIP 1975 or 1976. Moreover, the teaching was minimized to the limit.
    It was decided that people between the ages of 18 and 30, in the overwhelming majority of men, would participate in the training. The aim of the exercise was to get out of the city at about 20 o'clock and after passing several checkpoints to reach the next morning to the neighboring town, which was located 30 kilometers away. We walked light. Without "belongings". Approximately 15-20% reached the place. And these were healthy people of military age, without belongings and families.
    Of course, you can move the population of the 500 thousandth city to the countryside. What next. Try, purely theoretically, not far from your city in the villages of the district to place, for example, at least 200 thousand, provide it with housing, provide life (and this is a sanitary condition)

    Already in the 2000s, he was the head of the emergency fire department of the Ministry of Emergencies at work. Learning is both laughter and sin. It was especially funny when they asked questions, and they gave us advice ....
    1. Operator
      Operator 8 July 2016 23: 00
      0
      Even according to your overestimated estimate of the 6-mt, ICBM and RSD warheads with flight times from 10 to 40 minutes would have hit 55 cities in the USA, which is equivalent to at least 55 millions of killed and n-th number of wounded.

      I have already assessed the deployment of the ground forces of the general purpose of NATO countries in Europe - seven days. In a week, the vast majority of citizens from Soviet cities would have reached temporary accommodation. The townspeople themselves will provide life, the sanitary condition - the doctors of them, food - the civil defense system and the State Reserve.
  • Old26
    Old26 8 July 2016 21: 39
    +3
    Quote: Operator
    The first echelon - the personnel army in Eastern Europe, plus reserves transferred over the course of the week from the western regions of the USSR (in the amount of 5 million people) were aimed at dropping out of the attack to the west. There was nothing to stop NATO’s cadre of a trained Soviet army with WWII experience, armed to the teeth with tanks, artillery, armored personnel carriers, front-line aviation and tactical nuclear weapons (6000 charges) - ATGMs and attack helicopters were absent as a class.

    Tactical (non-strategic) nuclear weapons in the Soviet Army in 1962 were approximately 2800 charges. In total, the USSR had about 3300 strategic and tactical charges (I drop a dozen or two charges, rounding off). Our enemy had approximately 7200 strategic and about 20000 tactical. That is a total of approximately 27300 charges. Plus 200 English. Where do you think tactical weapons were basically? In the United States or in the troops in Europe ?. And about ATGMs and helicopters, you are not quite right. There may not have been drums, but there were anti-tank ones. Around the year 1961. ATGMs were also, and a lot. If we adopted the first ATGM system in 1960, then in the west - in 1955. About 10 thousand were produced by only one ATGM model, the French SS-1962, by January 30. The next SS-11 model was produced approximately 6000 a year (since 1956), that is, by the end of 1962 there were about 36 thousand in service. And there were West German ATGMs. In service with 1960. For 8 years (from 1959 to 1966) 170000 thousand were produced. That is, more than 21000 a year or 4 thousand for 85 years. Do you think this is the absence of ATGMs as a class?

    Quote: Operator
    The only option is to bomb Germany, Denmark, and Benelux, where the vanguard of the SA would break into the first day. It would raise the hand of the NATO command to destroy their own peoples with nuclear weapons - a question. I think not.

    It all depends on the situation. At least they were always ready to hold back our armada with nuclear weapons, if there was no other option.
    1. Operator
      Operator 8 July 2016 23: 20
      0
      I agree: I was wrong with the NATO ATGMs, but the best weapon against ATGM operators was the preventive clearing of the tank column offensive using low-power nuclear charges (1-3 ct), and they were in the right quantity in the SA.

      Against tank units as a whole, low-power nuclear charges (non-neutron type) are not effective, and charges from 10 CT and higher will primarily destroy housing and infrastructure together with residents and not the fact that they will damage most of the tanks - see photo of Hiroshima and Nagasaki .

      Moreover, the breakthrough of Soviet tanks of the first line of defense of NATO meant that the tanks were in the thick of the enemy troops and the detonation of nuclear charges above them would result in an automatic breakthrough of the second line of defense, where the second echelon of tanks would be drawn, etc. etc.

      After the 1962 of the year, the United States adopted low-power neutron charges effective in combating armored vehicles, and also developed a strategy for hitting the second echelon of the SA.

      But it was already too late - the number of nuclear charges of all classes and their carriers in the USSR increased sharply, which made it possible to lay the main emphasis not on the SA, but on the Strategic Missile Forces, SLBMs and OTRK. There is no defense against nuclear missiles.
  • Old26
    Old26 8 July 2016 21: 55
    +4
    Quote: Rus2012
    Dear colleague, I will have a slightly different interpretation, sorry ...

    Yes, no, our interpretation is basically the same. I just do not consider the political and simply human component. I am trying to prove to my comrade the OPERATOR that with that shortage of nuclear warheads on strategic carriers (ICBMs and IRBMs in Cuba), no one would ever stage a demonstration in order to "drown" the radars of the air defense system and the air defense itself with high-altitude nuclear explosions. The strikes would be applied to specific targets, and would not detonate them in the stratosphere, spending on this almost a sixth of the available charges.

    Quote: Rus2012
    1mT GCH 8F12N (in such a case)

    laughing good You really don’t pay attention, colleague (although I was engaged in fishing, but I also worked in this direction - RCT), that I usually write an 8F126 warhead (for example), and not a 8F126 warhead. I would have to explain to most comrades that the RGM has one designation, the body is another, the warhead is the third, and the charge is generally the fourth designation.
    1. Rus2012
      Rus2012 8 July 2016 22: 19
      0
      Quote: Old26
      I just do not consider the political and simply human component. I am trying to prove to the OPERATOR comrade that with the shortage of nuclear warheads on strategic carriers (ICBMs and IRBMs in Cuba), no one would ever stage a demonstration in order to "drown" the radars of the air defense system and the air defense itself with high-altitude nuclear explosions. Strikes would be targeted at specific targets

      ... here I agree, the terms "demonstration strike" especially on the wasteland - it became fashionable later. They would have hit "important targets" and "in areas", and then even the then generally accepted "guaranteed triple strike" - most likely simply did not exist ...

      You just have to pay tribute to President Kennedy that you could hold on and hold on to your copperheads. Nikita Sergeyevich, too, that he backed off.
      By the way, they both suffered because of this and later: one completely lost his life, the other escaped with removal ...

      I think the author of the material should post it on the VO forum and open a discussion for those interested in the topic ...
      There is still a lot of unclear things there. And every year the "involved" and their listeners leave ...
      You need to try to "play out" the situation to the end in order to avoid falling into such a scenario anymore ...
      1. Operator
        Operator 8 July 2016 23: 47
        0
        I gave a possible scenario of a nuclear conflict in order to clarify the situation.

        Firstly, there was no Caribbean crisis, there was a full-fledged Soviet-American Caribbean war, which began with a military blockade of an ally of the USSR and the Soviet military contingent on its territory, which continued with air battles involving American planes and Soviet air defense systems and ended with a peace agreement.

        Secondly, the USSR not only did not start the Caribbean War, but did not provoke it in any way - which is especially important (tired of reading the cries of white-tape about the compelled actions of the USA). The USSR deployed its troops in strict accordance with international law at the invitation of another sovereign state. Otherwise, we can talk about the legitimacy of the military blockade, for example, of Turkey, since the USSR also did not like the deployment of American missiles there.

        Thirdly, I’m sure that the US president retreated only because his analysts reported a negative forecast of the results of the Third World War - the USSR’s capture of Western Europe, the Middle East, Japan and South Korea, losses from 50 to 100 million of Americans, transition to the socialist camp India, Indochina, Indonesia, Iran, Pakistan and all of Africa.

        Fourthly, in the Caribbean war the USSR definitely won, since it had an order of magnitude less nuclear potential, but was able to conclude an amicable agreement on an equal footing with the only nuclear superpower at that time.

        Fifthly, such a scenario will never be relevant for us, since since the mid-1980 of the USSR / Russia it has been the only nuclear superpower. For us, the analysis of the situation from the point of view of the United States of the 1962 model of the year is rather relevant.
  • Old26
    Old26 8 July 2016 23: 03
    +3
    Quote: Operator
    and would be hit by supersonic cruise missiles with 6-mt warheads.

    I look at the power of the BG cruise missiles you are growing by leaps and bounds. The real X-20 had 3 mt. You already have 6. so, if our dispute-conversation continues for another week, I'm afraid your capacity will reach at least 25 megatons.

    Quote: Operator
    Air defense fighters fly out to intercept hundreds of heavy bombers (whether or not equipped with bombs or cruise missiles) with entire divisions.

    Andrew! I’ll probably repeat it for the hundredth time. Forget about hundreds of Soviet strategists. I will not even repeat once again how many were and what. I already wrote. Moreover, a little higher I wrote how many regiments and how many squadrons were going to use. Given the fact that the raid would not be on one side. Quantity - about 64-70 cars. This is the whole "massive" the raid of Soviet bombers. The command perfectly understood that from only one direction it would be possible to provide at least some support to the bombers.
    If you believe that the Americans are "stupid", as M. Zadornov shows them, you can believe that they would have flown out to intercept the entire air division, that they were not dispersed throughout the area they covered.

    Quote: Operator
    These American divisions, which were lifted into the air, would have been hit by supersonic cruise missiles with 6-mt warheads. Moreover, at a short distance from the aircraft, so that not only radars, but other on-board electronics break down, as well as the effect of light radiation and a shock wave.

    Alas, our planners considered only one option for a breakthrough, and besides, it does not guarantee 100% completion of the task. Knowing the structure of the Sage air defense system, the planners understood that the bombers would be spotted by early warning missile systems over the North Pole. Considering the separation of the air defense system and the presence of numerous detection and identification radars of the Sage system, which transmitted information to the operational center of the region, and from there it went to the positions of the Bomarks and Nike-Hercules, as well as to the airfields of the air defense aviation, the only possible a breakthrough option was recognized as a variant of bypassing these positions (airfields and bach missiles). It was impossible to bypass the positions of the numerous detection and identification radars of the Sage system.
    It was taken into account that
    1. From the north, the United States covers the Canadian area. It contains airfields with fighters and 2 BOMARKOV bases. With a certain direction of flight from it was possible to get around, not with a 100% guarantee, but nevertheless. BOMARKOV had a seeker, and even with a miss of 800 meters, his nuclear warhead was capable of destroying the target. The main danger is fighters. But for some reason, all open publications on this topic are considering the option when the fighters went "in pursuit". In this case
    1. From the F-86D fighter bomber left.
    2. Fighter F-102 having a line of interception at a subsonic distance of 810 km could carry out only one attack, the second was excluded. At supersonic, having an intercept boundary of about 500 km, he intercepted a bomber with almost 100% probability. But at such a boundary, one could try to get around the zone.
    3. The same with the F-106. The boundaries of interception were respectively 770 and 450 km. The result is similar to that of the F-102.
    4. The F-4 fighter was not considered, in principle, since the bulk was transferred to Europe
    5. The bomber could not get away from the F-101 Fighter in principle. So such a flight is a game of "Russian roulette".
    1. Rus2012
      Rus2012 8 July 2016 23: 37
      +1
      Quote: Old26
      It was taken into account that
      1. From the north of the USA covers the Canadian area.


      But, dear colleague, this is if we assume that the DA of the USSR acts autonomously preventively without taking into account interaction with the strategic missile forces!
      In fact, there was a wonderful object "Portal" in Chukotka with an RSD (4 launchers), the task of which was to "smash" targets in Alaska and Canada: KP-NKP, including airfields ...
    2. Bongo
      9 July 2016 01: 41
      +1
      Quote: Old26
      1. From the north of the USA covers the Canadian area. There are airdromes with fighter jets and 2 BOMARK base. With a certain flight direction, it was possible to get around, not with the 100% guarantee, but nonetheless. BOMARK had a GOS, and even with a miss of 800 meters, his JBCH was able to destroy the target.


      Vladimir, good morning!
      In general, I agree with your point of view, but with CIM-10 "Bomark" the moment is debatable. After the launch of nuclear ballistic missiles and the Tu-16 attack on the radar of the DEW line in Alaska and Canada and the destruction of the SAGE interceptor guidance system, with a high degree of probability this complex proved to be incapable. In addition, the development of serial F-4B fighters in the 1962 in the US Navy has just begun and these machines could not have any effect on the course of hypothetical military operations.
      1. Rus2012
        Rus2012 9 July 2016 12: 15
        0
        Quote: Bongo
        In general, I agree with your point of view


        Dear colleague, in my opinion (and a number of missile - veterans of the Strategic Missile Forces) as a whole, by the early morning of October 30 (27 October. The day D.Kenedi made a decision on an air strike in Cuba + 2 days, after which the strike should take place ) - the United States would unexpectedly take about 15 45 units of forced Soviet preventive strikes .: 10-12 P-12 from Cuba (within half an hour from the moment the Yankee Air Force invaded the airspace), 4 P-7, up to 30 - P -16 (within an hour after the first detonations of the HFG in the Western Hemisphere) ...

        Most of the current US establishment was not prepared for this turn of events.
        They assumed a different scenario: destroy / throw out 5 thousand. contingent (even in this they were wrong) with unprepared RSM of the USSR Armed Forces from Cuba. To use tactical nuclear weapons in Europe, in the event of the beginning of an "asymmetric" campaign of the Soviets to the shores of the Atlantic in response to the invasion of Cuba. Engage the announced ultimatum on the use of the suppressive SNC against the USSR in the event of further actions with their "imperfect" missiles. Those. escalating up stairs ...

        At least, it was necessary to realize what happened ... to calculate the losses and, taking this into account, to build further actions. For the colossal impact only on the mind, the preemptive strike of the Soviets, for the American nation it could turn out to be comparable with something - with a moral shock to the Soviet people at the beginning of the Second World War 1941, and for material and human losses - unacceptable for the continued existence of the country ...

        I deliberately did not consider what would happen to Europe and the number of strikes the USSR received at this first stage.
        Purely theoretically, from the moment the USSR ICBMs were launched, about 400 IRBMs were to be launched at targets in Europe, Asia, and Alaska. And a certain number of the "first wave" of DA crews (on duty in the "pit") from the jump airfields, dispersed in a timely manner in the "special period" of early-mid October. They, of course, "came to the scene" after the strikes of the ICBM-RSD, which cleared the sky from the air defense ...

        As for the "retaliatory strikes" of the US Armed Forces, it would depend heavily on the effectiveness of Soviet ICBM-RSD strikes. The P-7 would have hit the "squares": New York, Los Angeles, San Francisco, Texas. R-16 - for more or less smaller, but more dangerous targets: command and control units, SNS bases ... R-12 from Cuba and Chukotka - within reach, for primary targets to be destroyed in the first place ...

        PS: By the way, with the Soviet P-14, too, not everything was clear. Various sources claim that they were sky-ready. The reasons are different: the missiles themselves or the warheads did not arrive ...
        But, there are recollections of one rocketman Vitaly Borovok - one battery in its entirety on the island was: "Finally, literally a day or two before the blockade was announced, the first and only ship Divnogorsk (loaded with R-14s) with the first battery of our regiment arrived at the port of Mariel."
        1. Rus2012
          Rus2012 9 July 2016 12: 41
          0
          Quote: Rus2012
          not everything is clear.

          ... I already wrote above about the "misunderstandings" with the SBCH to the S-75.
          Indeed, the V-760 missile with specialty in Cuba could not be, it was accepted into service in 1963. But this product was developed on the basis of the B-755, that is, on its nodes and systems. Nothing prevented the existence of a product B-755 with the letter "o" - experienced, released in a small series.
          Moreover, the S-25 "Berkut" air defense system already had a special unit, and work to support the S-75 SBSh began in the mid-50s.

          It also suggests that this is taken - http://www.gsvsk.ru/content/21/read64.html -
          In total, 164 was brought to Cuba
          nuclear munitions, including:
          to R ‐ 12 - 36 warheads for 1 Mt;
          to R ‐ 14 - 24 warheads according to 1 and /
          or 2,0 ‐ 2,3 Mt;
          to cruise missiles FCR ‐ 1 - 80
          Warhead from 2 to 20 ct;

          to Il-28 bombers - 6
          407H bombs on 8 ‐ 12 ct;
          to tactical missiles "Moon"
          - 12 warhead for 2 ct;
          to PU RCC "Comet" system
          “Sopka” - 6 warhead.


          While - to 34 available on the island of FCR-1 - all were intended 80
          nuclear warheads
          ?! The minimum that can be said is not to converge!

          This information is also alarming -
          Air defense
          2 air defense divisions, with C ‐ 75 complexes,
          each as part of 3 zrp and 1 RTB, Total
          144 PU.

          10th Air Defense Division (294th, 318‐
          th, 446 th.
          C ‐ 75, four starting
          6 PU in zrdn) and one
          technical division in
          each separate movable
          missile-technical base
          (OPRTB)
          separate
          radio engineering battalion);

          11th Air Defense Division (16th, 276th
          and 500-th anti-aircraft missile
          regiments armed with SAM ‐ 75,
          four starting (according to 6 PU in
          zrdn) and one technical
          division in each
          separate movable rocket
          technical base (OPRTB)
          ,
          separate radio engineering
          battalion);


          RTB, OPRTB - terms related to 12GUMO
  • Old26
    Old26 8 July 2016 23: 03
    +3
    Quote: Operator
    After the planes were neutralized, the next strike with cruise missiles would be launched against high-altitude air defense radars in the form of high-altitude nuclear explosions with the generation of electromagnetic radiation (bombers are protected by temporary shutdown for the duration of the explosion).

    It turns out interestingly. Only 20 cars could carry the X-40. How many would have reached the milestone when it would have been possible to shoot back is not known, since you will also spend at least 18 missiles on HZ what. And about turning off the radar on the bomb, it’s very creative. Here is how the radio command system will work in this case, don’t you tell me? And what will happen to radio stations, navigation devices, for example, with a radio compass? Will you also disconnect? Can Americans turn off their radars during the explosion? Or is it prohibited by your vision?


    Quote: Operator
    Eight air defense divisions are extinguished by eight X-20 cruise missiles with 6-mt warheads each.

    "Marvelous are thy works, O Lord." Canadian region - an area of ​​2000 by about 5000 km. And the numerous radars, aviation and everything else scattered throughout this territory are you going to extinguish with one missile? But other areas partially overlap the Canadian one (in the south). To extinguish everything in this area, you need to get close to it in general, to its borders almost close ...

    In short, Andrey! Better try writing an alternative technotriller. There you can deploy hundreds of bombers and the X-20 with 20 mt warheads. In the 1962 version and with the availability of the resources that each of the parties had, your options are not real
    1. Operator
      Operator 9 July 2016 00: 15
      0
      I do not agree with your estimate of the number of Soviet strategic bombers (atomic and non-atomic) in October 1962. In my estimation, they were released around 400 by that time and all of them could participate in the attack on the United States - at least in order to disperse the air defense forces.

      Moreover, non-nuclear bombers, having in their composition one atomic armed X-20, could play the role of distracting groups.

      You may not know the whole set of methods for using X-20 cruise missiles. Quite possibly, there was a method of their application by the mass of fighters in the air, rising to intercept the mass of bombers. 3 mt is quite enough for one air division, for eight enough eight times 3 mt.

      What bothers you about temporarily turning off the on-board radio electronics of bombers before detonating a nuclear charge of a cruise missile or a bomb - the bombers' crews know in advance the estimated moment of detonation and can very well pilot aircraft for several minutes without a radar, radio compass, etc.

      But fighter pilots and air defense system operators basically do not know this moment and are forced to use electronic devices until the very moment of the explosion. Moreover, if the situation would occur at night and / or at a distance that excludes visual contact with the bombers.
  • Old26
    Old26 10 July 2016 07: 53
    +3
    Quote: Operator
    But it was already too late - the number of nuclear charges of all classes and their carriers in the USSR increased sharply, which made it possible to lay the main emphasis not on the SA, but on the Strategic Missile Forces, SLBMs and OTRK. There is no defense against nuclear missiles.

    As against nuclear missiles of any country, incl. and the USA. The number of carriers and charges naturally increased regularly, but a sharp jump was observed only in the Strategic Missile Forces. With SLBMs, a jump appeared only in 1968-1969 in connection with the entry into operation of Project 667A boats. The number of strategic bombers compared to previous years, for example 1964, even fell slightly. Regarding the tactical, there was a steady increase of about 800-1000 charges per year

    Quote: Rus2012
    But, dear colleague, this is if we assume that the DA of the USSR acts autonomously preventively without taking into account interaction with the strategic missile forces!
    In fact, there was a wonderful object "Portal" in Chukotka with an RSD (4 launchers), the task of which was to "smash" targets in Alaska and Canada: KP-NKP, including airfields ...

    YES, of course, did not act autonomously. But a preemptive blow of half a hundred BG to such a gigantic territory would not give the result that we have always expected from him.
    "Portal" in Chukotka. Yes, it was. But the 83rd regiment began to deploy there only in 1963, and deployed in half. Yes, he covered 2/3 of Canada, but what are 4 heads again for such a territory.

    Quote: Operator
    Even according to your overestimated estimate of the 6-mt, ICBM and RSD warheads with flight times from 10 to 40 minutes would have hit 55 cities in the USA, which is equivalent to at least 55 millions of killed and n-th number of wounded.

    This, Andrei, you have super-high marks. Let's start with the fact that it is not known what charges were on 32 P-16s. And he had 2,3 Mt, and 1 Mt, and 6 Mt. You immediately took the maximum. The R-7A had 1,3 Mt warheads. On the MRBM in Cuba - 1 mt. And only the X-20 had 3 mt. Further. The KVO of the same P-16, and even more so the P-7A, was large enough, which led to a decrease in the number of victims. Because if you aim at the "bedroom" area, but find yourself in a business center, where there are a priori fewer people, the number of victims does not increase from this.
    1. Operator
      Operator 10 July 2016 08: 37
      0
      The growth of the American nuclear arsenal after October 1962 could no longer influence the situation with the confrontation with the USSR - having collapsed once during the Caribbean War (with several dozen Soviet strategic carriers), the USA could not start a war with the growth of the Soviet strategic nuclear arsenal first to several hundred carriers, and then up to several thousand.
      Moreover, most of them were represented by ballistic missiles, from the mass launch of which there is no protection to this day.

      Plus, armed to the teeth, including tactical nuclear weapons, the Soviet Army was ready to drop an American expeditionary force into the Atlantic Ocean on a narrow land field in Western Europe.

      By 1985, the USSR was completely victorious in a military confrontation with the only enemy in any scenario of the outbreak of hostilities.

      So Soviet nuclear weapons were nevertheless used in the Caribbean War - in terms of their "deterrent" factor.

      PS I have already said that in American cities the largest concentration of the population is in multi-story business centers, and not in low-rise sleeping areas and suburbs. Therefore, a nuclear strike must be delivered from 13 to 14 hours of Washington time, taking into account the difference between the eastern and western coasts of the United States.
      1. Operator
        Operator 10 July 2016 10: 29
        0
        Interestingly, as a result of the Caribbean War, John F. Kennedy personally completely destroyed his political reputation.

        In his inaugural address upon assuming office, US President Kennedy said: “Let every nation, regardless of whether it wishes us good or evil, know that we pay any price, we will bear any burden, we will bear any difficulties, we will support any friend, we will oppose any enemy in order to ensure the triumph of freedom. ”

        And did not pay in October 1962, balabol.
  • Old26
    Old26 10 July 2016 07: 55
    +3
    Quote: Operator
    In a week, the vast majority of citizens from Soviet cities would have reached temporary accommodation. The townspeople themselves will provide life, the sanitary condition - the doctors of them, food - the civil defense system and the State Reserve.

    Theoretically, yes, in practice it is extremely difficult to do. If only because the speed of movement of such refugees will be extremely small, their number will be huge, if you evacuate the city. Try in a village where 3-4 thousand people live to place at least 10-15 thousand extra ... The experience of natural disasters, isolated, speaks differently.

    Quote: Bongo
    In general, I agree with your point of view, but with CIM-10 Bomark, the point is debatable. After nuclear attacks by ICBMs and the Tu-16 attack on DEW radars in Alaska and Canada and the destruction of the SAGE interceptor guidance system, it was most likely that this complex was incapable.

    Perhaps Sergey, perhaps. But it is worth not forgetting that we had very few ICBMs, we would have to hit the main targets in the United States, which is already Canada. TU-16 - it was certainly a force, but the combat radius could indeed strike at Alaska, possibly in the western part of Canada, but he could hardly "endure" all the radars. In addition, the lack of radius led to the fact that their route was calculated, and aircraft carriers, as a basing option, have not yet been canceled.

    Quote: Rus2012
    ... R-12 from Cuba and Chukotka - within reach, for the primary objectives to be destroyed in the first place ...

    PS: By the way, with the Soviet P-14, too, not everything was clear. Various sources claim that they were sky-ready. The reasons are different: the missiles themselves or the warheads did not arrive ...
    But, there are memories of one rocketman Vitaly Borovok - one battery in full force on the island was: "Finally, literally a day or two before the announcement of the blockade, the first and only ship Divnogorsk (loaded with R-14s) arrived at the port of Mariel. battery of our regiment "

    There was no P-12 in Chukotka at all, and the P-14 appeared in 1963. It's hard to say whether it was or not. I have never seen such data. Okay, they didn't talk about it 20 years ago, but now, if it were, they could. I repeat, there is no official data, but the participants' recollections ... No offense to him, but there is a common expression: "he lies as an eyewitness."
    1. Rus2012
      Rus2012 10 July 2016 10: 26
      0
      Quote: Old26
      I have not seen such data. Okay, they didn’t talk about it 20 years ago, but now, if it were, they could say.

      ... okay, I haven't checked the Portal deployment date, probably it is. But, it is known for sure that part of the N-Tagil BSPs were aimed at objects in Alaska.

      Returning to the P-14 in Cuba ...
      They were most likely there
      - there is a statement of three independent participants - the same Vitaly Borovok (on the arrival and personal meeting of a part of the medical personnel and equipment of two regiments 665рп, 668рп),

      - Esina V.I., Colonel General, then nachalatka, later beginning. General Staff of the Strategic Missile Forces: "By October 23, the 51st RD was concentrated on the island of Cuba in the following composition:
      * Division management, communications battalion and a separate engineering and combat engineer battalion;
      * Three missile regiments (79, 181, 664) and serving them;
      *part of the management of the 665 rp led by the regiment commander, combat support battery, one starting battery and serving this regiment of prtb in full force ".

      - My acquaintance, also spoke about the presence on the island of P-14,
      BUT, he also told that they DIDN'T DELIVER FUEL (UDMG).

      That is, it turns out that during the blockade on Cuba, some vessels broke through:
      - "Divnogorsk" (DIVNOGORSK) - dry cargo ship (1961, Poland, 8843 GT, **), Odessa, MMF. - October 21-22 got, transportation units of the 51 missile division (1-th battery 668rp)
      - “Metallurg Anosov” (METALLURG ANOSOV) dry cargo ship steamer (1962, USSR, 12285 GT, **), Odessa, MMF. Captain Nikolai Zakharovich Babienko.
      22 October. Nikolaev - Mariel. Transportation of 51 missile division units, 665 missile regiment - regiment headquarters, combat support and service units.

      It can be assumed, by analogy with the loading and delivery of the P-12, that ships from 6 to 14 of the R-14 missiles could arrive on the island with these ships. True, without a piece of equipment and a fuel component ...
      1. Rus2012
        Rus2012 10 July 2016 19: 37
        0
        Quote: Rus2012
        ... okay, I haven't checked the Portal deployment date, probably it is.

        ... by the way, according to the "Portal", a very interesting infa was found -
        In June-August of the 1962 of the year, the 83y missile regiment with P14 missiles was relocated from the Primorsky Territory to the region of the city of Anadyr (from Ussuriysk to the port of Sovetskaya Gavan, then to the port of Anadyr). During four flights, the regiment was completely relocated, and installation work began in the difficult conditions of the Far North of Chukotka.

        In August 1962, the 83y separate missile regiment was visited by the Commander-in-Chief of the Missile Forces, Marshal of the Soviet Union N.I. Krylov in order to familiarize with the progress of construction work and the arrangement of life and life of personnel. This was perhaps the first time a missile regiment was transported along with weapons by sea. If you recall that
        the subsequent redeployment of a full-fledged missile division to Cuba was also called "Operation Anadyr", then perhaps not only an experiment of sea redeployment took place here, but at the same time a cover operation ...

        On 23 on January 1964, the regiment took up combat duty at a new location (Anadyr1 (Gudym),
        town2).
        In the period 1962-1969 years. The 83 missile regiment was based in Anadyr as part of one division with four ground launchers of the P14 rocket (8K65).
  • Old26
    Old26 10 July 2016 07: 56
    +3
    Quote: Rus2012
    While - to the 34 available on the island of FCR-1 - all 80 were destined
    nuclear warheads ?! The minimum that can be said is not to converge!

    The question is of course interesting. I only once came across infa that not the amount of FCR-1
    there were 34 units, and the number of PUs. How reliable is it - HZ, but then, in principle, everything is clear. 2 BK plus some margin for replacement. And as for the RTB in the air defense units - I think that there were still charges there, although this is purely intuitive. How many times, after all, in our history it was such that the product was put into service in the year XXXX, and by that time it had already been in the army for a couple of years on the database.

    Quote: Operator
    I do not agree with your estimate of the number of Soviet strategic bombers (atomic and non-atomic) in October 1962. In my estimation, they were released around 400 by that time and all of them could participate in the attack on the United States - at least in order to disperse the air defense forces.

    So share your rating. But only reasoned, not type, it seems to me. I will be glad if I'm wrong. But alas, facts are a stubborn thing. And the number of certain types is known. If desired, there is a resource on the network (to find a link), where not only the quantity is written, but also the serial numbers of the machines produced.
    1. Rus2012
      Rus2012 10 July 2016 10: 59
      0
      Quote: Old26
      I only once came across infa that is not the number of FCR-1
      there were 34 units, and the number of PUs.

      ... everything is clear -
      561th regiment of the FKR regiment of Maltsev FKR KS-7 8PU.17-!? Xnumx
      584th regiment of the FKR regiment of Trifonov FKR KS-8 8PU.17-!? Xnumx


      Quote: Old26
      Share your rating.

      As a result, on the whole and in general, it turns out that the United States, in the course of the "Cuban missile crisis", followed the events behind one step. Advice - in accordance with the laid down plans for deployment, transition to iron wartime algorithms - in a collision of interests with US policy.

      The United States - knew little about the state of real things on the island, trying to counter them with actions tested during the 2 World War II - massive air attacks in dense formation. The effectiveness of such actions can be judged by the realities of the Korean and Vietnamese wars.

      I described the results of the UNEXPECTED NIGHTMARE obtained by the USA as a result of such actions.
      But what kind of damage WE COULD RECEIVE - I find it difficult to assess. But it should be. significantly less than those who "drew" from the potentials of the colliding sides. The decisive factor in this situation was that the USSR was forced to deliver "PREVENTIVE STRIKES". And most importantly, the USSR Armed Forces were ready and able to do this.
    2. Operator
      Operator 10 July 2016 12: 09
      0
      The score is:

      In total, about 500 turboprop Tu-95 bombers were produced in the USSR. 1956 launched serial production. In 1957, the aircraft was modernized and in the Tu-95M version adopted. Until the 1958 of the year, the Kuibyshev Aircraft Plant built 50 Tu-95 and Tu-95М bombers (some of them are in the versions of the Tu-95A and Tu-95MA nuclear weapons), after which it switched to the release of the Tu-95K (missile carrier) modification. In the mid-1960's, the release of the Tu-95K was discontinued. At the end of the 1970, on the basis of the Tu-142M long-range anti-submarine aircraft, a new aircraft was created, called the Tu-95MS, which were produced in the amount of 90 units.

      But by October 1962 of the year, 32 turbojet bombers M4 and 90 units 3М were built.

      So it turns out about 400 of Soviet strategic bombers and missile carriers.