Model of limited nuclear attack Russian on coast of the enemy

http://cont.ws/post/198607
Using a compact nuclear reactor on the lead-bismuth coolant mixture, "status-6" has unlimited range of travel and long stay offline, including "sleep" mode. Nuclear Rector 'Status 6 "allows us to develop a cruising speed of 185 km / h at a depth of 1000 meters. This makes the system immune to interception conventional torpedoes on chemical fuel.
To date, the only possible way of interception "status-6" is its massive bombing of depth bombs with nuclear warheads. However, the consequences of radioactive contamination from the mass detonation of nuclear bombs deep will be comparable to similarly arising after the explosion of the warhead "status-6." This raises questions about the appropriateness of his interception.
Running System "status-6" is possible from anywhere in the ocean coast of Russia, as well as on board any vessel of appropriate size. It is reported that this system will be armed with submarine "Belgorod" and "Khabarovsk", which, judging by its internal dimensions, will be able to carry up to six sets of this type.
No one knows how many of these autonomous underwater drones at the moment are already at the bottom of the most different corners of the world ocean, waiting for the command activation of the long-distance stations.

At the headquarters of the Russian Navy was carried out computer simulations of attacks "status 6" on the coast of the enemy.
No attempt to intercept underwater drone failed. After a nuclear strike on the coast of the enemy: the number of dead - 16.4 million people. Wounded - 39 million people.



Blue circle of 72 kilometers - the zone of destruction of buildings.
Orange circle of 150 kilometers - the zone of fires and fatal burns from a flash of light.

I have a question - Why crazy in the White House provoked Russian?
These weak-minded military men and politicians in the White House, the Pentagon and NATO are hoping to win a third world war?
Why Pentagon places in Europe another armored division?
Why are American politicians intervene in the traditional zone of influence of Moscow?
Western politicians want to wake the bear. They got what they wanted. Bear woke up.

What do you think about it?

 

Why this thread which is bat crazy insane?

Are you that afraid of the Russians? What can you say about someone starting a thread about the Russians having a plan and an option to kill MILLIONS of Americans.

Yet blame the U.S. govt. for it.

 

Oh by the way Destroyer.

The "100 megaton torpedo" is impossible to build as you are suggesting.

Nuclear fusion devices AT BEST can yield about "8 megatons per ton of weapon".

So your suggested 100 megaton torpedo would have to have a warhead of 12.5 tons. Not possible in any remotely conceived of torpedo design.

 

And if that bomb is ever used, there will be 140 million dead russians.

What's your point? Russia and NATO already have guns aimed at eachother's heads. They have had since the cold war. it's not news. Why even bother trying to arms race the west? You're never going to win a war, you already have nukes to deter any attack on you, and you can't afford this. Why not spend your resources on fixing Russia instead? You're not going to use the weapons, so why even buy them?

edit: btw, it sure as (*)(*)(*)(*) wouldn't be limited if you nuke new york! There is probably no action more guaranteed to make the US send their nukes over to all russian cities.

 

I have a question - Why crazy propaganda man make provoking false Russian threat plus want make war with stupid in White House?

Big torpedo go boom at bad men America.

 

If this would be a realistic weapon, the Russians could strike at the US without the detection. Taking out DC NY LA San Diego Hawaii.... the US would be handicapped, and unable to launch much of a retaliation, and then the regular nukes would strike other CC targets etc etc. The only thing the Russians would have to face is US submarines, by this time the Satelites would be taken out and CC would be limited, so response would not end Russia. Although the nuclear winter, and toxic radiation would probably kill 80% of humanity, and civilization would crumble... but at least Destroyer and Russia win

 

US ability to launch counter strikes is independent of wheter DC NY LA etc are nuked or not. Nukes are hidden everywhere underground, on submarines and what not. retaliation strike is a basic concept in nuclear doctrine, it's not new. Russia can nuke how many US cities they want simultaneously. There's going to be retaliation no matter what, leveling all russian cities.

Hopefully Russians aren't stupid enough to try.

 

I doubt this very very much, if CC is taken out along with satellites the US response would be very limited...hardly enough to destroy Russia. If either the US or Russia can strike first without detection prior to explosion they probably will lower the retaliation by 70%. In any event all this would be enough to destroy the world as we know it.

 

why do crazy Satan worshippers in the Kremlin dream of murdering 20 million people?

maybe they are war criminals that should be arrested before they can commit genocide.

 

"Limited" still means the largest russian cities are leveled. That's still a deterance, unless russians are suicidal.

 

What do I think? I think Putin is a punk and so are the schills here to continue this kind of thread. It's not anyone's fault that you don't measure up as a man.

 

The Tzar bomb had a 50 megaton payload.

Castle Bravo was 12.5 megaton.

Regardless. It would make no sense to produce a 100 megaton torpedo when a 0.012 megaton torpedo would wipe out an entire carrier fleet.

 

Tsar Bomba was upwards of 15 tons or more IIRC.

And a 0.012 megaton torpedo is 12 kilotons. I could and would destroy a carrier if it hit it. But would probably due little damage to the escort ships.

It it detonated about a quarter of a mile away it would probably do little to the carrier itself.

 

12 kilotons was the size of the bomb dropped on Hiroshima and everything within a radius of 1 mile was destroyed.

Sure ... a few ships on the edge of the radius might remain intact but everyone inside would be dead.

A quarter mile away ?? Done, finished if not completely vaporized.

But really now ? Do you not understand the point - that 100 megaton device is overkill. Call it a whopping 0.050 device if you want to make sure the carrier group is gone ... or how about a massive 0.5 megaton device ...

40 times the payload of Hiroshima. Would that be enough ?

 

The point in the OP was to use a 100 megaton torpedo to destroy a coastal city. Not a naval target.

I have heard former Soviet officials in History Channel specials make the suggestion of using a submarine on a suicide mission to deliver a 100 megaton device close enough to Washington D.C. to disrupt American command and control if the Soviets were launching a first strike on the U.S.

 

I do not understand the rational behind 100 megatons. Like 20 is not enough ? There is not really much difference as you do not get a 5 times greater blast radius. Command and control would be disrupted.

From a first strike perspective - 1 Russian nuclear sub carries 16 missiles (MIRV = 10) for a total of 160 targets hit with 5-7 times the payload of Hiroshima.

Strike out 160 US cities with populations of 500,000 or more and tell me what you have left ?

A first strike strategy would first take out the satellites followed by a number of sub's launching their payload followed by a few thousand ballistic missiles - The 5-20 megaton variety.

The US would be a "No Go ... high radiation" zone on the map for decades as would Russia due to the counter strike.

It really is a silly discussion as there is no way for either side to prevent annihilation. This was the whole point of the "MAD" doctrine.

The Reagan Administration, being the raging fools that they were, opted out of this doctrine and started down the path of raging stupidity by trying to view a nuclear war as winnable.

 

Calls the Americans crazy maniacs provoking poor innocent Russia. Starts thread talking about Russian plans to nuke a city with no military significance which will kill millions of innocent people. How (*)(*)(*)(*)ed is this bull(*)(*)(*)(*)?

 

Yes, reduce retaliation by 70% thereby only destroying Russia or America 1.5 times instead of five times. Our civilization would be kaput. hello dystopia!

 

Actually unless those 160 American cities are all within a radius of a few hundred miles what you suggest is not possible.

Each ballistic missile whether sea or land launched as a certain "footprint" in which it can deposit each nuclear warhead. Some being at most a few dozen miles apart.

So no, one submarine can't destroy every major American city.

 

I did say that...did I not?

 

I never said "Every City" Just 160 of them ! Pick 16 regions in the US having 10 large cities and ... city no more.

You have no clue what you are talking about. "At most a few dozen miles apart" Give me a break. Each independent re-entry vehicle is independently targetable and these are released from the main missile independently while still in space.

The warheads can be released at different speeds and on different trajectories - and at different times from something called a "bus" http://www.britannica.com/technology/MIRV

Further, the range of SLBM's can be as much as 5000 miles. Launched off the coast each of these missiles can drop their 10 (MIRV's) over a wide range, likely over a range of 500-1000 miles.

So yes .. a Russian Sub has the capability to destroy 160 major cities in the US.

 

Your information is in error. Not even an American Ohio class submarine with Trident II D-5 SLBMs can deploy warheads over an extremely long or wide footprint.

 

who said anything about "extremely long" what does that even mean ?

The warheads are deployed from "SPACE" what do you figure a degree or two in trajectory difference makes once the missile hits the ground ?

I can rough calculate it if you like .. just have to know the height. Your claim of a 20 or so miles is simply not true.

Where are you getting your info from ?

 

Immediate family member who was a USAF ICBM guidance system technician for 15 years.

And technically, the ICBM or SLBM Bus deploys the warheads after it reenters the atmosphere. High atmosphere but still in the atmosphere.

 

From a trajectory standpoint it makes little difference. From the "high atmosphere" a degree or two makes a huge difference in distance once on the ground.