Incredible Facts
The Vela incident, during which two nuclear explosions were recorded in the South Atlantic, can be called the most famous nuclear mystery.
This happened on September 22, 1979, and there was much talk that it could be a joint test of nuclear weapons by Israel and South Africa.
However, apart from this incident, in the world nuclear science there is no shortage of riddles and strange occurrences.
10. Death of nuclear scientists in India and Iran
Over the past 10 years, the list of dead nuclear scientists in India has expanded significantly. While the authorities ignore this fact or speak of their deaths as something inexplicable, many locals testify that the best representatives of their profession are dying, and under dubious circumstances.
Two senior engineers from India's first nuclear submarine have been found dead on railroad tracks. It is believed that they were poisoned, however, their bodies were left on the tracks to make their death look like a suicide.
But the police came to a different conclusion. They dismissed the lawsuit, citing the fact that these were "two ordinary incidents."
Another nuclear scientist was strangled in his sleep. Some of the investigators tried to "write off" the incident as a suicide, although there was a lot of evidence indicating that a murder had been committed. However, no arrests were made.
Two other scientists were burned in their own laboratory, although they were not working with combustible materials, when the fire broke out. One scientist was kidnapped by a group of armed men, but managed to escape.
Again, the authorities were quick to dismiss all incidents. A parallel can be drawn with the death of Iranian nuclear scientists, which attracted much more media attention.
Iranian scientists were killed with car bombs. Officials blame Israel, which vehemently denies any involvement. Some experts point to the United States, which also speaks of its complete non-involvement in the deaths.
Secrets of nuclear weapons
9 Mysterious Drones Over French Nuclear Power Plants
Drones of unknown origin were seen flying over 13 of France's 19 nuclear power plants in 2014. Air areas over these territories are controlled by the French Air Force, but the aircraft were so small that they initially went unnoticed.
Despite the fact that the French government said there was no threat to power plants, the authorities spent one million euros to create systems to detect and eliminate any such drones.
However, no one knows who launched these drones. Officials thought they had cracked the case when they arrested three people preparing to launch a drone near a train station in central France. But they had a simple, cheap version of the aircraft.
However, these people now face imprisonment and a fine of 75,000 euros.
The drones discovered were believed to be worth at least several thousand euros each, and they could not be caught even with the help of a coordinated effort.
An army of helicopters was sent after one of the drones, however, the device was smart enough to escape them.
The drones and their creators have raised concerns about the vulnerability of France's nuclear facilities. Some point to Greenpeace who have used drones in their work before and who openly express their views on France's nuclear program.
However, the organization is only one of several suspects, as there is currently no direct evidence to support any of the theories.
8. What is a bank of fog?
When the US Navy decided to refurbish its W76 warheads, which are a significant part of its nuclear arsenal, they faced a major challenge.
After opening the warheads, they discovered a secret material code-named "piles of fog" that needed to be replaced.
However, no one knew how to do it.
The fog bank was created in the 1970s and 1980s, and there were very few details about the actual process. Everyone who was involved in this has not worked in this area for a long time. As a result, attempts to create new material $23 million went to no avail.
But after that, another 69 million was spent to restart the production process of the fog bank. Everything ended successfully.
While a bank of fog is big enough in the navy to warrant $92 million in taxpayer dollars invested in the process, no one but the project's contributors knows exactly what it is.
Experts suspect that it's a kind of airgel, which functions as a link in the warhead, helping parts of the device to contact each other and transfer energy to each other.
However, whatever the fog bank is, it is a reminder that even the most important part of any technology can become a victim of time.
7 Karen Silkwood Mystery
In 1974, 28-year-old Karen Silkwood was a laboratory assistant at the Kerr-McGee plutonium plant. It was believed that the plant had problems with quality control as well as safety procedures, and she was elected by the trade union committee to appear before the US Commission on atomic energy with a status report.
With a folder of documents clarifying the issues, Silkwood was on her way to a meeting with a New York Times reporter on November 13. However, before reaching the meeting point, she turned off the road and crashed into a concrete wall. The woman died, and the documents were never found.
As a result of the investigation, the police found alcohol and sedatives in her blood, which led them to conclude that Karen fell asleep at the wheel.
However, a private detective investigating the case found dents in the back of her car and suggested that she might have been forced to swerve off the road.
An autopsy of the girl's body showed that her body suffered from serious radiation poisoning. A search of Karen's apartment showed that in her kitchen, bathroom and even on a sandwich in the refrigerator accumulated a huge amount of plutonium.
The plant's lawyers suggested that the girl was emotionally unstable and dependent on sedatives, as a result of which she was poisoned.
However, regardless of whether Karen was a lunatic who poisoned herself or was killed by informants, the factory closed a year after the woman's death, because the main company that bought fuel rods from him began to complain about the poor quality of the products and simply stopped buying them.
The Silkwood case was also closed.
6. Nuclear alert in 1969
In 1969, the Nixon administration secretly put US nuclear forces on high alert without explanation. The reason was so highly classified that even the Chief of the Joint Staff Committee didn't know about anything.
Even today, no one can really explain why the administration then took such a potentially destabilizing step.
Declassified documents point to a connection to the Vietnam War, implying that the administration decided to "flex its muscles" to demonstrate their willingness to take any measures necessary to end the war.
This is consistent with Nixon's "madman theory" which suggests that the president had a rather dubious approach to foreign relations.
According to the theory, Nixon ruled in such a way as to look like a madman from the side so that the hostile communist countries of the bloc did not provoke it for fear of a nuclear response. The nuclear alarm looked like Nixon was preparing to attack North Vietnam in order to convince Moscow to enter into negotiations with Hanoi.
According to others, the alarm was created in order to deter a Soviet nuclear strike on China during disputes over the Sino-Soviet border. Documents show that Soviet leaders were indeed considering a preemptive strike against Chinese nuclear facilities at the time.
Since even the military leaders of the highest echelon did not shine then, Henry Kissinger (Henry Kissinger) is one of the few survivors who knows what happened. However, even he does not give any clear answers in his memoirs.
Henry Kissinger
However, regardless of the true cause of this anxiety, it appears to have had little effect on foreign relations.
Mysteries of radioactive materials
5. Did spies steal American uranium?
Before and during the Cold War, the Nuclear Materials and Equipment Corporation (NUMEC) was active at the nuclear facility in Apollo, Pennsylvania. The facility was closed in 1983.
But in the mid-1990s, there was a radiation leak in the neighborhood. The owners of NUMEC are still paying millions in compensation to local residents who have filed a lawsuit in connection with the development in them amid the leak of various types of cancer.
But even while the facility was running, NUMEC owned another potentially damaging case. Each nuclear facility, due to seepage, writes off a certain amount of material for natural loss.
However, NUMEC's records showed hundreds of kilograms missing. Some experts have suggested that this is to blame leakage through vents. Others say the leak was only on paper and is the result of poor accounting.
Meanwhile, several experts and intelligence officials have a different theory. They believe that uranium was stolen by Mossad spies. In the 1960s, Israel conducted covert operations around the world to secure nuclear materials.
The creator of NUMEC, Zalman Shapiro, was in active contact with the Israeli intelligence bureau. Several times he even visited the center incognito.
The AEC organization, which is responsible for monitoring and controlling the supply of uranium and plutonium from private factories, stifled any investigation involving Israel in the bud, because they did not want to wash dirty linen in public.
Later, the CIA director launched his own investigation because environmental samples near one of the Israeli reactors showed a rare type of uranium that could only come from NUMEC.
A CIA investigation revealed that Shapiro was in contact with one of Israel's top spies, as well as many other important people in the intelligence community. Former employees have claimed to have seen containers that were likely filled with nuclear material at the NUMEC facility's loading dock.
There were also documents showing that the material was being sent to Israel.
When the NUMEC facility was finally decommissioned, 90 kg of missing uranium was found, but a study soon after showed that between 1957 and 1968 269 kilograms of uranium disappeared.
Over the next 9 years another 76 kilograms disappeared, despite the fact that the amount of uranium processed has increased. This is far more than any reasonable limits on natural attrition.
Eventually, the investigation fizzled out, leaving behind only speculation as to what had happened.
4. Polonius killed Yasser Arafat?
In 2006, Russian dissident Alexander Litvinenko was poisoned with polonium-210, which made this "combat" substance famous. The substance was easily detected in the body of a man.
This radioactive material was also at the center of a possible assassination two years before Litvinenko's death.
Alexander Litvinenko
When Palestinian leader Yasser Arafat died in France in 2004, his personal doctor was extremely unhappy the refusal of French doctors to diagnose the disease that led to his death.
The official statement says that Arafat died from a "mysterious blood disease." His wife wished to carry out the burial without an autopsy. However, Arafat's death happened shortly after a sharp deterioration in health, therefore, many Palestinians suspect poisoning.
In 2012, Al Jazeera investigates the possibility of poisoning. Swiss tests found traces of polonium-210 on his personal belongings, but experts stressed that the symptoms that accompanied Yasser last days and the hours of life do not correspond to those that occur with polonium poisoning.
After the discovery of polonium in such large quantities, the Palestinians accused Israel of being involved in the case. Israel, in turn, claims that polonium was deliberately planted, since its half-life is 138 days, so after so many years after Yasser's death, he simply cannot be present in such quantities on his clothes.
Despite everything, the body was exhumed.
Independent studies were carried out in different countries. After the remains were tested by Russian scientists, they decided that the polonium poisoning theory was unfounded.
Swiss scientists, however, found a high content of polonium in pelvic bones and on the ribs of Arafat. They argued that the skull and limb bones that were analyzed in Moscow were not suitable material for analysis because the highest levels of material were not concentrated in these parts of the body.
Some of the samples were sent to the French laboratory, whose specialists also ruled out the possibility of poisoning.
Thus, many contradictory conclusions have accumulated, there is no clear answer, and no one understands whether Arafat died of natural causes, or whether he was poisoned with polonium after all.
Nuclear world: secrets
3. The secret of the container in Genoa
Millions of identical cargo containers regularly pass through the port of Genoa. Many of them are filled with scrap metal because the need for cheap sources has created a huge international business.
With so many containers traveling all over the world, it's no problem to ship anything anywhere, ranging from drugs to illegal immigrants.
However, one of these containers in particular caused the port a huge amount of trouble.
All containers are checked for the presence of radiation, but the installed scanners still ignore the detected low levels, because many household items are somewhat radioactive.
While the presence of such scanners facilitates merchant shipping, overlooking items with a low degree of radioactivity is dangerous because items such as a nuclear bomb, for example, also emit a low level of radiation.
In 2010, however, one shipping container emitted such high levels of radiation that scanners could not even show its value: the arrow went off scale.
The shipping address for this container was calculated as Bermuda-based shipping company Textainer. When asked about the toxicity of the cargo, the company said the container had been leased to a Mediterranean Shipping Company.
After that, he went to Saudi Arabia under the supervision of Sun Metal Casting, a scrap metal dealer in the Arab emirate of Ajman. The authorities of Genoa simply stated the fact of the highest radioactivity of the contents emanating from cobalt - 60, however, apparently, no one wanted to do anything about it.
Genoa tried to ship the container back to Saudi Arabia and then to United Arab Emirates but both countries refused to accept it. Since he was never sent, he stayed in the port for about a year, which eventually caused protests and strikes by port workers.
In the end, it was decided that the port and the Italian government would dispose of it, dividing the cost of $ 700,000 between two.
When cobalt was found, it was a small cylinder, probably used in any medical device or apparatus that sterilizes food. However, the origin of the cobalt, as well as how it ended up in the container, will forever remain a mystery.
Mysteries of nuclear tests
2. Nazi atomic bomb
The world would be very different if the Nazis had succeeded in building the atomic bomb. It took the US 125,000 people and $30 billion to build its first two nuclear weapons.
The Germans had at their disposal only a small part of the budget available to the United States, but German physicists were among the best in the world. Since the dissolution of the Nazi project nuclear weapons one question remains unanswered: why did the Nazis never succeed in this field?
There is a theory that the head of the atomic project, Werner Heisenberg, deliberately sabotaged the project because he knew where nuclear weapons could ultimately lead. It is believed that the people working on the project were reluctant to do their job for the same reason.
The theory is interesting, but, oddly enough, it has very few adherents. In the letter, Heisenberg says that he wants to state his unwillingness to complete the bomb in a meeting with his mentor Niels Bohr.
Q. Were nuclear weapons used in Hiroshima and Nagasaki? Were they really nuclear bombs?
A. Nuclear bombs.
Q. Were nuclear weapons used after World War II? Just like a weapon, not a test.
A. It was used, the Guardians say, like, somewhere in Vietnam ...
Q. Is it true that there were saucer fights in Vietnam?
A. There were.
Q. Why were there saucer fights in Vietnam and, say, not in Afghanistan?
A. Something to do with the Grays and the technology transfer from them that was going on at the time. The Americans at that time began to use their technology.
Q. Does Russia or the United States now have combat-ready nuclear weapons?
Oh. Hmm... The Guardians say no.
Q. No nuclear weapons? What happened to him?
A. Withdrawn. It is stored somewhere in one place, both ours and American.
Q. And who took him there?
Oh. They don't say...
Q. What about atomic briefcases?
Oh. Bluff.
Q. That is, neither Russia nor the United States, no organizations and terrorists have access to combat-ready nuclear weapons?
A. Corporations have access. Terrorists… no, not really.
Q. Was nuclear weapons used in Fukushima to create a wave?
A. No, it has not been used.
Q. Does Russia have more powerful weapons than nuclear weapons, such as ultra (hyper) sound, plasma, tectonic weapons, etc.?
A. Yes, hypersonic and something related to radio frequencies.
Q. What about the USA?
O.HAARP. I don’t see anything so special, they have a lot of conventional weapons, we have more powerful ones.
B. The Moscow heat of 2010 isHAARP?
Oh yeah.
Q. Why didn't Russia answer, since we have better weapons?
A. There are certain agreements. These were tests and both sides were interested.
Q. Is there a connection with the installation test in Saudi Arabia at the same time the abnormal rains happened there?
A. Yes, there is a combined effect.
Q. Earthquake in Armenia in 1988 - the result of the use of tectonic weapons?
A. No, somehow it’s not right ... There is some kind of overlay of a natural process and something else ... a feeling that there was an underground explosion. Keepers say - a nuclear underground explosion carried out by ours. Well, in general, it turns out that the tectonic weapon, they experimented with the possibility of provoking tremors with an explosion.
Q. Is it true that the main reason for the extraction of all minerals is the creation of cavities to fill them with water and form a reserve of drinking water under the surface of the planet?
A. Not all of them, but some - yes, for this too. 10-15 percent somewhere. Such places are evenly dispersed over the surface.
THEMATIC SECTIONS:
| | | | | | | |
While political scientists are discussing the future of the post-federal space, the last redoubt of the Eurasian empire, Mr. Putin's subjects are cherishing the hope that the collapse of Russia will never happen, this simply cannot happen. Iron logic. And, as an argument, a “nuclear shield” ominously sat down in their subconscious. It can be said that the "nuclear argument" is the last bastion of psychological stability and confidence in the existence of a powerful (albeit reeling from its knees) state - the patron and protector of the orphans and the poor.
And God forbid you destroy the Soviet nuclear myth! The Eurasianists will instantly turn into boys from G. Danelia's movie "Kin-dza-dza!", who have lost their tsaks. In the psychology of the natives, the last hope of capturing the Chatlan planet Plyuk will die. All points of stability and hope for the future, everything that one could (was) be proud of will turn into nothing.
In order not to cause spiritual trauma to the ideological builders of developed Eurasianism, I advise them not to read further!
According to the site"Internet vs. TV Screen" Russian rulers in the "decaying" West are not taken seriously.
Nuclear charges, unlike conventional bombs and shells, cannot be stored and forgotten until they are needed. The reason is a process that is constantly going on inside nuclear charges, as a result of which the isotopic composition of the charge changes, and it quickly degrades.
The warranty period for the operation of a nuclear charge in a Russian ballistic missile is 10 years, and then the warhead must be sent to the factory, since plutonium must be changed in it. Nuclear weapons are an expensive pleasure, requiring the maintenance of an entire industry for the constant maintenance and replacement of charges. Oleksandr Kuzmuk, Ukraine's defense minister from 1996 to 2001, said in an interview that Ukraine had 1,740 nuclear weapons in stock, Kuzmuk "however, those nuclear weapons expired before 1997." Therefore, the adoption of a nuclear-free status by Ukraine was nothing more than a beautiful gesture ( http://www.proua.com/digest/2008/08/18/121502.html)
Why "before 1997"? Because even Gorbachev stopped the production of new nuclear charges, and the last old Soviet charges had a warranty period that ended in the 90s. "Both Russia and the United States have not been producing weapons-grade uranium or weapons-grade plutonium for more than 10 years. Somewhere since 1990, all this has been stopped" (V.I. Rybachenkov, Advisor to the Department for Security and Disarmament of the Russian Foreign Ministry, http://www.armscontrol.ru/course/lectures/rybachenkov1.htm ). As for the United States, the adviser "misleads the public", but the fact that under Gorbachev the production of weapons-grade uranium and weapons-grade plutonium was completely curtailed in the USSR is just true.
So that there is no temptation to make new nuclear charges for ballistic missiles, the Americans concluded a "very profitable" deal with the leadership of the Ministry of Atomic Energy of the Russian Federation (for 20 years!). The Americans bought weapons-grade uranium from old Russian warheads (they promised to buy plutonium later), and in return Russian reactors producing weapons-grade plutonium were shut down. "Minatom of Russia: the main milestones in the development of the nuclear industry": "1994 - Adoption by the Government Russian Federation decisions to halt the production of weapons-grade plutonium." ( http://www.minatom.ru/News/Main/viewPrintVersion?id=1360&idChannel=343 )
In Russia, not only has the service life of old Soviet nuclear charges for missile warheads expired "before 1997", but there is no plutonium to make new ones. They cannot be made from old Soviet plutonium, because, like plutonium in warheads, its isotopic composition has irreversibly changed. And in order to obtain new weapons-grade plutonium and manufacture new nuclear charges for missiles, it takes not just time - there are no specialists, the equipment is not in working condition. In Russia, even the technology for manufacturing barrels for tank guns has been lost; after the first few shots, the flight of the next shells from a new Russian tank is hardly predictable. The reasons are the same - the specialists have grown old or dispersed from non-working industries, and the equipment is either dilapidated, or taken away, handed over to scrap metal. It is likely that much more sophisticated technologies for producing weapons-grade plutonium and creating nuclear charges from it have long been lost, and they will have to be restored not for a year or two, but at best for 10 years. And will the Americans allow the Russian Federation to restart reactors to produce highly enriched weapons-grade plutonium? Russia has set up a unique experiment in the destruction of the technosphere of a modern technogenic society, under the current regime, the technosphere is melting right before our eyes, society is losing technology, infrastructure, and most importantly, people who are not able to work as sellers. The Russian Federation quite naturally turned from a country with nuclear weapons into a country potentially capable of possessing them, the status has changed from a real superpower to the status of a potential superpower, and this fundamentally changes Russian relations with other countries.
Why were they on ceremony with the Russian Federation until recently, and not slammed in the late 90s? After the expiration of the warranty period, nuclear charges are capable of exploding for some time. Even though these will not be explosions of the power they were previously designed for, but if several blocks in New York are demolished and hundreds of thousands of people die, then the American government will have to explain. Therefore, the American government allocated the most powerful supercomputers to the US Department of Energy, officially announcing that for scientists to simulate degradation processes in nuclear charges, the only thing they "forgot" to tell the media was that they were going to simulate degradation processes not in American charges, but in Russian ones. The game was worth the candle and no money was spared for these purposes, the American elite wanted to know for sure - when not a single Russian nuclear warhead was guaranteed to explode. Scientists gave the answer, and when the estimated time came up, American politics with regard to Erefia has changed as fundamentally as the Russian nuclear status. The Kremlin rulers were simply sent to three letters.
In the spring of 2006, joint articles by Keir A. Lieber and Daryl G. Press (in "Foreign Affairs" and in "International Security") appeared on the possibility of a disarming strike against Russian nuclear forces. Lieber and the Press started an open discussion - in a democratic country, everything must be discussed beforehand (although decisions are made by other people and even before discussion). In Moscow, only a tiny bunch of kneaded patriots felt unkind and got worried, the elite didn’t even move an ear, the American plans coincided with their plans (were they not going to leave her a “weapon of retaliation” after setting off from the completely devastated “this country”? Of course not). But then the position of the Russian elite "suddenly" became more complicated. In early 2007, the influential Washington Post published an article recommending no more flirting with the Russian ruling elite, as there was no one behind it. real power, and put the crooks in their place. Here the roof was torn off already at Putin himself, and he rolled the "Munich speech" about a multipolar world. And in early 2008, Congress instructed Condoleezza Rice to compile a list of leading Russian corrupt officials. Who has earned a lot of money honestly in Russia? None. The last fog has lifted, and the Kremlin elite has a keen sense of the impending end.
President Medvedev, in his post, announced grandiose plans in the military sphere - "Serial construction of warships is planned, primarily nuclear submarines with cruise missiles and multipurpose submarines. An aerospace defense system will be created." To which Condoleezza Rice coolly replied in an interview with Reuters - "The balance of power in terms of nuclear deterrence will not change from these actions." Why would he change? What will Medvedev load on ships and in cruise missiles? There are no suitable nuclear charges. There are only false targets on Russian missiles, there are no real targets. Building a missile defense against missiles like "Satan" is insane, you miss once, and goodbye to a dozen large cities. But against radioactive scrap metal, which today is on Russian missiles instead of warheads (most likely, it was also removed, since the old weapons-grade plutonium is very hot - hot as an iron), you can create a missile defense against it, if the missile defense misses, then nothing particularly terrible happens, although it is unpleasant then to decontaminate a hectare of its territory. The missile defense system is designed to catch radioactive scrap metal when the Russian Federation is finally disarmed. The elite does not like missile defense, not because it is around Russia, but because the elite is not allowed out of Russia, it has been turned into a hostage of its own games.
But what about the Russian generals? They fell into mysticism. As once upon the collapse of the Third Reich, and today, with the expected imminent end of the Energy Superpower, the military has the same faith in a secret superweapon, this is the agony of the ability to think soberly. The generals started talking about some warheads maneuvering in space (from a technical point of view - complete nonsense), about hypersonic super-high-altitude cruise missiles, about installations that send short super-powerful electromagnetic pulses. Generals love their homeland, but money even more. Enriched uranium was sold at a price 25 times lower than its value, since it was stolen, stolen from its people, and they don’t take the market price for the stolen, but sell it for next to nothing, part of the money for the sale of warheads and sawing the Satan missiles went to the generals. The generals were assigned as batmen in tsarist Russia, they were assigned a chic pension, and in Chechnya they could play to the fullest at soldiers, drunk to smithereens, send unfired boys to slaughter, and you won’t get anything for it (at least one general was tried for the storming of Grozny?). The son of every general could also become a general; there are more generals in Russia per capita than anywhere else in the world.
Details about the state of strategic weapons were told in the Duma at closed meetings in order to hide the truth from the population. The media only discussed the state of carriers of nuclear weapons, and kept silent about the main thing, the state of the nuclear weapons themselves. Lying was beneficial to the Americans, as it allowed them to continue waving a picture of a dangerous Russian bear in front of their own electorate. The lies suited the oligarchs, since they were going to leave "this country" in the near future. And the generals are silent, because what can they say now? That they stole a nuclear shield from the people, sawed it up and sold it to the enemy?
For 30 years, the balance of nuclear deterrence was determined by treaties between the USSR and the USA; more than that, the USA does not offer to start a new treaty process, there is nothing to agree on. Putin ran urgently to legalize the border with China, and China began to publish textbooks, where almost all of Siberia and Far East- Territories seized by Russia from China. The EU offered Russia to sign the Energy Charter, according to which the EU will extract oil and gas on the territory of the Russian Federation, transport them to itself, and the Russians are offered a reward - fico. EU officials frankly explained that Russia has three options - to lie under the EU, lie under the US or become Chinese cheap labor, that's the whole choice. The main players are aware of what is happening and are not shy.
After Russia turned from a real superpower into a potential one, the situation around the bank accounts of the Russian elite began to heat up sharply. The UN has adopted a convention on corruption, and the West is not joking today, it is going to use it against our kleptocracy. So the West decided to repay our traitors for their betrayal. Throw throwing - is it a crime, is it immoral? Not at all.
The conversation between the Russian rulers and the West turned into "don't understand my," both sides are talking about completely different things, Moscow to them - "You promised us!", And those to the Russians - "So you have nothing else but a cheap bluff!" (The sending of the Russian Federation to Venezuela Tu-160 did not cause a new Caribbean crisis, as it was perceived by the "probable adversary" solely as a clownery).
Russian richest Natural resources cannot belong to a weak unpopulated power. The United States decided to stop buying old weapons-grade uranium from the Russian Federation. Although it is very profitable for the Americans to buy it at a price many times lower than its market value, it is more important to land Russian generals on the coccyx before discussing the terms of surrender.
******
Meanwhile, Russia has stopped the production of weapons-grade plutonium
. NTV reported how the last reactor of this type existing in Russia was closed in Zheleznogorsk. It has been producing plutonium for the last half century. Especially for its service in the USSR, the closed city of Krasnoyarsk-26 was created, later renamed Zheleznogorsk.
The Zheleznogorsk Mining and Chemical Combine was a unique nuclear enterprise that had no analogues in the world. Its production shops were located deep underground.
******
But even if the nuclear shield of Russia by some miracle had survived and the production of nuclear plutonium had not been curtailed, the Russian Federation would still be hopelessly behind its closest competitors in technical terms. For example,American nuclear potential has long surpassed the Russian nuclear fake by a third
. According to Gazeta.ru The United States outnumbers Russia by a third in the number of deployed long-range ballistic missiles, their launchers and nuclear warheads.
The Russian nuclear potential turned out to be below the level of the Treaty on the Reduction of Offensive Arms, which entered into force in February 2011. Experts doubt that the Russian Federation will be able to bring its potential under this ceiling over the next 10 years.
******
Already by 2015 Russia could theoretically be slammed like a fly
. According to the St. Petersburg Military parity , maintaining in the required quantitative and qualitative condition the fleet of Russia's strategic nuclear triad - ICBMs, strategic submarine missile carriers and heavy bombers - in the foreseeable future will become an impossible task for the country. A number of conceptual mistakes in the development of the strategic arsenal, made in the late Soviet and post-Soviet period, led to the fact that after a certain period of time Russia risks being left with a weapon that cannot guarantee the country's security.
The mobility of strategic weapons as a panacea for their invulnerability played a bad joke on the General Staff of the USSR Armed Forces. First of all, the very concept of creating ICBMs on self-propelled automobile and railway chassis was erroneous. By creating such the most complex systems weapons as movable ground missile systems(PGRK) RT-2PM "Topol" (NATO code SS-25) and combat railway missile systems (BZHRK) RS-22 "Molodets" (SS-24), the country incurred huge additional costs for the creation of these strategic groupings. American ICBMs of the Minuteman and MX series, similar in their combat capabilities, were placed in highly protected silo launchers, where they were in a state of immediate use in an emergency.
What will Russia be left with by 2015? As you know, the BZHRK RS-22 has already been withdrawn from the Strategic Missile Forces and destroyed. A certain number of RS-20 (R-36MUTTKh) and RS-19 (UR-100NUTTKh, NATO code SS-19) mine ICBMs are in service, but they life cycle already running out. These missiles have not been produced for a long time, and the endless "extensions" of their presence in the Strategic Missile Forces can only cause a bitter smile. The only real combat system is Topol and Topol-M.
In 1994-2002, the number of ICBMs of this type was maintained at the level of 360 launchers. And then, of course, the collapse began. Launchers and missiles were aging, they had to be withdrawn from the combat strength of the Strategic Missile Forces. The deployment of stationary and mobile Topol-M missiles to replace them was catastrophically late. Thus, by 2006, only 252 Topol ICBM launchers remained in service from the highest number of 369 from 1993. Instead, by 2006 armament of the Strategic Missile Forces received only 42 stationary and the first three mobile "Topol-M". 117 decommissioned, 45 received. In 2007, according to Military Parity estimates, approximately 225 Soviet-made Topols remained in service, and at the beginning of 2008, according to the website www.russianforces.org, there are only 213 of them units.
According to the calculations of American experts, in the next five to seven years, the entire fleet of mobile Topols deployed in 1984-1993 should be decommissioned. And what in return? By 2015, Russia plans to adopt 120 Topol-M ICBMs, including 69 in the mobile version. Again, the Russian Federation remains in the red - more than 100 old missiles will not be replaced by anything.
Thus, by about 2015, the Russian Strategic Missile Forces will have approximately 76 fixed and 69 mobile Topol-Ms. In total, there will be approximately 145 of them. Note - monoblock. As for the new multiply charged type RS-24, there is no data on their deployment. It is worth noting that the planned deployment of such a number of Topol-M is based on the figures of the State Armaments Program (SAP) until 2015, which has never been fully implemented. The Ministry of Defense of the Russian Federation cannot fix the cost in any way certain types weapons, including strategic ones, as a result of which the defense industry inflates their cost to exorbitant heights. Recently, the Chief of the General Staff, General Yu. Baluyevsky, spoke about this in an interview with the Vesti-24 channel. And the reason for this is the fact that the defense budget of the Russian Federation is a completely non-transparent item of government spending, which leads to this kind of financial somersaults.
Let's summarize. By 2015, Russia will have 145 ICBMs in service, of which almost half will be mobile. This is a completely unnecessary waste of resources. The monopolist in the development of strategic missiles, the Moscow Institute of Thermal Engineering, is still holding the Russian Federation hostage to an absolutely outdated "mobility concept". Even the Americans advise the Chinese not to follow the "Soviet" path, quite clearly understanding the futility of such a decision. And it is felt that overseas experts are not joking, but are advising business. At one time, they were smart enough to abandon the mobile MX and the Midgetmen. And the Russians persist. If you read military forums, then the rocket men themselves call the Topols “matches” for their low combat capabilities, and their mobility even gave rise to a joke: “Why are Topols mobile? “And therefore, to increase the flight range.”
As you know, the United States has adopted a program to modernize the B-2 stealth strategic bombers, as a result of which the Americans will be equipped with the latest radar with active phased array, which has fantastic capabilities for detecting small mobile ground targets, and will be able to take on board up to 80 guided bombs with a guidance system GPS. That is, in one sortie, the "invisible" will be able to destroy up to several dozen mobile targets, along the combat route of which the destroyed launchers missiles, radars and aircraft hangars. Truly, a saying in a slightly modified form would be appropriate here - “How Mamai flew by.”
The situation with the naval component of the strategic triad is even more sad. At present, according to the same overseas site, the Russian Navy has 12 strategic nuclear missile carriers - six type 667BDRM (Delta-IV) and six type 667BDR (Delta-III). They have 162 missiles with 606 nuclear warheads. Seems like a good arsenal. But this is only at first glance. Submarines can be destroyed from air and space in an instant. By 2015, the state of the naval component of the strategic nuclear forces of Russia also raises many questions.
But what about military aviation? This is where things get really bad. Worse than in the Strategic Missile Forces, and even worse than in the SSBN. According to Western estimates, at the beginning of 2008, the Long-Range Aviation of the Russian Air Force had 78 heavy bombers, including 14 Tu-160 (Blacjack) and 64 Tu-95MS (Bear-H), which theoretically can launch 872 long-range cruise missiles into the air.
This type of Russian strategic triad is suitable only for demonstration flights over the oceans. It is absolutely unsuitable for combat response to a surprise attack. All bombers will be destroyed in the blink of an eye by the latest means of aerospace attack. When the flights of strategic bombers were resumed, the American press and even official representatives The White House frankly mocked the prehistoric appearance of the Russian Tu-95MS, considering them to be absolute "naphthalene", taken out of nowhere. Indeed, in our time, keeping a turboprop bomber in service, the engine blades of which have an effective dispersion area (ESR) the size of a football field, is nonsense. Tu-95 has no chance to overcome the airspace of even a third-rate country.
As for the Tu-160, the gigantic dimensions of this aircraft turn each of its flights into some kind of launch of the American Space Shuttle. It is no coincidence that almost every aircraft of this type has its honorary name as a combat ship of the navy. A bomber weighing 275 tons takes on board 150 tons of fuel. Preparation of the aircraft for flight, refueling and suspension of weapons takes several hours, and during this process a swarm of special maintenance vehicles stand near the aircraft. Of course, at X hour, these planes will be easy prey for American vultures.
What does Russia have at the exit?
Sad, frankly, the conclusions for the imperial hopes.
The grouping of stationary and mobile Topol-M, which in 2015 will form the almost monopoly backbone of the Strategic Missile Forces, in terms of its combat capabilities will practically remain at the level of light ICBMs of the mid-70s of the last century. Insufficient throw weight of 1-1.5 tons will not allow the implementation of powerful combat equipment of these missiles, including multiply charged warheads for individual targeting. Of course, in theory it is possible to put three low-yield 200 kt nuclear warheads, but even this solution can reduce the range of an ICBM, which today barely reaches 10,000 km.
Equipping these ICBMs with some kind of hypersonic maneuvering warheads that “can overcome any missile defense system” will make the Americans think that Russia considers the United States as its main adversary. Against this background, the Chinese, with their much larger strategic programs, will appear to the Pentagon hawks as true friends of America. However, the cunning Chinese are trying to achieve this without advertising, unlike Russia, their weapons programs. The Kremlinites are trying to rattle weapons that are not even available. Silly strategy. And funny.
The ideology of deploying the marine component of the triad has been destroyed. SSBNs, which are practically as good as the American Ohio in terms of their geometric dimensions and displacement, will be equipped with small missiles with the formidable name Bulava. The insufficient range of these missiles forces them to be based in the Pacific Fleet right next to the United States. It is no secret that a powerful multi-level missile defense system is being deployed in this region, including a ship-based one with Standard SM-3 anti-missiles, and not only American, but with the inclusion of Japanese and South Korean ships equipped with the AEGIS combat information and control system and vertical missile launchers . Add to this component the GBI anti-missile base in Alaska with offshore platforms of multifunctional SBX missile defense radars floating off its coast. These weapon systems can click like nuts from the first hit of a Bulava missile. And in this area, which is also teeming with anti-submarine defense systems, the Russian "Boreas" with "Maces" will go to swim. Needless to say, a "wise" decision.
Pro strategic aviation there is nothing to add.
What to do? The eternal Russian question. It's too late to drink Borjomi when the liver has decomposed. It's time to stop saber-rattling weapons that don't exist.
As you can see, the systemic crisis of Putin's vertical put an end to our Russian Federation - the defense industry and the nuclear shield. The "nuclear sword" has turned into a fake, which can only scare Georgia or Chechen militants. However, it is not a fact that even these small but proud peoples will tremble in front of a pile of Russian scrap metal inherited by Russia from the militaristic Soviet Union.
Article last year, I think that now the situation is even worse. In principle, I suspected this for a long time, but here are serious calculations. The article is not from the Ukrainian site, if that.
Russia's nuclear bluff for internal use
Russian rulers are not taken seriously in the West. The West is also not considering the nuclear threat to Russia, and there are very serious reasons for this. The myth of the "nuclear shield" is firmly planted only in the minds of the Russian viewer, who is misinformed by pro-Kremlin televangelists.
Nuclear charges, unlike conventional bombs and shells, cannot be stored and forgotten until they are needed. The reason is a process that is constantly going on inside nuclear charges, as a result of which the isotopic composition of the charge changes, and it quickly degrades.
The warranty period for the operation of a nuclear charge in a Russian ballistic missile is 10 years, and then the warhead must be sent to the factory, since plutonium must be changed in it. Nuclear weapons are an expensive pleasure, requiring the maintenance of an entire industry for the constant maintenance and replacement of charges. Oleksandr Kuzmuk, Ukraine's defense minister from 1996 to 2001, said in an interview that Ukraine had 1,740 nuclear weapons in stock, Kuzmuk "however, those nuclear weapons had already expired before 1997." Therefore, the adoption of a nuclear-free status by Ukraine was nothing more than a beautiful gesture.
Why "before 1997"? Because even Gorbachev stopped the production of new nuclear charges, and the last old Soviet charges had a warranty period that ended in the 90s. “Both Russia and the United States have not been producing weapons-grade uranium or weapons-grade plutonium for almost 10 years now. Somewhere since 1990, all this has been discontinued ”( IN AND. Rybachenkov, Advisor to the Department for Security and Disarmament Affairs of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of the Russian Federation). As for the United States, the adviser “misleads the public,” but the fact that under Gorbachev the production of weapons-grade uranium and weapons-grade plutonium was completely curtailed in the USSR is just true.
To avoid the temptation to make new nuclear charges for ballistic missiles, the Americans concluded a “very profitable” deal with the leadership of the Ministry of Atomic Energy of the Russian Federation (for 20 years!). The Americans bought weapons-grade uranium from old Russian warheads (they promised to buy plutonium later), and in return Russian reactors producing weapons-grade plutonium were shut down. "Minatom of Russia: the main milestones in the development of the nuclear industry": "1994 - Adoption by the Government of the Russian Federation of a decision to stop the production of weapons-grade plutonium."
In Russia, not only has the service life of old Soviet nuclear charges for missile warheads expired "before 1997", but there is no plutonium to make new ones. They cannot be made from old Soviet plutonium, because, like plutonium in warheads, its isotopic composition has irreversibly changed. And in order to obtain new weapons-grade plutonium and manufacture new nuclear charges for missiles, it takes not just time - there are no specialists, the equipment is not in working condition. In Russia, even the technology for manufacturing barrels for tank guns has been lost; after the first few shots, the flight of the next shells from a new Russian tank is hardly predictable. The reasons are the same - the specialists have grown old or dispersed from non-working industries, and the equipment is either dilapidated or stolen.
It is likely that much more sophisticated technologies for obtaining weapons-grade plutonium and creating nuclear charges from it have been lost, and they will have to be restored not for a year or two, but at best for 10 years. And will the Americans allow the Russian Federation to restart reactors to produce highly enriched weapons-grade plutonium? Russia has set up a unique experiment to destroy the technosphere of a modern technogenic society, under the current regime, the technosphere is melting before our eyes, society is losing technology, infrastructure, and most importantly, people capable of working not as sellers or security guards. The Russian Federation quite naturally turned from a country with nuclear weapons into a country potentially capable of possessing them, the status has changed from a real superpower to the status of a potential superpower, and this fundamentally changes Russian relations with other countries.
Why were they on ceremony with the Russian Federation until recently, and not slammed in the late 90s? After the expiration of the warranty period, nuclear charges are capable of exploding for some time. Even though these will not be explosions of the power they were previously designed for, but if several blocks in New York are demolished and hundreds of thousands of people die, then the American government will have to explain.
Therefore, the American government allocated the most powerful supercomputers to the US Department of Energy, officially announcing that for scientists to simulate degradation processes in nuclear charges, the only thing they “forgot” to tell the media was that they were going to simulate degradation processes not in American charges, but in Russian ones. The game was worth the candle and no money was spared for these purposes, the American elite wanted to know exactly when not a single Russian nuclear warhead was guaranteed to explode. Scientists gave the answer, and when the estimated time approached, American policy towards Russia began to gradually change as fundamentally as the Russian nuclear status.
In the spring of 2006, joint articles by Keir A. Lieber and Daryl G. Press (in Foreign Affairs and International Security) appeared on the possibility of a disarming strike against Russian nuclear forces. Lieber and the Press started an open discussion. In Moscow, only a tiny bunch of kneaded patriots got worried, the elite didn’t even move an ear, the American plans coincided with their plans (they weren’t going to leave her a “weapon of retaliation” after setting off from the completely devastated “this country”?).
But then the position of the Russian elite "suddenly" became more complicated. At the beginning of 2007, an article was published in the influential Washington Post newspaper, which recommended not to flirt with the Russian ruling elite anymore, since there is no real power behind it, but to put the crooks in their place. Here the roof was torn off already at Putin himself, and he rolled the "Munich speech" about a multipolar world. And in early 2008, Congress instructed Condoleezza Rice to compile a list of leading Russian corrupt officials. Who in Russia earned big money honestly? None. The last fog has lifted, and the Kremlin elite has a keen sense of the impending end.
Even during the “presidency” of Medvedev, the Russian authorities announced grandiose plans in the military sphere - “Serial construction of warships is planned, primarily nuclear submarines with cruise missiles and multi-purpose submarines. An aerospace defense system will be created.” To which Condoleezza Rice coolly replied in an interview with Reuters - "The balance of power in terms of nuclear deterrence will not change from these actions." Why would he change? What will Medvedev load onto ships and cruise missiles?
There are no suitable nuclear charges. There are only false targets on Russian missiles, there are no real targets. Building a missile defense system against Satan-type missiles is madness, you miss once, and goodbye to a dozen large cities. But against radioactive scrap metal, which today is on Russian missiles instead of warheads (most likely, it was also removed, since the old weapons-grade plutonium is very hot - hot as an iron), you can create a missile defense against it, if the missile defense misses, then nothing particularly terrible happens, although it is unpleasant then to decontaminate a hectare of its territory. The missile defense system is designed to catch radioactive scrap metal when the Russian Federation is finally disarmed.
But what about the Russian generals? They fell into mysticism. As once upon the collapse of the Third Reich, and today, with the expected imminent end of the Energy Superpower, the military has the same faith in a secret superweapon, this is the agony of the ability to think soberly. The generals talked about some warheads maneuvering in space (from a technical point of view - complete nonsense), about hypersonic super-high-altitude cruise missiles, about installations that send short super-powerful electromagnetic pulses.
Generals love their homeland, but money even more. Enriched uranium was sold at a price 25 times lower than its value, since it was stolen, stolen from its people, and they don’t take the market price for the stolen, but sell it for next to nothing, part of the money for the sale of warheads and sawing the Satan missiles went to the generals. The generals were assigned as batmen in tsarist Russia, they were assigned a chic pension, and in Chechnya they could play to the fullest at soldiers, drunk to smithereens, send unfired boys to slaughter, and you won’t get anything for it (at least one general was tried for the storming of Grozny?). The son of every general could also become a general; there are more generals in Russia per capita than anywhere else in the world.
Details about the state of strategic weapons were told in the Duma at closed meetings in order to hide the truth from the population. The media only discussed the state of carriers of nuclear weapons, and kept silent about the main thing, the state of the nuclear weapons themselves. Lying was beneficial to the Americans, as it allowed them to continue waving a picture of a dangerous Russian bear in front of their own electorate. The lies suited the oligarchs, as they were going to leave "this country" in the near future. And the generals are silent, because what can they say now? That they stole a nuclear shield from the people, sawed it up and sold it to the enemy?
For 30 years, the balance of nuclear deterrence was determined by treaties between the USSR and the USA; more than that, the USA does not offer to start a new treaty process, there is nothing to agree on. Putin ran urgently to legalize the border with China, and China began to publish textbooks, where almost all of Siberia and the Far East are territories taken away by Russia from China. The EU offered Russia to sign the Energy Charter, according to which the EU will extract oil and gas on the territory of the Russian Federation, transport them to itself, and the Russians are offered a reward - fico. EU officials frankly explained that Russia has three options - to lie under the EU, lie under the United States or become Chinese cheap labor, that's the whole choice. The main players are aware of what is happening and are not shy.
After Russia turned from a real superpower into a potential one, the situation around the bank accounts of the Russian elite began to heat up sharply. The UN has adopted a convention on corruption, and the West is not joking today, it is going to use it against our kleptocracy. So the West decided to repay our traitors for their betrayal. Throw throwing - is it a crime, is it immoral? Not at all.
The conversation between the Russian rulers and the West has turned into “don’t understand my yours”, both sides are talking about completely different things, Moscow to them - “You promised us!”, And those to the Russians - “So you have nothing else but a cheap bluff!” (The sending of the Russian Federation to Venezuela Tu-160 did not cause a new Caribbean crisis, as it was perceived by the "probable enemy" solely as a clownery).
Russia's richest natural resources cannot belong to a weak, deserted power. The United States decided to stop buying old weapons-grade uranium from the Russian Federation. Although it is very profitable for the Americans to buy it at a price many times lower than its market value, it is more important to land Russian generals.
Meanwhile, Russia has stopped producing weapons-grade plutonium. NTV reported, as the last reactor of this type existing in Russia was closed in Zheleznogorsk. It has been producing plutonium for the last half century. Especially for its service in the USSR, the closed city of Krasnoyarsk-26 was created, later renamed Zheleznogorsk.
The Zheleznogorsk Mining and Chemical Combine was a unique nuclear enterprise that had no analogues in the world. Its production shops were located deep underground.
But even if Russia's nuclear shield had by some miracle survived and the production of nuclear plutonium had not been curtailed, the Russian Federation would still be hopelessly behind its closest competitors in technical terms. For example, the American nuclear potential has long surpassed the Russian nuclear fake by a third. According to Gazeta.ru, the United States outnumbers Russia by a third in terms of the number of deployed long-range ballistic missiles, their launchers and nuclear warheads.
The Russian nuclear potential turned out to be below the level of the Treaty on the Reduction of Offensive Arms, which entered into force in February 2011. Experts doubt that the Russian Federation will be able to bring its potential under this ceiling over the next 10 years.
By 2015, Russia could theoretically be slammed like a fly. According to the St. Petersburg Military parity, maintaining in the required quantitative and qualitative condition the fleet of Russia's strategic nuclear triad - ICBMs, strategic submarine missile carriers and heavy bombers - in the foreseeable future will become an impossible task for the country. A number of conceptual mistakes in the development of the strategic arsenal, made in the late Soviet and post-Soviet period, led to the fact that after a certain period of time Russia risks being left with a weapon that cannot guarantee the country's security.
The mobility of strategic weapons as a panacea for their invulnerability played a bad joke on the General Staff of the USSR Armed Forces. First of all, the very concept of creating ICBMs on self-propelled automobile and railway chassis was erroneous. Creating such complex weapons systems as mobile ground-based missile systems (PGRK) RT-2PM "Topol" (NATO code SS-25) and combat railway missile systems (BZHRK) RS-22 "Molodets" (SS-24), the country incurred huge additional costs to create these strategic groupings. American ICBMs of the Minuteman and MX series, similar in their combat capabilities, were placed in highly protected silo launchers, where they were in a state of immediate use in an emergency.
What will Russia be left with by 2015? As you know, the BZHRK RS-22 has already been withdrawn from the Strategic Missile Forces and destroyed. A certain number of RS-20 (R-36MUTTKh) and RS-19 (UR-100NUTTKh, NATO code SS-19) mine ICBMs are in service, but their life cycle is already running out. These missiles have not been produced for a long time, and the endless "extensions" of their presence in the Strategic Missile Forces can only cause a bitter smile. The only real combat system is Topol and Topol-M.
In 1994-2002, the number of ICBMs of this type was maintained at the level of 360 launchers. And then, of course, the collapse began. Launchers and missiles were aging, they had to be withdrawn from the combat strength of the Strategic Missile Forces. The deployment of stationary and mobile Topol-M missiles to replace them was catastrophically late. Thus, by 2006, only 252 Topol ICBM launchers remained in service from the highest number of 369 from 1993. In return, by 2006, only 42 stationary and the first three mobile Topol-Ms entered service with the Strategic Missile Forces. 117 decommissioned, 45 received. In 2007, according to Military Parity estimates, approximately 225 Soviet-made Topols remained in service, and at the beginning of 2008, according to the website www.russianforces.org, there are only 213 of them units.
According to the calculations of American experts, in the next five to seven years, the entire fleet of mobile Topols deployed in 1984-1993 should be decommissioned. And what in return? By 2015, Russia plans to adopt 120 Topol-M ICBMs, including 69 in the mobile version. Again, the Russian Federation remains in the red - more than 100 old missiles will not be replaced by anything.
Thus, approximately by 2015, the Russian Strategic Missile Forces will have approximately 76 fixed and 69 mobile Topol-Ms. In total, there will be approximately 145 of them. Note - monoblock. As for the new multiply charged type RS-24, there is no data on their deployment. It is worth noting that the planned deployment of such a number of Topol-M is based on the figures of the State Armaments Program (SAP) until 2015, which has never been fully implemented. The Ministry of Defense of the Russian Federation cannot in any way fix the cost of certain types of weapons, including strategic ones, as a result of which the defense industry inflates their cost to sky-high heights. The Chief of the General Staff, General Yu. Baluyevsky, spoke about this in an interview with the Vesti-24 channel. And the reason for this is the fact that the Russian defense budget is a completely non-transparent item of public spending, which leads to this kind of financial somersaults.
Let's summarize. By 2015, Russia will have 145 ICBMs in service, of which almost half will be mobile. This is a completely unnecessary waste of resources. The monopolist in the development of strategic missiles, the Moscow Institute of Thermal Engineering, is still holding the Russian Federation hostage to an absolutely outdated "mobility concept". Even the Americans advise the Chinese not to follow the "Soviet" path, quite clearly understanding the futility of such a decision. And it is felt that overseas experts are not joking, but are advising business. At one time, they were smart enough to abandon the mobile MX and the Midgetmen. And the Russians persist. If you read military forums, then the rocket men themselves call the Topols “matches” for their low combat capabilities, and their mobility even gave rise to a joke: “Why are Topols mobile? “And therefore, to increase the flight range.”
As you know, the United States has adopted a program to modernize the B-2 stealth strategic bombers, as a result of which the Americans will be equipped with the latest radar with active phased array, which has fantastic capabilities for detecting small mobile ground targets, and will be able to take on board up to 80 guided bombs with a guidance system GPS. That is, in one sortie, the "invisible" will be able to destroy up to several dozen mobile targets, along the combat route of which destroyed missile launchers, radars and aircraft hangars will lie in ruins. Truly, a saying in a slightly modified form would be appropriate here - “How Mamai flew by.”
The situation with the naval component of the strategic triad is even more sad. At present, according to the same overseas site, the Russian Navy has 12 strategic nuclear missile carriers - six type 667BDRM (Delta-IV) and six type 667BDR (Delta-III). They have 162 missiles with 606 nuclear warheads. Seems like a good arsenal. But this is only at first glance. Submarines can be destroyed from air and space in an instant. By 2015, the state of the naval component of the strategic nuclear forces of Russia also raises many questions.
But what about military aviation? This is where things get really bad. Worse than in the Strategic Missile Forces, and even worse than in the SSBN. According to Western estimates, at the beginning of 2008, the Long-Range Aviation of the Russian Air Force had 78 heavy bombers, including 14 Tu-160 (Blacjack) and 64 Tu-95MS (Bear-H), which theoretically can launch 872 long-range cruise missiles into the air.
This type of Russian strategic triad is suitable only for demonstration flights over the oceans. It is absolutely unsuitable for combat response to a surprise attack. All bombers will be destroyed in the blink of an eye by the latest means of aerospace attack. When the flights of strategic bombers were resumed, the American press and even the official representative of the White House openly mocked the prehistoric appearance of the Russian Tu-95MS, considering them to be absolute "naphthalene", taken out of nowhere. Indeed, in our time, keeping a turboprop bomber in service, the engine blades of which have an effective dispersion area (ESR) the size of a football field, is nonsense. Tu-95 has no chance to overcome the airspace of even a third-rate country.
As for the Tu-160, the gigantic dimensions of this aircraft turn each of its flights into some kind of launch of the American Space Shuttle. It is no coincidence that almost every aircraft of this type has its honorary name as a combat ship of the navy. A bomber weighing 275 tons takes on board 150 tons of fuel. Preparation of the aircraft for flight, refueling and suspension of weapons takes several hours, and during this process a swarm of special maintenance vehicles stand near the aircraft. Of course, at X hour, these planes will be easy targets.
What does Russia have as a result?
Sad, frankly, the conclusions for the imperial hopes.
The grouping of stationary and mobile Topol-M, which in 2015 will form the almost monopoly backbone of the Strategic Missile Forces, in terms of its combat capabilities will practically remain at the level of light ICBMs of the mid-70s of the last century. Insufficient throw weight of 1-1.5 tons will not allow the implementation of powerful combat equipment of these missiles, including multiply charged warheads for individual targeting. Of course, in theory it is possible to put three low-yield 200 kt nuclear warheads, but even this solution can reduce the range of an ICBM, which today barely reaches 10,000 km.
Equipping these ICBMs with some kind of hypersonic maneuvering warheads that “can overcome any missile defense system” will make the Americans think that Russia considers the United States as its main adversary. Against this background, the Chinese, with their much larger strategic programs, will appear to the Pentagon hawks as true friends of America. However, the cunning Chinese are trying to achieve this without advertising, unlike Russia, their weapons programs. The Kremlinites are trying to rattle weapons that are not even available. Silly strategy. And funny.
The ideology of deploying the marine component of the triad has been destroyed. The SSBNs, which in terms of their total geometric dimensions and displacement are practically not inferior to the American Ohio, will be equipped with small missiles with the formidable name Bulava. The insufficient range of these missiles forces them to be based in the Pacific Fleet right next to the United States.
It is no secret that a powerful multi-level missile defense system is being deployed in this region, including a ship-based one with Standard SM-3 anti-missiles, and not only American, but with the inclusion of Japanese and South Korean ships equipped with the AEGIS combat information and control system and vertical missile launchers . Add to this component the GBI anti-missile base in Alaska with offshore platforms of multifunctional SBX missile defense radars floating off its coast. These weapon systems can click like nuts from the first hit of a Bulava missile. And in this area, which is also teeming with anti-submarine defense systems, the Russian "Boreas" with "Maces" will go to swim. Needless to say, a "wise" decision.
There is nothing to add about strategic aviation.
As you can see, the systemic crisis of Putin's vertical put an end to our Russian Federation - the defense industry and the nuclear shield. The "nuclear sword" has turned into a fake, which can only scare Georgia or Chechen militants. However, it is not a fact that even these small nations will tremble in front of a pile of Russian scrap metal inherited by Russia from the militaristic Soviet Union.
Despite the consoling statements of the Russian military leadership, there is simply nothing to defend against the NATO forces of the Russian Federation. The date when the Americans will create a full-scale missile defense system is already known, we are talking about 2015.
The American military cruisers Lake Erie are equipped with the Aegis missile defense system, this missile defense system is capable of tracking and destroying not only intercontinental ballistic missiles, but also nuclear submarines and even orbiting satellites moving at a speed of 8 kilometers per second. This super-weapon will block the Russian imaginary and practically rusty nuclear potential by 100%.
The Aegis anti-missile system was developed on the basis of a conventional air defense system of the same name. American designers simply increased the power of the electromagnetic radiation of the radar and upgraded it to a new software. And due to this, the radar system of the Aegis complex was able to track intercontinental ballistic missiles at a great distance - 320 km.
The main armament of the Aegis system is the super-powerful missile of the latest generation Standard-3, which is capable of destroying targets in outer space and at a distance of up to 500 km.
In order for the Standard-3 to be able to hit targets outside the atmosphere, the developers equipped its body with four stages or blocks with fuel liquid. The first two blocks of the rocket accelerate it within the atmosphere, the third takes the rocket into outer space, and the fourth part of the rocket is a kinetic projectile, it is he who hits the target.
American destroyers latest system Aegis missile defense systems are located not only in the Atlantic Ocean, they periodically enter the Black and Barents Seas. This means one thing - each of them can shoot down a ballistic missile of a Russian nuclear submarine right at the initial stage of the flight, even if the launch is made from Russian territorial waters. This is despite the fact that 40% of Russia's nuclear potential is based precisely on nuclear submarines.
The Aegis complex can disable Russian missiles already at the boost stage, perhaps this is the reason for the refusal of the Americans from any negotiations on missile defense. That is, the Pentagon has become confident that the United States now has such power and such potential that it is able to prevent a nuclear strike from Russia.
By 2015, NATO forces will have 400 cruisers and destroyers equipped with Aegis interceptors and Standard-3 interceptors, each of which is capable of destroying any Russian ICBM. And this despite the fact that Russia has only about 80 new intercontinental missiles left, the rest were fired back in the Soviet Union.
The age of the Satan and Topol missiles, which are on duty in the Russian missile forces, is already 30 years old. The combustible mixture with which they are stuffed during this time has lost its qualities, and the metal body of the missiles has corroded, which means that in the event of a military conflict, many of them simply will not take off. And it will be better than they take off, but due to their unpredictability, they will strike at their own territory
In an old Soviet joke, children show off who has what toys. Vanya talked about the teddy bear, Tanya boasts of a new Barbie doll, and the son of a drunk, listening to them with envy, suddenly burst into a tirade: - And I have .. Yes, my .. Yes, I’ll hang f#zd@lei on you all!
This is exactly how Putin's kneeling electorate is leading today. The nanoleader has nothing more to offer society, the President of the Russian Federation cannot explain to the Russians why he pays tribute to Kadyrov, and the terrorist attacks in the Caucasus do not subside, why his Skolkovo project failed, why the Russians screwed up with the Superjet-100 project, and many others. other Siberian Cranes and Aladdin's amphoras are not impressive for the plebs. Victory with Colorado scarves is also fizzling out and some kind of whip is required. And here, such happiness - Crimea!
P.S. If you think that this is like a propaganda article, then there is infa and fresher. In particular, the article: http://censor.net, here is an excerpt from it:
“We have forty Satan missiles with an expiring warranty period, and Topol is not serious at all,” a Moscow professor about Russia’s “nuclear shield”. There is practically no "nuclear shield of Russia" anymore. Such a terrible secret for compatriots was discovered in his report by the Doctor of Technical Sciences, Professor of the Department of Natural and Technosphere Safety and Risk Management of the Russian State technological university Peter Belov.
Why should we worry about nuclear weapons? What makes it so important?
The nuclear arsenals now available for immediate use by the United States and Russia are capable of destroying civilization and humanity, and all the most complex forms of life on Earth. This supreme act of destruction can only be accomplished within minutes of an American or Russian president ordering hundreds of long-range ballistic missiles with thousands of nuclear warheads.
How powerful can a weapon be to destroy civilization and humanity?
Nuclear weapons are millions of times more powerful than the "conventional" high-explosive charges used by armies in modern war. The largest "conventional" bomb in today's US arsenal has an explosive yield of up to 11 tons (about 22,000 pounds) of trinitrotoluene (TNT). The smallest nuclear warhead the United States and Russia possess has 100,000 tons (or 200 billion pounds) of TNT.
The thermal or thermal energy released in a nuclear explosion is not comparable to what happens on Earth in natural conditions. When a nuclear warhead explodes, it is like the birth of a small star. The explosion creates a temperature that is similar to that at the center of the Sun, i.e. hundreds of millions of degrees Celsius.
The huge fireball that forms radiates deadly heat and light that will start fires in all directions if the explosion occurs over areas with a lot of flammable materials, such as large cities. These fires will quickly join together and form a monstrous single fire, or firestorm, covering tens, hundreds, and even thousands of square miles or kilometers of the earth's surface.
America and Russia each have many thousands of large, modern strategic nuclear warheads available for immediate launch and use. Just one medium-sized nuclear warhead detonated over a city will immediately create fires over the surface with a total area of 40 to 65 square miles (or 105 to 170 square kilometers).
Large strategic charges can create fires over much larger areas. A one megaton (1 million tons of TNT) charge will set fires in an area of 100 square miles (260 sq. km). An explosion of a 20 megaton charge can immediately start fires over an area of 2,000 square miles (5,200 sq. km).
The total energy released during a fiery hurricane and completely burning the urban surface is, in fact, a thousand times greater than the energy released initially directly from the nuclear explosion itself. In the incredibly lethal environment created by the fiery hurricane, virtually all life will be destroyed, and in the process, a huge amount of toxic and radioactive smoke and grime will be created.
In a major war between the US and Russia, thousands of strategic nuclear weapons could be detonated over cities in one hour. Many large cities will likely be hit by not one but several nukes each. All these cities will be completely destroyed.
Within an hour, a nuclear firestorm will cover hundreds of thousands of square miles (kilometers) of urban areas. Anything that can burn will be burned in the fire zones. In less than a day, up to 150 million tons of smoke from these fires will quickly rise above cloud level, into the stratosphere.
As noted on the home page, the smoke should quickly form a global smoke layer in the stratosphere that would block sunlight from reaching Earth. This would destroy the protective ozone layer and lead to deadly climate change, dropping the average global temperature at the earth's surface in a matter of days to levels well below that of the Ice Age. Daily minimum temperatures in the continental regions of the northern hemisphere would remain below freezing for years.
Such catastrophic changes environment, along with the massive release of radioactive and industrial toxins, would lead to the collapse of terrestrial ecosystems on land and at sea, which are already under great stress. Many, if not most, complex life forms would not be able to withstand such a test.
There would be a mass extinction similar to what happened when the dinosaurs and 70 percent of other living things disappeared 65 million years ago. People live on top the food chain, and we would certainly have died along with other large mammals.
Even the most powerful leaders and the richest people Those with super-shelters equipped with nuclear power plants, hospitals, and years of food and water supply would be unlikely to survive a nuclear war in a world devoid of complex life forms. Those who can push buttons should know that in a global nuclear holocaust, there is no escape from ultimate destruction.
If nuclear explosions in cities will lead to darkness and disastrous climate change, then why didn't this happen after Hiroshima and Nagasaki were destroyed by nuclear bombing at the end of World War II?
The fires in two medium-sized Japanese cities did not create the amount of smoke needed to form a global smoke layer capable of causing disastrous changes in the earth's climate. In other words, millions of tons of smoke would have to rise into the stratosphere to affect the global climate, but the burning of Hiroshima and Nagasaki did not produce that much.
However, new research shows that 100 Hiroshima-sized nuclear weapons detonated in large cities in India and Pakistan could create enough smoke to cause catastrophic climate change. The yield of this number of charges is only half a percent of the combined yield of operationally deployed US and Russian nuclear weapons.
In a major nuclear war, in which American and Russian nuclear weapons are detonated, between 50 and 150 million tons of smoke would be thrown into the stratosphere. This is enough to block sunlight from the earth's surface for many years.
Why are you sure that computer research that predicts climate change in the event of a nuclear war, correct? How can you check this if a nuclear war never happened?
To conduct repeated checks, American scientists applied the latest climate model developed by NASA for space research (NASA Goddard Institute for Space Studies, Model IE, in conjunction with the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change). This model is capable of fully simulating the troposphere, stratosphere and mesosphere from the earth's surface up to a height of 80 km. The same methods and climate models that predicted global warming were also used to justify global cooling due to nuclear war.
While it is true that it is impossible to be accurate in assessing the results of a nuclear war unless it is actually carried out, it is nonetheless clear that this is a research method that we must avoid. However, the application of the above climate models has been very successful in describing the cooling effect of volcanic clouds. This was done both in intensive US analyzes and in international intercomparisons carried out as part of the Fourth Assessment of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. Models of this type have also successfully evaluated the cooling effect of dust storms on Mars (dust blocks the sun's rays from reaching the Martian surface in the same way that smoke in our stratosphere might prevent them from illuminating the Earth).
This research is also being carried out intensively by other scientists around the world as part of a common scientific process referred to as “peer review”. All important and widely accepted scientific methods are used to ensure that such a study is verifiable, repeatable, and error-free.
In other words, studies that predict climate change due to global warming or global cooling are performed in the best and most respected tradition of the scientific method and are verified by scientists around the world. This process has provided us with most of the scientific discoveries and advances over the past few centuries. There is a strong consensus in the global scientific community that these results must be taken seriously and that they must lead to action.
If nuclear war can destroy humanity, then why do states continue to keep and modernize nuclear weapons? Nuclear weapons prevent war?
Nations that retain nuclear weapons as the cornerstone of their military arsenals (US, Russia, Britain, France, China, Israel, India, and Pakistan) do so because they are committed to nuclear deterrence. That is, they believe that their possession of nuclear weapons will deter other countries from attacking them. Conversely, they think that if they didn't have nuclear weapons, then there would be a greater chance of attack from countries that do.
So nuclear deterrence remains a key operational strategy for the United States and Russia—and every other nuclear-weapon state.
The U.S. Department of Defense Military Dictionary states: “Deterrence is the notion that there is a credible threat of unacceptable opposition.” Today's "plausible threat" created by the operationally deployed nuclear weapons of the United States and Russia, is a thousand times more powerful than all the warheads detonated by all armies in the second world war. It is clear that a "plausible threat" based on such an arsenal means the destruction of most of the people on the planet.
The same leaders who rely on nuclear deterrence also believe that there is no realistic way to eliminate nuclear weapons. The question they cannot ask themselves is, what will be the likely choice between these two alternatives of action after a while? To stubbornly maintain extremely dangerous nuclear arsenals as the basis of deterrence, or to sincerely strive for a world free of nuclear weapons?
Those who see the indefinite retention of nuclear weapons as a viable and legitimate option often tend to present the idea of destroying nuclear arsenals as a "destabilizing" goal, and apparently believe that deterrence will always prevent nuclear war. However, their long-term optimism is not supported by logic or history.
Containment will only work as long as all parties remain rational and fearful of death. However, for many extremist groups, a plausible threat of retaliation is not a deterrent, no matter how strong it might be. History is full of examples of irrational leaders and decisions that led to war. Nuclear weapons, coupled with human fallibility, not only make nuclear war possible, but ultimately make it inevitable.
Suicide is not a defense.
If the ultimate goal of national security policy is to ensure the survival of the nation, then trying to achieve this goal through nuclear deterrence must be seen as a complete failure. Because deterrence sets no rational limits on the size and structure of nuclear forces, tens of thousands of nuclear weapons have been created. They continue to be on alert and patiently waiting to destroy not only our nation, but every other people on Earth.
So, the consequence of only one failure of the containment system could be the end of human history. A big nuclear war will make our planet uninhabitable. Even a conflict between India and Pakistan, in which only half a percent of the global nuclear arsenal is detonated, would lead, according to forecasts, to catastrophic disruptions to the global climate.
Leaders who decide to defend their nation with nuclear weapons must face the fact that nuclear war is suicide, not a way to save their citizens. Suicide is not a defense.
If we accept the statement that “there is no realistic path to a nuclear-free world,” then we are condemning the world's children to a truly bleak future. Instead, we need to reject the 20th century mentality that still continues to lead us to the abyss and understand that nuclear weapons are a threat to the human race.
