New Russian Subs
Ecce Homo! Loquitur...
Thread Starter
New Russian Subs
Thankfully we will have an adequate ASW force of SSN submarines, frigates and Nimrods to defend the new carriers when these start to enter service. Won't we?
The Independent: Russia deploys new nuclear cruise missiles
Saturday, 28 March
Six new atomic submarines, armed with improved nuclear-tipped cruise missiles, will join the Russian navy. The Defence Ministry said the first, the Severodvinsk, will be launched in 2011 and at least five others of the same type will be built by 2017.
The new hypersonic cruise missiles with increased range are designed to strike "aircraft carriers of the potential enemy if they pose a direct threat to Russia's security," the ministry said. It added that the missiles are also capable of hitting land targets.
Russia has increasingly relied on nuclear weapons to compensate for the decline of its conventional forces. In December, the chief of the Russian general staff, General Nikolai Makarov, said Russia will keep its arsenal of tactical nuclear weapons, which he said were necessary to counter a massive Nato advantage in conventional weapons. Tactical nuclear weapons have a much shorter range compared to strategic nuclear weapons. They are intended for use within a theatre of battle.
Earlier this week, the Russian navy's deputy chief of staff said the role of tactical nuclear weapons in the Russian navy may grow. Vice-Admiral Oleg Burtsev said the increasing range and precision of tactical nuclear weapons makes them an important asset.
The Independent: Russia deploys new nuclear cruise missiles
Saturday, 28 March
Six new atomic submarines, armed with improved nuclear-tipped cruise missiles, will join the Russian navy. The Defence Ministry said the first, the Severodvinsk, will be launched in 2011 and at least five others of the same type will be built by 2017.
The new hypersonic cruise missiles with increased range are designed to strike "aircraft carriers of the potential enemy if they pose a direct threat to Russia's security," the ministry said. It added that the missiles are also capable of hitting land targets.
Russia has increasingly relied on nuclear weapons to compensate for the decline of its conventional forces. In December, the chief of the Russian general staff, General Nikolai Makarov, said Russia will keep its arsenal of tactical nuclear weapons, which he said were necessary to counter a massive Nato advantage in conventional weapons. Tactical nuclear weapons have a much shorter range compared to strategic nuclear weapons. They are intended for use within a theatre of battle.
Earlier this week, the Russian navy's deputy chief of staff said the role of tactical nuclear weapons in the Russian navy may grow. Vice-Admiral Oleg Burtsev said the increasing range and precision of tactical nuclear weapons makes them an important asset.
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: London, New York, Paris, Moscow.
Posts: 3,632
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
How odd!
Was it not a matter of a "few" years ago when NATO (ie us!) relied on its arsenal of tactical nuclear weapons, to counter a massive Soviet advantage in conventional weapons?
Usual BS from the bear.
Was it not a matter of a "few" years ago when NATO (ie us!) relied on its arsenal of tactical nuclear weapons, to counter a massive Soviet advantage in conventional weapons?
Usual BS from the bear.
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: bristol
Age: 56
Posts: 1,051
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Some things never change!
Although it does sound like a role reversal that it is now the Russians who are relying on nuclear weapons to create an equality, it still seems to be that they can built counters to the west's threats before they are actually deployed.
Anti carrier cruise missiles, before Brit and French carriers are built.
Just like the way they countered: Valkyrie, Commanchie etc etc...Hmmm could there be a link growing here
Anti carrier cruise missiles, before Brit and French carriers are built.
Just like the way they countered: Valkyrie, Commanchie etc etc...Hmmm could there be a link growing here
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: UK
Posts: 100
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Lancashire
Age: 48
Posts: 550
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Does anyone really give a $hit, seriously?
The first thing we'd know is a bright flash, then ENDEX, job jobbed.
We have no role in the decision making process, so why worry?
Go out and enjoy you life before someone takes it from you with their nuclear tipped sub launched cruise missile.
I can't see the point in worrying about something that's not in your/our control.
Look at the bright side, a nuclear war would probably wipe that smirk from brown's face, so it wouldn't be all bad.
The first thing we'd know is a bright flash, then ENDEX, job jobbed.
We have no role in the decision making process, so why worry?
Go out and enjoy you life before someone takes it from you with their nuclear tipped sub launched cruise missile.
I can't see the point in worrying about something that's not in your/our control.
Look at the bright side, a nuclear war would probably wipe that smirk from brown's face, so it wouldn't be all bad.
Does anyone really give a $hit, seriously?
The first thing we'd know is a bright flash, then ENDEX, job jobbed.
We have no role in the decision making process, so why worry?
Go out and enjoy you life before someone takes it from you with their nuclear tipped sub launched cruise missile. I can't see the point in worrying about something that's not in your/our control.
Look at the bright side, a nuclear war would probably wipe that smirk from brown's face, so it wouldn't be all bad.
ALWAYS assume NEVER check
Join Date: May 2008
Location: Trap 3
Posts: 72
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by anita gofradump
Shame he's not got enough money to afford a new chess set, let alone play with it.
All mouth and no trousers.
Oh, you misunderstand. This thread is about Russia, not the UK.
Originally Posted by anita gofradump
Shame he's not got enough money to afford a new chess set, let alone play with it.
All mouth and no trousers.
Oh, you misunderstand. This thread is about Russia, not the UK.
We aren't so much as broke, just looked after by a PM who was not elected. I suppose that counts as brokEN.
I don't own this space under my name. I should have leased it while I still could
As for BS, they would not be the first country to talk up a threat for political or economic ends.
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: UK
Posts: 932
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
On a lighter note, Novosti are telling us that the new Russian SSKs are to be called the "Lada Class". (RIA Novosti - Russia - Russian Navy to commission first Lada class diesel sub in 2010) 
So at least our Russian friends are capable of offering us a laugh every now and again!
S41
So at least our Russian friends are capable of offering us a laugh every now and again!
S41
Ecce Homo! Loquitur...
Thread Starter
Don't know why we are getting all wound up about Ivans rocket boats. If they want to screw up Europe it would be easy - just turn the gas off! The modern day equivalent of giving Berlin a squeeze
Don't know why we are getting all wound up about Ivans rocket boats. If they want to screw up Europe it would be easy - just turn the gas off! The modern day equivalent of giving Berlin a squeeze
Pretty easy to ensure enough enough power you just shut industry down EU wide and all of a sudden massive capacity to keep people alive becomes available.
Then it becomes a plan to protect it which is where it could get smokey.
Course Russia realises then when it turns the taps of big time and ratchets up the turn off then it has already lost. EU has only to show it can survive without them for a short while even at a big economic cost to make Russian exports to Europe a thing of history. Expectation is that US reserves start to get shipped pretty quickly across the pond as well as they watching the dominoes.
Russia knows the threat is starting to wear thin and its bluff will get called within 5 years..
I am assumming this scenario is already part of the War Colleges scnario courses.
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Lancashire
Age: 48
Posts: 550
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Yes
Not for those outside the direct target area, they have a long slow painful death from radiation poisoning, places with not much strategic influence, like Blackpool.
You have no role in the decision making process.
Demonstrating no concern for your own safety borders on insanity.
ALWAYS assume NEVER check
Is this the next thing on the new world orders agenda after bird flu, wmd's, terrorism etc etc
How about we all just go about our daily lives, get robbed blind by the 'govern'ment, retire then die.
The formula worked well up until recently.
Last edited by Thelma Viaduct; 29th Mar 2009 at 00:28.
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Lancashire
Age: 48
Posts: 550
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
PP,
I like your thinking. Nihilistic existentialism is probably ill-suited to most on here though, so stand by for further incoming.
I like your thinking. Nihilistic existentialism is probably ill-suited to most on here though, so stand by for further incoming.
Thanks for the heads up, I appreciate the forum is frequented by the parochial.
I wouldn't personally give it a name, if I did it wouldn't be as long or difficult to spell as Nihilistic existentialism.
I'd sooner call it logical thinking.
Whether you're facing a country with 10 or 10,000 nukes, you're equally as screwed in an all out war. After 10 have landed & gone BANG, I'm sure you're not too anxious about the remaining 9,990.
So why worry about 10,096???
Like I said, let the clowns at the top make their decisions (they will anyway) & just crack on with life. Getting in to a worried state about a future capability is bordering on the pathetic when you look at the context of it all.
The clowns in 'govern'ment rely on our fear, without it they have no purpose.
Last edited by Thelma Viaduct; 29th Mar 2009 at 21:44.