Russia's Putin unveils 'invincible' nuclear weapons
Thread Starter
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: London
Posts: 7,072
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Russia's Putin unveils 'invincible' nuclear weapons
Russia's Putin unveils 'invincible' nuclear weapons - BBC News
Some nice graphics in the video but the audience don't look terribly excited.....
J V Stalin would have has "applause breaking into standing ovation " at the very least
Also they clearly "launch" from Russia but the other land masses are carefully altered so you can't see who the target is........
____________________________________________
Russia has developed a new array of nuclear weapons that are invincible, according to President Vladimir Putin.
Mr Putin made the claims as he laid out his key policies for a fourth presidential term, ahead of an election he is expected to win in 17 days' time.
The weapons he boasted of included a cruise missile that he said could "reach anywhere in the world".
He said of the West: "They need to take account of a new reality and understand ... [this]... is not a bluff." Giving his annual state of the nation speech, Mr Putin used video presentations to showcase the development of two new nuclear delivery systems that he said could evade detection. One included a "low-flying, difficult-to-spot cruise missile... with a practically unlimited range and an unpredictable flight path, which can bypass lines of interception and is invincible in the face of all existing and future systems of both missile defence and air defence".
Another weapon he discussed was a submarine-launched, long-range missile capable of delivering a nuclear warhead.
Some nice graphics in the video but the audience don't look terribly excited.....
J V Stalin would have has "applause breaking into standing ovation " at the very least
Also they clearly "launch" from Russia but the other land masses are carefully altered so you can't see who the target is........
____________________________________________
Russia has developed a new array of nuclear weapons that are invincible, according to President Vladimir Putin.
Mr Putin made the claims as he laid out his key policies for a fourth presidential term, ahead of an election he is expected to win in 17 days' time.
The weapons he boasted of included a cruise missile that he said could "reach anywhere in the world".
He said of the West: "They need to take account of a new reality and understand ... [this]... is not a bluff." Giving his annual state of the nation speech, Mr Putin used video presentations to showcase the development of two new nuclear delivery systems that he said could evade detection. One included a "low-flying, difficult-to-spot cruise missile... with a practically unlimited range and an unpredictable flight path, which can bypass lines of interception and is invincible in the face of all existing and future systems of both missile defence and air defence".
Another weapon he discussed was a submarine-launched, long-range missile capable of delivering a nuclear warhead.
All existing and future defensive systems?? Blimey,that's a bit of a bold claim. No doubt one to whip his social media fanbase into a frenzy.
Kanyon, on the other hand, has certainly got western planners scratching their heads.
Kanyon, on the other hand, has certainly got western planners scratching their heads.
Arms Race, Part 10? OK, I guess it's time to practice ducking and covering.
Yes. I read this. I call bull****skiovitch.
Either the Russian defence industry has achieved multiple simultaneous technological breakthroughs, or Comrade Vladimir is just repackaging and reannouncing programs at various stages of development- and spinning them all as operationally ready or deployed.
Either the Russian defence industry has achieved multiple simultaneous technological breakthroughs, or Comrade Vladimir is just repackaging and reannouncing programs at various stages of development- and spinning them all as operationally ready or deployed.
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: Middle America
Age: 84
Posts: 1,167
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Surely Trump will have several Twitter responses. "Our IBCMs are faster than yours." "You have yet to see our mini-cruise missiles enter your front door key hole at Mach 5.7" "Call me if you would like to discuss over lunch someday, bring your red button so we can compare."
There should be a demo flight of the low-flying cruise missile with a "practically unlimited range", by flying it around the world twenty times without a refuel.
Otherwise, a load of Horsztschmitzki.
Otherwise, a load of Horsztschmitzki.
But what is the point?Are the Russians still of a mindset that we are still in a cold war ?Ploughshares not guns!Nobody wants to invade Russia ,the people are happier than they have ever been ,who is bankrolling all this technology(missilewise)!
Claims are easy, credible evidence not so much.
One of the reports I saw said a "nuclear powered" cruise missile. Pretty much everyone gave up on nuclear powered missiles or aircraft decades ago - granted if you could make one work it would have nearly unlimited range but just to make something workable would be groundbreaking - making it fit on a cruise missile would be earth shaking.
I wonder what part of "MAD" Putin is forgetting? The USA still has a plentiful supply of instant sunshine that could be quickly rained on Russia.
One of the reports I saw said a "nuclear powered" cruise missile. Pretty much everyone gave up on nuclear powered missiles or aircraft decades ago - granted if you could make one work it would have nearly unlimited range but just to make something workable would be groundbreaking - making it fit on a cruise missile would be earth shaking.
I wonder what part of "MAD" Putin is forgetting? The USA still has a plentiful supply of instant sunshine that could be quickly rained on Russia.
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Hanging off the end of a thread
Posts: 32,720
Received 2,711 Likes
on
1,150 Posts
Invincible nukes, what's the point, they would never kill every nuke sent in response and what got through on both sides would turn the world and their respective countries into a desolate barren rock.
Hmmm.. rather like a spotty kid in a Cessna 172 on a visit to Moscow.
It amazes me the World elects Muppets to positions of power..
One included a "low-flying, difficult-to-spot cruise missile... with a practically unlimited range and an unpredictable flight path, which can bypass lines of interception and is invincible in the face of all existing and future systems of both missile defence and air defence".
It amazes me the World elects Muppets to positions of power..
Join Date: May 2012
Location: Moscow region
Age: 65
Posts: 567
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I like the comment from Turbine D :-)
Indeed, the truth evaporates as soon as it leaves development and testing engineers. Industrial "generals", though have good technical education and knowledge, report to mil. customers what they would like to hear. The latters report to the mil hightest mngt (where technical education does not exist any more) about some general user requirements only. And hell knows what do they understand or not. And finally, the ministers report to the guy number 1, all of them having no technical knowledge at all. Then come fantasies and statements like "my red button is much bigger and more red than yours" :-)
The only real thing that I agree with in all this poorly structured stream of information is that it was a bad move from the US back in early 2000's (was it 2000 or 2002) when the US unilaterally broke the 1972 year treaty concerning anti ballistic missile defense. The reason was clear: Russia was in a bad shape at this time and temptation was high, but the Russians warned (I clearly remember): "Don't do that, otherwise we'll be back". Nobody listened.
Now we have Aegis with SM deployed all around, NATO at out door step with 5-10 min flight time. Also showcases like the one in Yugoslavia. Thus, efforts to deal with this new situation are justified.
IMHO, it is more dangerous than it was before, when there were many ICBMs, but only one region per country allowed to be defended by anti-ICBM missiles (Grand Forks and Moscow).
Indeed, the truth evaporates as soon as it leaves development and testing engineers. Industrial "generals", though have good technical education and knowledge, report to mil. customers what they would like to hear. The latters report to the mil hightest mngt (where technical education does not exist any more) about some general user requirements only. And hell knows what do they understand or not. And finally, the ministers report to the guy number 1, all of them having no technical knowledge at all. Then come fantasies and statements like "my red button is much bigger and more red than yours" :-)
The only real thing that I agree with in all this poorly structured stream of information is that it was a bad move from the US back in early 2000's (was it 2000 or 2002) when the US unilaterally broke the 1972 year treaty concerning anti ballistic missile defense. The reason was clear: Russia was in a bad shape at this time and temptation was high, but the Russians warned (I clearly remember): "Don't do that, otherwise we'll be back". Nobody listened.
Now we have Aegis with SM deployed all around, NATO at out door step with 5-10 min flight time. Also showcases like the one in Yugoslavia. Thus, efforts to deal with this new situation are justified.
IMHO, it is more dangerous than it was before, when there were many ICBMs, but only one region per country allowed to be defended by anti-ICBM missiles (Grand Forks and Moscow).
Every time I hear something like this, I'm reminded of Neville Shute's wonderful book: "On The Beach" and the film. It's all about the world being destroyed as a nuclear cloud moves slowly south after an exchange of weapons in the northern hemisphere.
The cloud eventually reaches Australia, where the story is set.
Old Duffer
The cloud eventually reaches Australia, where the story is set.
Old Duffer
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Hanging off the end of a thread
Posts: 32,720
Received 2,711 Likes
on
1,150 Posts
I remember that one, they are on a sub and end up racing cars before the end.
both ways, you seem to have missed that little point.
NATO at our door step with 5-10 min flight time.
Join Date: Jan 2017
Location: RPVI
Posts: 70
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
