|
Kazinsal posted:Considering the state of the rest of the Russian military's equipment at every level I would be surprised if even 20% of their strategic warheads could successfully detonate. Not sure about the %, but nuclear warheads DO have an expiration date, after which they fizzle or don't reach their yields.
|
#
?
May 6, 2022 06:29
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 5, 2024 23:30 |
|
|
Allegedly a Russian frigate close to Odessa doing evasive maneuvers and firing its CIWS at something. https://twitter.com/GirkinGirkin/status/1522452548334100480 https://twitter.com/sentdefender/status/1522349841807986688
|
|
#
?
May 6, 2022 07:15
|
|
|
It was allegedly hit/heavily damaged but no real source confirming.
|
|
#
?
May 6, 2022 07:18
|
|
|
Nuclear Tourist posted:Allegedly a Russian frigate close to Odessa doing evasive maneuvers and firing its CIWS at something. Either it got hit or it is role playing as the Kamchatka. 
|
|
#
?
May 6, 2022 07:22
|
|
|
Just Another Lurker posted:Either it got hit or it is role playing as the Moskva.
|
|
#
?
May 6, 2022 07:52
|
|
|
Some guy tweeted that there's no unusual fleet radio traffic the way there was with Moskva so probably nothing unfortunately
|
|
#
?
May 6, 2022 08:23
|
|
|
What was the fire in the Black Sea that NASA picked up a few days ago? Rumor was it was another Russian ship, but the last 2 days have just been a blur for me.
|
|
#
?
May 6, 2022 09:22
|
|
|
AreWeDrunkYet posted:In theory, a sufficiently overwhelming and sudden nuclear first strike can take out an adversary's ability to respond before they get a chance to fire back. Basically take out enough of the Russians' ability to respond before they respond, so the response is survivable. Honestly, in a fictional reality if ”the west” was looking for a once-in-a-lifetime opportunity to gamble for a chance to ”win” the cold war MAD race right about now would be the time to quicksave and try: -russias newest SLBM system is still not reliable or widespread. -russias conventional power weakness is very clear. -Russian defense budget can not have had in real money figures sustain the post-cold war USSR nuclear triad budget-wise between 1991-2022 -Any not-maintained ICBMs should ve way past their best-before date. And first/foremost: Russia has very recently spent a poo poo ton of its limited SRBM stockpiles with conventional warheads to blow up Ukrainian farms and schools. So out of the last ~45 years right now USSR/russia is by far least capable of full-size nuke second strike, possibly the dissolution of USSR and Moscow coup days nonwithstanding. And no, i am not advocating calling the nuke bluff with a 1st strike. Just noting the power balance shift.
|
|
#
?
May 6, 2022 09:46
|
|
|
Yeah nuke stuff aside, this is almost certainly the weakest Russia has been conventionally in a very long time, particularly in terms of their ability to respond to something in the East or the North in addition to what they're attempting in Ukraine. I'm curious how much Russia's stability degrades if they keep throwing their combat forces into a Ukranian meat grinder. Russia is huge and is very much not held together by good-intentions and mutual interest of being a part of Russia. I don't think they're quite at the point of being unable to meet all their security needs, but that point absolutely does exist and they're currently going in that direction, barring some changes in strategy
|
|
#
?
May 6, 2022 11:09
|
|
|
OUR POWER IS BASED ON THE PERCEPTION OF OUR POWER. DO YOU UNDERSTAND THE DAMAGE THIS HAS DONE???
|
|
#
?
May 6, 2022 11:18
|
|
|
Russian leadership is full of poo poo, but Medvedyev has got one thing right: a dissolution of Russia is going to be very, very ugly.
|
|
#
?
May 6, 2022 11:38
|
|
|
Oh sweet if Russia breaks up/balkanizes, the launch codes actually reside with the General Staff of the military, Putin/Shoigu/Gerasimov all have nuclear "briefcases", but Gerasimov has physical control of the launch and arming codes, and can initiate a strike on his own with or without the other 2 agreeing to a launch, unlike the US where the military does not have launch authority or control of any nuclear codes.
|
|
#
?
May 6, 2022 12:52
|
|
|
Nuclear Tourist posted:Allegedly a Russian frigate close to Odessa doing evasive maneuvers and firing its CIWS at something. Not 100% what that video is supposed to be, but it's not a CIWS going off. That's not an easily mistakeable sound.
|
|
#
?
May 6, 2022 13:08
|
|
|
Comrade Blyatlov posted:OUR POWER IS BASED ON THE PERCEPTION OF OUR POWER. DO YOU UNDERSTAND THE DAMAGE THIS HAS DONE??? Ahhh, Chernobyl. Such a great series.
|
|
#
?
May 6, 2022 13:19
|
|
SquirrelyPSU posted:Not 100% what that video is supposed to be, but it's not a CIWS going off. That's not an easily mistakeable sound. Is it shore artillery hitting around it or something?
|
|
|
#
?
May 6, 2022 13:20
|
|
|
Ajaxify posted:https://www.19fortyfive.com/2022/05/javelin-nlaw-operator-in-ukraine-killed-6-russian-armored-vehicles-in-1-day/ Time’s man of the year this year really should be ‘Dude with a tube’.
|
|
#
?
May 6, 2022 14:41
|
|
|
SquirrelyPSU posted:Not 100% what that video is supposed to be, but it's not a CIWS going off. That's not an easily mistakeable sound. I saw that video a few weeks ago, described then as a Ukrainian corvette firing at an unknown target.
|
|
#
?
May 6, 2022 14:41
|
|
|
https://mobile.twitter.com/ASLuhn/s...yEvents%3Dfalse
|
|
#
?
May 6, 2022 15:20
|
|
|
AreWeDrunkYet posted:In theory, a sufficiently overwhelming and sudden nuclear first strike can take out an adversary's ability to respond before they get a chance to fire back. Basically take out enough of the Russians' ability to respond before they respond, so the response is survivable. Oh I understand that, I just meant what is it that the Sentinel, Columbia Class, and Raider will have though could potentially allow for this ability vs are current fleet. Not that I’m encouraging it of course.
|
|
#
?
May 6, 2022 15:25
|
|
|
Looks like the Admiral Makarov was hit. https://twitter.com/BWhiteSwan/status/1522579044075716614
|
|
#
?
May 6, 2022 15:49
|
|
|
Generation Internet posted:I saw that video a few weeks ago, described then as a Ukrainian corvette firing at an unknown target. My mistake for posting bullshit then, hadn't seen it before. Farking Bastage posted:Looks like the Admiral Makarov was hit. I don't know, that looks an awful lot like video game footage to me, like Arma3 or DCS. Happy to be proven wrong though.
|
|
#
?
May 6, 2022 15:53
|
|
|
AreWeDrunkYet posted:In theory, a sufficiently overwhelming and sudden nuclear first strike can take out an adversary's ability to respond before they get a chance to fire back. Basically take out enough of the Russians' ability to respond before they respond, so the response is survivable. Part of the goal of the tv movie The Day After was to argue against the idea that life could continue after a medium size nuclear exchange, especially that even if the USSR is reduced to atoms it would in no way be a win for the USA. And it was effective in making citizens understand that any desire for a nuclear war wasn't an abstract deterrent but an existential threat.
|
|
#
?
May 6, 2022 15:55
|
|
|
Farking Bastage posted:Looks like the Admiral Makarov was hit. Video aside, Ukraine is claiming that it happened and are using Russian sources to confirm. There's also apparently a rescue and recovery ship that just shut off its beacon and left port.
|
|
#
?
May 6, 2022 16:06
|
|
|
Hyrax Attack! posted:Part of the goal of the tv movie The Day After was to argue against the idea that life could continue after a medium size nuclear exchange, especially that even if the USSR is reduced to atoms it would in no way be a win for the USA. And it was effective in making citizens understand that any desire for a nuclear war wasn't an abstract deterrent but an existential threat. Citizens and a certain movie-loving President of the United States
|
|
#
?
May 6, 2022 16:09
|
|
|
God, people loving love movies.
|
|
#
?
May 6, 2022 16:18
|
|
|
SquirrelyPSU posted:Not 100% what that video is supposed to be, but it's not a CIWS going off. That's not an easily mistakeable sound. Regardless of the provenance of the clip, that noise (and the little splashes in the water near the ship) could very well be a small autocannon of some sort, even if it doesn't have the distinctive chainsaw noise of the Vulcan. example: https://twitter.com/annquann/status/1215503533044191233?lang=en
|
|
#
?
May 6, 2022 16:35
|
|
|
Marshal Prolapse posted:Oh I understand that, I just meant what is it that the Sentinel, Columbia Class, and Raider will have though could potentially allow for this ability vs are current fleet. Not that I’m encouraging it of course. They're a bit faster and/or quieter than their predecessors, which (again with a big IN THEORY disclaimer) makes the first strike more likely to succeed.
|
|
#
?
May 6, 2022 16:45
|
|
|
Madurai posted:Regardless of the provenance of the clip, that noise (and the little splashes in the water near the ship) could very well be a small autocannon of some sort, even if it doesn't have the distinctive chainsaw noise of the Vulcan. Lol chainsaw
|
|
#
?
May 6, 2022 17:55
|
|
|
175-225 B-21’s in the inventory means 100 to 150 B-21’s available as a first strike. Let’s say they can each carry between 8 and 10 AGM-181’s. That’s 800-1200 warheads on the low side and 1,000-1,500 on the high side. With clever planning and ToT practices, we could quite honestly take out everything but Russias SLBM’s. The navy can probably do that, though. We’ve got some pretty bad rear end SSN’s even if the L.A.‘s are getting long in the tooth. 800 warheads is plenty for a complete counterforce / decapitation strike. And it would come from stealth bombers carrying stealth cruise missiles all timed to happen practically at the same time across a target area that spans 12 time zones. 1200 warheads is probably overkill but allows for the time honored tradition of over-targeting. 1,500 warheads is absolutely overkill, with nothing to be gained in practical counterforce terms. The B-21 opens exciting doors, most of them were hoped to be reached 40 years ago with the ATB/B-2 but thems the breaks. The idea is high sub-Mach speed, stealth, and the ability to be procured and maintained in large numbers. Also being able to carry AGM-181’s is huge, too. As are hypersonics. And conventional cruise missiles. This gets a lot less exciting if we only procure 75-100, and they’re a bitch to maintain, and they only carry 4-6 AGM-181’s. If we play the game with those numbers 25-31 bombers for a first strike with 100 to 186 AGM-181’s. That’s a lot less spicy of a first strike.
|
|
#
?
May 6, 2022 18:23
|
|
LtCol J. Krusinski posted:175-225 B-21’s in the inventory means 100 to 150 B-21’s available as a first strike. Let’s say they can each carry between 8 and 10 AGM-181’s. That’s 800-1200 warheads on the low side and 1,000-1,500 on the high side. Just for shits and giggles, let's say we achieve a strike of about 1000 warheads going off and completely "win" ie Russia gets off zero nukes and now has no nuclear capability. 1. How bad does that affect the global fallout situation, ie how many neighboring countries to Russia (many of them friendly) are going to get hosed by fall out? 2. What happens next? Would anyone else go ahead and lob off a few nukes at a potential threat while everything is flying? Ie would Pakistan and India just go ahead and gloves off etc? Where would China weigh in on this with their own? I have no agenda here, just idly wondering how it would all play out in that situation.
|
|
|
#
?
May 6, 2022 18:51
|
|
|
At first impression, with a strike like that the rest of the world's nuclear capable nations would be forced to kill the snot out of the USA right then and there or accept that the US can dictate anything it want to anyone it wants from then on out. If they have proven willing and able to snipe a nation as big as Russia without regard to the fallout hitting their allies and without the russians managing to fire off a meaningful reply, no-one else is going to be safe.
|
|
#
?
May 6, 2022 19:04
|
|
|
That Works posted:I have no agenda here, just idly wondering how it would all play out in that situation. Something like this probably 
|
|
#
?
May 6, 2022 19:07
|
|
|
|
|
#
?
May 6, 2022 19:19
|
|
|
That Works posted:Just for shits and giggles, let's say we achieve a strike of about 1000 warheads going off and completely "win" ie Russia gets off zero nukes and now has no nuclear capability. Ideally fallout is minimized by maximizing accuracy, air bursting where possible, and minimizing yield. Our next generation of warheads should be sub-Kiloton to 15 kiloton capable. Again, counterforce only here, you only need to use as much boom as is required to kill the target. You are emphatically not trying to kill as many civilians as possible with the explosion / fire. The B-21 scares the ever loving poo poo out of Russia. In ways the B-2 just couldn’t. If we really do procure a large number, and it delivers, first strike is back on the table. Also if you think I’m talking out my rear end about those really low yield nukes I’d direct you to our most recently deployed warhead.
|
|
#
?
May 6, 2022 19:19
|
|
|
LtCol J. Krusinski posted:Ideally fallout is minimized by maximizing accuracy, air bursting where possible, and minimizing yield. Our next generation of warheads should be sub-Kiloton to 15 kiloton capable. Again, counterforce only here, you only need to use as much boom as is required to kill the target. You are emphatically not trying to kill as many civilians as possible with the explosion / fire. Why is it more scary than the B-2? The higher numbers of it that would be available?
|
|
#
?
May 6, 2022 19:40
|
|
|
what game is this from?
|
|
#
?
May 6, 2022 19:45
|
|
|
Roblo posted:Why is it more scary than the B-2? The higher numbers of it that would be available? More stealthy maybe? Idk
|
|
#
?
May 6, 2022 19:47
|
|
|
Didn't they only finalize poo poo for the B21 last year? No way we have 200~ right now, that's years of production yet to be done. I mean, I still believe russian missile command can't launch more than an Estes model rocket at this point, but I'm also sure we don't have $120bil of bombers ready after approval only last year.
|
|
#
?
May 6, 2022 19:52
|
|
|
TheWeedNumber posted:what game is this from? Shadow President I believe. [edit] yep! https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shadow_President
|
|
#
?
May 6, 2022 19:53
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 5, 2024 23:30 |
|
|
Nuclear Tourist posted:I don't know, that looks an awful lot like video game footage to me, like Arma3 or DCS. Happy to be proven wrong though. https://twitter.com/OAlexanderDK/status/1522650765441048578?t=IjJO1phvbkzoLYvS7lYUqQ&s=19
|
|
#
?
May 6, 2022 19:58
|
|