Urban75 Home About Offline BrixtonBuzz Contact

Russian Long Range Bombers disrupt UK airspace

...One would "nuke the shit" out of the other. No prizes for guessing who.

while what you'd said is broadly true, if you took the 40 largest cities in Russia and detonated a 100kt warhead over each - would Russia still exist as a polity?

if the idea of nuclear deterance is to make a nuclear exchange so painful, regardless of the damage done to the enemy, that its an unusable weapon, then the logic of it is to make a credible threat. nuking missile silos and submarine bases that might be empty is, imv, not a way to make that threat more credible, and therefore more untenable a risk.
 
while what you'd said is broadly true, if you took the 40 largest cities in Russia and detonated a 100kt warhead over each - would Russia still exist as a polity?

I suspect that the degree of impact is debatable (you're assuming a 100% success rate for the weapon and 100% failure rate for ballistic missile defence systems, neither of which are true).
That you, the other party - that is the country, infrastructure, agriculture, industry, societal frameworks, etc - would shortly not exist would be hard to dispute.
 
And another "Bear" gets an escort from Lossiemouth's Typhoons ..............
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-32308307

There was a bit of a free airshow over East Yorkshire last night; two Typhoons doing their thing at low altitude. I couldn't see it - as luck would have it I was having a shit at the time - but it was fucking loud. There's been speculation about whether it was connected with the Bear earlier in the day or some other incursion, but it now seems not. I'd be grateful if the RAF could warn us next time they're going to have a playfight right over Hull, so we can all be outside with our cameras. :D
 
I live a short distance from Spadeadam so we get low flying displays on a frequent basis. Usually ear-splittingly loud if a jet, just plain noisy if helios or Herci-birds ............ To the point I can do some ID by sound !
 
Tis easy to ID these things, very distinctive sound
Off-Loading_Canada_Troops.jpg
 
I was in a lecture hall when a Hercules flew up the nearby valley, I said to fellow students "Why is a Hercules flying past?" reply - "You what, no windows, how can you tell ?"
Later, when we went for a coffee, one of the college porters told me I had missed three of them going up the valley. Shortly afterwards, the planes came back .................... apparently they were dropping paras onto the mountains for an exercise.
 
while what you'd said is broadly true, if you took the 40 largest cities in Russia and detonated a 100kt warhead over each - would Russia still exist as a polity?

if the idea of nuclear deterance is to make a nuclear exchange so painful, regardless of the damage done to the enemy, that its an unusable weapon, then the logic of it is to make a credible threat. nuking missile silos and submarine bases that might be empty is, imv, not a way to make that threat more credible, and therefore more untenable a risk.


The yanks got into counterstrike how to fight a nuclear war etc to attempt to justify th military industrial compex and sac general posts.
Nukes make the rest of the military fairly irrelevant you cant take your toys out to fight the designated big bad.
 
The yanks got into counterstrike how to fight a nuclear war etc to attempt to justify th military industrial compex and sac general posts.
Nukes make the rest of the military fairly irrelevant you cant take your toys out to fight the designated big bad.

then you know little of counter-strike - counter-strike is a viable doctrine (ish), however it would require spectacular testicular fortitude to actually implement it, which rather detracts from its usefulness.

its true that its of more use to the US as the geographical size and spread of the US gives them a far greater ability to accept a limited number of return shots, whereas as in Europe everyone is on top of each other and there's very few places you could use strategic warheads without vapourising a city/large town as collateral damage - the French system is designed with this in mind, our system uses an incredibly accurate off-the shelf US system because thats what happened to be what was available.

despite the French system being less capable - ours can do counter-force and old fashioned city-busting, whereas the French system can only do city busting - theirs is more expensive.
 
I'm obviously no expert but I struggle to see an scenario in which a nuclear exchange would not result in all the participant nations being utterly ruined as a functioning country, for a generation at least. Certainly at as far as the big five nuclear powers are concerned. I suppose the likes of Russia could survive & contain an exchange with one of the minor nuclear players like, say, Pakistan.
 
It has emerged that late last month Italian Air Force Typhoons (currently deployed to Lithuania) carried out a supersonic intercept, out over the Baltic Sea, of a Tu-22M 'Backfire' bomber which was heading towards Sweden and Denmark.
tu-22m_26.jpg
 
then you know little of counter-strike - counter-strike is a viable doctrine (ish), however it would require spectacular testicular fortitude to actually implement it, which rather detracts from its usefulness.

its true that its of more use to the US as the geographical size and spread of the US gives them a far greater ability to accept a limited number of return shots, whereas as in Europe everyone is on top of each other and there's very few places you could use strategic warheads without vapourising a city/large town as collateral damage - the French system is designed with this in mind, our system uses an incredibly accurate off-the shelf US system because thats what happened to be what was available.

despite the French system being less capable - ours can do counter-force and old fashioned city-busting, whereas the French system can only do city busting - theirs is more expensive.

Would the French participate, I imagine that would be a key question, should the SHTF, would America have the balls?
Or would Europe just roll over?
The scenarios are endless, but NATO cutting its defence budgets starts to limit them, from a Russian perspective?
 
Yeah but are policy is to make sure whoever starts it gets to glow in the dark.
Trident can punch through moscows abm defences kill hardened underground shelters or even target flying command centres ( thats not really difficult get a nuke with in 10 miles and vladforce 1 is toast).
Uk goverment really doesnt belive stings idea that the russians love their kids but does tend to belive they care rather more about their own neck:hmm:
Happily the french take the complimentary view that what counts in nuclear war is lots of dead citys so are going for the megadaeth approach france might not survive but niether will the majority of russians
Got to love the French; up to 1961 they called their buckets of sunshine "Force de frappe"...
 
"my other plane is also forty years old", probably

'my other plane is one of only four others that will get off the ground...'?

how true that is is a matter for some debate, though their lack of bumping up against other people air defence zones (which is what their role is) over the last decade suggests that all is not well in the 160 fleet.
 
IMG_6724.JPG

Facebook saying this was a QRA intercept on TU 160 Blackjacks this week. Are the markings right for today?
 
Back
Top Bottom