Slashdot Mirror
Russia Is Building a Nuclear Space Bomber (thedailybeast.com)
An anonymous reader quotes a report from The Daily Beast: The Russian military claims it's making progress on a space plane similar to the U.S. Air Force's secretive X-37B robotic mini-shuttle. The tech is pretty basic. But alone among space-plane developers, the Kremlin is proposing to arm its space plane. With nukes. Lt. Col. Aleksei Solodovnikov, a rocketry instructor at the Russian Strategic Missile Forces Academy in St. Petersburg who is overseeing the space plane's development, said the orbital bomber would be flight-ready by 2020. It's unclear how much money the Kremlin is investing in the project, and how serious senior officers are about actually deploying the space plane, if and when Solodovnikov and his team finish it. In any event, the military space plane could give Russia a potentially history-altering nuclear first-strike capability. "The idea is that the bomber will take off from a normal home airfield to patrol Russian airspace," Solodovnikov said, according to Sputnik, a government-owned news site. "Upon command, it will ascend into outer space, strike a target with nuclear warheads and then return to its home base." Thanks to its orbital capability, the bomber would be able to nuke any target on Earth no longer than two hours after taking off, Solodovnikov claimed.
... anti-missle systems.
and the bernie protesters.
Not sure how this is better than an ICBM? Sounds more like they are just grasping for an actual use for spaceplanes.
Some Russian officials want some attention.
"We're still here guys... we really are!"
This is better than an ICBM because...? I don't see the point.
Confucius say, "Find worm in apple - bad. Find half a worm - worse."
I am not a legal expert but I believe their plan to produce a nuclear-armed spacecraft violates the Outer Space Treaty (to which Russia is a signatory) and specifically Article IV which says "States Parties to the Treaty undertake not to place in orbit around the earth any objects carrying nuclear weapons or any other kinds of weapons of mass destruction, install such weapons on celestial bodies, or station such weapons in outer space in any other manner." (which sounds like exactly what Russia wants to do)
Then again, with the way the Russian economy is these days, I dont think they have the funds to actually build or launch this thing so it wont matter...
On the other hand an arms race in space might be a real nice technology driver if we survive it.
What there wasn't a credible source like Gawker or the Weekly World News ?
I really like articles which make large claims (here "a potentially history-altering nuclear first-strike capability") without spending the minimum of thought on them.
A first strike capability encompasses disabling the second strike capability of the opponent. I would be interested to learn how a rather large and slow plane would be able to find all the space-radars switched off so no one noticed the fleet of planes flying two hours through outer space, the early warning system not detecting re-entry of the warheads, and all the nuclear subs in the ports.
Very obviously the author of the article is privy to some information not about space planes but mind-altering capabilities of the Russians. I propose he gets a visits from the nice guys at CIA.
such weapons. In the book Dead Hand, the story of the cold war talks in Reykjavik was told, where Gorbatchov was strongly voicing opposition against President Reagan's plan for SDI. While it was a plan for a missile defense shield, it did carry the outer space characteristic. The USSR in that time tried to create their own version of a space weapon, but was unable due to technical and economical constraints. As Russia is still going through a harsh economic time due to their Crimea actions, I doubt they have the money or even technical competencies to pull this one off. News at eleven. Probably internal propaganda.
Is anyone else tired of us coming up with expensive ways of killing each other? It's like we're a class room of kids one uping each other to see who can cause nuclear winter the fastest.
>The idea is that the bomber will take off from a normal home airfield to patrol Russian airspace,...Upon command, it will ascend into outer space, strike a target with nuclear warheads and then return to its home base.
Yeah, right. Why didn't anybody else build a plane than has the capability of ascending into orbit as needed and come back then ? Perhaps because the enormous energy needed to go from aerodynamic flight speed to orbital velocity can't simply be carried along in a pod or something ?
Let's assume that Mr. Solodovnikov's outline of the modus operandi isn't exact but that what is planned is rather along the lines of Airplane takeoff (vs. ICBM rocket which is much more detectable) and going to orbit and drop a heat shielded nuke from there. (No need to land back, it's nuclear war all over anyway by then.) Even this would be so expensive that it will once again stretch Russia's financial capabilities beyond what's possible.
while there's a military coup in Turkey.
Space... where everyone can easily spot you.
Fascinating. This post, albeit trollish, gets modded down. However, there's a blatant flame of another poster that hasn't been modded down. Neither has the post that has no content at all and simply repeats the n word six times in the subject. It is logical that what are viewed as the worst posts will be the first to be modded down. Criticism of moderators seems to be considered worse than blatant flames and posts devoid of content that only contain ethnic slurs. Very interesting.
An ICBM takes 9 minutes to "strike anywhere".
He got you right where it hurts, didn't he? And he's right, too :-)
The most beligerent country in the world is the U.S., in case you haven't read any news for the last 70 years since WW2. The U.S. spends billions and billions on its invasion force (they call it "defense force") and improving nuclear strike capabilities, but when Russia does the same, then it's beligerent? You're a funny one.
They can fire Cruise Missiles from any barge in their extensive canal network
http://russia-insider.com/en/military/how-russias-cruise-missiles-change-strategic-military-balance/ri10730
It's to go with their fleet of these
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...
More hype, more BS.
bit.ly/292cBQA
Nah, I just wanted to flame someone. He's completely wrong and looked like a good target. The US would happily increase cooperation with Russia if only Russia would stop sabre rattling. Russia just can't accept that they're no longer a superpower and don't have the influence they once had. Instead of accepting this new reality, they're desperate to prove they're as powerful as ever, at any cost. That's the problem. Most European countries aren't individually the superpowers they once were, but they've accepted the reality and worked together to collectively increase their power. Russia will have none of it, and that's a big part of the problem.
Comment removed based on user account deletion
Because a straight vertical line from directly overhead is the fastest delivery route.
That's why.
But...
Missile silos are hard to pre-emptively destroy. A space plane on the other hand...
------ The best brain training is now totally free : )
Surely such weapons of mass destruction can't be too far way now?
Go die in a fire, shithead. I hate you, your country, and your family. You are a massive piece of shit. I hope some day I get to go defecate on your grave and your parents' graves. Just like Russia, you're a complete waste of resources and contribute nothing useful to the world. Fuck off, you stupid cumstain.
If you want an answer to 'Why do they hate us?', now you know.
The US would happily increase cooperation with Russia if only Russia would stop sabre rattling.
The US has bases in every country in the world except for China, North Korea, Iran and Russia. The US military budget is the same as the combined military budget of every other country in the world and the only country likely to have the capability is the US.
It might be ok, if the US government and military were controlled by the citizens of the US, but they are hostages just like the rest of the world is. Far from being a shining beacon of freedom, the US military is used as the whip controlled by the slaver that is corporate America and the hidden autocracy who runs it.
I bet you americans already have them, After all isn't that how you claim it works USA #1
lol space radar ... idiot ....... lol stilll chuckling to myself , those radar waves sure travel far in space lololol geek website come on man, im 30 now, been reading since 14, the level of intelligence of the new readers is whats wrong with /.
One does not fire something straight down with 15,000mph of orbital velocity. there's no RV in existence that would survive such a maneuver. You have to hit the 15,000mph winds head on, which means *not* straight down. No matter what, your only way back in is ballistic. The only advantage this really has, is that you may potentially be able to get it into orbit without getting caught, which takes away the biggest early-warning to a hostile party that you're about to nuke them- the launch. With no early warning, a THAAD/Aegis, any terminal interceptor will likely not have enough warning to respond. The space bomber is the easy answer to terminal-stage interception. It carries the drawback of being very easy to shoot down, but likely not before it has de-orbited its payload. So, easy to take out in a first strike (making it a useless second-strike weapon), but also pretty much impossible to stop a first trike from the vehicle. This is an unwise escalation in nuclear armament. I thought we had treaties preventing this nonsense. It's a space Red October.
This is a scary piece of technology. Could potentially lead to space race 2.0. If russia has nukes in space, it's only a matter of time before we will too.
Not 'could' - it already did. In the article about the X-37B, you can find:
The robotic space plane launched atop a United Launch Alliance Atlas V rocket on May 20, 2015, kicking off the X-37B program's fourth flight. This mission, dubbed OTV-4 (short for Orbital Test Vehicle-4), remains a clandestine affair. "I can confirm the fourth OTV mission is approaching one year on orbit," Air Force spokeswoman Capt. Annmarie Annicelli said in response to Space.com's inquiry about the X-37B's activities.
So apparently a space race is already going on, initiated by the US (or possibly China), in which the US now has a head start of a few years on Russia. Same as with nukes, same as with H-bombs.
"Money is a sign of poverty." - Iain Banks
When some space "debris" takes out that shiny space plane
Re-entry isn't early warning. ICBM launch is early warning. By the time you see the plasma trail of reentry, your options are just about gone. This is a fantastic first-strike weapon, in that it can be done with precisely no warning. As for disabling second-strike capability? Na. This is just the Russians freaking out that THAAD/Aegis systems may be getting deployed around enough sensitive spots that they feel even their first strike capability is becoming limited. A plane boosting slowly into orbit can do so without being noticed. An ICBM cannot. An Aegis can't hit a terminal ICBM RV unless it has warning. With something that can achieve orbit, or even suborbital velocity slow enough to not be noticed can de-orbit payloads that will absolutely not be noticed until far enough through re-entry as to be impossible to intercept with THAAD batteries.
Nuke the fucks and they will pipe down. Worked with japs, will work with towelheads as well.
And the Chair Force is working on moon-based drone submarine interceptors, because we can't have a Nukular* Space Planes gap.
Idiots, all of them.
*Grammar Nazi Disclaimer: intentional colloquial misspelling for sarcastic effect. Do carry on.
Scruting the inscrutable for over 50 years.
Yep. In fact both the US and Russia are signatories to the Outer Space treaty which pretty much forbids sending wmds into space.
Of course its nukes we're talking about. Once you pull *that* trigger, upsetting some lawyers in Geneva is about the last thing your worried about.
Excuse the Unicode crap in my posts. That's an apostrophe, and slashdot is busted.
Huh? Before firing, why would it be at a 15,000 orbital velocity and not geosynchronous?
------ The best brain training is now totally free : )
Right assumption, wrong input. Russia is an superpower. NATO, isn't. But wants to be. Nato is a wannabe, a bastard child of the cold war mindset, controlled by the Pentagon and the world war wanters.
Personally, a space plane finally! Damn right, but hopefully not low orbit. We need a low cost off planet mode, just to keep the use opeñ. Since the privates are all just doing nasa experiments, and little actual development. All I can say, do it.
Curious... Some of those countries also have nukes. So would your "nuke them" position equally apply to them "nuking" you?
Because geosynchronous orbits are 22,000 miles plus in altitude. There's no conceivable way to get there without a really big rocket.
This is something that US Citizens always fail to understand.
If you build 1 nuke, other countries will build one as well to prevent you from attacking them.
They just put nukes at Russia border and say they are are for "defensive" purposes, but when Russia puts a nuke in Cuba, suddenly it is an "offensive" weapon?
They paint Kennedy as a "hero" for starring down the Russians, but seem to forget about his secret deal to remove nukes from Turkey. Naturally he didnt want the US citizens to know about this "side deal".
It seems that the russians can barely keep their old tech running, let alone do things the rest of the world can't. Hard to see them pulling this off, sounds more like chest thumping.
What radar coverages? There was more radar coverages inn the 1960,then now. Regan started star wars but he crippled the rest of the nation. After the second round of brac, we now know less about what is in our skies. And you have to remember any time there is a gust of solar wind, the long range radar has to be recalibrated.
They thought about ad clicks. That is about it.
The US would happily increase cooperation with Russia if only Russia would stop sabre rattling.
Actually, the USA has over 1,000 military bases abroad - many of them in Asia, as close as possible to the frontiers of Russia, China, and Iran. Not to mention its 11 (give or take) massive carrier battle groups which prowl the oceans to intimidate other nations.
Russia has, from memory, three or four small military bases outside its own borders. Apart from Syria, where it is fighting terrorism (because someone has to, and the USA isn't) they are all in friendly nations next door to Russia itself - Belarus, Armenia, etc.
When the USA sails its carrier battle groups or other naval units a few miles from Russia and China, in waters many thousands of miles away from the USA, that isn't sabre-rattling.
When the USA organizes "NATO" military exercises that involve large numbers of soldiers and weapons parading around a few miles from Russia, that isn't sabre-rattling.
When the USA places German tanks as close to St Petersburg as they were in autumn 1941, that isn't sabre-rattling.
When the USA places missile stations that could, without anyone knowing, be equipped to fire offensive nuclear missiles, within a few miles of Russia that isn't sabre-rattling. (Although it is exactly equivalent to the Soviet actions to prevent which President Kennedy precipitated the Cuban Missile Crisis).
But when the Russians or Chinese calmly announce the measures they have taken to defend themselves, or when they conduct military exercises entirely within their own borders - THAT is apparently sabre-rattling.
See http://www.globalfirepower.com.... Clue: Russia is the 5th-ranked in military spending, slightly below the UK. Its spending is less than one twelfth of the USA's.
http://www.globalresearch.ca/p...
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/...
I am sure that there are many other solipsists out there.
Usually after the fact as well.
in the 50's Russia was into the "space race", the US was heavily focused on improving their new nuclear "toy".
Suddenly Sputnik, and the world sees what Russia can do leaving the US plays catch-up.
Thankfully instead of doing something useful for years, they wasted billions on nukes..
As Putin has advised us, the next war with Russia will not be fought only on Russian and European soil. It will be fought in American cities like New York and Washington, D. C.
"You are a massive piece of shit. I hope some day I get to go defecate on your grave and your parents' graves."
Oh, I get it now... I, C, BMs! It's your comment and this article both that I was looking at. They are all full of shit.
NATO's combined military and economic assets dwarf Russia's. What an idiotic post.
The world's burning. Moped Jesus spotted on I50. Details at 11.
Let's be mindful here that probably the only East Asian nations not happy that the US is keeping the South China Sea open to navigation is China, and probably North Korea (if NK even really cares at all). Everyone else wants the US there, even Vietnam, a one-time enemy now quickly becoming one of the US's pre-eminent allies. The Europeans sure the hell still want US/NATO military assets in Eastern Europe because of growing tensions with Russia.
And China using water cannons to attack Filipino fishermen is hardly "peaceful", China violating maritime law and trying to turn a sea mount into an island to extend its territorial waters and economic zone is hardly peaceful, and everyone should be damned glad that the US is now regularly reminding China that pouring a bunch of concrete on an atoll does not an island make.
The world's burning. Moped Jesus spotted on I50. Details at 11.
Exactly -- the article is nonsense. If the plane leaves Russian airspace, that's a pretty clear warning that they want to attack. It's pretty much the same thing as seeing an ICBM launch. And submarine-based missiles are already able to hit by surprise any city in much less than two hours.
I am way too late with this, but it seems no one bothered to double check the links. Even the Russian MoD has stated this is totally incorrect:
The media reports suggesting that Russia is developing a strategic bomber that is capable of performing tasks in space, do not correspond to reality, Russia’s Defense Ministry said in a statement received by TASS on Thursday.
The ministry said that the media had misinterpreted the words of a military academy representative about an alleged development of "a space bomber".
http://www.ruaviation.com/news...
Do you know why the road less traveled by is littered with the bones of the unwary?
Does anyone seriously believe that there aren't tactical plans sitting around for the US Air Forces X-37 as well? Maybe not anything naming nukes specifically but "multi purpose munitions racks" almost certainly. The purpose stated for this "bomber" seems pretty foolish, you can already do much more, much faster & much cheaper using ICBMs. However if they can make the Stage and a half (carrier craft and orbital space plane) concept work they may succeed where so many others have failed, creating a reusable space plane.
Can you imagine how much better we all would be without squandering wealth on this level of military spending?
Greed is the root of all evil.
No space launch, winged or not, is covert. The one advantage of this thing is the ambiguity about whether or not it's going to release weapons. There's no doubt about what country is targeted shortly after an ICBM launch. However, if this thing is real, and orbital, the first half of the launch timeframe for an ICBM still leaves the potential targets unsure of the target. Won't be used against the US or Britian, as our SLBMs can still get ordered to launch in a meaningful timeframe, but will push the Chinese, French and future nuclear powers to adapt fast. And no, the Indians and pakis are only pointing at each other and China, so they don't have a significant posture against Russia anyway.
I saw moonraker, and you are wrong.
OMG Ponies!!! with Glitter!!!! I miss Pink
It's sad. You used to represent hope but now you speak like the oppressor. You speak like a traitor to the values that made America great, freedom, justice and liberty FOR ALL. Even though you were given the right to bare arms, you can't stand up to your own government because you're a coward, you're afraid of it. You suppress your own countrymen because you think you are going to be the one holding the whip, when in reality the ones holding the whip are disgusted by you.
Nukes are only used to scare the public. In reality, precision bombing is used in war. Just think of the TV coverage of all the wars in the middle east. There is no need to obliterate a whole city, if you can take out the military capability alone.
Excuse me, but please get off my Pennisetum Clandestinum, eh!
They might have nukes, but they have shit delivery systems - at very best medium-range (if it manages to launch at all). So nuke away and if any of them survives to whine about it, nuke them again.
> Oil and gas are basically the only things they don't need to buy.
as well as, so it appears, space planes and nukes.
Call the waaaambulance. And then nuke Mecca pour encourager les autres.
This is just what the planet needs right now- an orbital weapons platform armed with nuclear bombs. What could possibly go wrong?
Just cruising through this digital world at 33 1/3 rpm...
_One_ of those countries has nukes, Pakistan.
You can bet we know exactly where they are and have plans in place to drop an airborne division in and take them. Likely aided by a simultaneous Indian attack
Ask yourself, what happens when the muslim brotherhood takes over Pakistan? Do we just let them keep their nukes?
But that all changes when Iran finishes their nukes. Which won't be long now.
John McAfee 'It was like that time I hired that Bangkok prostitute; to do my taxes, while I fucked my accountant'
Now just ensure to drop one each on countries like Pakistan and others, who support terror groups.
do you really think that the launch facility for the x37 does not have in a LockUp the needed bits to go nuclear??
all it would take is a swap of payload and maybe a swap of a server "blade" (to hook to the Football)
trust me lawyers have nothing on Military folks on evading the truth
This is typical Russian Wunderwaffe-style bullshit.
Their economy is in the shitter, and they can't even close the deal on a 4.5 gen fighter pretending to be a 5th gen machine. India is pissed, and Russia is looking to cancel orders.
Even if they get this 'bomber' off the ground it's going to have it's own fan club courtesy of the USAF.
So whatever.. as soon as a US city goes up in nuclear flames so does the world.
...you mean that we likely already have one.
http://www.space.com/30245-x37b-military-space-plane-100-days.html
those radar waves sure travel far in space lololol
They certainly travel farther than down here, in the air. You might know something we don't, but your chuckling is not very informative.
[SHOW SOME LENIENCY TOWARDS
A coworker has been the cause of a certain amount of disturbance at work.
Originally having some shortcomings of his own, he would have no help from our archaic bureaucratic organizational structure and certainly not from our mostly tech orientated colleagues -- who think people have a switch on their brains to fix behaviors at will.
After some time, suggestions became bullying and mocking -- and so he decided to follow the "defense strategy" which says the best defense is an offensive. So he became a bully himself. To the point his company has become a PITA for everyone. Not too different from how Americans and Russians are seen by their neighbors, I'd say.
That's why I see a clearly different pattern in China from the US and Russia: the main fault of the Chinese is probably not willing to join themselves either with the US or with Russia.
The US and Russia are exactly where Japan was pre-WW2: they both a problem with internal militarism and thus are forced to have an external bullying Politics. Where will this lead them to? Well, let's say it didn't work that well for Japan, as Hiroshima and Nagasaki have shown us.
You reap what you sow.
Don't nuke it.
Take their holy rock, carve it into a crapper, put it in a random American highway rest stop bathroom and move it once a week.
Launch detection is done with satellite infrared sensors. You couldn't fly to orbit without being detected. The IR sensors have to ignore large ground based fires, they can see hypersonic exhaust plumes.
John McAfee 'It was like that time I hired that Bangkok prostitute; to do my taxes, while I fucked my accountant'
Huh? Before firing, why would it be at a 15,000 orbital velocity and not geosynchronous?
You should be modded to oblivion for saying a stupid thing like that on a nerd forum.
see. Just fine.
vroooooooooom vrooooooooooom kshhhhhhhhhhhh kshhhhhhhhhh peew peww
The only advantage this really has, is that you may potentially be able to get it into orbit without getting caught
There is ZERO chance this gets launched without the United States knowing about it and tracking it. We track all launches from anywhere in the world. Hell, we even track orbiting space junk. This is going to be tracked. A secret launch is impossible anymore.
This story was already discredited. The Daily Beast is not a reliable source.
Nope, you just turn the power off to them. Do you think those systems have yet to be completely infiltrated? We know where they are, we know who built them, we probably supplied them with the tech either overtly, covertly or through back channel deals.
This probably happened years ago and everybody knows about it. Politicians don't really care - they weren't going to use the things anyway. Military folks know that starting a nuclear war means Pakistan is the new word for radioactive toast.
Those things are just an expensive monument to human foolishness.
The thing about something like this, it appears to be less intended to replace existing delivery mechanisms, but be more of a means to convey a threat than anything else. If tensions get high, Russia can launch a number of these into orbit, similar to how in a situation where a handgun is pressed to someone else's face, the person holding the gun would pull the hammer back on their revolver to show they mean business, even though a single action pull on the trigger will do the same as cocking the hammer and firing.
Realistically, how dangerous is it? For this purpose, it is an excellent propaganda vehicle. However, I suspect these have multiple purposes, perhaps being able to launch/maintain satellites or other military purposes.
The ironic thing is that these "nuke shuttles" might not be all bad. It might be that they wind up being one of the few craft that can fix research satellites when in orbit, due to the decommissioning of the US shuttle fleet.
Sounds like the next Metal Gear, we need a super top secret mission to take it out.
Actually, the USA has over 1,000 military bases abroad .
Citation please? The USA has been happily closing military bases worldwide since 1991, and no short-term locations used to fight the Afghan and Isis do not count as bases for the purposes of an argument about strategic goals.
Pakistanis aren't that incompetent. Don't assume stupidity based on belief in a stupid religion. There are even smart Mormons, Seventh Day Adventists and Scientologists.
I don't doubt the Pakistanis know little about maintaining nukes and a significant percentage would be duds.
John McAfee 'It was like that time I hired that Bangkok prostitute; to do my taxes, while I fucked my accountant'
So the agreements to not have nukes in space that the Russians signed is like the agreement that after Ukraine gives over all of its nukes to Russia and the US, Russia will never ever ever invade Ukrainian territory and will respect the borders forever. So the agreement with Russia is valid while Russia doesn't have the capabilities, or at least while the ink is still wet. After that, pact or agreement is something that others believe will happen. They hold the paper while the bombs fall (suckers!) Russia never got to be the largest country by keeping the army quartered. The boys got guns to shoot. They got guns, they got ammunition, they got propaganda people to provide encouragement, they got people who can fabricate lies to incite the populace. The truth in Russia is what the government wants. You read the story, see the blurry picture, and suddenly you have people who will set their own hair on fire. Russia does not feel that what happened in Afghanistan (79-89) was fair. The Afghans were being slaughtered in large enough numbers before they got arms from the US (allegedly). And then all of a sudden they were losing a helicopter/plane or a tank/apc per day. And the Afghans were not taking prisoners (well ok, they were taken prisoner for a while, treated like a woman --sodomized-- then were either shot or decapitated). Even the Kremlin gets tired of manufacturing body bags after a while. But not enough to not try again, and again, and again.
The Russian Aerospace entities have a very long istory of making bold pronouncements of the amazing things they are going to build and missions they are going to do "soon". They are worse (in the sense of bigger bolder plans yet weaker follow-through) than even the worst of this sort in the West.
Do a little googling. All sorts of fantastic Russian rockets, spacecraft, missions, that were all supposedly in various stages of funding, planning, and so on.
In the REAL world, they are sill flying their crews on the same R-7 family of rockets that Gagarin flew on (the Soyuz derivative in use today is not very different from the version flown in 1966). I am NOT insulting them or the Souyz! The people working in that industry have done a remarkable job of reliably operating that thing with fluctuating budgets and even total political turmoil while gradually making good incremental upgrades. There's also nothing wrong with driving a 1966 Volkwagon car (provided you maintain it well and it can pass a smog check) if it meets your needs. It might be the perfect car for you, just as Soyuz has been perfectly suited to the actual space missions the Russian government has been willing to fund. Russia'sBuran Space shuttle proves that they have the tech needed for such a project, but also proves they do not have the financial will. They only ever flew Buran once, unmanned, then left the fleet to rot in collapsing facilities. The point, however, is that all the bold promises and great concept art in the world will not replace funding, which is an indicator of commitment. Same problem with all the other space/military activities by all the other governments.
Of course, Russian Federation is building a bomber. It can't manufacture cars, planes and despite its vast territory is forced to import food. But they are building technology more advanced than all industrialized countries can manage to, at this moment. I am guessing it's going to be manned by volunteers from RF who occupied Crimea. Didn't they say they were going to mars within 5 years at some point in the previous year? This is just another attempt at distraction or attention grabbing when the world's still shell-shocked from the events of the past week. Technologically, they are just coasting on the accomplishments of the past century. They still have designs of nuclear reactors, so they sell them states around the world. They still have tanks, so they use them to threaten their neighbors. It's highly doubtful that they can still mass produce tanks (something they were capable of 50 years ago). No brilliant scientist would work for RF government today. They don't have the money to pay them and they don't have a base cadre of scientist left to train new ones.
Any guest worker system is indistinguishable from indentured servitude.
now go off an baaaaaah with all the other sheep baaaaaaa traitor baaaaa
I thought we had stopped nuclear escalation. Thank you Mr. Putin, you fucking cunt. I don't give a rat's ass what all the armchair experts here come up with, an escalating nuclear arms race is not a trivial thing. Going to read A Canticle for Leibowitz again and hope I got the ending all wrong.
-- I ignore anonymous replies to my comments and postings.
I see that only one person mentioned the acronym FOB (fractional orbital bombardment). The point here is that an ICBM reaches a max altitude of around 750 miles which makes it easily detectable. It's also moving at significantly slower than orbital velocity at the apex which provides time to react. An object in low earth orbit may be less than a tenth of that altitude, and is moving faster, at orbital velocity. So it can come over the horizon, burn to decelerate, and reenter more quickly than an ICBM, leading to a greater element of surprise. The mission profile described in the article also wouldn't have a traditional launch signature (the one big launch burn of an ICBM). With nuclear weapons it's a bad thing to be surprising, because it increases the likelihood that the adversary will get jumpy and falsely detect a threat, leading to a regrettable situation (yes I'm trying to be funny). This is why the US and USSR agreed to ban FOB technology in the 60s. For the Russians to re-invent FOB technology would be incredibly destabilizing. I hope they are just bluffing.
This is a reaction to the new missile system installed recently in Romania and the recent NATO maneuvers in Eastern Europe to intimidate Russia (among a series of other aggressive political actions against Russia). It's a way of saying to the US : stop threatening us, stop trying to extend your sphere of influence, or we will escalate. Now the question is who will back down first (hoping that at least one will back down).
The whole purpose of subs deployed on strike-on-ping-timeout orders was to eliminate possibility of your advisory somehow "sneaking" a nuke at you. So no, even though such plane could launch, orbit and fire unnoticed (which it won't), the Re: would be still coming thanks to the ping timeout so no, the "first strike" doesn't apply.
Again, strike-on-ping-timeout has it's own dangers which should demotivate one to develop "sneaky" systems to encourage the other to keep more of strike-on-ping-timeout subs deployed.
Please do your own research. And you do not get to decide what "counts" as a US base. (Although if you want to introduce that criterion, Russia does not have one single strategic base outside its own borders - they are all small and tactical).
I am sure that there are many other solipsists out there.
Orbiting, mobile, stealth platforms with hypersonic nukes scares me. This thing sounds like a bad TV movie from the 70s. Why the hell would anyone care if you could land a nuclear bomb delivery platform?! Let's hope this is where they're spending their money. It would indicate that they are even dumber than their counterparts in Washington.
Every rule has more than one consequence.
You made the point, up to you to provide documentation.
By the way Sevastopol, Cam Rahn Bay and Kant Air Base are all strategic Russian military locations located on foreign and their are numerous more in former Soviet states.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...
It was just matter of time before something like this would happen. Assuming the US already have this capability (to some extent) - having russia a similar level of technology is just scary. ..
- This shit do not have to go into space. Just don't - go there
Wouldn't ICBMs travel faster?
What is the advantage here?
Physics fail.
Two of my imaginary friends reproduced once
Please read before you embarrass yourself any further. In fairness though, to maintain geostationary orbit (earth) requires a bit less than 7,000MPH, not 15,000.
Two of my imaginary friends reproduced once
I don't doubt you've been reading since 14. It is never too late to learn, you're a glimmer of possibility.
You realize you're making his point, right?