C'mon bro, I know you're still a regular visitor here after all these years. Please man, /k/ needs you right now.
Give us some professional insights about the state of the russian nuclear arsenal.
Dear tourists and other anons: We've had enough headless chicken discussions. I really want to dedicate this thread to an oldschool /k/ gentlemen's discussion about nuclear weaponry.
Please! keep the shilling for each side off the table, there are tons of other threads for that kind of shitposting.
Do we have ANY professional insights about russias nuke forces?
>How hard have they been impacted by corruption?
>Does Russia have a real maintenance cycle for the upkeep of warheads and missiles?
>Did the rooskies axe the personnel of their missile forces too for their Ukraine adventure?
>What about the naval missile forces? Can they even be considered a real threat these days?
Once again: Oppenheimer, if you're reading this, please answer. You don't have to use your trip, it's enough if you use your usual style of writing and spacing
>Who the frick is Oppenheimer?
Get the frick off this board newbie or lurk more.
Have a bump, oldgay
>Oldgays
Oppie been here around 2016, wasn't he? Hardly a oldgay lore.
>2016 was 6 years ago
AHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH
>I'm married for 7 years
Feelsgood.jpg
congrats anon.
t. hanks
>i've been off and on PrepHole for 18 years
holy FRICK i didn't need to realize that right now
>naval missile forces
I know their submarines are loud as shit so they won't be a problem, glowies got em on lockdown
This is no longer true of Russian subs.
They have very very few operational, though.
lel more than half of their ssbn force are still relying on those rusting piece of crap delta iii/iv. There’s like 3/4 yasen ssn at most, while those are better than Soviet era subs, they still not really a match for seawolf/Virginia even in quality
>This is no longer true of Russian subs
If they are factory new that is. Give them 2 year with the Russian maintaaaainer and you can hear them from halfways around the world.
Actually, their submarines are still fairly hard to track and give the US a run for their money. The Chinese on the other hand are amateurs and freak out over the thought of our submarines cruising around their waters.
t. family friends with the Underlord
Underlord?
Isn't that the whole reason why they operate under the polar ice, since the shifting glaziers make a ton of noice?
>polar ice
>shifting glaziers
>noice
based moron
Most of them sound like a pair of skeletons fricking in a trash can...even some of the "good" ones.
t. former submariner
>none of the above applies to diesel boats
Tangentially related, is there an archive of declassified russian nuclear research documents like the Los Alamos Archive CDs ?
I hope there's somebody else like Oppenheimer to cover for him
Any info about probable current target lists for Russian nukes? Especially Nato targets in Western Europe.
Major military bases (especially Airbases capable of housing US nuclear weapons) and capitols
A retired CIA boomer I know says that a pharmaceutical lab in bumbfrick Indiana in a town of like 10k people was on the first strike list. So who knows really.
1980 target lists are going to be wayyyyy different than today
What town?
Oppenheimer isn't coming back dude
Why did he leave?
Think he got doxxed and it threatened his employment.
Who was the Oppenheimer trip? Qrd?
just a namegay that worked in the nuclear capability assessment industry iirc. worked for some sort of thinktank or something. very knowledgeable guy that posted regularly until some nofun homosexual doxxed him.
Just a namegay is a little bit underwhelming.
Oppen brought lots of knowledge into this board.
He was probably the single best tripgay we had here since I started coming here in 08
Say hi to him and that he's missed here.
Hope all the doxxing didn't affect his career.
I'll let him know.
He's doing well for himself.
I'll ask him, but he's been using this as an opportunity to talk about the uselessness of 'No First Use' pledges.
He's a policy guy. Anything beyond that is his thing to talk about.
Based. Preemptive first strike to cripple their ability to nuke is way better no first strike pussy shit.
>He was probably the single best tripgay we had here since I started coming here in 08
Meplat?
Also forgot the name of that guy in the 75th.
Ricky sperged out too much. He knew his shit but goddamn did he liked to throw arrogant, b***h fits.
Still in the archives anywhere?
>And that's just from the subs.
>Russia CAN kill us all. We CANNOT stop them.
LOL, ten rubles for your account, comrade.
Most of Russia's missile subs are in their pens in Russia, because they're barely able to drive them without sinking to the ocean floor permanently. When they do go out, they've got American subs trailing them ready to blow them out of the water the moment a missile hatch opens.
Russian submarines are the absolute least scary of Russia's nuclear arsenal because they'll never be able to use them.
>Still in the archives anywhere?
should be. posted until a couple years ago i believe.
I learned a lot from Oppenheimer. I wish he was still around but I understand why he isn't. I thought, like most normies, that even a small nuclear exchange would be Armageddon until Opp broke it down with sources and evidence. Nuclear war is fricked, but humanity will go on unless there's some super frickery like cobalt salted bombs.
Ditto. He helped me understand that the real threat is what happens *after* the fallout settles, and *that* can be mitigated to some extent, if not for the decades of media doomposting.
Pretty sure he worked for the state department on their actual nuclear force team or whatever, the people who assess other nation's nuclear deployments and tactical positions. May sound weird for the State Dept to have such a thing for some people, but the US puts out money practically on demand if you can justify you need something for nuclear defense or policy.
He was in the Bureau of Verification and Compliance. They do arms control policy, so they need to know a lot about the shit they're negotiating.
A namegay who posted a lot about nukes. People suck his wiener, usually saying
>If only Oppenheimer was here
right after posting an opinion which is verbatim his to the point that it could be copy-pasted from the archives. Like as if he would be able to add anything, at that point lmao, except adding an appeal to pseudo-authority.
As I recall he simply read a lot of books on nuclear game theory and regurgitated them. As if any glownig ever reveal his powerlevel or would get believed even if he did.
No, he's the real deal. He used the books as an object to point people towards info what was in the public that they could check themselves.
Trust me, my dad works at Nintendo.
he got doxed and he was some rand institute policy guy if I recall.
>he was some rand institute policy guy if I recall.
>rand institute
So worse than a glowBlack person
Wasn't RAND. It might have been CNAS, but I'm not sure about that.
Unironically he was fantastic and I wish he was fricking back.
Quality poster when it comes to nukes, he often would make long and informative posts and back everything up with sources and more information. It was a rare sight on an imageboard. For a long time he was basically the authoriy when it came to nukes on /k/ and would often end debates with his posts, which probably pissed a lot of people who had no knowledge but still very strong opinions about the topic of nukes.
some homosexual doxxed him like
said. we can't have nice things here.
Me, apparently. I trolled him a lot because I hated the f-35 and he said people like me were the main reason he stopped posting here.
>Bragging about a thirdie loser
Your kind has been humiliated. Take the hint and frick off
I'd like to beat you with a trench club I built last week
I saw your thread, got myself a project for this weekend. Thanks Anon
Based and redpilled. After all, /k/ is just for shitposting, us chads have reddit for serious discussion.
>because I hated the F-35
I guess you're going to have to cope with how fricking wrong you are literally every time the F-35 succeeds over the next century, which will be often.
>this homosexual likes the jack of all trades that beats all other jets instead of:
>minmax speed sr71
>minmax agility of F-22
>minmax durability of B-17G
>minmax strength of AN-225
>minmax attack of A10
>minmax cost of Super Tucano
>Sweepy boi F-14D
>Flawless Air to Air record F-15
Yeah, it'd probably beat all but the top two in a fight but can it beat goku though?
>minmax agility of F-22
Lol what? The F-22 doesn't min anything except the taxpayer's wallet. The thing is OP across the board.
>Oppie
>F-35
That's not even the right trip; it was Dagon who was the F-35 anon. Oppie only really covered nukes.
Why the frick haven't the rest of us?
Were the spetznaz really recalled from Chechnya to suddenly guard nuclear weapons? And from whom?
I sure ain't Oppenheimer, but I do understand the Russian politics - not the version that's fed to the West but the real thing. Putin will NEVER use nuclear weapons, because it's the only thing that could possibly threaten his power, nothing else does, or even comes close. Including a catastrophic, 1905-style defeat in this war, complete with losing Crimea. He does not in the least fear his population, he can crush any literally level of dissent barring a 1917-style revolution (which won't happen unless this drags on for years). On the other hand, he had real fear of his own henchmen, the few thousand people who actually hold the real tools of power in Russia. They will turn on him if Russia is embargoed, and suffers the rest of the relevant consequences - driving these powerful men into poverty and handing them a lot of very angry soldiers to run their coup. It's not gonna happen, period.
Putin is lerally drawing up a massive, poorly trained army in moscow, right now, while banning alcohol, and promising them deaths in the meatgrinder. At the pace this war moved, he's in almost the exact position as Nicholas II in late 1916.
Can you give us some understanding of how you reach this conclusion? Not to argue just want to know what goes into making the sauce
The short version is that if Putin loses the carrot of resource sale money, the only thing he has to control his population is the stick - which is not held by him directly, but by the Rossgvardiya and FSB. Which are ruled by corrupt, opulent oligarchs just like himself. If he can't pay them properly, then why would they ever follow his increasingly moronic orders? They will simply kill him and take over. And there is zero incentive for them to keep his policies up, they will do everything it takes to restore relations with the West.
>if Russia is embargoed
>>How hard have they been impacted by corruption?
>>Does Russia have a real maintenance cycle for the upkeep of warheads and missiles?
>>Did the rooskies axe the personnel of their missile forces too for their Ukraine adventure?
>>What about the naval missile forces? Can they even be considered a real threat these days?
you'd think that as the one thing keeping the russian regime safe from getting desert stormed in the ass the nuclear force would be the last branch of the government to get its funding cut
If I was in charge of maintaining the nuclear arsenal I would skip it all and pocket the money. The chance of it being used and getting caught is very low and the amount of cash needed to keep these thing operational is very high. The US spends around 50 billion a year to keep its nuclear force operational. to give a example
Russian nukes are super powerful and even more dangerous now because China has shared their quantum entanglement technology so they entangle warhead matter in Siberia to matter in Washington, D.C. so when it detonates it’s actually the entangled matter across the world that blows up. That, or they’ve fallen into complete disrepair for the last 3 decades while the world’s sole superpower has continued to pursue and perfect technology of death. I think the biggest indicator for where nuclear forces stand is the not insignificant amount of military leaders in the Pentagon who are confident in a first strike capability successfully neutralizing other nations’ arsenals. That’s scary, and usually kept under the radar because believing that MAD doesn’t actually apply to the US will make smaller nuclear powers shit themselves.
Outside of Russia it really doesn't though. The Indians and Pakistanis certainly don't have the capacity to remotely threaten us. Best Korea MIGHT be able to lob a couple missiles to the pacific coast but immediately transitions to was/were. The British and French could strike us but lack the arsenal and delivery systems to even come close to a MAD scenario. The Chinese are probably closest in terms of ability to fight a nuclear war but they could exhaust their entire ICBM supply and still not destroy more than 75% of US launch silos. Meanwhile the US has not only the first strike capacity, but the second, third, fourth, and probably fifth to completely exterminate anyone that got into a nuclear exchange with it. I'm not saying the US is invulnerable to attack, but if it came down to it nobody else even stands a chance of threatening MAD.
China is a bit more of a question mark these days. They've been building a huge dense-pack field the last few years: several hundred silos' worth. Since they're not under any treaties (and the concomitant inspection regimes), there could be anything from a few dozen to a few thousand warheads in there. I would like to assume that CIA/NSA/et al know the actual number, but they haven't shown much competence at foreign intelligence the last few decades.
Implessive
It can't be mobilization. Anyone who actually knows about the Russian military knows this will take too long.
They have a thing called Dedovshchina that is essential to unit cohesion and training. Basic just have Dedovshchina, but it is manpower intensive.
Dedovshchina requires a new conscript to be gangbanged, generally at least a few times. To be a proper gang rape, it really needs at least 4 people penetrating, or 5 might be a minimum, plus those to hold the guy down.
Even with 10,000 veterans taken away from the front, a figure they cannot spare, this would allow, at most, 6,000 gangbangs a day, and that's with each man doing three a day.
But you will burn out your veterans with that level of activity. For any sustained period only one per day can be done, likely less.
And so at current remaining force levels, the number of unwounded initiates ready to perform Dedovshchina, you are looking at months to fully mobilize 100,000 men.
Even if you resort to drafting women to use as fluffers, you're not getting 100,000 in field quickly, let alone a 1,000,000.
Forcing a solid GBer to GB at such high frequencies just degrades a high quality rapist. They won't be the same after that level of use, like burning out an artillery barrel.
Okay, lemme explain this shit real quick.
>Putin is not in control of Russia's nukes
Russian doctrine says russia cannot use nukes unless russia itself is threatened. Russia is not being threatened by being attacked in a country it invades.
>Putin cannot order the use of nukes on Ukraine.
Literally cannot. More people than he control the nukes and they won't let him use them even if he orders it.
Okay? Okay.
>Russian doctrine says russia cannot use nukes unless russia itself is threatened. Russia is not being threatened by being attacked in a country it invades.
Too bad this is exactly why Russia is officially annexing occupied territory in Ukraine
Putin has already received a private message from Xi Jinping that China will no longer ally with Russia if nukes are used on Ukraine.
Got a link to some articles there, buddy?
Its not a private message its a fullblown treaty.
>https://www.wsj.com/articles/under-new-scrutiny-chinas-nuclear-pledge-to-ukraine-11647007200
>In its 2013 guarantees, Beijing praised Ukraine’s 1994 agreement to give up thousands of nuclear weapons from its time as a Soviet republic in exchange for security assurances from the U.S., U.K. and Russia. “China pledges unconditionally not to use or threaten to use nuclear weapons against nonnuclear Ukraine, and under the conditions of Ukraine suffering an invasion using nuclear weapons or suffering the threat of such kind of invasion, to provide Ukraine with corresponding security guarantees,” t
This assumes China won't go back on their word. Socialism, remember?
You checked the internet lately? China recently told Russia to stop being morons in Ukraine when they met as part of some UN meetup club.
China is much more trustworthy than the US, Russian, and the eurobitches.
>China is much more trustworthy than the US, Russian, and the eurobitches.
>t. Never dealt with the chinese
Even actual mainlanders refuse to give their own any benefit of the doubt
Much as I'd like this to be true, I have to request proofs.
You know as well as I do that China would never bother to honor that.
OTOH, I'm guessing it's the only reason Ukraine hasn't formally recognized Taiwan at this point, considering that China has been (1) ratting out Ukraine's DJI drone GPS coordinates to Russia, (2) helping Russia violate sanctions, and (3) buying shitloads of oil from Russia.
They've been buying oil from Russia to resell for profit lmao
You’re fricking moronic.
That Anon forgot to add that the threat must be existential. Russia being attacked in areas it just annexed is not a threat to Russia itself.
>Too bad this is exactly why Russia is officially annexing occupied territory in Ukraine
Doing this kind of shit to twist your "doctrine" only means that your doctrine isn't comprehensible enough for USA which justifies first strike.
>More people than he[sic] control the nukes
on paper
>More people than he control the nukes
correct
>and they won't let him use them even if he orders it
you have literally no way of knowing this
Russian state propaganda is actively psychologically priming their population for a tactical nuclear exchange.
If the chance of them using nukes was 1% at the beginning of the war, it's at least 10% now.
i....is...is it you Oppen?
I'm not him.
I piss on your ecelebs.
Oppen is not returning to PrepHole. I can answer the questions for you:
>How hard have they been impacted by corruption?
Unknown, but it is not worth considering if their nuclear forces are not credible.
>Does Russia have a real maintenance cycle for the upkeep of warheads and missiles?
Yes, but I do not think Oppen would be familiar with this. His specialty was US forces and general theory.
>Did the rooskies axe the personnel of their missile forces too for their Ukraine adventure?
Unlikely.
>What about the naval missile forces? Can they even be considered a real threat these days?
Yes.
t. A good friend of his
Thanks not oppen, remember to make friends with the mossad officers assigned to watching you and never get an Iranian visa
Yep.
I can dm him if you do have questions though.
Ask him what he thinks the US response would be to a nuclear attack on Ukraine by Russia. Tell him he's missed and that Black person who doxxed him has ass cancer right now.
Is Opp a DoE glonig? I'm only curious because I myself am one.
sorta unrelated to thread, but:
>spy releases multiple classified docs on PrepHole
>Users are reported to have called him "fake and gay"
Just a reminder that this has happened on multiple occasions.
I was in that thread, was years ago. It was a member of the Australian intelligence agency. I called him a homosexual.
>Michael Scerba was a 21-year-old graduate at Australia's Department of Defense when he happened upon information relating to the Five Eyes spying program. According to The Age, he uploaded the data to PrepHole in October 2012, all the while speaking about his admiration for Julian Assange. Unfortunately, only 14 people chose to comment on the post, many of which Scerba is alleged to have described as "a bunch of 'fake and gay' remarks."
>The incident was discovered purely accidentally, too, since a former employee of Australia's intelligence agency stumbled upon the post and alerted authorities. So, you know, at least one person worked out that it was genuine.
Holy kek. So we have moron graduates and retiree glowies browsing /k/. What a world.
Speaking as someone who has been on PrepHole and /k/ for a long time and is in academia:
PrepHole in its early days was mostly popular among college students. A lot of these college students have graduated and entered the field. Many of them are glowies, I personally know of multiple. We are taking DARPA, NSA, FBI, etc. Can also confirm of at least a few USSOCOM members and State Dept people that are on PrepHole. It's not nearly as uncommon as you may think.
There are a lot of users on here, don't forget that, and you're here forever.
this god forsaken place is actually wickedly influential under all the bullshit
Straight up. PrepHole mafia runs deep. In government, corporate life, and academia there is an entire class of mid-20s early-30s nerdy, introverted, but socially competent men who fly below the radar but are in charge of some important shit at the behest of some management fricko. This is where the oldgays are these days.
Weirdly, the two things you see the most of with NSA analysts is Touhou and furries.
>20s early-30s nerdy, introverted, but socially competent men who fly below the radar but are in charge of some important shit at the behest of some management fricko. This is where the oldgays are these days.
Just realized this applies to me too. Just in another "importa" field, big big pharma.
Is there another identifier for us besides the four of clubs?
ways of using language you never really get over that aren't really in the "real world". even if you're smart you can still slip something a normie would never say or a way of saying it
Like what?
>NSA
>touhou and furries
I should be surprised, really, but I'm not.
That former Ausgay glonig that snitched needs castrated, beaten, and raped.
>DoE glonig
kek is that from the radiation?
No, blackbody radiation
He got doxxed as a nuclear thinktank policy member, so not DoE but probably someone you've run into at a conference at some point.
>Did the rooskies axe the personnel of their missile forces too for their Ukraine adventure?
bruh troops from the strategic rocket forces have already been killed on the front.
I dub thee, Dr No (Dr Not Oppenheimer)
Oppenheimer was one of the few namegays that actually improved the IQ around this place.
Tell him I still want him to have my sisters babies.
>Tell him I still want him to have my sisters babies.
You want your sister to have his babies, right anon?
Right?
right
im hi af right now and brin not functioning
I recognize that bulge,
Think of it this way. Would you maintain something that's never going to get used? And if it was would mean end of the world or your London mansion anyway.
Its not like tank, that still needs at least rudimentary function for excercises. Nukes are as good as soviets originally made them and that's about it. Some will work. Some will fizzle. Some will be duds.
At best they just sort them by age and keep the most recent ones where it matters.
Stop this moronic thinking. Nukes are the one thing Russia's military budget actually cares about. It's all they have. It's what they hide behind. Even if 90% of Russian nukes were dudes, the remaining 10% could kill all life in USA.
Do we have any hard info on this? Or did they sell tritium on black market?
How much yield does the fission initiator has? Few dozen kT?
Roughly. I think Ivy Mike had some 45kt fission
Fission initiators require tritium as well - to reduce weight, so they can even be delivered.
Again that depends entirely on them actually being able to deliver them. The Russians can't even fly strategic bombers over Ukraine, they'd never get close to US soil, so that's 1/3 of the triad gone. Their missile subs are loud as frick, easy to locate and track, and while one or two might be able to get off a Salvo the rest would get sunk in extremely short order. That leaves their missile forces, of which the most recent are maybe 10 years old. 10 years for them to sit there, with all that money being thrown at them, with all those tempting offers for rocket fuel or guidance components or other important pieces from men with suitcases full of cash who are definitely not CIA.
On top of that 6000-6500 is the estimated stockpile. Stockpile, not armed and ready force. The US has 400 armed silos, probably 400-500 missiles on subs, and maybe 2-300 air launched weapons, on a stockpile of just over 5000 weapons. That's about 20%. Let's say Russia has similar numbers that could be launched rapidly, about 1200. We already know maybe a third of that can't be used, and of the other third 80% will be on the bottom of the ocean. That leaves about 400 ICBMs. 90% failure rate of that is a hell of a lot less scary and nowhere near the ability for MAD. Oh, and that assumes it's all towards the US. Can't forget about western Europe.
Tl;dr: Russian nuclear threats are not scary.
Oh frick off. Even 1 working nuke can kill millions.
And? Millions, tens of millions in Europe and the USA die. Russia ceases to exist. That's how it works. Russia cannot realistically threaten MAD because they lack the capability. I'm not saying it would be a trivial thing having a few metropolises wiped out but it would not utterly destroy a country the size of France or Germany, let alone the USA. The only calculation in nuclear war is "can we eradicate the other side while staying alive ourselves" and if Russia goes down that path they lose.
No. Wrong. Russia has the capability to kill all of america and europe (down to the last child) even if we just take the nukes from their minimum of 8 nuclear attack subs that are on patrol at any one time.
Russia has 8 ballistic missile equipped submarines on patrol at any one time. Each sub holds 16 ICBMs, which in turn contain 6 nuclear warheads each, for a total of 96 nukes per sub, and 768 in total. It's more than enough to target every major city in Europe and America. And that's just from the subs.
Russia CAN kill us all. We CANNOT stop them. We can ONLY kill them in return. Get this into your head and you might begin to understand why NATO hasn't even established a no fly zone over Ukraine.
It is absolutely astonishing that even after half a year of watching the tattered remnants of the Soviet Union struggle to field a tank that even looks modern by 90's standards there are STILL cucks pretending that they have a modern, highly-advanced nuclear force that could conceivably threaten the existence of the United States, let alone the world itself. You are fricking delusional, Russia's submarine fleets have not been a threat to American supremacy in several decades. They unironically have a better chance getting strategic bombers to attack American soil than with subs.
I don't know is this a bit you're doing. If you're working for the NSA. But, Christ, man. It doesn't matter if even 95% of Russia's nukes just fizzle in their launch tubes. The remaining 5% is enough to kill hundreds of millions. It's why NATO hasn't already intervened and split open Putin's 70 year old butthole. It's why there isn't any no fly zone. It's why the black sea fleet isn't on the bottom of the sea floor. Russia's nuclear capability is the sole thing keeping their county alive at this point in time.
5% of their remaining active nuclear weapons are not enough to kill hundreds of millions, you are out of your mind.
Yes it is.
They really do.
>Just accept that only millions will die, bro
So yes, you are demoralized and arguing from emotion. Please leave the thread or at least stop shitting it up with replies. If I wanted someone to clutch her handbag in my ear while I tried to have a discussion, I'd call my grandma into the thread.
Between you and me, I'm the only one who knows how to put Putin into a bag without killing millions of innocent people in the process. Stop underestimating Russia's nuclear capability. They have it. We don't have a countermeasure. We do have moral high ground and we CAN milk this if we slowly bleed Russia dry.
I think you are really overestimating the destructive power of a nuke, overestimating the radiation and SEVERELY underestimating just how huge the world is.
Maybe if literally every nuke was the fricking Tsar Bombha. But they aren't.
It won't be the end of the world, but it would be a strike that would kill at the low end, dozens of millions and level a few cities.
It would make the covid supply shortage seem like child's play, you'd get a taste of Russia in the '90s or Venezuela now, or Cuba in the dark times.
Okay. Show us the numbers. Show how many 5% of the active nuclear weapons you think will be operable, how many will fly, how many will hit their targets, and how many of those are densely populated urban centers with projected death figures. Prove your bullshit, we are all waiting.
75 nukes of the 1500 operationally ready Russian warheads, with an average yield of 400 KT each, are enough to kill 100 million people? Each one is going to kill over a million? What kind of numbers are you thinking of here?
Surely you are talking about reasonable estimates, even wild guesses, and not from emotion, right anon?
>It's why the black sea fleet isn't on the bottom of the sea floor.
Not for lack of trying, that's for sure.
>It's why the black sea fleet isn't on the bottom of the sea floor.
sinking the black sea fleet would release a lot of funds that could be used for weapons that are actually effective
YOU are wrong about how many submarines Russia has on patrol.
You are correct that nukes are bad. Which is why Pooter should not threaten their use in his war of aggression.
No, I'm in fact not wrong. My points are well researched and doubled checked. Russia keeps 8 subs on patrol as a MINIMUM number. Often it's more.
That may be a minimum de jure requirement, but they de facto do not have that many subs that are seaworthy.
>8
>MINIMUM
Russia currently has:
5xBorei
1xTyphoon (maybe; it was supposed to be decommissioned this summer)
7xDelta IV
1xDelta III
So, 8 would be more of a maximum, rather than a minimum.
Those rusting junks Delta wont last a day against nato SSN force
Also, the Typhoon is mostly a testing platform these days, so that one can be safely counted out
And moscow was state of the art ultimate super mega turbo ship capable of onetapping the entire american army and joe biden.
In reality it was sank cause it had exactly 0 anti missile capabilities and when it turned on the radar to be able to at least detect incoming missiles it interfered with communication.
Both outside and inside the ship.
Only thing it could do is lob missiles that hit the ground.
If russians say their ships are undetectable filled with billion nukes and west has no equal it means it's a half sunken wreck that was obsolete 50 years ago
Russia has 12-14 SSBNs total, even running Blue/Gold crews U.S. navy boomers only manage a 1/3 rotation. Your assertion is impossible
Even if Russia somehow got all their subs operational (HA!) and successfully launched all their missiles at civilian targets instead of tactically important targets like naval bases and command and control centers, do you have any idea how fricking large and spread out the US is? Nuclear weapons are very powerful, but they're not magic weapons that can destroy an entire region with a single blast.
but they're not magic weapons that can destroy an entire region with a single blast
>t. never heard of the back yard bomb.
>the back yard bomb
Wasn't a bomb.
The russia that has to weld down reactor doors otherwise imporvished sailors try to sell reactor components to feed themselves?
Lmao.
>tempting offers for rocket fuel
LOL yeah a lotta people want highly toxic substances that spontaneously burst into flame.
That's for the liquid-fueled ones, which, amazingly, Russia still uses. (The U.S. got rid of all of its liquid-fueled ICBMs decades ago. And yes, Russia really REALLY still STILL uses liquid-fueled ICBMs.)
For the solid-fueled ones, good luck breaking the tubes open to steal chunks of useless crap for no reason.
As long as they target NYC, San gaycisco, or D.C., I'm fine with it. Not even joking, I'll even donate Bitcoin to the "Dear Esteemed Leader Putin please nuke NYC" fund.
Remember Russias pacific nuclear sub fleet has been ransacked of so many useless and dangerous components in port that it now represents a major public health risk in Siberia
https://www.sfgate.com/news/article/Stripped-for-cash-Impoverished-Russian-sailors-2905998.php
This article is from 2001 and Russia's maritime maintenance situation is even more dire now, I wouldn't overestimate the readiness of the sub fleet or underestimate the ability of conscriptovich to pilfer random components to sell for scrap
>Again that depends entirely on them actually being able to deliver them. The Russians can't even fly strategic bombers over Ukraine, they'd never get close to US soil, so that's 1/3 of the triad gone.
real low IQ posting hours
Russian strategic bombers have been slinging their inaccurate cruise missiles since day one with impunity (you know the exact attack profile they use for their nuclear tipped missiles that have replaced freefall bombs since the 70s)
You also are too low IQ to understand what a naval bastion is
Both sides have an "active" arsenal of 1500-2000 warheads. The US arsenal is biased towards Tridents, while the Russian force is biased towards silo and road-mobile launchers. Russia also has a number of "tactical" SRBMs and cruise missiles, while the US got rid of all of those.
One thing that gets missed is the psychological impact of an exchange, even if it's just a couple of warheads: once people wake up and realize how significant and imminent the threat is, there is a great amount of self-harm that can be done by panic (e.g., people fleeing cities). Thousands, even millions of people can be impoverished or even killed just from the 3rd-order effects of the panic.
So, there's very little chance that any sort of exchange would be anywhere near painless, even in the best cases.
I can imagine that even just a minor exchange where all detonations occurred outside both respective nation's borders could see de-urbanization occur similar to or even higher order than what we saw during the pandemic lockdowns.
you sound like 12
I'm him, frick off
>>Did the rooskies axe the personnel of their missile forces too for their Ukraine adventure?
>How hard have they been impacted by corruption?
How corruption has impacted these systems is obviously not clear due to the relative secrecy of nuclear projects. However we can make some deductions from previous incidents of corruption. The nuclear missiles themselves could have components that are not truly up to the proper gost specification, or made out of cheaper less effective materials. There are also several well known industry corruption cases that can provide us some understanding of the delivery systems as well.
Modern Russian nuclear doctrine for the air triad component seems to be that a long range strategic bomber such as the Tu-95 would launch a Kh-102 to hit the target from a distance. In 2015 a defectively produced engine on a Tu-95 caught fire, so there is some case to be made that bad/substandard parts are being used. The Russian aerospace industry is notoriously corrupt, moreso than others within the borders of Russia.
Next we should look at the state of Russia's nuclear submarine force. We know from testimonies from the Kazen incident that the majority of money spent on Russian submarine manufacturing is actually used to provide kickbacks to politicians, high ranking military officials, and others involved with their contract bid approval system. What this might mean in regards to quality, I do not know. Yet it cannot mean anything good. I do know that in 2008 a nuclear submarine's fire suppression system was randomly triggered, absent of fire, causing approximately 20 people to die. This does not speak well to their submarine based capabilities.
>cont.
As for their ICBM systems, we know that the Russian military simply is not keeping around as many ICBM's as they once were. In a 2022 report entitled "Russia’s Nuclear Weapons: Doctrine, Forces, and Modernization" from CRS, Russia likely has about 310 ICBM's in an active, ready state. Their conditions are mostly unknown, but if previous inferences can tell us anything they are likely to not be in good shape.
Amy F. Woolf is a rather annoying individual, but has some good perspectives on Russian nuclear capability. Her policy perspective is rather skewed and self serving, however her works may be of use for others looking into nuclear readiness.
>Does Russia have a real maintenance cycle for the upkeep of warheads and missiles?
They obviously must. For example, they are currently developing the RS-28 ICBM system to replace its old START era SS-18 stocks. This would imply that they at the very least have trigger points of when certain systems need to be updated or replaced entirely.
One interesting point to note here is that Russian early warning systems seem to be in a decayed state. There are several still operating facilities in an unmanned state, with roofs and antennas caving in. Yet the facilities still seem to report back pings and communicate (at least in an automated manner) back to Khabarovsk.
>Did the rooskies axe the personnel of their missile forces too for their Ukraine adventure?
No clue. I won't speak on something I haven't read into. I would assume that they have not, but assumptions can be dangerous.
Anyways, goodbye.
>310 ICBM's in an active, ready state
Wouldn't that make the other 6000 or so useless ICBM's good decoy targets? Gotta target them all anyway.
Russia only has 1,458 weapons deployed (bombers, subs, missiles). 3,039 in reserve without deployment means and 1,760 recently or soon to be destroyed weapons.
Nuclear weapons are not everlasting. they are radioactive in nature and this makes the very precise electronics required to make a bomb explode instead of fizzle need replacement every few years.
the USA spends more than the entire russian defense budget just to maintain a smaller stockpile.
>they are radioactive in nature and this makes the very precise electronics required to make a bomb explode instead of fizzle need replacement every few years
Never mind the electronics, the fissile material decays over time and becomes less optimal to both trigger and sustain a chain reaction.
Half lifes are a thing.
That is a factor, but I think people forget just how dense and heavy, yet relatively soft plutonium is. The nuclear pit has to be removed from the nuke and inspected periodically to ensure it hasn't deformed under it's own weight. If its off from it's intended geometry even microscopically it has to be replaced.
I like You. Sometimes I wonder if pic related still applies.
HE HAS RETURNED! PRAISE BE TO THE BEST TRIPgay!
O-Oppenheimer?!
The 2008 incident you reference also has possible indicators of condition - allegedly the breathing gear was of questionable functionality.
OP here. Thanks man, seriously. Hope you're doing good.
Good posts. Thanks.
Frick guys, c'mon. You don't need Oppenheimer to know that the answer is "nobody knows for sure, and the ones that do, can't/won't openly talk about it."
is the closest answer you'll get anyways. A few people really fricking blew it with him, I don't blame him if he never comes back.
Realistically, the warheads are probably functional since they’re designed to sit in a box without being bothered until they’re needed and the soviets did extensive nuclear testing. However, I seriously doubt that they could deliver a fraction of what they have in their arsenal. Their military has failed comically in every other aspect, it seems silly to think that they’d be any different around the stuff that no one is ever supposed to be seen and will never be used. Considering the state of their surface vessels that they sent into an active combat zone, I can’t imagine that their subs and ICBMs would be in any better shape. Look at the leaked maintenance records for the Moskova. At best they might be able to bomb eastern portions of the EU, but considering how poorly their air force has performed that is even questionable. They’d probably do more damage by giving out nukes to every literal who terrorist group that has a grievance with the west. I’d be surprised if they don’t drop a tactical nuke on keev though.
Russia has made it abundantly clear they’ve been larping as a super power by wearing the decaying skin of the soviet union.
>However, I seriously doubt that they could deliver a fraction of what they have in their arse-
Not him but I live near Macdill and I don't care.
Yes yes, and their EW will black out NATO with the flip of a switch and the SU-57 will gain air superiority within minutes and the T-14s will be all the way to the english channel by sundown.
I'm basically nextdoor to NB Bangor and SWFPAC so I'm fricked regardless who cares let's go
Bremergay here that lives 3 blocks from PSNS. I like our odds but if things get spicy, I'll see you on the other side.
>living that strategic target life
I'll hug my kids and take consultation in the fact that maybe the world will be rid of the Russian menace for good.
I also don't miss the random fricking alarms from that yard at all hours, only need to hear them during business hours. Buttttt it constantly reminds me how fricked our navy currently is.
>random fricking alarms
Start noting the time when you hear them, anon. They're almost never random. When they are, it's usually because we're drilling. I won't go into specifics here.
If something significant goes wrong, the Sun will report it. They don't always get all of the facts correct, but nothing happens around here without them hearing about it. Believe it or not, we're pretty good at what we do, at least on the nuclear side of the house.
t. nuc yardgay
I live here. If a nuclear war occurs I'll atleast have a front row seat.
No, not Stargate command!
Used to live in SW DC, could see the pentagon from my balcony. Made planning for ww3 easy: Mix a drink and go outside to watch. Now that I live somewhere where I might actually survive it makes everything more complicated.
If Russians deliver a fraction of what they have in their arse, the world will be drowned in a tidal wave of cum.
>Realistically, the warheads are probably functional since they’re designed to sit in a box without being bothered until they’re needed and the soviets did extensive nuclear testing.
Nope. The electronics and conventional explosives degrade over time, also there are isotopes that help trigger the initial blast that need replacing. The bomb components also oxidize and corrode, just like any other metal.
>the warheads are probably functional since they’re designed to sit in a box without being bothered until they’re needed
That's not true. You NEED to do a lot of maintenance with nuclear weapons somewhat frequently or they stop working. This is even if they're locked in a vacuum. Radioactive material of that level loses its mass rapidly to the point where it will either partially detonate, or just not go off. On top of that, the container can fail as the fissile material is bombarding it with subatomic particles and can literally transmute it into another metal. That's what people mean with "maintenance"; you literally have to rebuild the entire bomb every few years or it turns into a box that makes you sick.
they respond to sitting unchecked in an air tight box about as well as a dog does.
half life exists, dumbass.
Summoning Oppenheimer. Please, we need you now more than ever.
Quite the thread here, lads.
allright, as as spacegay (connection to ICBMS) I'll try to add some informative stuff.
2 aspects: nuclear weapons themselves, and the delivery vehicles.
Testing the first is a big no-no unless you're north korea, Most nuclear weapons are quite old, and like any fissile material it slowly degrades.For thermonuclear ones, there is Tritium - a gas - involved that needs to be replenished every few years. This costs money. One of the main reasons the department of energy is owner of a few top 100 supercomputers is to simulate the physics of aging nuclear warheads, to make sure they still perform. Russia has some similar capacity, but less.
Delivery vehicle - the US tests ICBMS by picking a random deployed missile, pulling it out of it's bunker, putting it near cape canaveral, and launching it at kwajalein atol. Obviously, without it's warheads, but with representative dummy warheads loaded with sensors. These tests are anounced, so Russia does not get jittery, using NOTAMS to mariners/airplanes. Russia has a similar testing area in the north. There is to my knowledge not much know about russian testing procedures.
here,
generally, some thoughts:
-there is little evidence that russia's nukes wont work anymore. Generally, the performance might be lower yield if you dont monitor your physics package/tritium gas refill, but it's still a nuke
-there is overwhelming evidence of corruption and inadequate maintenance in all of the russian armed forces; this is likely to extend to atleast some part of the strategic forces. However, "lol they dont work" is not a statement i would be willing to bet a city on.
>However, "lol they dont work" is not a statement i would be willing to bet a city on
Not if the city was either DC, NYC, Chiraq, Seattle, SanFran or LA.
>cape canaveral
Wrong coast. You're thinking of Vandy.
You guys have some weird and fricking moronic ideas about Russia's nukes. This concept of "russia's nukes don't work anymore" that's been floating around is completely unsubstantiated and comes from a place of wishful thinking. Yeah, maybe they aren't all well maintained anymore because Russia is a shitfrick nightmare country that literally can't do anything right, but they don't need their entire arsenal to work. They only need a small amount of working nukes to cause catastrophic damage to any western country, and you're pretty fricking stupid if you think Putin doesn't understand that. In this balancing act that he's putting on to keep himself in power, he understands that having working nukes is vital to keeping the west intimidated and out of the war with Ukraine.
Look, NATO would have intervened in Ukraine months ago if the threat of nukes wasn't there. The CIA clearly thinks enough of Russia's nukes still work, and they're kind of the authority on that type of shit. So knock off this dumb wishful thinking, it's not productive and honestly makes you seem kind of moronic.
>How hard have they been impacted by corruption?
I don't know shit about the nuclear arsenal (feel free to stop reading here), but I did spend the 2010's draft dodging from the Russian military, and of course now I've been forced out of retirement with that activity to draft dodge for several years more, so I'm privy to at least a bit of information about it just based on loosely keeping up with it. What I can tell you is that the military there is highly corrupt: you spend two years in the military, during your first year you get raped by seniors and during your second year you're a senior that gets to rape the freshers, so most people see service as a big waste of time that should be avoided. You will maybe spend time training, but because of how much money gets siphoned out of the process by corrupt officials it won't be any training that's any good, the most you'll do is get summoned by oligarchs with connections in the government to build their vacation homes for them. So with that perspective, I imagine that most of the nuclear budget has been stolen by some oligarch somewhere, most of the nukes are likely in very bad shape much like the rest of their equipment that has been neglected for years due to corruption.
>now I've been forced out of retirement with that activity to draft dodge for several years more
godspeed anon
this is larp
draft is for 1 year and has been for a while.
It's likely in as piss poor of a state as their army and airforce. Shit even France might have morr active nukes.
I don’t know much about nukes but everybody posting about how NATO would directly intervene if Russia’s nukes didn’t work are absolute morons.
The current president of the US feels incredibly deep regret over voting for the Iraq war, a boondoggle which got his only non-crackhead son killed (in his head). He got elected due to a base that is overwhelmingly anti-war. He has been reported as being the most pro-afghan-pullout person in the Obama administration.
Do you really think this guy is going to start a foreign war in a midterm year? Maybe if it was absolutely required to protect the Geopolitical interests of the US, but it’s not. We’ve been perfectly fine giving them our kit from the 90s and early 2000s, which might as well be fricking Star Trek level tech compared to Russia’s broken-ass shit. As a President in Biden’s position, why the frick would you get directly involved in Ukraine? You can be effective enough at kicking Russia’s ass in a supporting role, avoid a controversial war that will depress the turnout of your base, look like a great diplomat for brining nations together instead of a Dubbya adventurist, and avoid hurting your own personal guilt about your son’s death.
Even if Joe Biden as a CIA-installed “remove Russia’s nuclear capability by detonating all their warheads instantly” button on his desk, there’s no reason for him to join the war. He’s currently experiencing basically the best possible scenario here.
>simping for tripgays
Commit not alive yourself you redittor
Black person you don't even understand what the point of a trip is. Quit trying to act like an oldgay when you're not.
Ricky
>no one:
>you: REDDIT
Shut the frick up newbie. Lurk two years before posting, and only then post if you even have guns.
Lol go back and count your likes you noguns redditseethe
bomp
Come on Oppenheimer we know you are lurking anon. Are we going to get nook? With what? Where? How? When? Miss you
I miss OPpenhiemer....Fricking homosexuals doxxed him...
Bump for summoning of Oppenheimer.
That's a nice collage you have there anon. May I suggest a cope cage somewhere? perhaps on dugin?
So russia and brit have ir at least had similar budgets for nuke forces, 1.6 bil if I remember right. We have waaaay more then that by several magnitudes.
What is the likelihood they have been doing the maintenance on a meaningful number of weapons with similar funding as the bits with far fewer warheads?
>What is the likelihood they have been doing the maintenance on a meaningful number of weapons with similar funding as the bits with far fewer warheads?
the problem is that their claimed 1500 deployed weapons is the absolute minimum they can get away with and even then might not be enough to take out US and NATO.
British have 225 warheads currently per wiki.
The budget numbers alone do not add up. You cannot spread 1.6 bil into the maintenance of just silo systems that rus has. Support facilities, rocket components, ground site maintenance, testing, security, etc.
Not to mention the droppable, deep storage, or sub systems.
sincerely doubt russian nuclear arsenal is capable of anything except at best being shot down by europes anti missile systems.
>it's insanely expensive meaning a lot of cash flows into it to keep it basically maintained meaning it's very tempting for officers to pocket the cash because nobodys gonna want a nuclear war and even putler wants to launch missiles you know what frick putler he's a moron comrade, let's drink
>it's all very remote so nobody wants to do inspections there
>it's very complex and prescise two things russia is incapable of doing reliably
>many of them use liquid fuel. Even us can't handle liquid fuel icbm's safely
>you got dumbfrick imporvished conscripts sent out in middle of fricking nowhere with ltierally absolutely NOTHING to do except get wasted, have gay sex and load government owned things nobodys gonna miss onto your buddies lada while you're deployed
>it's a virtual threat, it can't be paraded, it can't be showed off to globohomosexual westoid gays, so it doesn't have to be dragged to red square to look its absolute best (on the outside)
we're talking about an army that a large % of doesn't simply exist cause the commanders are paid less than a mcdonalds worker in the west and they keep dead people on the books to collect their pay.
You really think they wanna spend a few days visting some silo out of their moscow office instead of pocketing that money to check on some system that they report is a okay but in reality knows it's never going to be used cause nato is a defencive organisation and if some moron in kreml wanted to nuke someone he'd just flat out die
just like water takes the path of least resistance so does the russian military officers take the path of most income and least work
Russia at one point allowed its conventional forces to deteriorate while putting most of its military budget into nukes. How effectively was that money spent, and how well has it been spent in the decade since Russia started spending more on conventional forces again? Dunno.
At one point.
Russian aircraft even during the height of when they were needed were dogshit crewed by alcoholics with no flight hours. Folklore is full of stories and jokes about the red eagles.
There's songs sung about them how they fall out of the sky cause their planes break or they can't fly.
Your family wasn't in the cccp you have no fricking idea how people would rather drink vodka and collect their communist assigned pay than do actual work or do work well.
The myth of the mighty soviet tank that beat the west is a myth, in reality the situation was only slightly better than it is now according to tankers.
To be clear, their military has always talked a better game than actual performance. Even if they had more nukes ready than expected the delivery systems and options likely skew to shit anyway.
Slightly schizo question: is it possible that the US is effectively immune (or close enough) in an ICBM exchange due to our extensive high-altitude defense systems and that we're not telling anyone (even if they've already figured it out or we've told them in private) because that would upset the proverbial apple cart?
magic lasers don't exist
I was thinking more along the lines of MKV/EKV and LEAP. I'm wondering if we're so far ahead in this field that we could come out of an exchange with (at worst) the nuclear equivalent of a split lip.
"no"
If the US had deployed under supplied, undermanned, and under equipped units to invade a country poorer than some African nations I would be concerned about the state of their nuclear arsenal. The US has never done this.
Russia has done this and proven how ineffective their military is on the ground, at sea, and in the air, which just leave their strategic rocket forces as the final bargaining chip.
I guarantee their shit doesn't work just like the rest of their military in Ukraine.