• Guests may view all public nodes. However, you must be registered to post.

UA-RU | April 10th-30th | DISCUSSIONS

Status
Not open for further replies.
MikeG said:
This upgrades should have been handled long ago. I’d love to believe we have some top secret weapons that could knock Russias newest missiles out of the sky, but I’d feel a lot more comfortable if we kept parity with their strategic nuclear forces.
Click to expand...
I agree but I just don’t see a new and improved about this new super ballistic missile. It’s a relaunch of the old SS-18. It flew at “hypersonic” speeds and carried 10 Mrvs.
Not sure any ballistic missile can carry the czar bomb. It was a large airdrop warhead

Basically the Sarmat is a gigantic middle finger to the 1991 START treaty.
Are we behind technologically maybe.
But where we are behind is in deploying intermediate range missile batteries to Europe. That should have happened when Iskanders were deployed to Kaliningrad

We were behind in supporting Ukraine in 2014 and in 2021.
And if we don’t get heavy weapons systems into SW Ukraine well be behind in trying to prevent what happened to Mariupol happen to Odessa.
 
MikeG said:
This upgrades should have been handled long ago. I’d love to believe we have some top secret weapons that could knock Russias newest missiles out of the sky, but I’d feel a lot more comfortable if we kept parity with their strategic nuclear forces.
Click to expand...
I noticed this double cobra ball flight off of Russia’s east coast the other day but didn’t put it together at the time.
It coincided with the Sarmat launch evidently. They were there to monitor the reentry vehicles test evidently.

www.thedrive.com

RC-135 Jets Flew Unprecedented Mission To Spy On Russia’s New ICBM

Having two Cobra Ball spy planes observe the test of the new Sarmat ICBM is, by any measure, an exceptionally unique occurrence.
www.thedrive.com www.thedrive.com
 
Obreid said:
One Ohio sub carries 20 tridents with four warheads each that fly at 13000 and can park 100 miles off Russia’s coast.
I’m not saying Russia’s new missile is something to not be taken seriously and it definitely disregards the START treaty.
But who cares, while the US pulled the Pershing out of Europe Russia developed the Iskander and put them all along their western boarder.

But all this news release and breaking stories is just fear porn of Russia to say you better not piss us off.
No longer are nukes a deterrence to don’t launch nukes on us. Now it’s a strategic weapon to make sure we don’t do something they don’t like
.
It’s just bullshit posturing, if this is the new serious defense policy of Russia today.
Then we may as well hit them now with a debilitating first strike. Or their going to use this threat every time things don’t go their way.
Click to expand...
 
MikeG said:
How much was spent on upgrading and modernizing our strategic nuclear deterrent?
Click to expand...
Someone else wrote :

The US nuclear updates and maintenance budget is projected to cost 634 billion over next ten years.
That would be 63 billion a year. Slightly more that Russia’s entire military budget last year.
 
Erecon said:
Someone else wrote :

The US nuclear updates and maintenance budget is projected to cost 634 billion over next ten years.
That would be 63 billion a year. Slightly more that Russia’s entire military budget last year.
Click to expand...
Yeah I saw that. How about over the last 30 years? Where’s the new modernized generation of ICBMs to replace the MMIIIs? Why did we wait until now to start modernizing an already-outdated system?

The price of freedom is eternal vigilance. After the Berlin Wall came down, the US snd NATO as a whole gradually got complacent when it came to the Russian threat. We also spent that time selling China some of the rope they’ll try to hang us with. What should have happened was a continuation of “peace through strength.” It was said once that the one thing that kept the Russian General Staff awake at night was the MX missile. We should still have the next Gen of those, or modern rail/road mobile versions of them. Instead we got soft and let things age. Now we’ve got what? 400ish single warhead MMIIIs aging away? Thank God for the boomers. Let’s hope Russia and China don’t know how to find them…though I did see that the dementia patient in the White House axed the USNs request for a new nuclear armed cruise missile…SMH.
 
Last edited:
MikeG said:
Yeah I saw that. How about over the last 30 years? Where’s the new modernized generation of ICBMs to replace the MMIIIs? Why did we wait until now to start modernizing an already-outdated system?

The price of freedom is eternal vigilance. After the Berlin Wall came down, the US snd NATO as a whole gradually got complacent when it came to the Russian threat. We also spent that time selling China some of the rope they’ll try to hang us with. What should have happened was a continuation of “peace through strength.” It was said once that the one thing that kept the Russian General Staff awake at night was the MX missile. We should still have the next Gen of those, or modern rail/road mobile versions of them. Instead we got soft and let things age. Now we’ve got what? 400ish single warhead MMIIIs aging away? Thank God for the boomers. Let’s hope Russia and China don’t know how to find them…though I did see that the dementia patient in the White House axed the USNs request for a new nuclear armed cruise missile…SMH.
Click to expand...
Because Russia was considered satisfied with Crimea until now.
 
expat42451 said:
From things I have read in a diverse number of places over the years each reactor and fuel group used to begin the process of creating weapons grade fissionable material has a signature that stays with the material past detonation. From what I understand the daughter isotopes as well as the nuclear signature of whats left leads back to the origins.....
Click to expand...
Correct so would have to be made using stolen plutonium/uranium to produce the fission trigger for the fusion reaction. Any fission reaction would not overly affect the trace elements that are effectively contaminants allowing a way to identify the source.
 
Obreid said:
So what’s your take on this possible systems attack from Russia or denial of use from west or just something to say to make people nervous?
Click to expand...
Either or both sides may be involved in the attacks, the article said that "areas prone to "jamming" of GPS signals and spoofing attacks include Russia's western enclave, the Kaliningrad region, over the Black Sea, east of Finland, and the Mediterranean.". The west would hardly jam the Mediterranean imho.
 
Ben Dhyani said:
Either or both sides may be involved in the attacks, the article said that "areas prone to "jamming" of GPS signals and spoofing attacks include Russia's western enclave, the Kaliningrad region, over the Black Sea, east of Finland, and the Mediterranean.". The west would hardly jam the Mediterranean imho.
Click to expand...
This is interesting it identifies all of these locations same locations areas where pilots have already been reporting issues with GNSS issues sporadically in these regions since the beginning of the invasion.
We’ll see
www.aerotime.aero

EASA warns of intensifying GPS jamming incidents linked to war in Ukraine - AeroTime

European aviation safety authorities have warned of risks from increased incidents of GPS jamming, following Russia’s invasion of Ukraine. The jamming or spoofing of Global Navigation Satellite System (GNSS) signals has been observed by aircraft in various phases of flights, the European Union...
www.aerotime.aero www.aerotime.aero
 
Obreid said:
This is interesting it identifies all of these locations same locations areas where pilots have already been reporting issues with GNSS issues sporadically in these regions since the beginning of the invasion.
We’ll see
www.aerotime.aero

EASA warns of intensifying GPS jamming incidents linked to war in Ukraine - AeroTime

European aviation safety authorities have warned of risks from increased incidents of GPS jamming, following Russia’s invasion of Ukraine. The jamming or spoofing of Global Navigation Satellite System (GNSS) signals has been observed by aircraft in various phases of flights, the European Union...
www.aerotime.aero www.aerotime.aero
Click to expand...
From my understanding--on its conception GPS had a feature called selective availability- where the more precision signal"dithering" ability would be switched off and positions would be less precise in civilian GPS receivers......this is different than active jamming. This feature was discontinued in 2000 with the later GPS III satellites reportedly not including it. I wonder about the Cat 3 autoland capabilities that some civilian/commercial aircraft are certified for and how jamming would effect this- from my understanding, autoland is a certification that I believe must be proven periodically i.e in any 90 day period a certified aircraft must perform a certain number of autoland approaches/landings (even in non Cat 3 conditions) to keep its certification current otherwise its operation is restricted in Cat 3 conditions. I read that some autoland systems are augmented with GPS/GNSS as part of this but someone here more knowledgeable may be able to address this better.

For those interested more on autoland is here
en.wikipedia.org

Autoland - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org en.wikipedia.org

also apparently selective availability was discontinued in 2000 with reportedly, the GPS III satellites not including this feature

GPS.gov: Selective Availability

Information about the end of GPS Selective Availability
www.gps.gov

and for those wanting to know far more about GPS

en.wikipedia.org

Global Positioning System - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org en.wikipedia.org
Hope this helps and hope there are some pilots with more complete IFR knowedge that might like to contribute as well.

Another area where GPS timing pulses are critical is in both cellular systems and some wired (or fiber) newtorks. It can be argued that most notably in some 5G networks, other cellular systems and even some fiber systems that if GPS goes away or is jammed -- network timing errors start to occur. More on that here

 
Last edited:
I read in an italian article (https://www.lantidiplomatico.it/det...a_fase_3_della_guerra_in_ucraina/45289_46057/) a theory about the development of the phase 2 of the war, and the following phase 3. In short words, the article says that Russia will be succesfull to win the phase 2, defiting the main core of the Ukranian forces in Donbass. The article supposes that then, the Ukranian gouvernement, maybe in exile, will ask help to Poland and to the Baltics, that they will likely join the war, with regolar troops, but also with contractors recluted from contractor's companies and troops having left the Army just for that.
The articles says that in Poland is just ammassing 120.000 troops. Is it confrmed?
 
bartok said:
I read in an italian article (https://www.lantidiplomatico.it/det...a_fase_3_della_guerra_in_ucraina/45289_46057/) a theory about the development of the phase 2 of the war, and the following phase 3. In short words, the article says that Russia will be succesfull to win the phase 2, defiting the main core of the Ukranian forces in Donbass. The article supposes that then, the Ukranian gouvernement, maybe in exile, will ask help to Poland and to the Baltics, that they will likely join the war, with regolar troops, but also with contractors recluted from contractor's companies and troops having left the Army just for that.
The articles says that in Poland is just ammassing 120.000 troops. Is it confrmed?
Click to expand...
Poland is increasing its arms spending a heck of a lot, but they're not planning to go in with boots on the ground in Ukraine, no.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom