Nuclear Posture Review leaked-Confirms Russian undersea nuclear delivery system

The draft of the Nuclear Posture Review, ordered by the Pentagon, has leaked and confirms that Russia has developed a nuclear capable undersea vehicle. The Ocean Multipurpose System Status-6, or Kanyon as the Pentagon calls it, was detected by US Intelligence sources after being released from a Russian Sarov class submarine in 2016. Russian sources claim it can carry up to a 100 megaton warhead, with a range of 6200 miles, top speed of 56 knots, and maximum depth of over 3200 feet.

The NPR talks about modernization of the US nuclear triad, as well as Russian expansion of their nuclear arsenal. The final copy of the report is scheduled to be released in February so there will probably be changes made prior to release, possibly including removal of any mention of the Status-6.

WASHINGTON — A draft of the Pentagon’s Nuclear Posture Review confirms the existence of an underwater nuclear drone made and operated by Russia, a capability the U.S. Defense Department had not previously publicly acknowledged.

“In addition to modernizing ‘legacy’ Soviet nuclear systems, Russia is developing and deploying new nuclear warheads and launchers,” stated an unclassified draft of the nuclear posture review first published by the Huffington Post.

“These efforts include multiple upgrades for every leg of the Russian nuclear triad of strategic bombers, sea-based missiles and land-based missiles. Russia is also developing at least two new intercontinental range systems, a hypersonic glide vehicle and a new intercontinental, nuclear-armed undersea autonomous torpedo.”

A chart laying out Russian nuclear delivery vehicles developed over the past decade spells out the capability yet again, including a small illustration for an “AUV,” or autonomous underwater vehicle, called Status-6.

www.defensenews.com...

www.defensenews.com...

After the underwater journey, does it get airborne, or is it essentially a NYC torpedo?

a reply to: cosmania

From what I understand, it would be used against ports and coastal areas. The claim is it could create a tsunami that would cause more damage, but even without that, a 100MT warhead is going to do a hell of a lot of damage.

Russia also has the ability to deposit missile launchers underwater which can deploy missiles that can attack us. I read about that somewhere, but was unable to find if the USA has those too. I am thinking we have some of those around the area of Russia too, they usually cannot have too long of a distance, they could be three hundred miles off shore of the US though and reach almost anywhere. The Koreans even have nuclear warhead capable subs able to carry city killing missiles. Seems that these nuclear capable subs are owned by many countries. I think of NK as more of a threat with this than Russia, although pissing off Russia is not a good thing to do.

a reply to: rickymouse

North Korea doesn't have a confirmed SSBN yet that I've heard of. They have one they're trying to develop but they haven't put it into service yet. They got a few Golf class boats, but they were for scrap. There's no indication that they were able to return them to service.

originally posted by: Zaphod58
a reply to: rickymouse

North Korea doesn't have a confirmed SSBN yet that I've heard of. They have one they're trying to develop but they haven't put it into service yet. They got a few Golf class boats, but they were for scrap. There's no indication that they were able to return them to service.

I thought they had the Polaris Sub that could launch small nukes, they just didn't get one designed to work with it yet. Supposedly it will do the job, The NK is there on making the small nuke now that will fit the sub. I cannot say if they have tested it yet though, only that the missile has been tested without the nuke. That is what I read anyway.

Here is a link I went to find now. www.hisutton.com... Hey, I remembered they were Polaris, I don't know how I remembered that. Maybe because I used to have a Polaris snowmobile.

a reply to: rickymouse

Polaris is the missile type. It was in service until the early 90s, when it was replaced by the Trident.

They have the Sinpo, but until they have a working missile, and more than one or two, they don't have an actual working SSBN. The point of an SSBN is to launch missiles, so without a missile, you just have a sub that doesn't do much.

a reply to: Zaphod58


What makes this any different than their nuclear subs like the Kursk?
Just the drone part?

a reply to: Bluntone22

The fact that it's unmanned, and operates so fast and deep. That makes it a lot harder to detect and stop.

a reply to: Zaphod58

Honestly.. we don’t have anything resembling a reasonable chance of blocking even one intercontinental ballistic missle..


So I don’t really care how good the delivery systems get..

If we can’t stop them. Then weather it is launched by sub, silo or leprechaun mounted on a raptor with teleport technology...

It’s kinda irrelevant..

a reply to: JoshuaCox

This isn't launching a nuclear weapon though, it is the nuclear weapon. This could be stopped if it could be tracked, and we had something that could do deep enough and fast enough to stop it.

Imagine if they put out a couple of hundred of these bad boys! ..... they could have them almost dormant ready to strike when necessary.

Scary stuff ..... can't imagine them being easy to track.

a reply to: Catch_a_Fire

can't imagine them being easy to track.

It would be hard for them not to lose one. I wonder how Russia keeps track.

originally posted by: tadaman
a reply to: Catch_a_Fire

can't imagine them being easy to track.

It would be hard for them not to lose one. I wonder how Russia keeps track.

That's the creepy thing ..... they don't need to be tracked by Russia, no need for any beacon or signal. In theory I suppose they could be predesignated to specific targets, then released from a sub at whatever GPS coordinates where they sit silently until called upon by the "button pusher".

Very effective idea.

a reply to: JoshuaCox

Right so the most logical course of action would be to stop provoking the rest of the world with our endless military conflicts and economic sanctions and deal with our problems back here.

a reply to: Catch_a_Fire

They'd have to wait to release them. You can't get a signal down that deep, so they'd have to get up near the surface regularly to get any kind of signal. So they'd have to release them already set to head to a target area.

a reply to: Zaphod58

Wouldn't they just hide them in shallow waters?, I'm assuming depth capabilities and speed would be just to ensure successful hits once launched.

a reply to: Catch_a_Fire

Yes, but they'd have to hide them in shallow water near their own territory if they did that, and there's no point in doing that instead of just launching them when ready. If you put them into shallow water near an opponent, you're risking them being detected on the way in, or someone accidentally stumbling on them while they sit.

a reply to: Zaphod58

So it's not without flaws ...... an ingenious idea all the same.

a reply to: Catch_a_Fire

Oh it's ingenious, and deadly as hell, but no, it's not without flaws. Everything has some flaw to it.