Did Russia Actually Build Project Pluto?

originally posted by: Zaphod58
a reply to: FredT

The nuclear powered weapons are cruise missiles, not ICBMs. They're designed for low level, high speed maneuvering, making them hard to kill. .

Agreed, but they Actually they looked at a nuclear version of the Saturn V third stage aka Saturn C-5N and thankfully passed on it . Its theoretically possible but pointless to make an ICBM out of one

en.wikipedia.org...

NERVA Project: en.wikipedia.org...

Its amazing in retrospect we are still here

a reply to: FredT

You're already not stopping an ICBM, and it doesn't need a long flight time, so no, there's no need to do it with one. A cruise missile though..... If SAC had gone through with Pluto they could have parked missiles at positive control points doing orbits just waiting for a command to go to their target areas, and all they would have had to do was an occasional flyby to check on them, or even just radar monitoring.

a reply to: Zaphod58

You heard about the testing proposal for them? To tether them with a long chain and fly them in circles somewhere in the Pacific LOL

The flaw in that kind of plan though was the lethal radiation they spewed creating basically dead zones where they orbited and mass contamination above and below the orbits.

The Mach 3 shockwave 500 feet above the deck was also quite lethal to those unprotected just in case the radiation didn't kill you...

a reply to: FredT

Hey, you take out your target however you can. Just gives you the warm fuzzies doesn't it.

More info on the new russian toys:

defense-update.com...

www.thedrive.com...

If this is true, then it would be a game changer on 2 fronts.

The first would be that the USA would have to get the R&D into high gear and start coming up with countermeasures, that would be used to counter said weapons.

But the other thing that we should consider on some of these systems would be hackers. Some of those weapons would require a form of communications giving the systems directions. What if a hacker were to hack into an operational weapon and turn it from its course to use against another country or against Russia?

originally posted by: sdcigarpig
The first would be that the USA would have to get the R&D into high gear and start coming up with countermeasures, that would be used to counter said weapons.

Why would they have to develop countermeasures? These weapons do not change the strategic balance between Russia and the US. They are actually unnecessary and huge waste of resources. With or without these weapons Russia can nuke the US 30 minutes from now any time if they so choose. This has been true for more than half a century and won’t change anytime soon, with or without these new weapons.

Russian fear mongering notwithstanding, the US does not have the capability to intercept even a fraction of the warheads launched in a strategic strike. The US missile defense is solely aimed at intercepting very limited attacks by essentially rouge actors.

To realistically threaten the Russian strike option as it exist today under START, they would need to deploy hundreds if not thousands of ground based interceptors in layers from Northern Canada all the way south to the US Border. The existing Northern Warning System probably wouldn’t provide enough target info to generate intercept vectors so you need the equivalent of a dozen SBX radars. Of course the entire kill chain needs to be protected against nuclear strikes itself. Nothing easier than lop a nuclear cruise missile or two against a couple of radar sites to create a gap for a strategic strike package to punch through.

This kind of defense will already cost hundreds upon hundreds of billions of US-$ over time. And its just midcourse defense. To be really sure to stop a strategic attack, you’d need to deploy Terminal air defenses around counter value and counterforce targets too. That means THAAD batteries to protect just about every major US City and military base, just a few hundred should do the trick.

So this takes care of the ICBM threat. Sort of. Nobody knows if it will ever work against MIRVs and decoys. All there is left is to prepare against the SLBM and ALCM threats. That’s trivial in comparison. You just need to deploy THAAD and PAC batteries along the entire US Coastline.

Bottom line, if Russia wants to waste their very limited ressources on aquiring redundant strategic strike capabilities they should be welcomed to do so.

So if these missiles are so hard to detect and stop once enroute why not try and get them when they are detectable..during the launch/boost phase??

Dust off the old ABL’s...a few upgrades on the laser and tracking equipment which have surely moved on in the past few years and bob’s your uncle...don’t care how fast a missle is..it ain’t going the speed of light!!!

Ok I know this is a simple answer..probably too simple as I’m sure people will let me know and there are problems with laser power and tracking through the atmosphere etc etc but this post will stimulate the thought processes for some people..!

Sv out!!!

Project Orion supposedly went black back in the day and still is kicking around..

a reply to: mightmight

A more likely version of what a nuclear war would look like, is a limited nuclear war, with a smaller number of strikes often involving tactical nuclear weapons. This is where the purported missile shield comes into play and what Russia is so paranoid about. Of course, if this really did happen there is danger of this escalating rapidly.

Even so, in a limited nuclear war, Russia already has the ability to get past air defenses. The Russian government has proven they are absolutely paranoid and will use the idea of the west having a "missile-shield" as an excuse to disproportionately improve and expand their own arsenal, which will only prove to be a destabilizing act.

One has to wonder, just how all talk are they though? Are they serious or is this for propaganda purposes?

I suggest we test them and see how they respond. For example, the next time a Russian fighter crosses the Euphrates. Shoot it down. Show realistic videos of Moscow under nuclear attack the next time the US talks about nuclear war. Then, the next time Russian mercenaries attack a US base, flatten them such that not even a cockroach can survive (Mercenaries are 'roaches after all). Provide high-tech weapons to countries that are Russia's adversaries (they are already doing this to North Korea - but like it matters, it's not in their interest to nuclear strike) and sanction them. Those who hacked the political groups in the United States are also known, they should be punished. Re-nuke the B-1s.

originally posted by: Zaphod58
a reply to: anzha

God I miss that SOB. He'd stroke out in five minutes at the Pentagon today.

Naw he would walk around for a day go to the nearest army base and steal a flame thrower and return to burn it to the ground and start over.

a reply to: anzha

The very existence of such a thing is anathema to my soul. It takes a very special coward to not only kill from a distance, but to contaminate every patch of air ones delivery vehicle comes into contact with.

originally posted by: C0bzz
a reply to: mightmight

Even so, in a limited nuclear war, Russia already has the ability to get past air defenses. The Russian government has proven they are absolutely paranoid and will use the idea of the west having a "missile-shield" as an excuse to disproportionately improve and expand their own arsenal, which will only prove to be a destabilizing act.

One has to wonder, just how all talk are they though? Are they serious or is this for propaganda purposes?

The only thing i worry about is the Russian starting to believe their own propaganda. Their position on missile defense never made military or geopolitical any sense. Its fine as long as the fear mongering is just for internal consumption, but if they actually start developing / deploying these insane and unneccessary systems its bad sign.

a reply to: mightmight

The only thing i worry about is the Russian starting to believe their own propaganda.

Indeed.

Check out this article:

This essay on the fast-evolving European security situation by Aleksandr Khramchikhin—one of Russia’s most wide-ranging and prolific military observers and analysts—sheds light on how many Russians view the strategic environment and the strengths, weaknesses, and intentions of their adversaries in the West.

ABOUT THE AUTHOR
Aleksandr Khramchikhin is deputy director of the Institute for Political and Military Analysis in Moscow.

It is filled with either delusions or propaganda which "Carnegie Endowment for International Peace" posted. So apparently they do believe it, or some of them. I found it amusing that "Carnegie Endowment for International Peace" posted it when all it is going to do is have the precise opposite affect and exposes how deluded and dangerous "many Russians" are.

carnegieendowment.org...

At this point in time, I think I catch a Russian troll a day. I think I need to create a repository or database of them.

a reply to: [post=23194611]C0bzz[/post

At this point in time, I think I catch a Russian troll a day. I think I need to create a repository or database of them.

Please do, they are getting a little thick on the ground. Come to think of it, a list of Chinese trolls wouldn't be a bad idea either.

a reply to: thebozeian

Putin's state of the national address was posted on youtube. Every single comment was fake.

The good thing is they are not particularly intelligent and favor quantity over quality. So usually you can flip it around on them and make them look like fools.

We need training on how to detect false information as part of every university course as a mandated subject AND this needs to be introduced into High School curriculum. We also need to invest in our universities more, such that they are Australian, not not merely meeting the requirements of the richest foreigners.

At this time I am trying to learn more about the issue, but then I think I'll try to communicate these issues to the government and others. Usually "the right" here wants to privatize education and expand our defense force. What if you flip it around on them and make them invest in, for example, education for national security reasons?

Anyway, the more I can find, the stronger the case is.

a reply to: Irishhaf

If he didn't just say screw it and nuke Washington.

a reply to: C0bzz

I suggest we test them and see how they respond. For example, the next time a Russian fighter crosses the Euphrates. Shoot it down. Show realistic videos of Moscow under nuclear attack the next time the US talks about nuclear war. Then, the next time Russian mercenaries attack a US base, flatten them such that not even a cockroach can survive (Mercenaries are 'roaches after all). Provide high-tech weapons to countries that are Russia's adversaries (they are already doing this to North Korea - but like it matters, it's not in their interest to nuclear strike) and sanction them. Those who hacked the political groups in the United States are also known, they should be punished. Re-nuke the B-1s.

On the other hand to what I posted above, it seems like Russia has gone down the North Korea route of propaganda to its own people about external threats as a distraction from the situation it finds itself in, and therefore are using this as a distraction and political blustering to its internal audience. After all the Russian elections are coming soon.

But it does seem that the Russians actually believe this propaganda, even those in "think"-tanks, which still can make the situation dangerous.

Therefore I am unsure what the response should be. My initial position is very different to this subsequent position.

Perhaps a strong response is necessary in particular sanctions (Trump is holding this up), a revised nuclear posture (done - although perhaps it was a little too strong and expensive), punishing those who meddled in the election (being done slowly, and the response isn't strong enough), punishing Russia for cyber attacks (not sure how?) as well as making our countries more robust. Since Russia keeps believing in non-existent threats and that an external threat is needed to keep the elite in power, I'm not sure if militarily backing off on them will actually achieve anything, except cede geopolitical goals.

Better ways of undermining them are needed.

edit: nevermind

TheDrive has a good article on the nuclear powered missiles development.
www.thedrive.com...

No matter how you look at it, this weapon system is unjustifiable insane.