The Unz Review - Mobile
A Collection of Interesting, Important, and Controversial Perspectives Largely Excluded from the American Mainstream Media
 Andrei Martyanov Archive
The Implications of Russia's New Weapon Systems
🔊 Listen RSS
Email This Page to Someone

 Remember My Information



=>
shutterstock_317815559

Bookmark Toggle AllToCAdd to LibraryRemove from Library • BShow CommentNext New CommentNext New ReplyRead More
ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
AgreeDisagreeLOLTroll
These buttons register your public Agreement, Disagreement, Troll, or LOL with the selected comment. They are ONLY available to recent, frequent commenters who have saved their Name+Email using the 'Remember My Information' checkbox, and may also ONLY be used once per hour.
Ignore Commenter Follow Commenter
Search Text Case Sensitive  Exact Words  Include Comments
List of Bookmarks

During the August 2008 Russo-Georgian War, the operations of Russia’s 58th Army were termed as “coercion into peace”. It is an appropriate term once one recalls what truly was at stake then. Russians did win that war and, indeed, coerced Georgia into a much more peaceful mood. In Clausewitzian terms the Russians achieved the main object of the war by compelling the enemy to do Russia’s will. Russians, as the events of the last 19 years showed, have no illusions anymore about the possibility of any kind of reasonable civilized conduct from the combined West, least of all from the United States which still continues to reside in her bubble which insulates her from any outside voices of reason and peace. The American global track record of the last few decades does not require any special elaborations—it is a record of military and humanitarian disasters.

Vladimir Putin’s March 1st, 2018 address to Russia’s Federal Assembly was not about Russia’s upcoming presidential elections, as many in the election-obsessed West suggest. Putin’s speech was about coercing America’s elites into, if not peace, at least into some form of sanity, given that they are currently completely detached from the geopolitical, military and economic realities of a newly emerging world. As it was the case with Georgia in 2008, the coercion was based on military power. The Pre-Shoigu Russian Army, for all its real and perceived shortcomings, disposed of the US-trained and partially equipped Georgian force in a matter of five days—the Russian Army’s technology, personnel and operational art was simply better. Obviously such a scenario is not possible between Russia and the United States; that is unless the American myth of technological superiority is blown out of the water.

American power elites, the majority of whom have never served a day in uniform nor ever attended serious military academic institutions and whose expertise on serious military-technological and geopolitical issues is limited to couple of seminars on nuclear weapons and, in the best case scenario, the efforts of the Congressional Research Service are simply not qualified to grasp the complexity, the nature and application of military force. They simply have no reference points. Yet, being a product of the American pop-military culture, also known as military porn and propaganda, these people—this collection of lawyers, political “scientists”, sociologists and journalists who dominate the American strategic kitchen which cooks non-stop delusional geopolitical and military doctrines, can understand one thing for sure—when their poor dears get a bulls-eye on their backs, or foreheads.

Putin’s message to the United States was extremely simple: he reminded the US about its condescending refusal to even consider Russia’s position on the ABM Treaty. As Jeffrey Lewis, in a surprising moment of sobriety for Foreign Policy magazine put it:

The real genesis of Russia’s new generation of bizarre nuclear weapons lies not in the most recent Nuclear Posture Review, but in the George W. Bush administration’s decision in 2001 to withdraw from the Anti-Ballistic Missile Treaty, and the bipartisan failure by both the Bush and Obama administrations to engage meaningfully with the Russians over their concerns about American missile defenses. Putin said as much in his remarks. “During all these years since the unilateral U.S. withdrawal from the ABM Treaty,” Putin explained, “we have been working intensively on advanced equipment and arms, which allowed us to make a breakthrough in developing new models of strategic weapons.” Those technological breakthroughs are now here. Sadly, we’re never got the diplomatic ones we needed.

Putin’s message was clear: “You didn’t listen to us then, you will listen to us now”. After that he proceeded with what can only be described as a military-technological Pearl-Harbor meets Stalingrad. The strategic ramifications of the latest weapon systems Putin presented are immense. In fact, they are historic in nature. Of course, many American pundits, expectedly, dismissed that as bluster—it is expected from the US military “expert” community. Others were not as dismissive and some were, indeed, deeply shocked. The overall impression today, a day after Putin’s presentation, can be described in simple terms as such: the missile gap is real and, in fact, it is not a gap but a technological abyss. Paradoxically, this abyss is not where many do admit it—such as the RS-28 Sarmat ballistic missile, whose existence and approximate characteristics were more or less known for years. It is, undeniably, an impressive technological achievement of having a ballistic missile with not only practically unlimited range but also capable of trajectories which render any kind of Anti-Ballistic Defense useless. In the end, to be attacked from the South Pole, through South America, is not a contingency the US military is capable of facing. Probably not for very many years.

Nor is the Russian M=20+ hypersonic glider weapon system called Avangard, which is already in series production, an unexpected development—the United States has its own, albeit not successful yet, program for such types of weapons and those ideas were being floated in the US since the mid-2000s under the tutelage of the PGS (Prompt Global Strike). Yes, these are stunning technological achievements by Russia with Jeffrey Lewis’ term “bizarre” being a euphemism for “we don’t have anything comparable”, but it wasn’t even here where the real shock should be. Several of my articles on this resource have been focused precisely in the area where the United States was more than lagging—cruise missiles, all kinds of them. I predicted the American real military decline coming namely by this path many years ago, today it is patently clear that Russia holds an overwhelming military-technological advantage in cruise and aero-ballistic missiles and leads the US by decades in this crucial field.

While Western punditry was discussing all those exotic and, no doubt, stunning weapon systems designed for the delivery of nuclear weapons to any point on the globe with very high precision, many true professionals were gasping for the air when the Dagger (Kinzhal) was unveiled. This is a complete game changer geopolitically, strategically, operationally, tactically and psychologically. It was known for some time now that Russian Navy was already deploying a revolutionary M=8 capable 3M22 Zircon anti-shipping missile. As impressive and virtually uninterceptable by any air defenses the Zircon is, the Kinzhal is simply shocking in its capabilities. This, most likely based on the famed Iskander airframe, M=10+ capable, highly maneuverable, aero-ballistic missile with a range of 2000 kilometers, carried by MiG-31BMs, just rewrote the book on naval warfare. It made large surface fleets and combatants obsolete. No, you are not misreading it. No air-defense or anti-missile system in the world today (maybe with the exception of the upcoming S-500 specifically designed for the interception of hyper-sonic targets) is capable of doing anything about it, and, most likely, it will take decades to find the antidote. More specifically, no modern or perspective air-defense system deployed today by any NATO fleet can intercept even a single missile with such characteristics. A salvo of 5-6 such missiles guarantees the destruction of any Carrier Battle Group or any other surface group, for that matter–all this without use of nuclear munitions.

The usage of such a weapon, especially since we know now that it is deployed already in Russia’s Southern Military District is very simple–the most likely missile drop spot by MiG-31s will be in the international waters of the Black Sea, thus closing off the whole Eastern Mediterranean to any surface ship or group of ships. Russia can also close off the Persian Gulf completely. It also creates a massive no-go zone in the Pacific, where MiG-31BMs from Yelizovo in Kamchatka or Centralnaya Uglovaya Air Base in Primosrky Krai will be able to patrol vast distances over the ocean. It is, though, remarkable that the current platform for the Kinzhal is the MiG-31–arguably the best interceptor in history. Obviously, the MiG-31′s ability to reach very high supersonic speeds (well in excess of M=2) is a key factor in the launch. But no matter what the procedures for the launch of this terrifying weapon are, the immediate strategic consequences of Kinzhal’s operational deployment are as follows:

  1. It finally moves aircraft carriers into the niche of pure power projection against weak and defenseless adversaries, and away from the remote sea zone of Russia, be it the Mediterranean, Pacific or North Atlantic. This also means a complete no-go zone for any of the 33 Aegis-equipped US Navy destroyers and cruisers which are crucial for American Ballistic Missile Defense;
  2. It makes classic CBGs as a main strike force against a peer or near-peer completely obsolete and useless, it also makes any surface combat ship defenseless regardless of its air-defense or anti-missile capabilities. It completely annuls hundreds of billions of dollars investment into those platforms and weapons, which suddenly become nothing more than fat defenseless targets. The whole concept of Air-Sea Battle, aka Joint Concept for Access and Maneuver in the Global Commons (JAM-GC), which is a cornerstone of American global dominance becomes simply useless—this is a doctrinal and fiscal catastrophe.
  3. Sea Control and Sea Denial change their nature and merge. Those who have such weapons, simply own vast spaces of the sea limited by the ranges of the Kinzhal and its carriers. It also removes completely any crucial surface support for submarines in the area, thus exposing them for Patrol/ASW aviation and surface ships. The effect is multiplicative and it is profound.

Russia has many of those carriers—the program of modernization of MiG-31s to BM was in full steam for some years now, with front line Air Force units seeing a considerable inflow of these aircraft. It is clear now why such modernization was undertaken–it made MiG-31BMs into launch platforms for the Kinzhal. As Marine Major General James L. Jones went on record in 1991, after the First Gulf War, “All it takes to panic a battlegroup is seeing somebody dropping a couple of 50-gallon drums into the water.” The Kinzhal effectively removes any non-suicidal surface force thousands of miles away from Russia’s shores and renders its capabilities irrelevant. In layman’s lingo that means only one thing—the US Navy’s whole surface component becomes a complete hollow force good only for parades and flag demonstration near and in the littorals of weak and underdeveloped nations. This can be done for a tiny fraction of the astronomical costs of US platforms and weapons.

It is very difficult at this stage to fully predict the political fallout of Putin’s speech in the US. What is easy to predict, however, is the use of the beaten to death cliché of asymmetry. The use of this cliché is wrong. What happened on March 1st this year with the announcement and demonstration of new Russian weapons is not asymmetry, it was an acknowledgement of the final arrival of a completely new paradigm in warfare, military technology and, as a consequence in strategy and operational art. Old rules and wisdom have ceased to apply. The United Sates was not and is not prepared for this, despite many real professionals, including in the US itself, warning about the new unfolding military-technological paradigm and a complete American myopia and hubris in anything military related. As Colonel Daniel Davies was forced to admit:

However justified that pride might have been at the time, it quickly mutated into distasteful arrogance. Now, it is an outright danger to the nation. Perhaps nothing exemplifies this threat better than the Pentagon’s dysfunctional acquisition system.

It is prudent to predict today, against the background of an American approach to war that there will be no sensible technological American response to Russia in the foreseeable future. The United States simply has no resources, other than turning on the printing presses and completely bankrupting itself in the process, to counter. But here is the point, Russians know this and Putin’s speech was not about directly threatening the US which, for all intents and purposes, is simply defenseless against the plethora of Russia’s hyper-sonic weapons. Russia does not pursue the objective of destroying the United States. Russia’s actions are dictated by only one cause–to pull a gun on a drunk, rowdy, knife wielding bully in the bar and get him to pay attention to what others may have to say. In other words, Russia brought the gun to a knife fight and it seems that this is the only way to deal with the United States today.

If warnings and the demonstration of Russian military-technological superiority will have an effect, as was the Russian intent from the beginning, some sensible conversation on the new world order may start between key geopolitical players. The world cannot afford any more a pretentious, self-aggrandizing and hollow bully which knows not what it does and threatens the world’s stability and peace. American self-proclaimed hegemony is over where it really matters for any real and perceived hegemon—the military field. It was over for some time now, it just took Putin’s speech to demonstrate the good old Al Capone truism that one can get much further with a kind word and a gun than with a kind word alone. After all, Russia did try a kind word alone, it didn’t work and the United States has only itself to blame.

 
Hide 399 CommentsLeave a Comment
Commenters to Ignore...to FollowEndorsed Only
Trim Comments?
    []
  1. Russian technology is not superior, but they are not burdened with as much “free market” corruption as the USA. Billions of American dollars are wasted on fraudulent programs like lasers:

    http://www.g2mil.com/Laser_Scams.htm

    and the SM-3 missile defense scam:

    http://www.g2mil.com/NMD_Fraud.htm

    The USA should return to the method used before the 1980s where government organizations developed weapons and then contracted production to the private sector. Most of these military/government organizations still exist, but have been sidelined, so crap is developed by a free market profit seeking monopoly, like the F-35.

    In my book free on-line book:

    http://www.g2mil.com/war.htm

    I list the major areas that modern military forces choose to ignore:

    1. The lethality of of precision guided munitions to easily destroy ultra-expensive ships, tanks, and aircraft has been dismissed.

    2. The use of small lasers to blind combatants. The US Marine Corps recently added expensive “dazzlers” to its machine guns that will prove more effective than the gun itself. (pictured)

    3. The inability to replace munitions stocks in a timely manner. Most nations have limited stockpiles and the complexity of some make rapid production impossible. If the USA becomes involved in a major war that lasts longer than a month, it will have to pause for several months until new munitions are produced and delivered.

    4. The humanitarian disaster that would result by disrupting the fragile economy of megacities. This occurred during World War II, but today’s big cities are ten times larger! Armies may face hoards of millions of starving people begging for help.

    5. The millions of civilian vehicles on the world’s roads. It is impossible to tell if they are friend or foe unless inspected up close. Soldiers can use this to their advantage, which makes urban operations very dangerous for both civilians and soldiers.

    6. The problem of thousands of commercial aircraft roaming the globe. Agents aboard can collect intelligence and these present long-range targeting problems for precision guided munitions that may kill hundreds of innocents.

    7. Adding warheads to inexpensive, commercial, hobbyist UAVs create deadly “suicide micro-drones.”

    8. Modern anti-tank weapons are equally effective anti-aircraft weapons against slower targets like low flying helicopters and aircraft transports. A helicopter assault or airborne drop near a modern army will be disastrous as anti-tank missiles shoot upwards and knock down aircraft.

    9. Modern body armor has made 5.56mm and even 7.62mm bullets less lethal.

    10. Fleets of surface ships cannot hide for long in big oceans.

  2. Sugi says:

    The world had been taking it lying down. Putin slayed the hegemon and let some fresh air in again. Great article !

    • Agree: Zumbuddi, bluedog
  3. Deafening silence in all of the US media on this issue. Everyone is shell shocked and stunned. And since America is a fiscal basket case which will be soon forced to start cutting military spending, the technological gap with Russia will only increase.

  4. Anonymous • Disclaimer says:
    @Carlton Meyer

    Lasers are not a waste at all. Lasers are the future of warfare.

    • Replies: @yurivku
  5. Cyrano says:

    I am sorry Andrei, but I am not convinced of the Russian technological superiority. I believe that the Americans will produce even scarier videos of attacks on Russia, than those used by Putin in his presentation – showing attacks on US.

    In order to ensure complete fairness, I propose that the winner of this technological war be decided by the Academy of motion pictures and should be awarded at the next year’s Oscars with a statue for best special effects.

    History – as recorded by that biggest arbiter of truth – the Hollywood movies – clearly shows that more Germans died in the American made movies than in the Russian ones – thus it’s obvious that US won that war pretty much single-handedly.

    Similarly – if Hollywood produces better videos this time around too – the winning decision should go to US and Russia has no business messing with them.

    Of course, there will be skeptics that will say that US is flirting with disaster by trying to bully Russia – based on some historical precedence. I don’t really think that US are flirting with disaster, I think that they are having a full blown affair.

  6. Zumbuddi says:

    If the gods are kind, Putin’s speech three days before AIPAC circus means that is the last AIPAC humiliation the American people will suffer.

    The Russians ARE influencing the American politicsl process — Putin is Draining the Swamp.

    One question — who succeeds Putin? Is his governance a personality cult or a system/ value consensus?

  7. Bob2 says:

    > Russian technology is not superior, but they are not burdened
    > with as much “free market” corruption as the USA.

    You’re quite butt-hurt.

  8. WHAT says:

    Hey, no fair, I`ve read all this in your blog already. ^_^

  9. Miro23 says:

    Deafening silence in all of the US media on this issue. Everyone is shell shocked and stunned.

    The usually loquacious Chief Twitter is silent, and so are the media which is very unusual. The automatic MSM reaction is to attack anything coming from Russia, and present it as a threat, but this time, remarkably, it really is a threat, and they need some time to work it out.

    This shows that 1) the US media doesn’t have independent opinions – they’re propagandists, and they are currently awaiting instructions on the Party Line. 2) the US Deep State is in a quandary: Logically they need to back off, but they are fully invested in the “Russian menace” theme tied to planned attacks on Syria and Iran.

    The complications are that the US (now publicly) looks at a lot more at risk than it did on the 28th February (which invites an America First/ Israel First split in US policy making) and that the US military now have the issue out in the open in military terms (rather than the usual political terms ) with the risks fully exposed.

  10. @Cyrano

    You should leave humor to professionals, you are clearly not very good at it. But your sad, little effort at negating uncomfortable reality is appreciated, nevertheless. I’d do it too if I was spending $700B a year and had nothing to show for it, except for cartoons and Hollywood propaganda.

  11. Excellent article.
    I also payed attention to Daggers specifically also because unlike those “bizarre” nukes they can be used now. However , I am skeptical about American elites getting it at this stage. The process went too far. if this is Stalingrad, then next logical step is required. Which is important rather as psychological step, not that Russia would have needed it were USA a reasonable state. Placing daggers next to USA would have immediate psychological impact and there is nothing US Navy can do now unlike Cuban crisis. Having all of USA within 5 min flight, what bull eye on my dears backs can be better thought of.

    • Replies: @Reidar Barstad
  12. padre says:
    @Cyrano

    And what is your field of expertize in technology, since you are so adamant, that the Russian are no match for Americans?

    • Replies: @JohnnyRVF
  13. Vojkan says:

    “In other words, Russia brought the gun to a knife fight and it seems that this is the only way to deal with the United States today.”

    That’s a good summary. One that even the supposedly more moderate commentators in the West fail to get so whether it will be enough to bring back to reason the vain and greedy loons ruling the Western world remains to be seen.

  14. Aedib says:

    There are several well-grounded sources claimed that Kinzhal is just an aeroballistic version of the land-based Iskander missile. If so, I’m amazed with the range increase, from 500 km to 2000km. I know that this may be given by changing “initial conditions” from 0-km heigth, 0-mach to 20-km height 2+mach provided by the MiG-31BM.
    I consider the Tu-22M3 as a more “logical carrier” since, it can replace the liquid fueled Kh-22/Kh-32 by Kinzhal and so a bomber can launch up to 3 aeroballistic missiles. In such a case (10 km height 2- mach initial conditions) what will be the practical range? 1000km?
    MiG-31BM will provide the extreme range but you will need at least a dozen of them to attack a carrier group. Tu-22M3 can trade range for a higher fire volume.
    I suspect also that the missile is aimed at circumventing the INF treaty just by air-launching the missile toward land targets in west Europe.

    • Replies: @Andrei Martyanov
    , @Kyay
  15. yurivku says:
    @Anonymous

    Lasers are not a waste at all. Lasers are the future of warfare.

    How did you know that? As for me, graduated optic-electronic division of an institute, I know that all experiments in 1970-1980th with powerfull lasers in atmosphere weren’t successful due to heterogeneous structure of atmosphere and breakdown phenomenon in it.
    I didn’t follow the new achievements, but those problems seem to me to be irresistible and so usage of lasers is limited to small distances in atmosphere. In space – yes, it could be used.

    • Replies: @Ger
    , @Philip Owen
    , @Dragon
  16. @Russia is the best

    Nobody here is stunned or shocked. They are too arrogant and stupid to understand anything. In any case, they have more important issues to deal with, like allowing men who think they are women use the little girl’s bathroom.

  17. Anonymous • Disclaimer says:

    Russia is a real country, a true nation. It’s military has much more ethnic cohesion than ours ever will again. I wonder what the long term impact of that will be.

  18. yurivku says:

    Vladimir Putin’s March 1st, 2018 address to Russia’s Federal Assembly was not about Russia’s upcoming presidential elections, as many in the election-obsessed West suggest.

    Andrei, of cource, he was about “Russia’s upcoming presidential elections”. It’s absolutely clear, and he did very good step in election sense. Majority of us (me including) were impressed and being tired of US bullying, improved our vision of Putin. So locally he certainly won. All except some true liberasts who are screaming like a pigs in the slaughterhouse, we all got it with satisfactiond and pride.
    As for me I have some doubts in nuclear powered missile and probably speed of nuke submarine seems be exagerated, but who knows. Even in case of fake/exageration such trolling makes sense.

    But I traced the reactions of West MSM and in comments to that BS – MSM are writing now – Russia threats, Russia started Cold War, Russia started an arms race … seems like 80% of readers aggree and have totally clean of any thinking brains. I do support Putin’s discovering the reality for the common West, but I’m afraid we got even more close to that nuke abyss.

  19. Trmist says:

    Great analysis and perspective. A few points, first there are plenty of skeptics I suggest a real world demonstration of some of these new weapon platforms will be necessary to prove their existence. Second will Russia use their new and potentially superior position to offer protection to its neighbours and eventually kick America out of Eurasia. Finally, if these new weapons are the game changer on the battlefield the author suggests then the real fire works might occur in economic sphere, without the threat of military action against them how many countries stop using the US dollar for trade and US treasuries for reserves.

    • Replies: @Andrei Martyanov
    , @Kiza
  20. iffen says:

    I had much more confidence in what you have to say before you started writing that the IDF Air Force was destroyed/cowed by the “Syrian air defense” systems, not to mention the assertion that Russian mercenaries only exist in Western propaganda.

    • Agree: Momus
    • Replies: @Andrei Martyanov
  21. Anonymous • Disclaimer says:

    Putin’s speech was brilliant. The neocons couldn’t have asked for better content. A CIA writer like Tom Friedman couldn’t glorify militarism any better. The US has no choice but to ramp up defense spending to even more extreme levels to counter the new Russian threat.

    • Replies: @pogohere
    , @SimpleHandle
  22. Thank God for Russia and Putin, at last their is a country and a man who the Zionist neocons in the U.S. and Israel and Britain can not invade and destroy for the Zionist NWO, the tide has changed.

    • Replies: @Gleimhart
  23. This is one of the best articles that I have recently read. The validity of the points made is enhanced by some superb expressions and descriptions (pop-military culture, American strategic kitchen etc.) Eminemtly readable. Well done!

    From William Mallinson, author of ‘The Danger of Geopolitics to International Relations: Obsession with the Heartland’.

    • Replies: @Andrei Martyanov
  24. @Aedib

    There are several well-grounded sources claimed that Kinzhal is just an aeroballistic version of the land-based Iskander missile.

    This is precisely what is stated in the article–Kinzhal is Iskander on steroids, very large doses of steroids.

    MiG-31BM will provide the extreme range but you will need at least a dozen of them to attack a carrier group.

    The number of leakers in this case is very easy to calculate–because probabilities of intercept of even a single Kinzhal are approaching zero. I can give you one (of very many) scenarios how the CBG can be disposed of using just 3-4 Kinzhals. A salvo at Aegis (SM-3, 6) escorts (DDGs, CGs) which removes air defense umbrella and after that let 3M54 or Zircon finish off a defenseless CVN. Simple as that. You can mix and match here whatever strike force you want–X-32 by Tu-22M3 or whatever floats your boat.

    • Replies: @Y.L.
  25. @iffen

    I will have to learn to live now with your loss of confidence in me. I’ll try.

    • LOL: RadicalCenter
    • Replies: @Y.L.
  26. Y.L. says:

    What I find both galling and frightening, which proves Andrei’s point about America’s power elites, “are simply not qualified to grasp the complexity, the nature and application of military force. They simply have no reference points,” is proven by today’s article, which infuriates me in its sophomoric arrogance, posted on The Hill by “Tom Nichols…a professor of national security affairs at the U.S. Naval War College and an adjunct professor at the Harvard Extension School.”

    Nichols writes here: http://thehill.com/opinion/national-security/376680-theatrics-or-threat-putin-leans-on-nuclear-hysteria-to-mask

    “The only thing that could have made Russian President Vladimir Putin’s speech about Russia’s nuclear arsenal better is if he had given it wearing a Mao jacket and stroking a white cat, like the evil character Blofeld from a James Bond movie.

    “Putin’s theatrics represented a farrago of theater, fantasy and bluster. For some reason, Putin said he was unveiling a nuclear-powered cruise missile with virtually unlimited range. This is a strange thing to claim, for several reasons. It is technologically difficult to do (which is why the Americans never built one, even after considering it more than 50 years ago), but more to the point, it serves no purpose. Why build a cruise missile that takes hours to reach its target when intercontinental ballistic missiles (ICBMs) or submarine-launched ballistic missiles can reach the same targets in minutes?

    “Putin presented animation of the new missile, mostly consisting of computer graphics that looked like it could have been a cheap 1980s game called “Microsoft Cruise Missile Simulator.” The video showed a cruise missile flying a long distance while following terrain and avoiding obstacles. In other words, it was doing what we’ve known cruise missiles can do for more than 40 years.

    “Even if the Russians can build this nuclear white elephant, it’s not clear what it’s supposed to do. Like the “invincible” hypersonic missile that Putin claims can evade all defenses, it’s a solution searching for a problem: Russian ICBM warheads, like all ICBM warheads, already land at hypersonic speed, and there are no functioning missile defenses in the United States that have any real chance of stopping them.

    “Putin is unveiling this next generation of weapons from Drax Industries for two reasons. Most important, Putin is running for reelection, and while he has no chance of losing, he needs to gloss over his regime’s economic failures by legitimizing his rule in the militaristic themes he knows best as a product of the Soviet system.

    “Whatever hopes people might have had about Putin as a new kind of leader back in 1999, he has turned into a standard-issue Soviet kleptocrat leading a comical (but nonetheless lethal) cult of personality. The man who began his time in office with a candid assessment of Russia’s future challenges is now a whining autocrat who blames all of his country’s misfortunes on sinister forces in the “West” and particularly the United States and NATO.

    “Second, Putin embodies a gnawing and well-deserved insecurity at the root of the Russian defense establishment. The Russian military still relies on conscription and is still a nightmare of poor training, hazing and dodgy equipment. It is improving quickly — which should actually reassure the West, since a military in free-fall is more dangerous than a professional and competent force — but it is so weak that Putin knows he must rely on nuclear threats to punch above its weight.”

    *** End Excerpt***

    I think these excerpts prove the idiot has no idea that his much beloved carrier groups are now effectively rendered useless. Either he’s in denial or he’s that stupid or he’s lying, preaching to the “U.S.A.! U.S.A.!” choir.

    I am appalled.

  27. Aedib says:

    Are you sure about the “steroids”? It seems that’s just the air-launched Iskander. May be, Kinzhal is just Iskander with a bigger solid-fuel load. It seems strange that you can increase four-fold the range just launching it from a Mig-31, even if it helps a lot.

    http://charly015.blogspot.com.ar/2018/03/sistema-hipersonico-kinzhal.html

    Do you have info about the Avangar glider? I would love to know more about this thing.

    • Replies: @Andrei Martyanov
  28. anonymous • Disclaimer says:
    @Russia is the best

    What is the state of stand-up comedy in Russia?

  29. @Anonymous

    We Americans are strong because of our diversity. Martin Luther King discovered America. Frederick Douglass was the last Founding Father. Repeat as needed until you believe it.

    • Replies: @Bill
  30. March 1 2018 is Independence and Liberation Day for Humanity.
    PutinDAN or PutinDAY will be celebrated by freedom and self-respecting people everywhere.
    Spasiba to countless scientist and defense workers of RF.
    Spasiba Mr.Putin.

  31. @Carlton Meyer

    There are skirmishes (Libya, Iraq, Syria etc) And than are wars of superpowers.
    Obviously You are a bit confused.

  32. Tom Gregg says:
    @Y.L.

    Unfortunately the neocons will need a demonstration. Hopefully this can be done without the sinking of an aircraft carrier and the inevitable escalation that would follow…

  33. @Russia is the best

    If you recognized it as a sarcasm than Cyrano is not so bad.

  34. @Efstratios

    Thank you for your kind words, William. My upcoming book deals with those issues in much more expanded form. The title is: “Losing Military Supremacy: The Myopia of American Strategic Planning.” It is not often in one’s life that one begins to realize in terror that present West’s in general and US in particular so called “elites” and policy makers are for the most part ignorant amateurs.

    • Replies: @Y.L.
  35. Vojkan says:

    Interesting how many commenters bring back this to neocons. Should Russia disarm so that peace-loving Americans don’t have to endure the neocons’ militaristic ramblings?

  36. @Aedib

    Are you sure about the “steroids”? It seems that’s just the air-launched Iskander. May be, Kinzhal is just Iskander with a bigger solid-fuel load. It seems strange that you can increase four-fold the range just launching it from a Mig-31, even if it helps a lot.

    Isn’t it what you have just describes is a definition of being on steroids?

    Do you have info about the Avangar glider? I would love to know more about this thing.

    No, I don’t, and as strange as it sounds, it makes me quite happy. I am sure there are very many people today who would like to know more.

    • Replies: @Y.L.
  37. @Russia is the best

    US has now a NORAD. Now the US will have to build not only SOUTHRAD. US will have to build
    WESTRAD, EASTRAD, UNDERSEERAD and TOPRAD.
    In my humble opinion US has now a handful job.

  38. Panic stations! Nobody outside of Russia, and few enough inside it, I’d guess, have taken Puitn seriously. Putin can’t be so stupid as not to realize that, by making his announcement in the run-up to the election, it would be seen as electioneering. That’s just common sense. He also cannot be so stupid as not to realize that the US cannot just let another country announce that it has superior weapons to it. Putin has is already knocking holes in US credibility every day he is allowed to remain in Ukraine. The US reaction will almost certainly be an arms race, which Russia simply cannot afford and maybe even further and better arming of Ukraine. The author’s frantic attempts to plug the hole confirms my suspicion that Putin has lurched into yet another blunder, his seventh by my count.

  39. @Y.L.

    I am appalled.

    Don’t be–this is the “level” of current American “national security expertdom” which is a mix of ignorance, arrogance and huge insecurity. There are, of course, many fluffy “credentials” but for the most part those people are nothing more than empty suites, such as this “professor” from Naval War College. Actually, the butt-hurt oozes from his filled with BS piece. I think they got the message.

    • Replies: @Y.L.
    , @Kiza
  40. CK says:

    The Triad appears to have become a duo.
    The boomers and the silos.
    As it appears that the latest generation of Russian airframes are very stealthy, so it would extrapolate that the lead in stealth has “vanished.”
    I wonder when the Russians will announce the breakthrough that makes the oceans transparent to their satellites.
    I read somewhere that the art of diplomacy was the ability to say ” Nice Doggie, Nice Doggie until one had obtained a rock” . I suspect that the Russians have found the working Reset button that Hillary and her associates couldn’t.

  41. @anonymous

    Not as good as in usa. USA practically elects stand up comedians as Potus.

    • Replies: @chris
  42. The American global track record of the last few decades does not require any special elaborations—it is a record of military and humanitarian disasters.

    Yet, somehow, the Americans have always managed to benefit from those disasters. On the other hand, the very educated country full of graduates of very famous institutions, particularly the military academies, has disintegrated. In case you are wondering I am talking about USSR.

    The Pre-Shoigu Russian Army, for all its real and perceived shortcomings, disposed of the US-trained and partially equipped Georgian force in a matter of five days—the Russian Army’s technology, personnel and operational art was simply better.

    The mighty Russians defeated a tiny country. What an achievment! At least they had enough sense not to boast about it. At the beginning of the conflict the Russians were actually quite a bit disorganised, as is the habit of all Slavs. They were caught by surprise. That much for their better personnel and operational art.

    American power elites, the majority of whom have never served a day in uniform nor ever attended serious military academic institutions and whose expertise on serious military-technological and geopolitical issues is limited to couple of seminars on nuclear weapons and, in the best case scenario, the efforts of the Congressional Research Service are simply not qualified to grasp the complexity, the nature and application of military force. They simply have no reference points.

    You seem to know so much one is almost tempted to believe you rub shoulders with those elites on a daily basis. We all know by now that the only person in the world who can understand those issues is the greates general of all times, Andrei Martyanov, formerly known as Smoothie ( I wonder what happened ). The power elites do not have to understand those issues. That is not their job. Believe it or not they have plenty of experts, real experts, not bloggers who take care of those issues. Whose expert are better? You can measure that by the position of a country in the world. As far as the pathetic talk about USA collapsing every minute now I have been hearing that for 60 years. Here is a short list of the countries which really disintegrated. USSR, Yugoslavia, Iraq, Syria,Lybia,Ukraine,etc.

    After that he proceeded with what can only be described as a military-technological Pearl-Harbor meets Stalingrad. The strategic ramifications of the latest weapon systems Putin presented are immense.

    I am sure they are. After the slaughter of several hundred Russian mercenaries in Syria the mighty Russian stand off capabilities, to use your term, showed to the whole world that they can only stand down. The Russians did not do much in a way of response after the killing of their general, attack on their base, attack on their embassy, shooting down of their plane, etc. I know. Their technology is so good they do not have to. It is enough to talk about it.

    In the end, to be attacked from the South Pole, through South America, is not a contingency the US military is capable of facing. Probably not for very many years.

    They do not have to. It is an idiotic proposal.
    In any case if only half of your exagerated claims are true you should leave United States immediately unless of course you are suicidal.

  43. Y.L. says:
    @Andrei Martyanov

    Dear Andrei,

    I am pleased –thrilled–to hear from the author of this unemotional, rational, factual analysis.

    “Butt-hurt” indeed or delusion.

    The problem as the “Empire” doubles down as other comments and even your friend The Saker posted in:

    http://thesaker.is/how-far-can-the-americans-be-pushed/

    is that the hubris and stupidity may escalate into violence, i.e. direct conflict.

    You’re a better judge perhaps than I of American political and military stupidity. The C.I.A. controlled Hollywood keeps showing apocalyptic films so as to prepare the masses for mass death. In addition to making Russians bad guys.

    Do Russians understand–its leadership–that the extermination of their peons, namely us, is not a “bug” but a feature to the so-called Western elites? That is, they hold us in contempt. Look at the recent mass censorship by YouTube of even Christians.

    My concern is that a military conflict is unavoidable, except perhaps the Mad Dogs are such cowards and want to maintain invincibility maybe they’ll just stick to proxies in Ukraine and Syria…for now.

    Thanks for the concise and wise reply.

    • Replies: @Andrei Martyanov
  44. Y.L. says:
    @Andrei Martyanov

    RE: The Avangar glider.

    I don’t think the engineering is that difficult; all that is needed is ceramic-composite vehicle perhaps gyro guided, because rockets wouldn’t work in a plasma environment, I think, that can endure re-entry. The power is from falling down the gravity well. All that is needed is a guidance, that’s why I thought of a gyroscopic analog, system.

    It should be simple and efficient and not too costly. So I don’t think it will take too long to implement.

    If there any engineers whose field of expertise reading this, their thoughts would be appreciated.

    • Replies: @FB
  45. Y.L. says:
    @Andrei Martyanov

    I look forward to your book.

    I have a question: you didn’t discuss the deployed laser weapons? Are this laser powered equivalents of S-500 anti-aircraft systems? Targeting ground troups and tanks doesn’t make sense to me.

    Light speed targeting ABM and anti-aircraft tech would be devastating to Israel–and America’s–air superiority.

    Nothing has been written on this tech yet but I’m guessing that’s what it’s for. I hope you post a follow-up once more information is available.

  46. The one salient fact that impresses me the most about these Russian weapons systems is how useful they are. They were designed solely for the purpose of winning a war, specifically against America’s force projection platforms. They are not chess pieces in a global game of outbidding, outmatching, and intimidation. They are meant to be used; they will be used.

    The American elites seem to think that because their own procurement system is designed to do nothing except spread pork around by building splashy, non-functioning weapons systems that are good only for browbeating Third-World shitholes, that everybody else must think the same way. The only question on their minds is, “Whose palm does Putin think he’s greasing with these armaments?” And look at how cheap they are. Why, we could spend more than that in a month!”

    This development has convinced me more than ever that America is in its last days of hegemony. Our rulers simply will not realize how feckless and outclassed they are, even when they are swinging from the gallows.

  47. Kiza says:
    @Andrei Martyanov

    I agree, they are very, very dumb, but not so dumb to neglect something that may end their miserable little lives. Therefore, the “professor’s” write up is a butt hurt soothing piece. Just note the amount of hate and frustration reserved for the messenger, because they cannot even kill the messenger.

    • Agree: Andrei Martyanov
  48. Alfa158 says:
    @Y.L.

    The Academies have long been staffed by Cult. Marxist faculties. That is why you see so many military officers who seem to have astonishingly Liberal political and cultural views. The long march through the institutions has swept over all the major institutions in the West including the military. The military has been used as the perfect vehicle for instituting the changes the Left wants because it is based on strict obedience to orders from above. From racial integration in the forties to gay rights, tranny rights, combat roles for women, and racially equalized outcomes, the Left has used the military as the cutting edge. I remember an article in American Spectator on Clinton’s first inauguration. There was a flyover of military aircraft at the ceremony. The Spectator reporter saw a Clinton campaigner jeering at the planes, and one of his comrades interrupted him saying, “Hey, it’s cool, those are ours now”.

    • Replies: @Y.L.
  49. Y.L. says:
    @Alfa158

    Absolutely excellent point; they can’t win wars against real adversaries they can only murder and bully to spread an agenda.

    And now their bluff has been called.

    Ray McGovern’s essay on Consortium News is good but none of the State Department morons and Pentagon fools will understand.

    https://consortiumnews.com/2018/03/03/putin-claims-strategic-parity-respect/

    They’ll double-down and posture.

  50. Jamie_NYC says:

    Meh. Good for Russia, but let me ask you: how many NATO divisions did it take to conquer Ukraine? That’s right, zero. US did spend 5 billion dollars, organized QUANGOS, CIA was involved, no doubt. All the missiles in the world wouldn’t have helped Ukraine. Economic sanctions, propaganda and intelligence warfare are the biggest threats to Russia, as far as West is concerned, not open military confrontation.

  51. @Carlton Meyer

    I’ve been reading your site for a long time. Some points on your response to Martyanov:

    The USA should return to the method used before the 1980s where government organizations developed weapons and then contracted production to the private sector. Most of these military/government organizations still exist, but have been sidelined, so crap is developed by a free market profit seeking monopoly, like the F-35.

    Is this really accurate? There was plenty of development by commercial organizations prior to the 1980s, and military arsenals have their own failure records. Examples of commercial successes in the past:

    *Most aircraft produced until the F-111 (which ultimately matured into a fine aircraftt), and then afterwards the entire teen series of fighters as well as the A-10
    *The original AR-15, which the army chose to screw up royally

    Then we have examples of arsenal and lab failures such as:

    *Refusing the .276 round for the M1 Garand and later insisting on the 7.62 NATO in contravention of the superior British alternative
    *The aforementioned M16 screwup
    *BuOrd’s disgraceful WW2 torpedo foulup

    Now one thing that has changed substantially is that most ship classes used to be developed by the Navy itself and its government yards, but now they’re developed by contractors (badly, as shown by the Gerald Ford class, the Zumwalt class, and the LCS joke). But the old navy did solicit commercial designs as well.

    Some more competition is needed. This can come from renewed development by arsenals, but also we need trust busting in the defense industry.

    Program management is obviously a huge disaster, but who knows why? Cost-plus contracts? Officers and politicians effectively playing for the contractors rather than the country? Ignorance, as Martyanov suggested?

    2. The use of small lasers to blind combatants. The US Marine Corps recently added expensive “dazzlers” to its machine guns that will prove more effective than the gun itself. (pictured)

    Skeptical. Against trained infantry gunfire is largely suppressive. The enemy is destroyed by indirect fires and making use of microterrain to maneuver.

    That said adds another useful weapon for relatively little weight, and depending on the power of the laser and the weather that day it could outperform gunfire at longer ranges.

    3. The inability to replace munitions stocks in a timely manner. Most nations have limited stockpiles and the complexity of some make rapid production impossible. If the USA becomes involved in a major war that lasts longer than a month, it will have to pause for several months until new munitions are produced and delivered.

    This was an issue even in the Cold War (NATO officially planned on 30 days warstocks, but based on the experience of the Yom Kippur war it probably had one-two weeks). It was also an issue for all combatants in the early stages of both world wars.

    It seems difficult to plan for this, especially as politicians are likely to balk at huge warstocks which must be frequently replaced or refurbished.

    More important may be simply maintaining a strong industrial base–woops.

    5. The millions of civilian vehicles on the world’s roads. It is impossible to tell if they are friend or foe unless inspected up close. Soldiers can use this to their advantage, which makes urban operations very dangerous for both civilians and soldiers.

    This, incidentally, also makes the interdiction mission for airpower that was so successful in the summer of 1944 effectively useless against any industrialized opponent.

    In the summer of 1944 we had 11,000 fighters (as well as medium bombers, unsure how many) in Western Europe facing a few thousand German trucks and a small number of rail lines.

    In a modern conflict we’d have a few hundred fighters and attack aircraft against millions of trucks. Modern aircraft can attack more targets successfully, but the disparity is too huge to overcome.

    9. Modern body armor has made 5.56mm and even 7.62mm bullets less lethal.

    This is solvable problem in my view. Increase the sectional density and length of the bullet, and increase muzzle velocity.

    Explosive and raufoss rounds might work as well, though the small size of bullets makes me skeptical.

    Precision-guided glide weapons of relatively small size (e.g. 40mm in diameter) are another option.

    You also don’t need to kill an opponent to achieve mission kill, and even someone in hard-kill body armor will be suppressed by gunfire which then allows for attack by indirect fires.

    10. Fleets of surface ships cannot hide for long in big oceans.

    Embarrassingly the USN’s official response to the Chinese demonstration of an antiship ballistic missile was that battlegroups would be hard to find. Sure.

    Even if that were true, to attack the enemy on land the battlegroups must get close to shore, where they are easily found and attacked.

    The USN basically stopped even bothering to defend its surface fleet against serious opponents after the cancellation of the F-111B.

    The F-111B was a logical response to the threat of Soviet naval aviation. With a combat range of over 2,000 nautical miles on internal fuel, it could credibly keep Soviet maritime patrol bombers out of launch range for their anti-ship missiles (which were to be armed with tactical nuclear warheads).

    The replacement F-14 only had a range of about 500 nautical miles. While a fine aircraft in many respect, it was useless in its planned role of fleet defense.

    Advanced long-range SAMs could do the job instead of long-range interceptors, but the US lags Russia badly here and has no long-range SAMs of any kind.

    This leaves missile defense and CIWS (where the US also lags many foreign nations, even small European ones!) to protect the fleet.

    Good luck with that.

    Serious things that might defend the fleet:

    *Long-range interceptors
    *Long-range SAMs (USN equivalent of S-300/400/500 family)
    *High energy microwaves (with enough energy a bubble field could destroy missile electronics)
    *Upgraded and more numerous CIWS, ideally with lasers and rail guns if they ever get those to work
    *Actually armoring ships

    But even if all of these expensive technologies work as intended, they’ll still vulnerable to being overwhelmed by salvos as well as nuclear warheads.

    Probably we should accept that Karl Doenitz was right about the future of naval warfare–nothing on the surface.

    The navy should instead be made up mostly of submarines and long range aircraft. Surface forces would be limited to mine sweepers, ASW corvettes, and green/brown water small boats (like the LCS except not expensive and trash).

    The entire amphibious assault concept is ridiculous as well. Amphibious assaults were hard enough to pull off in WW2 against inferior opponents hard pressed on other fronts.

    Against a prepared opponent with modern technology they will fail spectacularly.

    And against an UNPREPARED opponent no specialized and expensive amphibious forces are not needed. They can be quickly conducted using improvised equipment as the Germans did in 1917 and again in 1940.

  52. Technology is not the factor that makes this leapfrog so hopeless for the US MIC. The structure of Russia’s defense industrial base is inherently more agile and efficient because it’s a resource of the state and not exclusively a private profit center.

    Back when the USSR had just collapsed in the expectation of peace and disarmament, Russian defense industries lost interest in weapons and looked to commercial markets. They pitched projects like satellite systems they could field at one percent of the cost of existing systems. You read that right. Comparable US systems were two orders of magnitude more expensive. Russia’s defense industrial base continued to out-innovate the Pentagon.

    The US counter is to spend ten times more and piss away 95% of it. The inherent drain on procurement includes loading, such as marketing for more and more programs, and McMansions for the C-Suite parasites, from performance bonuses whose intended incentives can always be negated with revenue growth. It’s as if you decided to bulk up, but instead of lifting weights you injected yourself with CIA’s metastasizing-cancer toxin. The beltway cannot possibly keep up.

    • Agree: FB
  53. Even if it borders on sedition, I’m glad to say that it’s time for the U.S. TO FREAKING BACK OFF THE REST OF THE WORLD.

    If it take martial threats, then so be it.

  54. Ram says:

    The mere fact that President Putin offered to sell the S-400 system to the Americans must imply that the S-500 system is far superior.

    • Replies: @reiner Tor
  55. Since the whole purpose of America’s military is to force the host, the United States and its population, to fork over wealth to the parasite, the military industrial complex, the news that all the technology is junk could not be better for them. Now they can throw that all away and make us pay for new useless junk.

  56. Anonymous • Disclaimer says:

    The US exports War and Terrorism as its number one export, all for the profit of the rich. The taxpayers pay for all sorts of military equipment that gets paid for but most of it is never really delivered. How many ICBM missiles do you think the thieving rich have in those silos in North Dakota? I would bet zero. Much more profit in pocketing the money and telling the suckers you buried their missiles in the ground where the Russkies, and the taxpayers, never can see them. Why would any of the super wonderful people who rule us lie about anything? Why would super wonderful Putin lie about anything? Only commie pinkos don’t trust their Government or the stuff they read on the internet.

  57. peterAUS says:
    @Regnum Nostrum

    Agree.

    To nitpick a bit

    After the slaughter of several hundred Russian mercenaries in Syria

    most likely less than 20, but, doesn’t affect your point.

    All this “online therapy” about all powerful Russia is just that.
    Good for them. Beats pills and alcohol.

    The war between The Empire and Russia won’t be with high tech weaponry.
    It will be by dissent, insurrections and ethic warfare, as in Ukraine.

    We’ll see how will all that “high tech” work in next flareup there.

    • LOL: FB
    • Replies: @Cyrano
    , @Philip Owen
  58. @Ram

    But it’s not yet in existence.

    • Replies: @Andrei Martyanov
  59. FB says:

    This is a good article…

    I would note that there is a lot of shock and anger in the US media…not only the aspect of ‘Russian Aggression’…but also the idea that the Russians have made a major technology leapfrog over the US…

    This is because for decades the US media and govt have loudly touted US and Western technology as far superior to that of the Soviet Union and Russia…

    As with any propaganda theme of the West…this canard was eagerly accepted by all…the media…the public…the so-called ‘experts’ etc…

    In a culture and at a historical time where ‘technology’ is fascinating to people…[despite the fact that they do not understand even the basic physical and technical side of it]… it is seen as a source of national power…

    We have arrived at this point in time where it’s all about the technology…and the corollary…

    ‘…Our technology is the best in the world…especially our military technology…’

    Of course…those who are technically literate and do in fact understand from a professional perspective the aerospace technology in particular…and will have likely been exposed to Russian and Soviet technical circles [such is the nature of science...it is and has always been an interactive, multinational field...]

    …So for those people the Putin announcement of March 1, really does not come as a big surprise at all…many would who are familiar with the vast scientific and technical potential of this nation…are not shocked to see some very significant technical breakthroughs…

    Still, speaking as one such individual, who has long taken the view that the Russians have the people and institutional tradition to pull of some amazing technological advances in aerospace, in particular…the magnitude of the leap described in the Putin address is still difficult to process…

    If these technologies are as mature as Putin has implied…then this is massive news in the aerospace domain…

    I will only highlight one of the new weapons systems here…the Kinzhal air-launched, hypersonic anti-ship missile…

    What we know so far…it is an air-launched, maneuvering missile with an unprecedented range of 2,000 km [1,080 nautical miles]…and an unprecedented speed of Mach 10…[7,600 mph at sea level]…

    If true…this is an astounding leap in cruise missile technology…ie if we consider here that ‘cruise’ means a maneuverable missile as opposed to one that flies on a simple ballistic trajectory like any piece of artillery…

    Let us compare to what is out there now…the Kh22 anti-ship missile was put into service in 1962…56 years ago…

    Like the Kinzhal it is air-launched…carried by the Tupolev Tu22M supersonic long-range bomber…

    The missile weighs 5,800 kg and has a range of 600 km [324 nm]…with a maximum speed of M4.6 [3,500 mph]…

    This was the original Soviet carrier-killer…there is nothing remotely similar in the West…the updated version that entered service in 2016… the Kh32 boasts an increased range of 1,000 km [540 nm]…and a slight increase in speed to M5…

    So clearly the groundwork for a ‘super-sized’ version of this kind of anti-ship missile has been in place for a long time…

    Both the Kh models are powered by liquid fuel rocket engines and employ a flight trajectory where the missile first climbs to a high altitude…27 km [90,000 ft] for the KH22…and 40 km [130,000 ft] for the Kh32…

    …then either dives at the target to achieve its maximum M4.6 speed [M5 for Kh32]…maneuvering all the way to the target to make it harder to knock out with air defenses…

    …or, alternately, making a shallow dive at M3.5 and then approaches the target flying close to the water surface at a height of 500 ft…

    Below is a picture of the KH22 carried by a Tu22M3

    We see one Kh under the starboard wing and another in a conformal [ie half-buried] position under the fuselage…the port wing would carry a third Kh…

    The below graphic shows the two flight profiles of the Kh…

    And here we see a ‘friendly’ cockpit tour of the Tu22M by USN Admiral Charles R. Larson…Commander-in-Chief of the Pacific Fleet…during the Cold War…

    So we see that the new Kinzhal missile claims twice the range and twice the speed of the existing Kh32…

    We know nothing about the propulsion system of this missile nor its flight characteristics…ie how high does it go…and how does it make its final approach to the target…?

    More on that in a bit…but first let’s look at the overall picture…

    The primary target for this missile would not be USN aircraft carriers but Aegis missile cruisers and destroyers carrying the SM3 ballistic missile defense interceptors [BMD]…as Andrei has pointed out…

    This is the real concern for Russia…the US already has over 64 Arleigh-Burke class destroyers in service plus 22 Ticonderoga class cruisers…for a total of 86 large Aegis-equipped warships in service…

    According to the US Missile Defense Agency…five of those cruisers and 28 destroyers are BMD capable…for a total of 33 ships as of 2017…the plan is to bring that number to over 70…

    There is also the Aegis Ashore installation in Romania [operational] and Poland which will soon be operational…

    Clearly that is a very large missile defense infrastructure that could pose an existential threat to Russia…

    The other side of this equation is the US’ longstanding drive for nuclear first-strike capability against Russia…

    The scenario would unfold like this…the USN Ohio-class ballistic missile submarines would launch a surprise strike against Russian silo-based ICBMs…strategic bomber bases…and any Russian ballistic missile subs in port…with the Trident 2 sub-launched ICBM…

    The retaliatory strike by Russia would be neutralized by the US missile defense…relying largely on the Aegis SM3 interceptor…which can be located on ships close to Russia’s coast…[as well as the Aegis Ashore installations in Eastern Europe]…

    This kind of first-strike has been openly discussed in US policy circles for more than a decade…

    ‘…According to our model, such a simplified surprise attack would have a good chance of destroying every Russian bomber base, submarine, and ICBM…’

    —Foreign Affairs, Volume 85, number 2…

    That from 2006…and this from 2013…

    ‘…On March 1, the Strategic Studies Quarterly, a journal published by the U.S. Air Force’s Air University, published an article admitting what…the Russians, have long been warning against: that U.S. strategic policy under the Obama Administration is seeking to create the capability to launch a first strike against Russia and/or China, without fear of nuclear retaliation..’

    Clearly Putin’s announcement of these new weapons is to bring a reality check to such unhinged individuals…who may in fact represent the consensus in Washington to this day…

    The threat as outlined in the above scenario is very real…the Trident 2 can cover 1,850 km [1,000 nm] in just 12.5 minutes…

    That’s with what is called a minimum energy trajectory or MET…which is the trajectory angle for maximum range for a given amount of rocket energy…

    The US has been exploring depressed trajectory [DT] ICBM flights which would reduce the 1,850 km flight time to just 7.2 minutes…

    The Trident 2 ICBM has a much greater maximum range [up to 10,000 km] but the obvious advantage is to get as close as possible before launching…it is estimated that a US sub several hundred km offshore in international waters could hit the most inland Russian missile silos and bomber bases with a maximum range of about 3,000 km…

    A 3,000 km DT launch would have a flight time of only 10 minutes…

    It is not clear whether the US has achieved the depressed trajectory capability, as this type of flight path results in increased heat loading [due to atmospheric friction]…and also reduced accuracy…due to unpredictable atmospheric effects like air density and winds aloft…

    It is also unclear just how well the SM3 interceptor actually works…prominent critics like MIT’s Prof. Ted Postol, a weapons expert and former science adviser to the pentagon…have pointed out that the SM3 flight test ‘success’ has been overstated and doubts that the system is actually capable of bringing down an enemy missile in an actual combat scenario…

    We also note that out of the 33 Aegis BMD equipped warships…17 are in the Pacific Fleet [plus five more such Japanese navy ships...yet the US has not attempted to shoot down a North Korean missile...many of which have overflown Japan...

    However...whatever the failings of the current system may or may not be...the rational assumption is that sooner or later this capability will in fact be functional...the same assumption can be made for the depressed trajectory launch of Trident 2 submarine ICBMs...

    Here is how the Aegis SM3 is supposed to work...

    from what we know about this missile it is capable of maneuvering both in the boost phase and the presumably the terminal phase as well…

    ‘…The missile is controlled during the whole flight with gas-dynamic and aerodynamic control surfaces. It uses small fins to reduce its radar signature…

    …It is rumored that during flight it can maneuver at different altitudes and trajectories and can turn at up to 20 to 30 G to evade anti-ballistic missiles…’

    The maximum speed is M6 to M7 and the missile does not leave the atmosphere…reaching a maximum height of 50 km [164,000 ft]…

    The range is 500 km…although this limitation may be self-imposed due to the IMF treaty…the Iskander is said to be very accurate with a circular error probable of just 5 to 7 meters…and some sources in the West say as low as 2 meters…

    The missile weight is 3,800 kg…which is two tons less than the Kh with a similar range…but ground-launched…an air launch at high speed and altitude would extend the same missile’s range considerably…

    So we see that the basic pieces are indeed there to put together something like the Kinzhal…an Iskander derivative with a bigger, more powerful rocket motor [solid fuel] to reach a higher speed of M10…

    Air launched form the unique MiG31 interceptor which is the only combat aircraft in existence designed to fly its entire mission at supersonic speeds…maximum speed is M2.8 and supersonic cruise is M2.4…

    Its service ceiling is 20 km [66,000 ft] so an air-launch of an Iskander type missile will get the rocket to nearly half its altitude and one quarter its speed…the fuel energy saved by air launch means the rocket can fly longer and faster…

    The big challenge is going to be aerodynamic skin heating due to the very high speeds coming down into the thick air at sea level…this is a materials science challenge that is similar to spacecraft atmospheric re-entry temperatures…on the order of possibly 2,000 C…

    Such materials already exist…ie reinforced carbon-carbon…

    Putting the pieces together…the conclusion seems to point in the direction that Putin is not bluffing about the Kinzhal…this technology leap may in fact be very real…and going into service as we speak…

    Also notable is the historical parallel…the Kh22 antiship missile and Tu22 aircraft were conceived in the 1950s as an asymmetrical response to USN aircraft carriers…and judging by the look on that admiral’s face while sitting in the Tu22 driver’s seat…there is much reason to believe that it would have worked as advertised…

    The Kinzhal is now the asymmetrical and cost-effective response to an even bigger and more threatening challenge…the US long march to an effective ballistic missile defense encirclement of Russia that could someday make a US nuclear first strike possible and survivable…

    The fact that US media is hyperventilating…eg see Megyn Kelly with Putin a few days ago…is quite comical…

    How dare the Russians thwart our plans to wipe them off the face of the earth…?

    • Replies: @FB
    , @Carlton Meyer
  60. Anonymous • Disclaimer says:

    “The Islamic State of Iraq and Syria is on the run around the globe” said chief Pentagon spokesman Dana W. White last year.

    “We’re not surprised by the statements and the American people should rest assured that we are fully prepared,” said Pentagon tranny Dana White a week ago.

    The US military exists to enslave the majority and to force them to pay the majority of their incomes in taxes. What do Americans get in exchange for their taxes? Do they get health insurance? No. Do they get retirement benefits? No, unless you consider $1000 or less a month in social security a “retirement.” Maybe if you live in your car. Do they get decent roads? No. Do they get decent public transportation? No. Do they get anything positive of any sort? No, except their “Freedoms” and their “Specialness” and “Preparation” by the world’s greatest Ponzi scheme. Nothing drains a country’s resources more than wasting them on war and soldiers, rather than on its own people.

    • Replies: @Thorfinnsson
  61. @reiner Tor

    But it’s not yet in existence.

    Series production started this February.

    https://sdelanounas.ru/blogs/104204/

  62. Bill says:
    @Jesse James

    Don’t forget inventing peanut butter. PBJ is what makes America great.

  63. @Y.L.

    he problem as the “Empire” doubles down

    You can be absolutely 100% sure that huge amount of money will be thrown at Pentagon, but as some people here astutely observed, most of it will be wasted or stolen. US will continue to invest into totally bankrupt weapons systems since they are not designed to fight but to make money. The track record of military-technological whopping disasters of the last decade or so is simply stunning–from F-35, to LCS, to now emerging unproven and fantastically expensive technologies for Columbia-class sub, to, basically not working air-defense and anti-missile complexes. This is simply unprecedented in human history.

    • Replies: @Aedib
    , @NoseytheDuke
    , @Y.L.
  64. @The USS Maginot

    Technology is not the factor that makes this leapfrog so hopeless for the US MIC. The structure of Russia’s defense industrial base is inherently more agile and efficient because it’s a resource of the state and not exclusively a private profit center.

    I agree with your thesis but the major factor here is a cultural one–a dramatically different attitude to war between Russia and US. I wrote about this here:

    http://www.unz.com/article/assessing-russias-military-strength/

    and I quote:

    In layman’s lingo, the United States lacks geographic, historic, cultural, economic and technological pressures to develop and have a coherent defensive military doctrine and weapons which would help to implement it.

    One cannot buy a history (albeit many in Washington think that it is possible) one has to experience it and built national institutions accordingly. US “elites” simply have no grasp what real war is.

    • Replies: @Kiza
  65. TheJester says:
    @Cyrano

    In the 1970s, NATO sponsored seminars on the Soviet Union’s military weaponry. I attended the seminars. We had “hands-on” access to Soviet tanks and other equipment. I was impressed. It was the biggest “bang for the buck” as opposed to the US model of letting private, for-profit contractors design and cost weapons for you. We left the seminars with a heartfelt fear of the Soviet Union’s military capability. BTW: Due to a few soldiers going “postal”, we were not allowed access to our unit weapons except in the case of an emergency … or, maybe a war.

    After 20 years in the Air Force in air operations and 26 years as a government contractor in finance and procurement, I offer the F-35 as the paradigm of the “death of the US military”. Bad design compounded by troubled procurement compounded by non-stop lobbying by politicians and contracts to ignore the obvious = a procurement disaster.

    The F-111 program proved that it was not possible to develop a common design that could meet the requirements of the Navy, Marine Corps, and Air Force. Carriers vs. land-based airfields. It cannot be done. The contracts and politicians made the case that it could be done. The F-35 is the dismal result.

    Russian weapons are designed by the military and then outsourced to government-industries or private contractors for production. US weapons are designed by contractors to maximize profits and then forced on the military services by politicians. Go figure the outcomes.

  66. @Anonymous

    The US military exists to enslave the majority and to force them to pay the majority of their incomes in taxes.

    This is a silly comment. All taxing authority (which in turn also implies monetary authority) is dependent on state power. Military power is but one aspect of state power. To that we can add police forces, courts, and of course the the tax authorities themselves. There are also the non-coercive aspects of state power such as propaganda, legitimacy, social services, public employees, etc.

    If the primary purpose of the US military were to enslave the domestic population, both its deployment and its weapons would be completely different. Instead of a global empire of bases which won’t even protect the Southern border, armed forces would be arrayed in bases located outside of major metropolitan areas.

    The army would have a lot more armor, artillery, infantry, and airpower. The air force would have low performance aircraft with large payloads. The navy would be more of a gendarmerie.

    And almost no one in America pays the majority of his income in taxes. Some people far into the top bracket in California who are very bad at tax planning and hate capital gains and qualified dividends perhaps.

    What do Americans get in exchange for their taxes? Do they get health insurance? No. Do they get retirement benefits? No, unless you consider $1000 or less a month in social security a “retirement.” Maybe if you live in your car. Do they get decent roads? No. Do they get decent public transportation?

    In other words you're a social democrat, and for that matter your statements aren't correct.

    Poor Americans and elderly Americans get health insurance from the government.

    The maximum monthly social security benefit is $3,538.

    The roads are not bad at all in most of the country.

    Can't argue with you on mass transit of course.

    I'd rather have minimal safety nets and an expansive private sector (stripped of rent-seeking, monopolistic, and parasitic elements to be sure). This is a class and ideological issue with trade-offs.

    What is damning is the relative inefficiency of public spending in America relative to many other industrial countries, and this isn't all owing to the bloated military-industrial complex (which is also inefficient). The country spends as much tax money on health insurance as many other countries but fails to cover the entire population. The pay-as-you pension system has an abysmal rate of return. Infrastructure projects are cartoonishly expensive compared to other rich countries.

    • Replies: @peterAUS
  67. Many people have commented on these futuristic weapons and have given very logical and lucid reasons why these weapons cannot and will not function in the Earth’s dense atmosphere. I totally agree with them.
    Is Putin bluffing? Why is he claiming to be close to having these weapons? Are they possible?
    I’m no scientist and I think I could be totally wrong and what I’m suggesting could be laughable, but here goes, laugh away.
    The engine and driving force of these new missiles is a Nuclear Bomb/nuclear reaction/ chain reaction that has no cladding, covering to keep radiation within limits or safe for humans. All these protective claddings are left behind once the self powered N bomb is launched as a missile.
    There is a missile launched by a human piloted jet too; how is he protected if all are open, radiating and dangerous nuclear self powered bombs/ missiles, let me know how.

    • Replies: @Sam J.
  68. Aedib says:
    @Andrei Martyanov

    You can be absolutely 100% sure that huge amount of money will be thrown at Pentagon, but as some people here astutely observed, most of it will be wasted or stolen.

    May be that was Putin’s idea. Let them outspend and enlarge the astronomic budget US’s deficit. In the end with 2500 strategic nukes on each side, MAD will remain firmly in place with or whitout NMD.

    • Replies: @Andrei Martyanov
  69. @anonymous

    Two rabbits on a road during the Stalinist terror of 1937.

    First rabbit: “Where are you going in such a hurry?”

    Second rabbit: “Haven’t you heard? There’s a rumour going round that all camels are to be castrated.”

    First rabbit: “But you’re not a camel.”

    Second rabbit: “After they catch you and castrate you, try proving you’re not a camel.”

  70. FB says:
    @Regnum Nostrum

    Your entire tedious post can be summed up in two words…

    Butt-Hurt

    Proof is here…

    ‘…At the beginning of the conflict the Russians were actually quite a bit disorganised, as is the habit of all Slavs…’

    I have no idea what your ‘Regnum’ is about these days… but I suspect this is how your ‘kingdom’ looks in many neighborhoods…

    Enjoy…

    • LOL: RadicalCenter
    • Replies: @CanSpeccy
    , @Regnum Nostrum
  71. wck says:

    A retired brigadier general on Fox yesterday claimed the Russians just made a video and it changes nothing.

  72. peterAUS says:
    @Thorfinnsson

    Measured, sensible and informative.

    Unfortunately, not what’s required in this thread: America bad; Russia great.

    The resident “Team Russia” will remedy that, I am sure.

    Never mind them.
    This

    The maximum monthly social security benefit is $3,538.

    caught my eye, though.

    I don’t have a personal experience but some contacts and plenty of “Internet info” (which can be deceiving on this issue).
    It’s “known” that the US “social safety net” is the worst in West.
    That number, though, if correct, is a good one.

    I mean, with that amount of available money provided by the State , how do we see all that visible homelessness and poverty in US?
    I know that drugs and alcohol, with general stupidity, can do that.

    I guess my question is:
    A family of four, breadwinner losing his/her job (offshoring, outsourcing, downsizing) getting on that “net”, renting……would they lose their accommodation and effectively have problem with food, shelter and medical help, while on that net while finding another job?
    And, how long can they be on that net?
    I know I can read about that a lot, but condensed info from a person on the ground there would be much more helpful.

    Just curious.

    • Replies: @Thorfinnsson
    , @iffen
  73. Art says:

    Is it not clear that the US generals have sold out America’s defenses to Israel – J-MIC rules the Pentagon. We fight wars for Israel – we are NOT defending America. We have lost our Twentieth century defensive edge. We now have a military that is good at assassinating village chiefs (and their families).

    The US generals keep expanding the geography of their killing until there is going to be a true world war.

    The cold-hard fact is that our US generals are defending Israel not America. Our US generals are not doing American defense – they are doing Israeli offence.

    Why is every US general a supporter of Israel?

    The trillions of dollars spent on the ME are depleting our defenses at home. Is this not obvious?

    The J-MIC must be taken on!

    Think Peace — Art

    p.s. In true fascist order, Netanyahu is meeting Trump today – in un-American fashion, there will be no free press asking questions.

    p.s. How does that bastard get to dictate to our country – ignoring our values.

  74. annamaria says:
    @Carlton Meyer

    The “free market” corruption begins on a level of personal dignity (morals). Both morality and patriotism are sorely lacking by the current US/UK power elite that has become a chimera composed of Cheney and the Lobby. We are dealing not so much with a “fraudulent” program as with deeply immoral bloody opportunists. http://turcopolier.typepad.com/sic_semper_tyrannis/2018/03/syria-leaks-suites-propaganda-and-dividends-presented-by-publius-tacitus.html#comment-6a00d8341c72e153ef01bb09f8f311970d
    From comment section. David Habakkuk said: ” … In relation to the ‘White Helmets’, the ‘case for the prosecution’ was set out in detail in a presentation by the journalist Vanessa Beeley to the Swiss Press Club in Geneva back in November, with Richard Labévière also involved – available, together with links to a range of supporting material, at http://21stcenturywire.com/2017/11/28/vanessa-beeley-presents-new-white-helmets-expose-to-swiss-press-club-geneva/.
    The first appearance of the ‘Working Group on Syria, Propaganda and Media’ was in a letter submitted to the ‘Comment is Free’ section of the ‘Guardian’, and not published by them, in response to an article by Olivia Solon which attacked Beeley among others.
    It claimed that critical discussion of the White Helmets in Syria has been ‘propagated online by a network of anti-imperialist activists, conspiracy theorists and trolls with the support of the Russian government’.
    The article rejected by the ‘CiF’ was reproduced, together with an account of the failure of the ‘Guardian’ either to publish it or to defend their decision not to, on Tim Hayward’s blog in January. It contains links to material which calls into question the role of the ‘White Helmets.’
    (See https://timhayward.wordpress.com/2018/01/12/the-guardian-white-helmets-and-silenced-comment/ ) …
    Concluding his demolition of the ‘Joint Intelligence Mechanism’ report into Khan Sheikhoun, also published on Hayward’s blog, Paul McKeigue writes: ‘The weight of evidence favouring the hypothesis of a managed massacre over a chemical attack has obvious implications also for the role of the White Helmets in this incident.’
    (See https://timhayward.wordpress.com/2017/12/22/khan-sheikhoun-chemical-attack-guest-blog-featuring-paul-mckeigues-reassessment/ .)
    This brings us back to a critical question about the ‘false flag’ chemical attacks in Syria, and in particular Khan Sheikhoun – that of whether the involvement of elements in Western élites is purely a matter of ‘ex post facto’ involvement in cover-ups, or whether ‘ex ante’ involvement in planning these operations may also be at issue.
    And, of course, in relation to Benjamin Norman and other FCO people, prominent among them Matthew Rycroft and Boris Johnson, a question really does arise as to: ‘What did they know and when did they know it?’
    - Olivia Solon — a presstitute for Guardian
    - Benjamin Norman — a “diplomat” at the British Embassy in DC
    - Matthew Rycroft — a British “diplomat” at UN
    - Boris Johnston — a person of easy morals and Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs, UK

  75. @Aedib

    May be that was Putin’s idea. Let them outspend and enlarge the astronomic budget US’s deficit. In the end with 2500 strategic nukes on each side, MAD will remain firmly in place with or whitout NMD.

    The main idea was to show futility of most American strategies re: Russia, including useless and immensely expensive ABM program. This, by definition, should “coerce” American “elites” into more constructive mode. Again, the whole nature of the American military posture since 1970s is lack of any desire to play by the rules, including within the more-or-less stable framework of MAD. In fact, the US constantly tries to exit MAD framework. Now it is over for US, it may try to exit MAD whatever it wants–it doesn’t matter: US is completely defenseless against both nuclear and conventional HPWs. Again, since 2010 Russia’s Military Doctrine, reiterated in 2014 edition of same, the use of high precision conventional weapons IS stated as means of strategic power containment. Obviously, most of US “experts” seldom comprehend what they read from Russia, but it is their problem.

    As per bankrupting itself–sorry, but the US is already bankrupt and the only exit from this situation for US is coercion of Europe and American re-industrialization. Is it possible at this stage? I doubt it but we still have to wait and see. A huge part of the US “dominance” was its claim to being capable to power wrestle anyone on the planet. This is absolutely NOT the case anymore. hasn’t been for quite some time, without this military mythology the globalist economic “order” begins to crumble–a process we all observe today. So, in summary–it is not one or the other thing, it is many things together working both in concert and providing synergistic effect. On March 1st Putin declared Russia’s absolute sovereignty–as I said, we are entering new post-Pax American world, and I mean right this very moment as I type this.

  76. Anonymous • Disclaimer says:
    @Thorfinnsson

    “This is solvable problem in my view. Increase the sectional density and length of the bullet, and increase muzzle velocity.”

    Found a gun for you :

    http://www.anzioironworks.com/MAG-FED-20MM-RIFLE.htm

    • Replies: @Thorfinnsson
  77. @peterAUS

    That number, though, if correct, is a good one.

    Social Security benefits are based on your lifetime contributions and what age you choose to begin taking them.

    So a higher earner will get more benefits (up to the cap, around $106k if memory serves) than a modest earner–simply because he paid more into the system.

    You can elect to take benefits as early as 62, or as later as 70.5.

    The system was designed with psychological, political intent. The idea was that the program would be impossible for conservatives to eliminate because all wage earners would feel entitled to pensions that they themselves had paid for (though strictly speaking it is a pure tax and your taxes are paid to current retirees).

    In act early economists recommend the system be funded out of general revenues and said there was no need for a payroll tax. FDR said he wanted people to take ownership in the system so no one could ever destroy the system.

    It is remarkably effective. It’s remarkable effective and neither Ronald Reagan nor George W Bush lasted more than a few weeks when they tried to roll back the system.

    The only wins conservatives have scored against it are taxing some of the benefits (began in the 80s) and making some changes to cost-of-living inflation adjustments in the 90s.

    It’s called the third rail of politics here and every old person is outraged by any suggestion that benefits should be reduced.

    There is however a lot of propaganda about the alleged future unaffordability of the system, and it now strikes me that there is an elite consensus in favor of modifying the system to reduce benefits.

    It’s “known” that the US “social safety net” is the worst in West.

    I mean, with that amount of available money provided by the State , how do we see all that visible homelessness and poverty in US?
    I know that drugs and alcohol, with general stupidity, can do that.

    I guess my question is:
    A family of four, breadwinner losing his/her job (offshoring, outsourcing, downsizing) getting on that “net”, renting……would they lose their accommodation and effectively have problem with food, shelter and medical help, while on that net while finding another job?
    And, how long can they be on that net?
    I know I can read about that a lot, but condensed info from a person on the ground there would be much more helpful.

    As a general rule of thumb the safety net is very weak for those in the middle class, whereas in many other Western countries there are universal social insurance systems intended to cover everyone regardless of income. Healthcare is an obvious one across the West, and much ink has been spilled about the outrageous cost of college in America. The government’s safety net here is simply to allow young folks to go into unlimited state-guaranteed debt.

    Something of a stealth middle class safety net is provided by the corporate sector in the form of health insurance, pensions, maternity leave, etc. This has been reduced since the 80s but still exist, and government tax policy encourages it. As an example if you leave your employer you have the right to keep your employer-sponsored health insurance through something called COBRA.

    A number of programs also exist to provide tax-deferred investment accounts for various social purposes. These are available for retirement, healthcare, and higher education. The programs cost the government nothing in expenditures, but reduce tax revenue (probably by less than the public benefit however).

    There is much more of a safety net for the poorer classes, but as a general rule of thumb many of these programs run through women since they’re dependent on the number of children you have (and, of course, household income). If you’re a single man or your baby mamma doesn’t want you around anymore, tough luck.

    Programs that exist for the poor include:

    *Food subsidies (the SNAP program)
    *Rent subsidies (the Section 8 program)
    *Tuition subsidies (Pell grants)
    *Medical insurance (the Medicaid program)
    *Health insurance for children CHIP program
    *Medical insurance subsidies (Obamacare) for those who don’t qualify for Medicaid
    *Heating bill subsidies

    Additionally some of the states have additional welfare programs.

    Actual cash transfers to the poor have largely been abolished since the 90s, though the Obama Administration revived them in stealth form by greatly expanding disability payments.

    As far as the homeless go, if you see them in the winter in cold cities they’re probably mentally ill.

    If they’re somewhere warm that’s still possible, though then there are other factors such as a lifestyle choice, temporarily down on luck, single man unable to find any work or charity, etc.

    • Replies: @peterAUS
    , @bjondo
  78. FB says:
    @Y.L.

    ‘…RE: The Avangar glider.

    I don’t think the engineering is that difficult…’

    Oh my…

    The easy answer is…if it was so easy…why isn’t everybody doing it already…?

    And here is a little more coherent explanation…

    As you hinted with your mention of ceramic composites…the primary challenge is the heat load generated by skin friction heating…

    Let’s put some numbers to those temperatures…

    A plasma is by definition a gas with an electric charge…for air, which is composed of mostly nitrogen [~3/4] and oxygen [~1/4]…the temperature at which ionization occurs is about 9000 C…

    The process happens by first N2 and O2 molecules separating [dissociating] into O an N atoms…

    ie O2 —> 2 O at 2000 4000…

    Then those N and O atoms begin to lose an electron at even higher temps…

    ie O —> O+ & e-…T > 9000…

    This is an incredibly high temperature that no known material can withstand…reinforced carbon carbon is used on spacecraft and is good to about 2000 C…

    Now spacecraft re-entering the atmosphere are designed to slow down as they begin encountering air drag at the upper atmosphere [where the air is still quite thin...]

    They do this by using blunt leading edge shapes…here is how a typical capsule looks like…

    The Space Shuttle similarly uses its blunt underbody to slow down…

    An ICBM warhead also inevitably slows down somewhat…but not because it is designed to…it is designed to plummet right in…but still retains a lot of speed as it approaches the ground [it is not designed to hit the ground but to air-burst...]

    But it spends a lot less time going that fast…giving the heat less time to transfer into its surface… and even then the heat load is a major challenge…

    Now with a gliding warhead…you obviously do not want to slow it down like you would the space shuttle…which comes down to land at airplane like speeds…it would be easy to shoot down…

    But the glider is also going to spend a lot more time flying through the thick air down low…so the heat transfer will have more time to build up…

    So here we bring in the other big part of the puzzle…which is the shockwave…in that illustration of the capsule above…the shock wave is seen just in front of the convex blunt curvature of the body…

    Fortunately…that shock wave also shields the heat…the temps behind the shockwave are much lower…a serendipitous fact of the physical world without which space travel…or at least the re-entry part…would be impossible…

    Even so…those heat loads are truly huge…

    Now the shockwave geometry clearly mimics the body shape…as seen in that capsule…with a glider you are still going to have a shockwave…but because it is designed to glide it must be more aerodynamic…ie its lift must be greater than its drag…

    That means the shape of the shockwave…and its proximity to the body…which is very important…may not be so ideal…

    This is a very large challenge in terms of aerodynamics and thermodynamics…

    Then you have other issues…how are you going to control the flight path…having a gyro is fine…but you need actual control surfaces on the craft…ie movable ‘flippers’ if you will…

    Those will require some kind of mechanical or hydro-mechanical actuation…where does the power for that come from…?

    What about shielding those mechanical pieces from the heat…?

    As you can see it gets complicated pretty fast…

  79. @Cyrano

    I’ve often thought there should be international war games where, for example, the Russians are authorized to launch a missile “attack” on some deserted area with dummy warheads, and we’re obliged to shoot them down to thwart the attack, and vice versa.

  80. Joe Wong says:
    @Carlton Meyer

    The USA should return to the method used before the 1980s where government organizations developed weapons and then contracted production to the private sector.

    This is a blatant admission that free market economy which is the source of innovation and efficiency is a hoax and a failure. Free market economy is nothing but a façade and a 3 Cup Scam to stealing from the people en masse without raising a fuss.

    • Replies: @Thorfinnsson
  81. CanSpeccy says: • Website
    @FB

    Don’t you mean like this?

    • LOL: FB
  82. @Trmist

    Second will Russia use their new and potentially superior position to offer protection to its neighbours and eventually kick America out of Eurasia.

    As Syria’s example shows, one of the major Russian exports of the future will be, in fact–already is, a political stability and defense against “regime changes”. This “product” will be in a very high demand.

    • Replies: @Art
  83. chris says:
    @Sergey Krieger

    Except that all they ever seem to be able to do is just bomb! (‘Badam-boom”)

  84. iffen says:
    @peterAUS

    Table 2.
    Social Security benefits, January 2018

    Type of beneficiary
    Beneficiaries
    Total monthly benefits (millions of dollars)
    Average monthly benefit (dollars)
    Number (thousands)
    Percent
    Total
    61,984
    100.0
    79,988
    1,290.46 Average Benefit

    The table format does not paste correctly. See the table here:

    https://www.ssa.gov/policy/docs/quickfacts/stat_snapshot/

    • Replies: @peterAUS
  85. @TheJester

    The F-111 program proved that it was not possible to develop a common design that could meet the requirements of the Navy, Marine Corps, and Air Force. Carriers vs. land-based airfields.

    The F-111 didn’t prove this at all. An aircraft carrier is just a short airfield, and one with launch catapults and landing restraining wires.

    The only fundamental design change requirement is a sturdier landing gear (and no doubt greater corrosion resistance) and arresting hook. It’s also beneficial to decrease the aircraft’s wing-loading, which is not necessarily undesirable in a land-based aircraft though comes with some trade offs (increased drag, reduced top speed, more turbulence in on the deck missions and thus a higher minimum altitude).

    Both the F-111 and F-35 for that matter address the wing-loading issue with different wings in air force and naval versions.

    Note that prior to the F-111 the F-4 did serve in all three services (and was successfully exported), and the Royal Navy’s Fleet Air Arm successfully employed it on carriers smaller than ours (though WW2-era Midway-class carriers were still in service).

    WW2-era USAAF aircraft would’ve worked just fine on carriers if the Navy had wanted them–note that the Spitfire and Fury were both successfully navalized. They even managed to take off from tiny (by today’s standards) carriers with B-25 Mitchells.

    The F-14 would’ve worked just fine in the Air Force, and not only was it pitched to the Air Force (as an interceptor, declined) but Iran uses it in its air force.

    The main problem with the F-111B is that it was under-powered for its mass to serve in a carrier role as a result of optimistic design targets. The Pratt & Whitney F100 would’ve solved that problem, and it had a first run just three years after the F-111B was cancelled.

    And even the F-111B as is would’ve worked just fine on the navy’s supercarriers. Trouble was it didn’t have enough thrust for the old Midway-class carriers.

    As for the F-35, here there is a fundamental aerodynamic problem caused by the tri-service requirement. In particular, the Marine Corp’s insistence on a VTOL design (which the Marine Corps never needed before the Harrier for some reason). This effectively ruined the airframe for all three services by adding space for the lift fan.

    But many problems with the F-35 have nothing to do with this at all and are simply the result of bad program management. The only other issue I’ve heard stemming from the airframe is some kind of problem with the F-35C’s tail hook, perhaps a consequence of the “stealth” requirement.

  86. Ger says:
    @yurivku

    Agree. Perhaps some people confuse James Bond movies with reality? I would not want to be on the receiving end ….. waiting for my ‘lasers’ to save me!

  87. @Joe Wong

    Is it?

    Certainly the “pure” free market (whatever that means) appears to have some deficiencies with respect to a mixed economy.

    And it seems the government, once committed, can produce a lot of basic scientific and technological innovation that the market is unlikely to.

    But the free market routinely delivers innovations in product features, efficiency, and quality. The free market also delivers innovation in management, distribution, warehousing, etc. New products and services are also routinely created.

    Are you suggesting we adopt a command economy?

    Free markets do many useful things, but the state must regulate the market (especially to prevent monopoly, or monopoly abuse–and maybe macroeconomic and monetary management) and also provide what the market cannot (in the case of “big science” research quite literally, and in the case of social benefits a question of what kind of society we want).

    Defense is a special role in that the main, or often only customer, for these products is the government itself. This makes it easy to corrupt the customer, as the customer’s agents incentives are poorly aligned with the customer. The principal-agent problem exist in the private sector as well but is less of a problem as not only are people fired routinely but entire companies fail (or have management replaced by vengeful stockholders).

  88. Cyrano says:
    @peterAUS

    Actually I don’t like Russia’s chances against US anymore. Not since Croatia became member of NATO. Their bravery is legendary. They almost helped the Germans at Stalingrad, but they were slaughtered like pigs and none of them made it back home alive. This time again, with the help of the Croats, the US is practically invincible – if the Russians dare to go against the formidable alliance of Croatia and US – they can expect similar results like at Stalingrad.

  89. JosephB says:

    Interesting article, and an easy read. Well done.

    I’m confused about Russia being upset about withdrawal from the ABM. From what I recall, we made it extremely clear the goal was not to stop Russia’s nuclear forces. We certainly didn’t build or even propose anything like enough capability to stop even 10%. Rather, with the spread of nuclear weapons to Pakistan, not building a deterrent looked like a huge risk. Was this calculus lost on the Russians?

    That said, I’m baffled as to why we tried to prosecute a global war on terror without involving Russia. “You have problems with crazy muslims blowing you up? Hey! Us too!” It seemed like the perfect opportunity to cement the end of the cold war with, if not an alliance, at least a working partnership. We probably could have even gotten China engaged. Instead, we tried to wage war in Russia’s backyard without Russia’s support.

    So I concur that there were about 15 years of blown diplomatic opportunities, but don’t see why the ABM was one of them.

  90. peterAUS says:
    @Thorfinnsson

    Comprehensive and informative.
    Didn’t know a couple of things.

    …there is an elite consensus in favor of modifying the system to reduce benefits.

    Of course. It’s the in their nature.

    As a general rule of thumb the safety net is very weak for those in the middle class, whereas in many other Western countries there are universal social insurance systems intended to cover everyone regardless of income.

    Interesting re former and true around here re later. The level of “assistance” depends on assessed needs of a person/family, not on their previous income.

    There is much more of a safety net for the poorer classes, but as a general rule of thumb many of these programs run through women since they’re dependent on the number of children you have (and, of course, household income). If you’re a single man or your baby mamma doesn’t want you around anymore, tough luck.

    And

    …single man unable to find any work or charity, etc.

    Interesting too.

    I will sound simplistic and naive, but it’s really hard to reconcile those extremes in US.
    I mean, I have no problem with capable, talented, or just ruthless and greedy, or just lucky, having all those zillions. Good on them.
    But, at the same time, in the same place, people who are going through the trash cans.
    Yes, I’ve heard all the explanations, all sound very reasonable, some don’t even understand (stupid me), but , still……

    I was in Hawaii recently and watching that was ….well….interesting.
    You walk around and see extraordinary opulence, often gluttony really, and at the same time all those homeless. Yes, I do know the story about them, but, still……
    Plenty of those, apparently, vets.

    I haven’t got the slightest how to fix that, or even is it possible, but, still……..something simply does not compute.

    Apologies to the “Team Russia”.
    Back to “Russia great” and “US bad”.
    Hell, you could even use this comment for that purpose.

    • Replies: @Thorfinnsson
  91. Andrei Martyanov

    Russia has many of those carriers—the program of modernization of MiG-31s to BM was in full steam for some years now, with front line Air Force units seeing a considerable inflow of these aircraft. It is clear now why such modernization was undertaken–it made MiG-31BMs into launch platforms for the Kinzhal.

    The intent to use the MiG-31 as a missile carrier opens up another possibility. If the carrier battlegroup is actually within combat range of the MiG-31 itself, it could be attacked with unpowered bombs.

    The MiG-31 would approach the target at maximum altitude and airspeed. It would be seen by the battlegroup’s numerous radars, but at that approach the assumption would be that it is on a reconnaissance mission.

    A guided bomb could then be released. As the bombs don’t need to carry missile propellant, very large bombs could be used. I don’t know the MiG-31′s maximum payload, but it seems like it could carry four one-ton bombs.

    Ideally the bombs would be “stealth” to reduce the battlegroup’s reaction time.

    Based on the public specifications of the RIM-174 SM6 the MiG-31 would be impossible to intercept at maximum altitude and speed.

    The Su-57 could also be used for this mission, though instead of a maximum speed approach it would employ the lowest feasible airspeed in order to drop a bomb right down the blind radar stack directly above the ship.

    Carlo Kopp proposed this approach for the F-22 (which he conducted a decade-long crusade for Australia to acquire) in a naval strike mission.

    • Replies: @Andrei Martyanov
    , @FB
  92. peterAUS says:
    @iffen

    Well, that’s helpful.

    Still, a couple of things are eluding me.
    I’ll use an example:

    A man, single, late 20s, professional, worked in, say, corporate environment, got “restructured/downsized/outsourced”. Salary at the time of being “let go” around 80K. Worked in similar capacity for, say, 6 years. Renting, of course. No savings (kid likes to travel).
    So, where I am, well, he does get an “assistance” which will pay for a rent, 3 decent meals per day and he’ll have a (state, not private, of course), medical help. Especially in emergencies. And this can last for quite a while, actually.
    Bottom line, no need to be homeless, no need to be hungry, and he’ll get the basic and emergency medical help.
    All the rest, well, that’s precisely the initiative to get a job, and do it fast. I mean, not much fun living like that. But, at the same time, no need to sleep rough, beg and go through trash cans.

    So..the same guy in US, how would that look like?

    • Replies: @iffen
  93. I guess it’s possible that Russia has the US against the ropes technologically — but I jointly doubt it. Furthermore, even if they were more technologically advanced, the US has the tactical what no one else on the planet has — an enormous ability to project massive force on any situation. And when looking at the numbers, even if one wanted to cut them by half, it’s jaw dropping.

    I think the problem for the US remains, being over extended. That over extension challenges the length of time we could sustain the initial onslaught. One of the blessings of living in the US, of being a citizen here is that the continent itself remains loaded with available resources that should push come to shove we could produce sustainable weapons production, food and supplies. The question is always for how long and how vast said supplies need be . Not only for the military, but for her population as well.

    Strategically, there is this, despite our foreign policy mistakes, the US does enormous good around the world, that goes unheralded. And that good will pay off in subtle and complex strategic terms, in my view. Whatever the next major conflict, who are friends are will matter — especially on the question of the breadth and scope extended operations.

    And why national cohesion and assimilation matters.

    We should cease our damaging immigration policy as to atleast that one end, among others.

  94. @peterAUS

    I will sound simplistic and naive, but it’s really hard to reconcile those extremes in US.
    I mean, I have no problem with capable, talented, or just ruthless and greedy, or just lucky, having all those zillions. Good on them.
    But, at the same time, in the same place, people who are going through the trash cans.
    Yes, I’ve heard all the explanations, all sound very reasonable, some don’t even understand (stupid me), but , still……

    It’s a political choice, pure and simple. And some of the political choices are unrelated to the welfare state–some municipalities have statutes against vagrancy and enforce them. Others don’t.

    I was in Hawaii recently and watching that was ….well….interesting.
    You walk around and see extraordinary opulence, often gluttony really, and at the same time all those homeless. Yes, I do know the story about them, but, still……
    Plenty of those, apparently, vets.

    Hawaii, for obvious reasons, is a place with a lot of voluntary homeless. The state has been trying to get rid of them by buying them tickets to the mainland.

    Many other voluntary homeless are found in California, Colorado, and Las Vegas. The California ones may be quasi-involuntary as it seems many arrived from the Midwest to get into paid rehab programs, then after running out of money moved into tent cities. But they weren’t homeless in the Midwest and panhandling enough for a Greyhound bus ticket is not hard (though embarrassing, or at least it would be for me).

    Bear in mind that Americans also donate a lot to charity, both in absolute and per capita terms. So almost every community (besides rich-only suburbs) has a food bank which people donate to, even if there’s no social need for it. My secretary for instance is a very kind person and as such is always trying to organize canned food drives for the food bank. The many users of the food bank are what Victorians would call the undeserving poor who are already on the federal SNAP program. The food bank lets them increase their purchases of marketable commodities (such as soda), which can then be traded for supplies not covered by the SNAP program (alcohol, tobacco, and illegal drugs).

    Note that my community does not have homeless people as it’s a rural small town.

    Lots of churches, including here, will also do things such as offer free Thanksgiving and Christmas dinners to the indigent and purchase toys for their children.

    Larger cities have a mix of public and private homeless shelters. There generally isn’t enough capacity for all homeless, but that works as many homeless don’t like the rules these shelters impose.

    • Replies: @FB
  95. @Thorfinnsson

    The intent to use the MiG-31 as a missile carrier opens up another possibility. If the carrier battlegroup is actually within combat range of the MiG-31 itself, it could be attacked with unpowered bombs.

    Many guided munitions today, with the exception of high super-sonic and hyper-sonic ASMs, are an easy target for AD systems of Aegis DDGs and CGs. Absolutely makes no sense to run a very expensive and valuable platform and two pilots who are priceless for a suicide mission when there is a huge arsenal of stand-off, uninterceptible strike weapons. Let’s put it this way–a no-go zone for any surface combatant today in case of Kinzhal from MiG-31 is around 3 000 kilometers from the shore (depending on inflight refueling of MiG-31, of course). There are other means to make sure that in the so called threatening period any CBG, no matter where, will remain under constant danger of annihilation. So, methinks, MiG-31BMs are just fine as Kinzhal carriers. That is the whole point of Kinzhal–making sure that if, God forbids, things get hot a very effective response is provided.

    • Replies: @Thorfinnsson
  96. d k shaw says:
    @The USS Maginot

    “9. Modern body armor has made 5.56mm and even 7.62mm bullets less lethal.”

    I cannot speak to any of the 7.62 rounds available. However, the 55 grain 5.56 round is intended to shatter as it enters a target, and armor will most likely stop it even at close range. The 62 gr bullet, however, has a steel rod in the center, and was designed to Pierce armor.

  97. @EliteCommInc.

    the US has the tactical what no one else on the planet has — an enormous ability to project massive force on any situation.

    No, it doesn’t, in fact US military didn’t fight near peer or peer since Vietnam and the only ability for power projection it has is against third world states.

    Strategically, there is this, despite our foreign policy mistakes, the US does enormous good around the world, that goes unheralded. And that good will pay off in subtle and complex strategic terms, in my view.

    LOL.

  98. FB says:
    @FB

    I managed to jumble up my comment @60…

    It was okay until this part…

    Here is how the Aegis SM3 is supposed to work…

    This shows that the SM3 is designed to intercept a ballistic missile two distinct phases of flight…the ascent portion of the target flight…starting right after rocket burnout and as the target is ascending in space on its ballistic trajectory…

    And secondly…the descent portion of the flight…where the target missile has passed its midpoint apogee and is descending toward the target…

    Now here is the important part that somehow got lost in the original post…

    We see here that intercepting the target ballistic missile in the ascent phase requires the placement of the Aegis SM3 interceptors close to where the target missile is launched…

    In the case of Russia…that would mean getting those Aegis ships near to Russia’s coast or the Aegis Ashore installations in Eastern Europe…

    If the intent was to intercept those target missiles on the descent part of the flight…the Aegis ships would be placed near the US…and Aegis Ashore would be placed right in the US…not Eastern Europe…

    So by understanding how midcourse missile defense works we see also the intent of those ballistic missile interceptors…they are aimed squarely at Russia…

    The other part that got lost in my original post was my introductory remarks about the Iskander ground-launched missile…which is suggested by Andrei as the possible building block for the Kinzhal…

    To briefly recap about what is known about the Iskander…it weighs 3,800 kg…two tons less than the Kh22 and has about the same range…500 km…

    This range limitation as noted already is likely artificial in order to meet the Intermediate Nuclear Forces Treaty [INF] which limits intermediate range missiles to 500 km maximum range…

    Which means adding a longer fuel section…it is a solid-fuel rocket so can be modular…can increase the range…

    The missile carries a warhead of up to 800 kg…so it is definitely able to sink a large warship with a direct hit…the Kh22 used a 1,000 kg warhead…which is said to have made a quite massive hole…

    ‘…Soviet Tests showed that a Kh-22MA equipped with 1,000 kg (2,205 lb) RDX warhead and with an approach speed of 800 m/s (Mach 2.4), used against an aircraft carrier, will make a 22 m2 (240 sq ft) hole, and the warhead’s cumulative jet will burn through internal ship compartments up to a depth of 12 m…’

    That’s with an approach speed of just M2.4…with a higher approach speed the kinetic energy itself would be greater…kinetic energy increases by the square of speed…so just doubling impact speed to ~M5 would quadruple the kinetic energy…M10 would mean 16 times the kinetic energy on impact…[in comparison to the Kh22 impacting at M2.4...

    Although it should be noted here that the likely impact speed would certainly be less than M10...perhaps half that I would estimate...due to drag in the thick air down low...we see the same with the Kh22...[the M5 is a top speed...not impact speed...which is not actually given]…

    In any case…it means a smaller warhead than that used on the Kh22 would actually be adequate…freeing up more fuel payload…

    As I noted already…the Iskander is fully maneuverable throughout its flight…suing both gas dynamic [ie thrust vector by means of paddles in the exhaust gas stream]…and aerodynamic control…ie by means of control surfaces like movable fins…

    Also as noted the MiG31 is the ideal platform for this missile…the Tu22 is bigger and can carry three Kh22/32…which is 18 tons…but it does not have the speed or altitude capability of the MiG31…

    Also important is that the MiG31 is designed to cruise at M2.4…it is the only aircraft in existence…since demise of the Concorde to cruise supersonically at high Mach number…neither the Tu22 nor the bigger Tu160 heavy bomber is designed for sustained supersonic…only dashes…

    This is true of all combat aircraft…

    For instance the F22 is designed for only a 100 nm sprint in its supercruise at M1.8…

    So the bottom line as far as the Kinzhal is concerned is that this is probably the most likely of the weapons mentioned by Putin that is closest to actual use…all the pieces are definitely there…the Iskander technology is well proven and has seen combat…2008 Georgia war…

    The MiG31 has been a uniquely powerful aircraft for three decades now and is a perfect match for this type of missile…

    As for the other weapons…certainly the nuclear powered cruise missile is intriguing…but we will leave that for another day…lots to unpack there…

    • Replies: @Ржевский
  99. peterAUS says:
    @EliteCommInc.

    Curious.

    If I may ask, against whom could US get in position to being overextended, lacking resources, needing strategic depth and ability to

    produce sustainable weapons production, food and supplies.

    What would be that enemy where

    the next major conflict

    would demand that?

    Every now and then around here pops up a scenario where US slugs out with Russia and/or China, or even those two together.
    I am really confused.
    Admit, that could be result of me being product of Cold War, but, it looks to me that everybody else here is product of “War on Terror”.
    Any of posters here, except the author, perhaps, done any exercise of that scenario? On paper, simulators/trainers, in the field? You remember how it looked like? Or, better, how it did not look like?
    One word: NUKES.
    MIRVs with each warhead having megaton yield. End of the life as we know. End of civilization on Earth.

    Can anybody here imagine a conventional war, ONLY, with Russia?
    If you can, good on you. I can’t.
    I can imagine it starting as conventional and then escalating, fast, into nuclear.
    From 0.2 kiloton yields, escalating into megatons in a matter of days.
    END.

    There are couple of good movies about that.
    I’d recommend British “Threads”. Not before major meal. Enjoy the last 20 minutes.

    Back to major conventional conflict that US could get involved in.
    One scenario only at the moment: Iran. Can’t see any “over extension/resource” problem there.
    Another: North Korea. Now, that one could go bad re nukes, so….

    Feels as Superman vs Galactus. Or whatever.

    • Replies: @kemerd
  100. iffen says:
    @peterAUS

    So.. the same guy in US, how would that look like?

    First, you are dealing with 50 different systems. Only Social Security is uniform throughout the country.

    As a general rule an able-bodied male would receive no permanent assistance in a state like mine (Alabama).

    He could get unemployment compensation for 26 weeks provided he complied with the job search rules.

    Other than pregnant women, adults in Alabama do not receive Medicare so if he was unable to pay his Cobra insurance premiums he would have no insurance. There are public health clinics but the availability varies by county.

    Many that are under 62 try to get approved for Social Security Disability. It is a bit of a racket. The rate goes up during times of high unemployment and is trending higher even though most jobs are less physically demanding. “Mental” disability is one of the best tickets available. This is the route most druggies take.

    Playing it straight is a real disadvantage. As a general rule people lose assistance as they earn more. As was pointed out, the ones who do not work and have no “income,” wink, wink, do best with regard to the available assistance.

    Many of the “homeless” have mental, alcohol or drug problems (or all three) plus the charitable organizations devoted to providing services for the homeless are extensive. Around the cities free meals are widely available.

    • Replies: @peterAUS
  101. @yurivku

    I am sceptical about the laser even in space. I can’t go into detail.

    • Replies: @yurivku
  102. @Thorfinnsson

    Laser dazzlers I had a look at 20 years ago for non lethal riot control were not effective, even dazzlers for night vision systems.

  103. @Michael Kenny

    You, sir, are a consummate idiot, and you are never chary in demonstrating this fact time and time again.

    P.S.: If President Putin lurches into more “blunders” than ten, will you need to take off your shoes and socks to keep track of their number? That’ll only work up to twenty of course. It it gets beyond twenty, perhaps Tiny Duck can help you out (although, come to think of it, I am not really sure how many appendages a duck has upon which he/she may count…).

    • Replies: @FB
  104. @peterAUS

    The Soviet Union spent 00 years trying to export socialist revolution. Excluding 1947, under the cover of Russian armies in Eastern Europe and China (more or less) it didn’t work. US attempts don’t seem to be making superior progress in comparison. On the other hand, there is a queue for membership of the EU.

    • Replies: @peterAUS
  105. bluedog says:
    @Michael Kenny

    Hmm and who told you you could count,up to seven you say can’t prove it my me,now if that rascal would just get out of my beloved Ukraine and turn the gas back on why things would just come up peachy RIGHT.!!!

  106. FB says:
    @Thorfinnsson

    ‘…Larger cities have a mix of public and private homeless shelters. There generally isn’t enough capacity for all homeless, but that works as many homeless don’t like the rules these shelters impose…’

    Gee…it all sounds so wonderful…where do I sign up…?

    • Replies: @Thorfinnsson
  107. @FB

    Replace control surfaces by thrusters. But the power source gets difficult.

  108. FB says:
    @EliteCommInc.

    ‘…Strategically, there is this, despite our foreign policy mistakes, the US does enormous good around the world, that goes unheralded…’

    Interesting…I would be interested to hear more…some examples perhaps…

    Of course we all know about the [ahem] ‘mistakes’…Iraq…Libya…Syria…Palestinians…etc…

    But hey…I’m sure despite these ‘mistakes’ all that do-gooding ‘will pay off in subtle’ ways…as you put it…

  109. @JosephB

    Putin offered Bush superior sites for a radar to monitor Iran. Bush refused and insisted on a site that monitored Russia as least as well. After that, Putin lost trust in US intentions. Bush screwed up so much.

  110. FB says:
    @JerseyJeffersonian

    Wow…my hat is off to you sir…

    That has to be the put-down of the year…

    Well done…although I doubt much will penetrate that massive bone formation he calls a ‘head…’

  111. @Andrei Martyanov

    I certainly wouldn’t recommend it as a favored approach, though it could come in handy in the event of a munitions shortage.

    I was thinking that the fact that the AN/SPY-1 operates in the S-band means a VLO bomb design approach could be successful.

    But I see it also has a six megawatt peak power output (compared to 20kW on the F-22 for instance).

    There goes that idea.

    Carlo Kopp claims there is a blind coverage funnel above warhips.

    http://www.ausairpower.net/Raptor-ASuW.html

    Smart bombs flying steep vertical dive trajectories literally fly down the blind coverage funnel above a warship, presenting difficulties for defensive systems not built to engage inbound ballistic missile class threats.

    If this is accurate it seems like a good attack mode, but I don’t see how the carrier platform could get in range without being detected. An LO aircraft surely will still be detected by a six megawatt radar before it’s in range to conduct a vertical bomb drop.

    A large VLO aircraft perhaps could avoid detection, but that doesn’t describe anything in Russia’s inventory. Perhaps describes the B-2, or did before modern VHF radar proliferated.

    It could however be an excellent approach for attacking smaller warships or merchant ships.

  112. An aside on the Georgians. Their US/NATO training was limited to operating communications equipment so that they could function in Iraq. Combat training was not included. Another ramshackle post Soviet Army basically.

    • Replies: @Avery
    , @FB
  113. @Anonymous

    Cool gun by not what I had in mind. A 7mm diameter, 42mm long bullet made of copper-jacketed tungsten in a plastic telescoped cartridge. As much ignition pressure as can reasonably be achieved with modern metallurgy in a small arm not weighing more than five pounds empty, 24″ or longer barrel (bullpup to reduce overall weapon length).

    Raufoss round (same size) might also be effective given that it allows quite a long penetrator and considerable quantities of thermite compared to existing cartridges owing to the long bullet length.

    This kind of cartridge would probably weigh around the same as the current 7.62 NATO. A bit heavy in other words, but not the end of the world. Especially if real effort is made on lightening much of the other bullshit carried by the infantry.

  114. !y main comment on these weapons. How to pay for all this, infrastructure renewal, double the growth rate alongside a huge decline in work force and all those new pensioners seeking healthcare? World class Big Data too. Productivity growth needs new investment which needs modest interest rates. That’s not really happening, a Rotenberg project or so excluded.

    Good and necessary article.

  115. peterAUS says:
    @iffen

    Informative.
    Cleared a bit of fog.

    Feels tough.
    At the same time, does make people and society tougher.

    Could be an interesting topic, somewhere/sometime else.

    Chat over break done, back to “USA bad, Russia great”.

    • Replies: @FB
    , @iffen
  116. FB says:
    @Thorfinnsson

    ‘…Based on the public specifications of the RIM-174 SM6 the MiG-31 would be impossible to intercept at maximum altitude and speed…’

    Say whaat…?

    A MiG31 attacking USN surface ships with gravity bombs…?

    Well…it’s hard to know where to begin…

    The MiG31 was designed for a specific job…to defend against cruise missile attacks on the huge Russian expanse…

    Designed to fly four abreast…200 km apart…covering an 800 km line and sharing radar data via datalink from those massive Zaslon phased array radars …[first 'fighter' jet to use phased array and datalink]

    That and to intercept fast flying airspace violators like the SR71…which they performed successfully on several occasions…

    Throwing this airplane at a modern air defense system would be suicide…its maximum g load is 5…half that of air superiority fighters…

    That means its turn radius…especially at high speed…would be very large…aircraft defeat missile shots by outturning them…this is the last airplane you want to try that with…

    The specs on that SM6 look pretty impressive…range up to 496 km [268 nm]…speed of M3.5…flight ceiling of 110,000 ft [34 km] which is 12 km higher than the MiG can go…

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/RIM-174_Standard_ERAM

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mikoyan_MiG-31

    I know Russian pilots are gung ho…but nobody’s going to try something like that anytime soon…

    And besides…when it comes to killing ships the Tu22M3 carries three Kh32 ship killers [six tons each] with standoff range of 1,000 km…

    Plus a six-shooter in the belly carrying the Mach 5 Kh15 ship killers…[smaller size...shorter range]…

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tupolev_Tu-22M

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kh-22#Variants

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kh-15

    • Replies: @Thorfinnsson
  117. Avery says:
    @Philip Owen

    {Their US/NATO training was limited to operating communications equipment so that they could function in Iraq}
    {Combat training was not included.}

    Not really. (yes, I know: US/NATO is not Israel….Israel was acting as US/NATO proxy)

    [This involvement includes the sale of advanced weapons to Georgia and the training of the Georgian army's infantry forces.]*
    [The military cooperation between the countries developed swiftly. The fact that Georgia's defense minister, Davit Kezerashvili, is a former Israeli who is fluent in Hebrew contributed to this cooperation.]*

    [HOW ISRAEL TRAINED AND EQUIPPED GEORGIA'S ARMY]**

    This is what was publicly let out.

    ___________
    *

    https://www.ynetnews.com/articles/0,7340,L-3580136,00.html

    **

    https://www.wired.com/2008/08/did-israel-trai/

  118. FB says:
    @Philip Owen

    That’s not what I heard…lots of US and Israeli equipment and training…

    • Replies: @Dmitry
  119. When it comes to the subject at hand, if a picture is worth a thousand words, a demonstration would be worth a million or more.

    • Replies: @John Q. Public
  120. peterAUS says:
    @Philip Owen

    Well…not quite sure I got your post.

    As for

    …US attempts don’t seem to be making superior progress in comparison.

    Probably on the same level just the opposite way.

    Soviet troops were on the border of West Germany and Austria. Yugoslavia and Albania were Communist.

    Now, US troops are, effectively, on borders with Russia (those “helping” the regime in Kiev). There is no Yugoslavia anymore and all its parts got absorbed into US sphere of influence. Albania too.

    Ideologically, what the resident “Team Russia” can’t see, US won.
    Neoliberalism. US vs Russia vs China “strains” don’t matter. They just bicker which elites would take the most of the world pie.
    Such bickering did get us WWI but that’s distant past. We are much more civilized and advanced now. Nukes.

    So…overall…if I were Neocon, or, better, “Wall Street”, I’d say “so far so good”.

    You do see EU as it is I hope. Well, maybe it isn’t but I’ll buy it when see US troops leaving all those countries (bases etc). Germany in particular.

  121. Art says:
    @Andrei Martyanov

    As Syria’s example shows, one of the major Russian exports of the future will be, in fact–already is, a political stability and defense against “regime changes”. This “product” will be in a very high demand.

    Why isn’t Russia pumping out S200-300-400′s like candy?

    This would be good for everyone – defense is always moral.

    p.s. After the F16 shoot down – have heard of no new Israeli flights into Syria???

    • Replies: @Andrei Martyanov
  122. FB says:
    @peterAUS

    Hey Pistol Pete…

    You seemed to have missed little ‘iffen when’s’ bottom line…

    Many of the “homeless” have mental, alcohol or drug problems (or all three)

    I’m sure he didn’t mean anything by that…I think he just wanted to include the maximum info possible…since your inquiries were so earnest…

  123. @Carroll Price

    Right, a demonstration. Do us Americans a big favor. Drop a hypersonic kinetic warhead on CIA in Langley, on The Farm, Camp Swampy (Fort Peary,) and No Man’s Island, on NSA HQ at Fort Meade, and on each of the CIA fusion centers where CIA Gestapo sit and read your tweets. Change our parasitic kleptocratic criminal regime for us. We will strew flowers and sweets in Putin’s path.

    • LOL: FB
  124. peterAUS says:

    As Syria’s example shows, one of the major Russian exports of the future will be, in fact–already is, a political stability and defense against “regime changes”. This “product” will be in a very high demand.

    Excellent product for sure.

    Marketing:
    “Your country, should it buy this product of ours, will look and feel exactly as Syria. Please, take a look at Syria and, with your own eyes, see how great our product is. We guarantee you the same result.”

    Amazing.

    • Replies: @FB
    , @annamaria
  125. MarkinPNW says:
    @Russia is the best

    So some “Russians” might suffer from an irony deficiency? Well, so do a lot of Americans.

    /

  126. @EliteCommInc.

    Whatever the next major conflict, who are friends are will matter — especially on the question of the breadth and scope extended operations.

    Can you name one friend the United States has that’s not bought and paid for – including Israel? You can’t be serious in trotting out the assertion the US has any friends who would remain friends more than 30 minutes following failure on delivery of the latest foreign aid check.

    • Replies: @Philip Owen
  127. iffen says:
    @peterAUS

    does make people and society tougher

    That’s the thinking of some. I don’t know if it’s true or not. To me it looks like it just makes life more miserable and shorter for the less capable. I guess if you kill of the weaker and less fortunate, then by definition what is left is “stronger” in some sense of the word.

    “USA bad, Russia great”.

    This new wave of Russo-phobia took me by surprise. I don’t believe it is deep seated in fly-over country, mainly being pushed by elites for some unknown (to me) reason. And no, for the benefit of all you 88s, I don’t think it is for the benefit of (((them))).

    • Replies: @peterAUS
  128. @FB

    Not saying it’s wonderful. I support harsh enforcement of vagrancy laws and sending convicted vagrants to CCC-type camps, with halfway houses to place them in employment on release.

    If unreformable they should be committed to asylums or perhaps legally entrusted to the care of relatives.

    • Replies: @iffen
  129. FB says:
    @peterAUS

    Get a grip man…

    Who is it that is arming the head-choppers…flying them in from all corners of the globe…paying them a monthly stipend…supplying them captagon pills by the barrel…?

    Yes…this is what will make Syria great…tweakers with beards and guns shouting Allahu Akbar all day…

    And then we have the Syrian ‘refugees’ raping donkeys in children’s zoos in Germany…

    Or getting a free 7,500 euro a month house for the Sharia-observing meathead with two wives…so they can have separate floors…all on the German taxpayer’s bill…

    I suppose it’s Russia doing all this…plus nonstop media agit-prop for these poor ‘rebels’…

    Meanwhile…85 percent of Syrians are now living in govt held areas…over 400,000 people have returned to Aleppo…including many Christians…but you wouldn’t know that from our media now would you…?

    Since you’re talking about teams here nonstop…I think you need to support your team…get out the flag Petey…show your support for your soulmates…

    • Replies: @Cyrano
    , @Vojkan
  130. @FB

    The specs on that SM6 look pretty impressive…range up to 496 km [268 nm]…speed of M3.5…flight ceiling of 110,000 ft [34 km] which is 12 km higher than the MiG can go…

    Mach 2.8 in level flight will outrun Mach 3.5 horizontally at any angle over 18 degrees.

    At 18 degrees the effective climb speed of the SM6 is Mach 0.7–and that’s ignoring boost & acceleration phase.

    So we’re looking at perhaps 15 minutes to reaching the maximum altitude of the MiG 31, by which time the MiG 31 would be 700 miles or so away–outside the engagement range.

    In other words the MiG-31 at maximum speed and altitude cannot be intercepted by the SM6.

    Now whether or not it can reach this speed while carrying 8,000 pounds of bombs and have enough fuel to not only outrun the missile shot but all turn back and return to base is another question.

    Of course no doubt the calculus of the USN and allied navies is that a sufficiently large missile to engage more distant threats is not worth the additional magazine capacity (and cost) aboard ships in light of the formidable AD systems of the Aegis BMD. More missiles to engage incoming missiles is presumably favored than larger missiles to defeat incoming missile carriers (which in the case of long-range ASM shots is literally thousands of miles).

    And dropping bombs at this speed, of course, makes dropping them directly down the blind coverage funnel. So the bombs will be engaged by the Aegis BMD.

    • Replies: @AndrewR
    , @FB
  131. @Andrei Martyanov

    Not to mention the numerous and immensely large sums (Trillions?) that have simply disappeared “in” the Pentagon. Donald Rumsfeld made one such announcement on 10/11/2001.

    • Replies: @pogohere
  132. peterAUS says:
    @iffen

    Hehe…a good one.

    To me it looks like it just makes life more miserable and shorter for the less capable. I guess if you kill of the weaker and less fortunate, then by definition what is left is “stronger” in some sense of the word.

    Can’t disagree.

    Still, the fact does remain that the US is the leader of all the Western world and, more importantly, the flow of immigration is still going into US and not back.
    So, while you do have a very valid point, well, people still see it as better than the rest. And that does include people from West as well.

    On the surface, it’s not right really. but, then, we have a society where everyone flocks in. Not only that, but tries very hard to get there. And, when get there, as such immigrants, no safety net whatsoever in the first place.

    Well, it’s a huge topic and above my paygrade I admit.
    Personally, I like here better. But, then, I know a lot of people here who’ve been working hard to get visa to US. Smart and hard working people.
    Well, how about this: I do ,personally, know several families here which have a member living in US. Now….those guys/girls….are the best of them. The most educated, talented, hard working, with the best “delivery” within their spheres. And we are talking medicine, IT, hard science…you name it.
    One could say that the best left for US; the second team is here.

    This new wave of Russo-phobia took me by surprise.

    Me too.
    I could understand it “then” where we had the M.A.D. over our heads, plus no Internet, and, well, effectively Cold War.
    But now……agree.
    Now, I do understand elite’s rage against Russia. But an average person buying it is, well, sort of very uncomfortable puzzle.

    I don’t believe it is deep seated in fly-over country, mainly being pushed by elites for some unknown (to me) reason.

    Maybe I could help.
    Snatching that “world masters” away just when they, almost, got it. Russian elites refusing to accept second class role. People in power don’t like that. Not at all.
    Plus, well, there is something in Protestant/Orthodox thing there too, if not so much as organized religion then cultural.

    And no, for the benefit of all you 88s, I don’t think it is for the benefit of (((them))).

    Haha…you got me as one of “88s”?
    Well, I’ve been called a lot here (including being Jew, hasbara etc.) but this is new.
    O.K.
    Let me put that this way: I wouldn’t mind a WN ethnostate along the similar lines Israel was when conceived, say, up to ’56. Not because I think “we” are better than “them”, just “you do your stuff and we’ll do ours”.
    The one I could say that there IS a black/brown/yellow/red/white racism, not only the latest; that homosexuality is not natural; that there IS a difference between men and women. That we, men “think” and not “feel” about serious issues. Etc.Oh, and yes, the “2nd”.
    What I haven’t been, still, able to resolve is the economy of that state and social order but working on it…hehe…Still have, I hope, 20 years to get it. The understanding, not the state that is.

    • Replies: @iffen
  133. iffen says:
    @Thorfinnsson

    Not saying it’s wonderful. I support harsh enforcement of vagrancy laws and sending convicted vagrants to CCC-type camps, with halfway houses to place them in employment on release.
    If unreformable they should be committed to asylums or perhaps legally entrusted to the care of relatives.

    There are no enforceable vagrancy laws, haven’t been since the 50′s. There are no CCC type camps, haven’t been since the 40′s. There are very few asylums spots available, the “inmates” have been living on the streets since the 60′s. “Care” and neglect by relatives can be part of the problem more often than not.

    • Agree: FB
  134. Cyrano says:
    @FB

    You have to realize that as a Croat he was “educated” in a Catholic madrasa school – where the emphasis is not so much on education, but on some more pleasurable, extracurricular activities such as – “In how many different ways can you, young boys make yourself useful to the priest”. That’s why he has comprehension issues – the poor retard.

    • Agree: Kiza
  135. iffen says:
    @peterAUS

    The most educated, talented, hard working, with the best “delivery” within their spheres.

    Meritocracy is eclipsing, quotas are rising. I am not sure how long we can live off the fat before the real decline.

    Haha…you got me as one of “88s”?

    Of course not, not sure how you read that in. Just a pre-empt, tiring if you say you don’t understand Ukraine, etc. then twenty comments; dem Jews.

    No rain, too much rain, dem Jews.

    We are going down, will be taking many with us, sorry.

    • Replies: @peterAUS
  136. FB says:
    @Thorfinnsson

    ‘…Mach 2.8 in level flight will outrun Mach 3.5 horizontally at any angle over 18 degrees…’

    Uh…no…

    This is a simple trig vector problem…ie the horizontal speed of the missile in a climb angle of 18 degrees will be 95 percent of its actual speed…

    Ie cos(18) = 0.951…

    The MiG top speed of M 2.8 is 0.8 [80 percent] of the pursuing missile speed of 3.5…hence the airplane could only outpace the missile if the missile angle is above 36 percent…twice what you stated…

    As to the missile climb speed…again your math is off…at that 18 degree angle it will be the sine of the forward speed that will give us the climb…sin(18) = 0.3

    which means the missile actual climb rate is still over M1…although it would not be expressed in terms of Mach number anyway…

    In order to climb at a rate of M0.7 the missile would have to be shot at a 45 degree angle…

    Admittedly the SM6 speed is rather slow at M3.5…about half that of the S300/400 rockets which are about 2 km/s…even the old S200 is actually a speed demon at 2.5 km/s…which is over M7…

    But still…

    ‘…So we’re looking at perhaps 15 minutes to reaching the maximum altitude of the MiG 31…’

    Well…that’s simply ridiculous…

    Climbing straight up it would take 18.4 seconds for a M3.5 rocket to reach 20,600 m…the MiG’s service ceiling…

    Now it would take a few additional seconds for the rocket to accelerate once it pops out of the tube and its motor lights up…not more than 10 seconds or so…considering its small cross-section area and resulting low drag…combined with the high thrust…

    So call it 30 seconds…if fired at an intercept angle of 45 degrees…the rocket would take 42 seconds to reach that height…including the 10 second acceleration to top speed of M3.5

    At that point the rocket would be 30 km out and 20 km high…

    If the radar lock was made before launch and the radar warning receiver on the MiG picked it up instantly…it means he has 30 seconds to make a turn that will break radar lock…

    Very doubtful he is going to make that turn tight enough to shake the missile…

    At M2.8 and 20 km altitude his speed is 827 m/s…so at maximum 5 g turn his minimum turn radius is going to be 14.25 km…

    Turn radius is given by the equation…

    Like I said…first he has to turn…but that 14 km turn radius means flying an arc that is 45 km long…ie 14 x pi = ~45…

    At his speed of 827 m/s that’s going to take him 54 seconds to make that U-turn…

    Now…if he reacted to his radar warning receiver instantly and started the turn…he might have a chance to outrun the shot by the time the admittedly slow missile gets there…

    we said 45 seconds…by which time it might be too late…

    It would be a game of chicken that I don’t anyone would want to play…sorry…

    • Replies: @FB
    , @Thorfinnsson
  137. annamaria says:
    @peterAUS

    Gloating about Syrian tragedy, peterAUS — in an openly pro-Israel manner? Are you able to see the difference between opportunists (presstitutes and profiteers) and decent (principled and courageous) individuals? Here are some samples for you:
    “Vanessa Beeley Presents Exposé on White Helmets at Swiss Press Club in Geneva:”

    http://21stcenturywire.com/2017/11/28/vanessa-beeley-presents-new-white-helmets-expose-to-swiss-press-club-geneva/

    “Is the UK FCO Financing Terrorism in Syria with Taxpayer Funds?” http://21stcenturywire.com/2017/12/02/white-helmets-local-councils-uk-fco-financing-terrorism-syria-taxpayer-funds/
    “Journalist Interrogated, Fired For Linking CIA Weapons Shipments To Syrian Jihadists:” https://www.mintpressnews.com/journalist-interrogated-fired-linking-cia-weapons-shipments-syrian-jihadists/231348/

    • Agree: SolontoCroesus, bluedog
    • Replies: @iffen
  138. peterAUS says:
    @iffen

    Thread hijack warning, please skip.

    We are going down, will be taking many with us, sorry.

    Feels that way.

    Well, hopefully, the feeling is wrong.

    You, Americans ,did put a very pleasant surprise by electing Trump. Or, better, by not electing The Bitch.
    So, hopefully, there is, still, enough of “Founding Fathers” spirit somewhere there to prevent the M.A.D.

    Putin’s regime won’t be able to keep accommodating and retreating. Even the most reasonable person, when faced with a bully, will snap, matter of time.

    That’s the problem with bullies…..they take being reasonable as being weak.

    Putin has been, unfortunately, sending those messages, IMHO. Neocons do believe that he’ll, again and again, be “reasonable” and pull back…and back.

    My main worry is that they won’t recognize the real red line when they reach it.
    And it is their fault. The hubris. The …stupidity.

    I am sure that Putin, if we were talking “old days”, up to Bush Senior tops, would’ve done that. In essence, trade his position of power for peace. But not his life and not that life being taken as bitch.
    Milosevic, Saddam and the worst case, Qaddafi.

    No way Russian siloviki will allow that.
    They shall launch.

  139. iffen says:
    @annamaria

    (presstitutes and profiteers) and decent (principled and courageous) individuals?

    Get real AM. Although I have read enough of your comments to know that that is not possible.

    • Replies: @annamaria
    , @peterAUS
  140. FB says:

    ‘…They shall launch…’

    Why don’t you do everyone a favor and launch yourself out of here…?

    • Replies: @kemerd
  141. Kiza says:
    @Andrei Martyanov

    Obviously, beyond the greed focused MIC there is a much more serious implication of US last experiencing, but only a medium intensity, war in its Civil War so long ago. The much more serious implication is that it is dishing out war mush more readily than any other nation on the planet. The reason that Ziocon parasites have found such a fertile ground in the US is almost like an isolated island, whose people consider war to be entertainment (shock & awe), have never had any serious family or home losses from it and are dumb and uneducated enough to be pulled by their noses through their MSM to any war that Ziocons fancy.

    In short, smart parasites feeding on dumb f*cks.

    Another point is that the parasites control and profit from the fully enclosed war cycle:
    Media,
    Weapon building industry,
    Post-war reconstruction industry and
    More stolen oil, water and land for Israel.

    In such system, the efficiency is an absolutely last (unprofitable) consideration.

    Therefore, US winning a war against Russia? Not in the next hundred years militarily but possibly through subterfuge: assasinations and regime change.

    • Replies: @Cyrano
  142. bjondo says:
    @Thorfinnsson

    and making some changes to cost-of-living inflation adjustments in the 90s

    Believe ‘some changes’ amounts to benefits being nearly half of what they would be if inflation measured honestly.

    There are benefits but the whole “benefit” system is shit, degrading, harmful and it is meant to be.

    Regarding the Russian weapons: show ‘em off at AIPAC. At least one, maybe two. From the left, from the right.

  143. annamaria says:
    @iffen

    What exactly was so insulting for you — the mentioning of the principled and courageous individuals or the impossibility to use any moral standards for rationalizing the ziocons’ desire to ruin sovereign Syria?

    Guess your family believes religiously in the eternal victimhood and in the right of Jewish people to demand special treatment from “others”– “because of Holocaust.” — This is over. After the fraternization of the Kagans’ clan (via Nuland-Kagan) with neo-Nazi in Ukraine and after Israeli’s support for ISIS, Jewish pretenses on superior morality (and similar fantastic inventions) have become unrealistic.

  144. likbez says:

    Some weak points of the article:

    1. There is some mystery in this Putin “bragging” about new formidable weapons. This is not his style. Why now? Why do it when sanctions are in place and can be easily be tightened as the result? Looks like in order to make such a statement Putin should have intelligence information about a real threat of attack from the USA, or some large scale provocation in Syria or Ukraine. Only in this case his statement makes some sense. As a open warning: do not do it. Otherwise this is just an open invitation for the new, more destructive and expensive stage in nuclear arms race. The scenario that Russia should try to avoid.

    2. Also the rule is: if your adversary is making a mistake, you should not try to stop him. If missile defense systems and aircraft carriers are useless why not to allow the USA to put another 100 billion dollars into it ? Something does not compute here. BTW both remain perfectly viable as the first strike weapons (you never know what those tubes contain and they can hold cruise missiles as well). The fact that they will perish is just part of the cost of the whole operation.

    3. Russia has way too many problems, both economic and political. So each dollar put into military technology is stolen from the civilian sector and makes sanctions more effective. So succumbing to the arm race is like self-sanctions.

    4. After 2012 it is clear that the way the USA will try to undermine Russia is most probably via political interference during the next election, in which there will be a power vacuum as Putin finishes his last term, and there is no Putin II. The problem of the leader succession is a well-known Achilles’ spot of Russia. In 2012 the “collective West” achieved pretty significant success in staging color revolution in Russia using pro-West (aka Zapadniki) and comprador sector in Moscow as the fifth column. The political situation in Moscow will always favor pro-European forces, as ther city has a huge concentration of employees of foreign companies, professionals and entrepreneurs who depend on the West and earn money from the West (compradors) . Efforts to put in power a classic neoliberal like Macron in France will be multiplied for elections in 2024. I do not see, why they can’t be more successful then in 2012.

    5. While weakened by the recent McCarthyism campaign in the USA, Russian comprador sector and neoliberals are still a very powerful political force and control a significant part of media and oligarch money. Russian constitution was written by the USA. And scars from the economic rape of Russia in 90th still did not fully heal. In other words, pro-Western forces in Russia are powerful enough to serve as a base to stage another color revolution. Probably along with crashing oil prices before the elections again, or some other nasty trick. In this case you do not need any missiles. As long as Russia is a neoliberal country Putin and his policies remain a political anomaly. And Putin himself a maverick. There will be no another Putin, but there can well be another Gorbachov, or, worse, Yeltsin. The same is true for China, but at least china has political control of the Communist Party and state ownership of the financial sector. The latter is not true for Russia and is a huge political risk. While neoliberalism entered the stage of decline there is no viable alternatives on the horizon.

    6. Loss of Ukraine was/is a huge geopolitical defeat of Putin (and Russia as a country) which can’t be compensated any bragging about new weapon systems. It was and still is a geopolitical knockdown.

    7. Hopes about “some sensible conversation on the new world order may start between key geopolitical players” are naïve. The US elite is hell-bent on world superiority as this is a pre-condition of the existence of the dollar as the primary world currency. This situation will not probably change until the end of cheap oil, which might take another twenty years or more.

    8. If time is working against the US, why not to sit quiet and try not to anger aging hegemon as China supposedly does (having also advantage of host of “offshored” manufacturing from the USA and having the USA as debtor).

    9. The level of brain drain from Russia actually is a huge limiting factor, which makes a claim about cruising missile with a nuclear reactor as a part of propulsion engine highly suspect.

    10. The network of intelligence agencies around Russia (which now include Estonia and Ukraine) probably represents much more serious threat then the “first style” capability of the USA, if such thing can eve exist.

    11. “Collective West” can easily tighten sanction expending them on more technological sectors, thus damaging Russia economic growth. So bragging about new weapons is bad diplomacy when the opponent is much stronger economically and politically.

    12. China has less than 300 nuclear weapons and still is regarded as a formidable nuclear power, probably spending 20 times less money in this area.

    13. The claim that “The Kinzhal effectively removes any non-suicidal surface force thousands of miles away from Russia’s shores and renders its capabilities irrelevant” is highly questionable. The idea of the first strike includes the elimination of the possibility of launching most (or all) Kinzhal missiles carriers, as a necessary part required for the success of the operation. Any losses of forward deployed units are acceptable in such a huge game.

    • Replies: @peterAUS
    , @Miro23
    , @FB
    , @TT
    , @pogohere
  145. FB says:
    @FB

    Actually made a slight booboo there myself…

    I had said…

    ‘…In order to climb at a rate of M0.7 the missile would have to be shot at a 45 degree angle…’

    That’s not correct…for some reason I was using tangent there instead of sine…

    the rocket launch angle would need to get smaller to decrease the climb rate…obviously…not bigger…a rocket flight angle of 12 degrees [to the horizontal] would give an upward component of 0.2… ie sin(12) = 0.2

    multiply that my our forward speed of M3.5 and we get an up component of M0.7…

    The rest of the calcs look correct…

    Also a note that in the formula for turn radius given…the g is for the acceleration of gravity which is 9.8 m/s^2…and the n is for the load factor of 5…that is the number of g’s the aircraft is pulling in the bank…

    Bottom line is that the math analysis is sound…the pilot flying toward the SAM would have to turn around first if he wants to outrun the shot…which would take time…by which time that missile would have a good chance of getting there…

    Depending on the actual circumstances and hence geometry of the engagement…

  146. Cyrano says:
    @Kiza

    Kiza, I agree with you on almost everything, except the zionist part. I think it’s the Anglo-Saxons that deserve most of the blame. Sure, the Jews are taking advantage of the situation, but I don’t blame them. If they are going to be used as propaganda props, why not gain something for themselves too? You don’t have to agree with me, everybody has their own opinion.

    • Agree: yurivku
    • Replies: @yurivku
    , @anon
  147. Svigor says:

    *drops off another case of vodka for the boyuz*

    See you in an hour, guys.

  148. peterAUS says:
    @iffen

    Just a pre-empt, tiring if you say you don’t understand Ukraine, etc. then twenty comments; dem Jews.

    No rain, too much rain, dem Jews.

    Well, you did utter the trigger word.

    Guess your family believes religiously in the eternal victimhood and in the right of Jewish people to demand special treatment from “others”– “because of Holocaust.” — This is over. After the fraternization of the Kagans’ clan (via Nuland-Kagan) with neo-Nazi in Ukraine and after Israeli’s support for ISIS, Jewish pretenses on superior morality (and similar fantastic inventions) have become unrealistic.

    Yahweh, help us.

    • Replies: @annamaria
  149. peterAUS says:
    @likbez

    Putin should have intelligence information about a real threat of attack from the USA, or some large scale provocation in Syria or Ukraine.

    I’d go for Ukraine.

    Something does not compute here.

    Well, “if we can’t have it it’s not good.”
    Sour grapes.

    Russia has way too many problems, both economic and political. So each dollar put into military technology is stolen from the civilian sector and makes sanctions more effective. So succumbing to the arm race is like self-sanctions.

    Agree.

    In other words, pro-Western forces in Russia are powerful enough to serve as a base to stage another color revolution.

    In this case you do not need any missiles.

    While neoliberalism entered the stage of decline there is no viable alternatives on the horizon.

    Agree.

    Loss of Ukraine was/is a huge geopolitical defeat of Putin (and Russia as a country) which can’t be compensated any bragging about new weapon systems. It was and still is a geopolitical knockdown.

    Agree.
    But, perhaps that’s not true. In any case, the resident “Team Russia” will now explain that. As victory, of course.

    Hopes about “some sensible conversation on the new world order may start between key geopolitical players” are naïve. The US elite is hell-bent on world superiority as this is a pre-condition of the existence of the dollar as the primary world currency.

    Agree.

    If time is working against the US, why not to sit quiet and try not to anger aging hegemon as China supposedly does (having also advantage of host of “offshored” manufacturing from the USA and having the USA as debtor).

    and

    The level of brain drain from Russia actually is a huge limiting factor, which makes a claim about cruising missile with a nuclear reactor as a part of propulsion engine highly suspect.

    and

    “Collective West” can easily tighten sanction expending them on more technological sectors, thus damaging Russia economic growth. So bragging about new weapons is bad diplomacy when the opponent is much stronger economically and politically.

    “Team Russia” coming up. You are about to see the light. Somehow.

    • Replies: @Aedib
  150. @Thorfinnsson

    Of course government arsenals/depots/yards had losers, but they were an honest try. There is something wrong when a profit-seeking organization earns more when their products are flawed and must be fixed, and earns more profits when products are costly to maintain, all the while legally bribing congressmen with “contributions” and Generals and Admirals with obvious kickbacks the same month they “retire”.

    The new $14 billion USS Ford aircraft carrier has a launch system that cannot be fixed because it never worked. It remains an experimental system that after 20 years of development is not ready for use, and may never be. Replacing it with a proven steam system will cost over $5 billion.

    The idea that items like aircraft carriers are somehow cheaper and better when produced by a monopoly is insane. Our Pentagon gets ten times more to spend than Russia each year. The fact that Russia can produce anything equal to the USA shows there are major problems.

    As I write in my book, aircraft carriers and amphibious ships have a key role in power projection. However, if a major war occurs they must hide far away until enemy subs, missile bases, and bombers are destroyed, which may take months if not years. Then they can come out of hiding to conquer.

    • Replies: @Kiza
    , @TT
  151. @FB

    Your concept is interesting but you’ve been fooled. The small SM-3s haven’t even half the range to reach IRBMs or ICBMs. It’s a massive and profitable hoax.

    http://www.g2mil.com/NMD_Fraud.htm

    • Replies: @FB
  152. @FB

    As long as you’ve gone that high in the sky, it makes sense to just go a bit higher and eliminate most heat/friction problems. It is far easier to carry some LOX and pop up outside the atmosphere and then back down, than to push thru thin air. Your vehicle mass is one third as much with a fat lifting body than a long and sleek hypersonic with three times more mass. In short, hypersonics are BS, just use faster and cheaper rockets.

  153. Vojkan says:
    @FB

    What a plonker. He could actually go to jail for sexually assaulting a pony whereas if he had raped a girl the case would have been dismissed as a matter of cultural difference.

  154. Kiza says:
    @Carlton Meyer

    However, if a major war occurs they must hide far away until enemy subs, missile bases, and bombers are destroyed, which may take months if not years. Then they can come out of hiding to conquer.

    I had a good laugh, this is what happens when so many people play armchair warriors. Where would you hide an aircraft carrier Carlton, under your mattress? This is not the Roosevelt’s WW2 to evacuate the carriers and leave the smaller ships to be sunk.

    Honey, I hid an aircraft carrier!

  155. Miro23 says:
    @likbez

    Looks like in order to make such a statement Putin should have intelligence information about a real threat of attack from the USA, or some large scale provocation in Syria or Ukraine. Only in this case his statement makes some sense. As a open warning: do not do it.

    It’s an interesting commentary, and I came to the same conclusion. Threats, braggadocio (We Are Empire) and general hubris are features of 21st century American foreign policy – not Russian, so I have to interpret Putin’s statement as reactive. There is something out there that Putin is aware of, and he’s saying “Don’t do It”.

    America is incapable of viewing itself through the eyes of others, and has the kind of blind arrogance that I would best compare to late 19th and early 20th Century German militarism – the deeply embedded German worldview (long before Hitler) of superiority, destiny, and the corresponding natural right to Empire. Hitler was only the last in a long line of German exponents of this view when he said “According to the laws of nature, the soil belongs to he who conquers it. The fact of having children who want to live, the fact that our people is bursting out of its cramped frontiers – these justify all of our claims to the Eastern spaces.”

    It took two World Wars, and Russian troops in Berlin, to rid the world of this cancer – and the same dynamic is now at work again. The crazed Imperialist is the USA (or at least its Zio-Glob leadership), but with the difference that a technological WW3 will be over in a matter of days if not hours.

  156. yurivku says:
    @JosephB

    I’m confused about Russia being upset about withdrawal from the ABM. From what I recall, we made it extremely clear the goal was not to stop Russia’s nuclear forces.

    Oh at last! I thought if ZUS establishment represented only by imbeciles, why can’t we see them here?
    And here you are.
    “I’m confused about” US “being upset about” Russias weapons? “we made it extremely clear the goal was not to stop” US’s stupid indespencable democracy spreading around the world!

    That said, I’m baffled as to why we tried to prosecute a global war on terror without involving Russia.

    That’s even better. YOU ARE TERRORISTS. You have to be stopped.

  157. yurivku says:
    @Philip Owen

    I can’t go into detail.

    Understand. Top secret ;-) ;-)

    • LOL: FB
  158. yurivku says:
    @Cyrano

    Sure, If one got a parasite it’not parasite is to blame, and neither parasite should get rid of its host.

  159. Aedib says:
    @peterAUS

    You are still too butthurt.

  160. kemerd says:
    @FB

    Launch they shall. Indeed. I am also not fun of Peter’s position of “might makes right” type of thinking but his analysis here is simple and sound.

    • Replies: @pogohere
  161. @FB

    I am not sure why I should be butt hurt but I thank you for the picture of daily prayers in Moscow.

  162. @Art

    Why isn’t Russia pumping out S200-300-400′s like candy?

    Actually she does. With the exception of S-200 which is long ago obsolete and not in production. S-300 and S-400, however, are hot-hot-hot(c) on the market. Even Turkey and Saudi Arabia bought S-400.

  163. Anonymous • Disclaimer says:
    @Michael Kenny

    What makes you think the USA can afford another arms race? The USA is about to go bankrupt…

    • Replies: @Sergey Krieger
  164. FB says:
    @likbez

    You make some interesting observations and your comment is thought-provoking…

    However…I think the intent of the article was to explore some of the technical issues of what we saw on March 1…not so much the political dimension…and certainly your approach is to try to get an overall…wide angle picture that gets every possible Russia issue into the frame…

    …which by necessity means you give up some resolution…or granularity if y0u will…compared to a more tightly focused article…

    You start with an initial premise of why announce these weapons now…and question the wisdom…the simple answer may be technical related…these weapons may be already mature technically and now is the time to show them…?

    Sometimes a cigar is just a cigar…

    A couple more points…you mention sanctions quite a bit…but we have seen that Russia is able to carry on just fine…sanctions or not…

    The key indicator there is that sanctions are having a much bigger blowback on the US itself…ie the US is losing Europe…

    Germany has been quite vocal about US going a step too far in trying to dictate energy policy…which is key to German industrial export economy…and besides they may finally be finding their sea legs after years of subservience to an increasingly unhinged country that is heading for the cliff…

    The Germans are going to get Nordstream 2…because they want it…it is actually more important to Germany than to Russia…Russia has been supplying energy to Europe for many decades going back to Soviet times…but is just now starting to feed the biggest energy consumer in the world…China…

    Other, smaller EU countries notably Italy…have become quite vocal about Russia sanctions hurting them…we saw just now an election in Italy where the ruling claque were turfed…

    So it seems that the days of US dictating the politics to its European vassals may be over…the kind of friction they are making with sanctions and their increasing hysteria is only hastening this process of vassals breaking off…

    The other issue is Ukraine…you bring to this the the typical US perspective of ‘losing’ a country…this again goes back to the vassal game…

    The US gained all of Eastern Europe after the collapse of the Soviet Union…but did Russia lose anything…sensible people will say the lost they burden of empire…long after it had ceased being profitable…as with the British previously…

    Ukraine is historically something of an artificial country…the original Kievan Rus [Rurivik dynasty] was the original Russia…it fell apart after the Mongol invasions…but the Russian and Ukrainian language and people are mostly indistinguishable…other than the Galician Catholic minority…

    For several hundred years the peoples of the Ukraine [ie even then it was more than a single national people] were under rule by the Poles and Lithuania…while the new Russian empire based in Moscow gained strength and eventually took over 300 years ago…

    There are and have always been Ukrainian nationalists that do not like Russia…but they are in the minority…the best way to think of Ukraine is similar to Scotland…even the Irish are more distant from the English than Ukrainians from Russians…

    Politically the situation we see in Ukraine is that the ordinary people don’t really care about the politics…they are genuinely concerned about bread and butter…it is quite sad actually that the US is treating the Ukraine as a pawn…and a quite cheap one at that…in its game with Russia…

    I don’t believe the Russians look at the situation that way…there is real fraternity among many Russians and Ukrainians that goes to a fundamental level…again similar to Scotland where the country is divided on the issue of the English…

    So unless the EU and US are prepared to do a full Marshall plan to drag Ukraine into a reasonable living standard…then this ‘win’ will turn out to be something of a chimera…

    Heck the polls even in eastern Europe are trending against the post Cold War direction…with about half the people now questioning if the new boss is really better than the old boss…

    And finally if you are going to do a wide angle shot like this…then get the crazy cousin into the picture also…ie the US and its failing Ponzi economy…that is bound to collapse just on the principles of mathematics…

    China and Russia are working to bury the source of all US strength…the petrodollar…this is literally kryptonite…the US is quite simply toast once the petrodollar sinks…

    China is the world’s biggest economy and biggest energy buyer…Russia is the world’s biggest energy seller…other nations too that are not so strong and have felt the body blows of US economic warfare…such as Iran, Venezuela and other will gladly join in…

    It’s starting to feel like US has used up all its chips and all its markers…

    The entire developing world wants real prosperity not economic colonialism and corporate plunder…

    These are some large and powerful currents that have to be taken into account…if one is going to take a wide angle shot of geopolitics…

    • Replies: @AP
  165. Kimppis says:
    @AndrewR

    I think that article was linked earlier.

    It’s obviously mostly nonsense.

    His description of Putin is totally wrong. But those kind of views are nothing new at this point, standard russophobia.

    He also seems to describe the Russian military as it was in… maybe around 2010. AFAIK, the basic modernization and reorganization is already largely done, the equipment is mostly modern, etc.

    The social situation overall (also in regards to hazing, evaders… whatever the actual term is) has massively improved. At the same time, military service and the military as a whole is viewed much more positively by the Russians, compared to only 5-10 years ago.

    Nowadays there are more contractors than conscripts. And of course, it’s not true that conscripts are automatically somehow massively inferior, in certain roles that is. These are from the end 2016, now the situation is obviously even “better”:
    - Officers 205,000
    - Contractors 384,000
    - Conscripts 275,000
    - Total = 864,000 active personnel

    Lastly, Putin actually mostly talked about economic and social issues, infrastructure… So the whole narrative is wrong. The weapons showcase was about deterrence, they want to focus on internal issues.

    • Replies: @Sergey Krieger
  166. @Anonymous

    While premise that ussr spent itself into bankruptcy on military was false, when it comes to USA it is the truth. Irony.

    • Replies: @Sarah Toga
  167. @Sergey Krieger

    If history shows us anything, that is that the US elite will NOT get it. They cannot be reasoned with. They might pretend to negotiate, perhaps to stall for time and then stab Russia in the back.
    If one operation could be done to eradicate most of their gear, that would do world peace a great service.

  168. @Kimppis

    Putin and those around him would better do concentrate on internal issues or eventually issues will concentrate on them.

    • Replies: @peterAUS
  169. @Anonymous

    You typed my first thought upon reading the article. No need to wonder the long term impact. Instead, prepare as best you can for you and yours.
    Unless Trump stops immigration/increases the re-emigration of foreigners. Also the obvious security measures: no Chinese nationals working in our research universities; reforming the make-work program we call the military budget; end “social engineering” in the military; teach real science at all grade levels – but only to those with adequate IQ, don’t waste resources on “equality”; etc.
    The window is closing.
    If immigration is not both stopped and reversed, if AA is not stopped, America ceases.

    • Agree: RadicalCenter
  170. Excellent piece.

    I believe that Vladimir Putin’s speech can be seen as Russia’s formal reply to the de facto ultimatum that’s been presented to Russia by pathetic-puppet-”president”-of-last-resort, Orange Clown (aka Teflon-Don-The-Con-Man, aka the “real” Donald Trump).

  171. Not to worry about USA’s technological deficit. We now have Common Core math!

  172. @Sergey Krieger

    Welfare? Other endless bring-home-the-bacon boondoggles?

    Military spending is bad enough, but not the main culprit in our bankruptcy.

    • Replies: @Daniel Chieh
    , @bjondo
  173. @Sarah Toga

    US military spending is substantial, but doesn’t hold a candle to unfunded pensions and other aspects of the welfare state, to which there is no solution for and doesn’t appear that anyone realistically will ever tackle.

    • Replies: @iffen
  174. peterAUS says:
    @Sergey Krieger

    Putin and those around him would better do concentrate on internal issues or eventually issues will concentrate on them.

    Agree.

    This…obsession….with high tech is actually puzzling.
    Not only that, but, overall, which “military” is better. “Whose father/older brother is stronger” kid talk.

    The Empire shall go for the Russia’s internal problems and try to capitalize on that.
    Ukraine was taken down using that approach.
    Oh, wait, not only Ukraine but all those who didn’t tow the line.
    Thinking that, somehow, a conventional war, only, will settle the issue is not only delusional but stupid.
    Why would The Empire do that? No reason whatsoever.

    It will try to do exactly what’s been doing since ’91.
    Internal…………dissent.

    So, while Russian elites will keep building high tech weaponry (remember USSR), The Empire will keep working on getting all those “unhappy” with Putin regime onboard and using them for weakening the regime.

    If the regime in Moscow can’t, or doesn’t want to see it, well, it doesn’t deserve that position.
    True, weapons industry is good for making money and stashing most of it offshore. Not sharing that wealth, though, with general population is not that smart, just, they simply can’t help it.
    That’s the way of the world there. Czars and serfs.

    The problem is,of course, they can’t step down even if they wanted to.
    Nobody wants kangaroo courts and hanging.
    Or public murder broadcast live on Internet.

    Conundrum.

    • Replies: @Sergey Krieger
    , @annamaria
  175. peterAUS says:
    @annamaria

    Thank you.
    Much appreciated.
    Now I can try to connect the dots.

    Still, not quite sure what the Jews have to do with all this “high-tech conventional war” between The Empire and Russia.
    I mean, it’s, apparently, Washington and Moscow elites just itching to settle their differences on the field of battle. Within gentleman parameters. No nukes, for example. Ever. Not even those small ones.

    But, them Jews…what they have to do with all that?

    Confusing.

    Hey, iffen, watch this space.

    • LOL: iffen
  176. Qqqqq says:
    @Carlton Meyer

    …..is not superrior…..
    U talk BS, to place here your advertisment, ergo u r a shill and a troll.

  177. iffen says:
    @Daniel Chieh

    to which there is no solution for and doesn’t appear that anyone realistically will ever tackle.

    Where have you been, DC? Don’t you know that unlimited immigration is going to pyramid those worries right out the window? Those millions of newcomers are going to be more than willing, nay enthusiastic, to cut back on their current consumption in order to fully fund retirement in sunny Sarasota for us old timers.

  178. bjondo says:
    @Sarah Toga

    By military spending, are you limiting to DoD budget or including the trillions for US wars for Israel – some 9 trillion $$ and increasing.

    How many trillions of welfare to Wall St?

    • Replies: @Sarah Toga
  179. @peterAUS

    Putin and his team did a good job regarding ensuring Russia safety and souverenity. That should have been done to keep partners away. But state real strength is her people and I believe Putin and his team have not done nearly enough. Country that used to have free education, healthcare, housing and many other social guarantees and confidence in the future….. But we are talking weapons. He did a good job. Arms race is over. USA lost.

    • Replies: @peterAUS
  180. AP says:
    @FB

    Ukraine is historically something of an artificial country…the original Kievan Rus [Rurivik dynasty] was the original Russia…it fell apart after the Mongol invasions

    Relationship of Kievan Rus to modern Russia and Ukraine is somewhat analogous to the relationship of Charlemagne’s Frankish Empire to modern France or Germany. Although both Germany and France would have to be in the same linguistic family for the analogy to be more accurate.

    For several hundred years the peoples of the Ukraine [ie even then it was more than a single national people] were under rule by the Poles and Lithuania

    Correct. This meant not only political separation but largescale settlement (about 10% of the population were Polish settlers – these were absorbed by the natives, so most Ukrainians have some Polish roots), centuries of schooling, etc. And this was enough to lead to a different culture, language, identity.

    eventually took over 300 years ago

    The eastern half of Ukraine was linked to Moscow in the 1650s (so indeed about 300 years), but the western half in the 1770s (so 200 years) and Galicia not until 1939.

    but the Russian and Ukrainian language and people are mostly indistinguishable

    Incorrect. Ukrainian is about as close to Russian as it is to Polish (Ukrainian grammar and pronunciation is closer to Russian, but Ukrainian vocabulary actually has more words in common with Polish than with Russian). The Scandinavian languages are closer to each other Russian is to Ukrainian. The catch is that in everyday life about half of Ukrainians, and most urban Ukrainians other than people in Lviv, use Russian rather than Ukrainian. Kiev is a Russian-speaking city (and Dublin an English-speaking one).

    the best way to think of Ukraine is similar to Scotland

    Anatol Lieven correctly observed that Ukraine’s relationship to Russia is somewhere between that of Scotland and that of Ireland, to England. Viewing it as Scotland is too positive, as Ireland too negative. Given that Scotland itself nearly separated, it is natural to see Ukraine as separate.

  181. @JosephB

    I’m confused about Russia being upset about withdrawal from the ABM. From what I recall, we made it extremely clear the goal was not to stop Russia’s nuclear forces. We certainly didn’t build or even propose anything like enough capability to stop even 10%.

    From your question it appears that you may not have grasped a basic point — the danger to the Russians of an anti-missile system on their borders is not that it could prevent a Russian 1st strike — which it obviously couldn’t, as you point out — but that it could stop a Russian 2nd strike in response to a US 1st strike that wiped out 90% (say) of Russia’s nuclear forces.

    Thus, the Russians saw the US as trying to build a 1st strike capability to which they would be unable to respond, which would completely change the balance of power.

    • Agree: Andrei Martyanov
  182. peterAUS says:
    @Sergey Krieger

    Putin and his team did a good job regarding ensuring Russia safety and souverenity.

    So far, up to a point.
    US troops are at the borders of Russia. Say, in civilian uniforms, and nobody bothers them. Before Putin came to power those troops weren’t there.

    But state real strength is her people and I believe Putin and his team have not done nearly enough.

    Yup.
    And it was easy actually.
    So, for those rare specimens in “Team Russia” as you(r) (handle) appears to be, why?
    If you can figure why, well, then you could try to start figuring out how to fix it. Or, is it even possible to fix it in the first place.

    Arms race is over. USA lost

    .
    Yeah……………….
    Feels good, I admit.
    Is it true, well, let’s say it is, for the sake of conversation.
    So what?
    The only important weapon there, when those two are concerned, is MIRV with multiple warheads, each warhead thermonuclear with megatons (plural) yield.

    So, if we are still talking practical scenarios, how about this:
    Ukraine, in late summer this year, executes a push on Novorossya?
    Implausible? Really?
    How, exactly, all that high tech will help people there?

    Or, just one of regions in Russia, far away from Moscow false opulence, simply refuses to pay tributes to Moscow (I mean, taxes). Different majority there, not Russian.
    Implausible? Really?
    Again, how, exactly, all that high tech will resolve that issue?

    • Replies: @Sergey Krieger
  183. kemerd says:
    @peterAUS

    watched “threads”, thanks for the recommendation. It is indeed a good one, which dramatically shows how ordinary people are helplessly watching their country committing suicide at the hands of their “leadership”

    • Replies: @peterAUS
  184. Rhetorius says:
    @Carlton Meyer

    “Russian technology is not superior”
    No need to read any further than that. You demonstrate typically American arrogance and delusion, refusing to admit that someone else may be more advanced than you in any sphere of human endeavor. You are just pathetic losers.

    • Agree: yurivku
    • Replies: @Cortes
  185. peterAUS says:
    @kemerd

    Yes.

    Probably the best “video presentation” of a, quite possible, scenario.

    But, the movie was about those days of the Cold War. And that’s……puzzling, of sort.
    I wouldn’t say

    watching their country committing suicide at the hands of their “leadership”

    though. Feels a bit simplistic.

    There was, at the time, simply the paradigm, the environment, where that scenario was, almost, inevitable. It wasn’t just leadership, it was all the society. Both of them actually.
    More importantly for this “conversation”, people didn’t have an access to proper information. Now they do.
    But, apparently, people cared for all that before.
    Now they don’t. Well, at least my impression.

    And, even more importantly, one couldn’t have organized, say, tens of million people in a day or two to protest, in West.
    Now, with all this technology (each drone has a communication device on him/her), it’s so easy.
    I mean, when I walk along the beach, around 90 % of people don’t enjoy the sea, sand etc. No…they type in their devices. Anyway.

    So, what’s going on, really, here?
    Why nobody cares?
    That makes people like me cooks in the eyes of an average person here. The drone with smart phone I mean..

    Maybe it’s experience.
    I do REMEMBER, still. The overwhelming ….dread…..really, when the “signal” was given to the unit and you really wasn’t quite sure, for those first couple of minutes at least, was it real or not.
    Was it just one of those endless “readiness/checks/inspections/evaluations/whatever” things, or, The REAL
    And if real, well, that’s it. The end. Facing the last half an hour, most likely, of my life. Spent, actually, in a way, helping that end. Bizarre, a?

    I don’t blame elites. They are what they are Always have been.
    But, the general populace, especially the “chattering classes” so concerned about the Gaia, dolphins, smoking, sustainability….not even registering NUKES. And not only buying but pushing this confrontation with Russia.
    What fucking sustainability they’ll be debating about after the first MIRV commences re-entry?

    So, we, relics simply watch. That’s all we can.
    It would be amusing if it wasn’t actually ….sad.
    On the plus side, well, we relics don’t have much time left and the best times are behind. So, should it happen, well, at least the ride was O.K.
    Now the drones, I mean people, under 40, ah well…….

    • Replies: @kemerd
  186. Cortes says:
    @Rhetorius

    In his “The Fringes of Power” Churchill’s private secretary Jock Colville tells the story of the incredulity of the US servicemen aboard the “Queen Mary” that the vessel was built in the UK. Incredulity is probably not strong enough: refusal to believe is better.

  187. @peterAUS

    Let’s talk USA. Considering America hollowed economy military has been what allowed USA to maintain her status along with such perks as us dollar status which allowed USA to print money, go into huge debt and use it to maintain life style USA population cannot afford without this arrangement. Hence, considering perception of USA military dominance is falling apart you would better think of the consequences of all recent developments for USA well being and possibly existence.

    • Replies: @peterAUS
  188. kemerd says:
    @peterAUS

    Yes, of course. I also added that they watched “helplessly”. The amazing part is that it is very plausible and yet also insane. That is probably why Putin felt he had to make that lengthy demonstration that they are indeed able to and going to hit, if have to.

    I put leadership in quotations because the rational thing for the UK (indeed all of western European governments) to do would have been to raid the american military installations and declare neutrality in a what appears to be imminent nuclear conflict between the US and USSR. Even though this might not have guaranteed that UK would not take hits, it would have been a route worth trying given how high the stakes were. But, like a good dog, they followed their owners blindly and that is why they were not really leaders worth taking seriously.

    • Replies: @peterAUS
  189. peterAUS says:
    @Sergey Krieger

    Fair enough.
    Measured too, for a change, re the most vocal and prolific members of the “Team Russia” around.

    We understand each other then.

    You will wait for US, The Empire to collapse. A very good point, actually, can’t argue that.

    I’ll wait for the next “snip” at the Russian sphere of influence. Syria, Ukraine, even RF proper.
    Snip by snip…..to take the current team in Kremlin down.
    Not bad point either I’d say. More likely, in short term, I believe. Snipping, not the end result.
    In long term, hard to say, besides, we are all dead at the end.Red giant or such. Or nukes.

    Good luck.

  190. peterAUS says:
    @kemerd

    I put leadership in quotations because the rational thing for the UK (indeed all of western European governments) to do would have been to raid the american military installations and declare neutrality in a what appears to be imminent nuclear conflict between the US and USSR. Even though this might not have guaranteed that UK would not take hits, it would have been a route worth trying given how high the stakes were. But, like a good dog, they followed their owners blindly and that is why they were not really leaders worth taking seriously.

    A good idea, but….NO.

    Didn’t work then, and doesn’t now.
    The Mechanism

    There was a well oiled mechanism to execute that process. That mechanism had been honed since the invention of nuclear weapons.
    All elements of that mechanism were working towards that end. Each and every element was carefully designed and constantly tested (as I hinted at above) to ensure playing the part in the process without even thinking. The best and the brightest in both societies, and the best resources of both societies were put there to ensure that.

    For UK Government to, effectively, execute a mutiny within NATO, at that very moment, not plausible. And, even if the PM and The Cabinet had done that, the military would not have executed their orders.
    Attack US bases there? With what? Ordering Lt Colonels that, out of blue, they have to capture the bases of the ally they, actually, were training together to harden and protect?
    Practically….impossible.

    Battles as in “Dr Strangelove”, between British Army and US troops protecting the bases?
    Nahh…..

    The best case scenario would’ve been a chaos within UK society at the very moment when the order was required to, at least, minimize the effects of war.

    No.
    When tensions look as getting out of hand it is already too late.
    MPs who would, probably, fire at citizens, with single shots, preferably in legs, would fire with full auto to kill. The guard detachments wouldn’t just have rifles, but automatic cannon. Etc.
    The Mechanism.

    The only way to prevent possible END is now, actually. An organized pressure, by concerned public, on decision makers. Putin’s speech was, I am sure, designed to try to initiate that.
    Is it working?
    It would, save the latest fads, selfies and gossip. And shopping specials.

    Funny, a?

    • Replies: @kemerd
  191. Y.L. says:
    @FB

    FB,

    You obviously have a mathematical and perhaps engineering background that I lack; mathematics was always a foreign language I could never master. I hope you’re still checking this thread since my reply is a day late. And perhaps the proverbial dollar short as well.

    Lacking your expertise, I wasn’t aware of the specific difficulties that you cited.

    I think you’re not saying that the technology is impossible just that we (Americans) have no idea how the Russians did it. I assume Mossad is hard at work to find out. ;)

    Well, instead of fighting the plasma, could the Russians have developed a technology not based on materials but on manipulation, i.e. could they have one of those tiny nuclear reactors on board and generate electric fields so that they’re not relying on matter shielding but manipulating the plasma and shock wave for the glider to ride? Really, I have no idea, I’m just throwing ideas out there. I read that Corning Ware was based on materials used in the nose cones of ballistic missiles but I didn’t know no such material could withstand the heat.

    Russia (Soviets) were working on plasma technology so perhaps that’s the answer. Or they’re super advanced in metallurgy-ceramics but from what you say, no known matter could withstand the heat.

    I wonder if the CIA is checking this board.

    Gilbert Doctorow, whom I respect immensely, viewed the *surprise* as an intelligence failure.

    https://consortiumnews.com/2018/03/02/missile-gate-u-s-intel-misses-russias-big-advances-in-nuclear-parity/

    I look forward to future posts by you (and I hope FB doesn’t stand for FaceBook).

    • Replies: @FB
  192. kemerd says:

    Actually, we don’t have to wait too long to see if the Russians will fold. Putin, as I argued before, is the representative of the faction who wants to integrate with the western elites but on equal terms and there are compradors who considers taking percentages from the loot of Russia by their western handlers and being welcome in the parties of the western institutions is good enough and the least risky path.

    I am with Peter that the likelihood of the second faction winning is higher. Only because the first faction cannot eliminate the second without hurting its own interests. In fact, Putin’s speech was mostly about how he will be trying to balance those factions and divide pork between them (hint. the state should withdraw from the economy, encourage private enterprises, etc.): such a policy of balancing can be sustained only so far; real sovereignty can only be asserted with elites who sees its future of its own making on its own soil. Billionaires have a tendency to relocate if they smell danger. Because of this and unfortunately for Russia, the first faction would easily fold if they feel the second starts to gain the upper hand and their personal fortunes are at stake. Therefore, if the person after Putin continues his policy of balancing oligarchs, the power will eventually be handed again over to Yeltsin types.

    In this respect, getting rid of all billionaires is the only way of asserting sovereignty as the remaining people including small scale business class will have to and would see their future in their own country.

    • Replies: @utu
    , @peterAUS
  193. utu says:
    @kemerd

    getting rid of all billionaires

    This a very good program not just for Russia.

  194. peterAUS says:
    @kemerd

    Actually….

    I am with Peter that the likelihood of the second faction winning is higher.

    that’s not exactly what I’ve been saying and what concerns me.
    That’s the easy, nice option. There is only one, very little snag there.
    TRUST.

    How can Putin and his team trust the “opposition” that, should they step down, they won’t be dragged at some court?
    How anyone with brains can trust that?
    I wouldn’t.

    Not after Milosevic, Saddam and especially Qaddafi.

    Let’s cut to the chase here.
    Have you people seen the Colonel’s murder?
    Then, have you seen the reaction of The Bitch on hearing that?

    Now….there is more.
    The “best and brightest” of US, and Anglo-Saxon world were all for The Bitch.
    Think about that for a second.

    So…..is it realistically to expect Putin and his team, mostly Russian siloviki, to, effectively, surrender to the victor’s justice of those people?

    I can’t.
    I can very well envisage: “I am going down….well…you are too.”
    And, realistically, we all do deserve that.

    Now, I am an relic from the Cold War. So, maybe I get all this wrong.
    But, then, Putin is coming from the same world. Maybe he, with age, got “civilized” enough not to do that. Mellowed a bit.
    Maybe he hasn’t.

    Now back to “my dick is bigger” high-tech weapon discussion.

    • Replies: @likbez
    , @kemerd
  195. anon • Disclaimer says:

    So why do so many Russian launch vehicles and commercial airliners CRASH? Is that the measure of Russian technology?

    • Replies: @peterAUS
    , @utu
  196. peterAUS says:
    @anon

    Maybe.

    Another possibility is that even the best technology can’t compensate for human factor.

    From the crew being overworked, untrained to being on drugs. Or vodka. Pick the one more likely.
    And, also, the ….ahm….something in the long line of support of that system. Like technicians who service/check the planes, crew that pump fuel, the quality of that fuel, etc. A bits and pieces of corruption here and there. Vodka too.
    And the last, but not the least, tower crews. Their equipment (parts, maintenance) , their training, shift patterns etc. And, of course, the vodka.

    When a weapon system is concerned everybody (civilians, amateurs and fanboys in general) always focus on that system only. Never on the all the chain that works around and supports that system.
    Just one little element of that system and ….blop.

    Ah, while we are on the topic, a couple of aside questions:
    Where do the members of Russian elite have their medical procedures done? Like coronaries, transplants etc. Even plastics.
    What cars do they drive? What home appliances do they have? Etc.
    Yachts they have?

    Not important probably.

    Back to “what weapon specs are more awesome”.

    • Replies: @Faker
    , @Erebus
  197. utu says:
    @anon

    So why do so many Russian launch vehicles and commercial airliners CRASH?

    Is it really many? Too many?

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_accidents_and_incidents_involving_military_aircraft_(2010–present)

  198. Faker says:
    @peterAUS

    I chuckle every time I see pictures of Kremlin cabinet meetings with all those guys staring at their iPads or iPhones. When they step out, they jump in their Mercedes. All their kids are sent to elite schools in the West (kind of reminds me of a superstar military analyst who’s predicted armageddon in the U.S. for about a decade while assuring everyone Russian is heaven on earth, BUT decides to reside in the former…) But I digress.

    Oh — the crash today. Interestingly, ZeroHedge, the “financial” site that features a quarter of articles dedicated to some Russian news did not have anything on that crash. How interesting!

    Frankly, given the way the West has ratcheted things up in the last few days, it is obvious nobody took Putin’s Super NES missile videos seriously.

  199. pogohere says: • Website
    @Anonymous

    Kissinger, Metternich, and Realism

    ROBERT D. KAPLAN JUNE 1999

    Henry Kissinger’s first book, on the Napoleonic Wars, explains Kissinger’s foreign policy better than any of his memoirs, and is striking as an early display of brilliance and authority

    Kissinger has always been influenced by Munich, if not always directly or humanely. His and President Richard Nixon’s opening to China in order to undermine the Soviet Union while they sought détente with Moscow; their unwillingness to quit Vietnam without first wreaking havoc and spilling blood; their support of odious yet pro-American regimes in Greece and Chile; and their brilliantly executed face-off with Syria and the Soviet Union in 1970, at the time of the terrorist challenge to Jordan’s pro-Western regime — all flowed to a significant extent from Kissinger’s determination to avoid the slightest show of weakness, for which read “appeasement.” Kissinger regularly mixed violence and the threat of it with diplomacy, so that the diplomacy had credibility. He preserved what he saw as the legitimate order, in which the Soviet Union was both contained and accepted, so that revolutionary chaos was confined to the edges of the superpower battlefield, in the Third World. [emphasis added]
    . . .

    When, in 1990, Iraq invaded Kuwait, Kissinger argued for military force against Saddam Hussein. The legitimate order in the Gulf had been disrupted by a revolutionary chieftain; to react merely with sanctions would constitute appeasement, and Kissinger said as much.

    part 1: https://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/1999/06/kissinger-metternich-and-realism/377625/

    part 2: https://www.theatlantic.com/past/docs/issues/99jun/9906kissinger2.htm

    • Replies: @Andrei Martyanov
  200. likbez says:
    @peterAUS

    Peter,

    that’s not exactly what I’ve been saying and what concerns me. That’s the easy, nice option. There is only one, very little snag there. TRUST.

    That’s an astute observation, but it cuts both ways. You also need to take into account the level of Neo-McCarthyism in the USA and resulting growing distrust toward neoliberals and compradors in Russia. Despite efforts of Putin personally and Putin administration (Lavrov, Medvedev) to suppression growing anti-Americanism, soon Russian people might start throwing eggs at neoliberals/comparadors rallies. Look at the travails of the elite prostitute who is the most neoliberal and pro-Western candidate for Presidents in the current race:

    https://sputniknews.com/russia-elections-2018-news/201803041062213741-sobchak-zhirinovsky-water/

    Add to that a distinct desire by the “Collective West” to expropriate Russian oligarchs holdings during the next six years of Putin rule (which they now probably understand, or at least start to understand after the most recent “blacklist”). That creates some links with the motherland even for the most cosmopolitan Russian bankers ;-)

  201. pogohere says: • Website
    @NoseytheDuke

    $21 trillion of unauthorized spending by US govt discovered by economics professor
    Published time: 16 Dec, 2017

    [MORE]

    The US government may have misspent $21 trillion, a professor at Michigan State University has found. Papers supporting the study briefly went missing just as an audit was announced.

    Two departments of the US federal government may have spent as much as $21 trillion on things they can’t account for between 1998 and 2015. At least that’s what Mark Skidmore, a Professor of Economics at MSU specializing in public finance, and his team have found.

    They came up with the figure after digging the websites of departments of Defense (DoD) and Housing and Urban Development (HUD) as well as repots of the Office of the Inspector General (OIG) over summer.

    The research was triggered by Skidmore hearing Catherine Austin Fitts, a former Assistant Secretary in the HUD in the first Bush administration, saying the Inspector General found $6.5 trillion worth of military spending that the DoD couldn’t account for. She was referring to a July 2016 report by the OIG, but Skidmore thought she must be mistaking billion for trillion. Based on his previous experience with public finances, he thought the figure was too big even for an organization as large as the US military.

    “Sometimes you have an adjustment just because you don’t have adequate transactions… so an auditor would just recede. Usually it’s just a small portion of authorized spending, maybe one percent at most. So for the Army one percent would be $1.2 billion of transactions that you just can’t account for,” he explained in an interview with USAWatchdog.com earlier this month.

    After discovering that the figure was accurate, he and Fitts collaborated with a pair of graduate students to comb through thousands of reports of the OIG dating back to 1998, when new rules of public accountability for the federal government were set and all the way to 2015, the time of the latest reports available at the time. The research was only for the DoD and the HUD.

    “This is incomplete, but we have found $21 trillion in adjustments over that period. The biggest chunk is for the Army. We were able to find 13 of the 17 years and we found about $11.5 trillion just for the Army,” Skidmore said.

    https://www.rt.com/usa/413411-trillions-dollars-missing-research/

    • Replies: @TT
  202. @Regnum Nostrum

    I think Americans might be able to get along just fine without the USA?
    If the USA wants to threaten or mute those who offer an opinion?

    As stupid as Americans are said to be,
    they do feel the pains of fake news, loss of freedom of speech,
    spying, corporate dominance, and corrupt in purpose leadership?

  203. Erebus says:
    @peterAUS

    Another possibility is that even the best technology can’t compensate for human factor.
    From the crew being overworked, untrained to being on drugs. Or vodka. Pick the one more likely.

    Perhaps you’ve seen the article linked below.
    Some excerpts from the summation follow:

    “Russia appears to have won at least a partial victory in Syria, and done so with impressive efficiency, flexibility, and coordination between military and political action.”

    “… Russia’s “lean” strategy, adaptable tactics, and coordination of military and diplomatic initiatives offer important lessons for the conduct of any military intervention in as complex and volatile an environment as the Middle East.”

    “… Washington should pay close attention to the Russian intervention and how Moscow achieved its objectives in Syria.”

    Leaving the requisite downplaying of what happened in Syria (“partial victory”?, really?) aside, the authors seem a little envious, frankly.

    Your points are of course valid, but the Russians seem to have answered those calls and a few others besides, at least in the Syrian theatre. One can expect a similar or better performance in any conflict involving Russian soil, especially as only the creme de la creme of missile crews would be assigned to game changing weaponry.

    Putin’s announcement represents a massive FAIL on the part of a $1T’s worth of intelligence agencies, military think tanks, political analysts and military planners who collectively didn’t see it coming. They’re all now in either panic, the foundation of America’s geo-political goals utterly undermined, or in denial.
    Denial is winning, so their next big FAIL is already underway. Heads aren’t rolling. The Pentagon thinks it can save the day by doubling down and demanding more of the useless crap they’ve got now. We can expect the CIA et al will roll out even more failing propaganda and politically destabilizing activity to continue trying their hand at regime change. Even the Afghans are on to them, so good luck with that.

    The US simply must internalize the strategic significance of these developments, and change everything about their postures and behaviours in the world. There’s little sign of that happening, Mad Dogs can’t learn new tricks, so we’re sailing into very treacherous waters indeed.

    http://www.armyupress.army.mil/Journals/Military-Review/English-Edition-Archives/March-April-2018/Rojansky-Victory-for-Russia/

  204. The Deep State, also known as the Swamp, holds Trump in contempt because he put Deep State people into so many positions. The Secretary of the Air Force is a Lockheed agent – she took in $600k from Lockheed while she was a politician. Mattis is in favour of trannies in the military – 50% suicide rate and $100k a pop. Tillerson was in favour of the Paris climate treaty, so was Mattis. There are signs that reality is sinking in though – putting Trophy systems on M1 tanks for example. The increase in the bomb production rate is a sign that it is not business as usual. A much larger warstock is necessary for the coming conflict with China. Nobody in the system has the guts to end the F-35. Mattis, for all his bravado, is just a political creature.

    One thing that struck me about Putin’s speech on the new missile systems is that he understood the technical detail of how the things worked to the extent of having a genuine personal interest in knowing such stuff. Corruption and the Russian mafia are still Russia’s biggest problem but I see that Russian wheat production is finally increasing near 20 years after the fall of communism.

    • Replies: @TT
  205. Mr. Martyanov — Does the ECM/EMP capability that the USS Donald Cook allegedly ran into in the Black Sea enter into these deliberations at all?

    • Replies: @Andrei Martyanov
  206. TT says:
    @pogohere

    These was reported some time ago. Pentagon needs another 911 to remove all evidents that they did after 5+Trillions unknown usage was discovered.

    Tip of iceberg how many trillions US is printing from air for its lavish unproductive lives & endless wars over last many decades unreported. The world having their foreign reserves tied by IMF to 5 currencies, is picking up the tabs of US, EU, Japan & UK free currency printing QE to artificially prop up their collapsing economy based on stupid theory of growth by borrowing.

    These countries run on deficit(except jp with high export & artificial low ex-ch rate), high debts, high salary, high property price, overspending with budget deficit, and financial banking scams to prop up high Nominal GDP.

    When music stop, someone will miss the seat.

    China & Russia know, they stored up time proven gold reserve, & Petrol Yuan started. When China replaced Petrol $ with yuan, slash its 3T US treasury reserve, the music stop.

  207. TT says:
    @David Archibald

    I see that Russian wheat production is finally increasing near 20 years after the fall of communism.

    Food commodity price is controlled by big oligarchs. West has big subsidy to artificially lowered their cost/ export price in name of food security, to the tune that all subsidies are enough to feed all hungries on earth. But its aim to destroy developing countries agri sector. Latin America was hit badly in past that agri no longer sustainable, when land bcom barren, capitalist swoop in to buy land dirt cheap.

    China & Russia aren’t stupid to let West control their food chain, but they imported these subsidized food without ruin own agri ability, esp for animal feeds. When sanction started, Putin simply activated its standby agri program. When trade war start, China will do the same, already its probing US sorghum subsidy.

  208. TT says:
    @likbez

    Looks like in order to make such a statement Putin should have intelligence information about a real threat of attack from the USA, or some large scale provocation in Syria or Ukraine. Only in this case his statement makes some sense. As a open warning: do not do it.

    Look at the keyword, allies. Putin emphasized, if Russia or its allies are attacked….. so its Syria potential hyper escalation, Ukraine brewing collision with new lethal weapons, to some lesser extent, Iran & Venezuela with Russia high investment.

    12. China has less than 300 nuclear weapons and still is regarded as a formidable nuclear power, probably spending 20 times less money in this area.

    China might have to do something similar to Putin later just to ensure US won’t took the wrong calculated risk to do something stupid. However China style is always keep secretive of its killer weapon that worry US most. Its said in every Wargaming, whenever Red team losing to Blue, they launch China Murderer Mace(Trump card), then everything end in Red favour.

    In another topic, some said China has est 400 nukes, with only 20~40 that can reach US which might tempted US to believe it could survive an exchange. So a large upgrade is necessary. Anyone got better idea?

    In last year during South China Seas confrontation, China actually sent out all its navy to conduct live exercise till eve of fake Hague court judgement, with nuclear subs in high profile despatched to US Guam & Indian ocean bases(where their nuclear bombers station). Two strike groups that with its Adm Harry threaten war start tonight, were reportedly hiding in East Philippine Seas to get out of H6k bomber missiles(aircraft carrier killer) range.

    WH panick of real war escalation, Obama sent its top general to China, with NSA advisor Rice also visited Xi to resolve. This shows US isn’t ready for a military clash with nuke China, with much lesser warheads than Russia.

  209. TT says:
    @Carlton Meyer

    The new $14 billion USS Ford aircraft carrier has a launch system that cannot be fixed because it never worked. It remains an experimental system that after 20 years of development is not ready for use, and may never be. Replacing it with a proven steam system will cost over $5 billion.

    EMALS works! Carrier Ford completes first flight operations
    By: Mark D. Faram   July 29, 2017

    https://www.defensenews.com/news/2017/07/29/emals-works-carrier-ford-completes-first-flight-operations/

    China took a short time to develop, and a much better medium power EMALS running on non nuclear powered a/c.

    China claims breakthrough in electromagnetic launch system for aircraft carrier
    By: Mike Yeo   November 9, 2017

    https://www.defensenews.com/naval/2017/11/09/tech-breakthrough-chinas-next-carrier-could-feature-electromagnetic-launch-system/

    Construction of the third carrier is expected to start next year and will use electromagnetic launch rather than steam-powered catapults. The carrier is expected to have 80,000 ton displacement which would put it in the super carrier class.

    https://www.nextbigfuture.com/2017/11/china-starting-construction-of-superaircarrier-with-electromagnetic-launch-but-using-older-heavier-fighter-jets.html/amp

    China was confident about its EMALS technology now that it was able to produce its own insulated-gate bipolar transistor (IGBT) chips, a key component of the high-efficiency electric energy conversion systems used in variable-speed drives, trains, electric and hybrid electric vehicles, power grids and renewable energy plants.

    • Replies: @Carlton Meyer
  210. @pogohere

    Kissinger, Metternich, and Realism

    All things described like “realism”, “order” and references to Napoleon is all contrived pseudo-academic bunk. In the end another “great” strategic minds such as neocons wrote (Kagan’s cabal) what is touted as the “best” history pf Peloponnese Wars. And look where this “academic brilliance” based on those ideas brought the United States and the world to. American elites of the 20th and 21st Century, with some minor exceptions, have no grasp of the nature of the military force (power) and how it applies. None and this can not be fixed. It is also a tragedy for many, including the US itself.

    • Replies: @5371
    , @pogohere
  211. @SteveRogers42

    Mr. Martyanov — Does the ECM/EMP capability that the USS Donald Cook allegedly ran into in the Black Sea enter into these deliberations at all?

    No. Russia does have the best EW capabilities in the world–the fact admitted even by US military’s top brass, but USS Donald Cook’s alleged “shutting down” of her radar by SU-24 never happened. It is all, hm, as strange as it sounds, Russian amateurs’ and fanboys’ propaganda. SU-24 is not capable to “shut down” anything on a ship with energy capacity of Arleigh Burke-class DDG. Two different weight categories. Most likely SU-24 simply put out what is known as pomehi (interference) which may have created multiple targets picture–this is possible. It is still very unpleasant and unnerving situation but nothing as dramatic as what became now a consistent and false meme.

    • Replies: @SteveRogers42
  212. Dragon says:
    @yurivku

    and I’m just guessing, but for the same reasons successful anti-laser techniques could be devised once that becomes a reality (even in clear day conditions)

  213. Y.L. says:
    @Andrei Martyanov

    Andrei, I don’t know if you’re still reading comments on this thread, but ZeroHedge posted confirming what you wrote, yet somehow analysts are still dismissive. Still to quote you “butt hurt.”

    https://www.zerohedge.com/news/2018-03-06/putins-hypersonic-rocket-revealed-be-modified-iskander-ballistic-missile

    Quote: “From a national security perspective, Putin’s claims of hypersonic weapons should not be underestimated but should be analyzed in an attempt to parse fact from fiction.

    “The team of analysts at The Drive precisely did that, and made several conclusions: In particular, one of the weapons Putin mentioned in his speech was an air-launched hypersonic anti-ship missile launched from a Mikoyan MiG-31 Foxhound. Upon closer examination, the Drive team found the hypersonic weapon closely resembles the Iskander short-range ballistic missile.”

    End quotation.

    I wonder if Putin will deploy the laser system to Syria, now that America is making threats.

    “A potential decision by Washington to take new military actions against Damascus would mark the second US strike on Syria in less than a year.”

    https://sputniknews.com/us/201803071062309965-us-considering-attack-syria/

    • Replies: @Andrei Martyanov
    , @FB
  214. 5371 says:
    @Andrei Martyanov

    The elder Kagan’s Peloponnesian war history is actually instructive from a neocon point of view. He identifies with the Athenian side, and with the most belligerent Athenian politicians, so completely that he shows not the least understanding of why the other side, or neutrals, or less aggressive Athenian politicians acted as they did. So although he uses a respectable scholarly apparatus, he has no conception of how history should be written.

    • Agree: Andrei Martyanov
    • Replies: @Andrei Martyanov
    , @Avery
  215. Y.L. says:
    @Andrei Martyanov

    Thanks for the reply but my point primarily is that the A.Z. (to quote The Saker) Empire is doubling down. Its attitude is still “what’re you gonna do about it” and the recent news indicates they’re pushing in Syria.

    A nuclear strike from Russia that kills 99% of the population doesn’t bother them in the slightest. Or they think Putin is bluffing.

    My concern is about the plane crash in Syria: why were so many pilots (allegedly) on board and thus so vulnerable. Not that it’s necessarily true that the “Deep State” caused this.

    https://sputniknews.com/world/201803071062295024-russia-syria-an-26-crash/

    The self-confessed military analysts “Q” with millions of followers states, incidentally, that CIA caused the recent jetliner crash to kill Rosatom executives and scientists. I don’t trust him. He says Snowden now is in China; was CIA all along and was deliberately sent to Russia for mischief making.

    https://qanonposts.com/

    Finally, if you have any idea about my hypothesis discussed with F.B. above whether the glider manipulates plasma using electric fields and a small on-board nuclear reactor or just uses an undiscovered and unknown to America composite. But from what F.B. wrote we have no how idea how it would work, hence the skepticism by the fake experts.

    I hope you can comment since you’re the expert and can separate truth from the bullshit.

    Putin’s character makes me think he doesn’t bluff. Western politicians are such liars they don’t believe Putin tells the truth.

    • Replies: @peterAUS
  216. Quaint says:
    @Russia is the best

    I don’t think they are “shell shocked”, that implies they understand what happened.

  217. peterAUS says:
    @Erebus

    Your points are of course valid, but the Russians seem to have answered those calls and a few others besides, at least in the Syrian theatre. One can expect a similar or better performance in any conflict involving Russian soil,…

    Agree.
    Keywords “Syria” and “similar”.

    How about:
    A new flareup in Novorossya->in, say, 3 months of “engagement” that part of Ukraine starts looking as parts of Syria now.
    An ethnic unrest in one of remote regions->reaction by the Kremlin->that part of RF starts looking as parts of Syria now.

    So, based on that, this

    ….the foundation of America’s geo-political goals utterly undermined, or in denial.

    and

    They’re all now in either panic, the foundation of America’s geo-political goals utterly undermined, or in denial

    sounds ….wrong?

    Perhaps those advising Kremlin are in denial?

    So, related to

    We can expect the CIA et al will roll out even more failing propaganda and politically destabilizing activity to continue trying their hand at regime change.

    how about:
    We can expect the Kremlin et al will roll out even more failing propaganda and internal politically destabilizing activity to continue trying their hand against The Empire.

    Just a thought.

  218. peterAUS says:
    @Y.L.

    Or they think Putin is bluffing.

    They do.

    My concern is about the plane crash in Syria: why were so many pilots (allegedly) on board and thus so vulnerable.

    Systemic failure. Somewhere between acquiring spare parts, through maintenance and general processes and procedures to, last, but not least….vodka.
    More to come in coming months.

  219. @5371

    So although he uses a respectable scholarly apparatus, he has no conception of how history should be written.

    True, but to add insult to injury neocons generally do not know actual military history–one is bound to fail to know it when they are in the business of erasing causalities, rather than finding them. That is why they suck as strategists, have a very vague understanding of operational and tactical issues and, of course, none of them understands serious military-technological problems. Just to reiterate my point–they have no idea what warfare is.

  220. @Y.L.

    The team of analysts at The Drive precisely did that

    Each time I hear (read) about some “team of analysts” and Russia in the same sentence I am getting a sour taste in my mouth.

    I wonder if Putin will deploy the laser system to Syria, now that America is making threats.

    No. Why?

    • Replies: @Y.L.
    , @Y.L.
  221. Avery says:
    @5371

    {…., he has no conception of how history should be written.}

    I think he does, so do his ilk.

    They mind-bend history to fit their narrative, to confuse the multitudes into seeing the world through their Neocon lens. Part and parcel of the full spectrum disinformation/propaganda/brainwashing campaign. History (books & movies), “news”, analysis, commercials,……nothing is off the table.

  222. pogohere says: • Website
    @Andrei Martyanov

    “All things described like “realism”, “order” and references to Napoleon is all contrived pseudo-academic bunk. ”

    Russia intends to relate to its adversaries from a position of strength. That is consistent with what Kissinger believes. Putin still meets with him on occasion. See http://www.nytimes.com/2012/01/20/world/europe/henry-kissinger-to-meet-with-vladimir-putin-in-russia.html, https://www.rt.com/news/331194-putin-meets-friend-kissinger/ and https://www.politico.com/story/2016/12/trump-kissinger-russia-putin-232925 . That was why I posted that excerpt from Kaplan’s review.

    No need to discuss Kaplan et al nor his work. I am aware of who he is.

  223. Y.L. says:
    @Andrei Martyanov

    I am assuming the laser is state-of-the-art anti-missile defense: better chance of shooting down Patriot missiles and making a point if another attack comes and prove the system exists and he’s not a liar. A real field test.

    I am saddened, incidentally, by the death of so many brave Russian personnel in the plane crash, which I notice you didn’t remark upon. If it was an accident, I am sure the callous Americans are saying, “See, they kill themselves, we don’t have to bother trying” unless there was duplicity involved and not just a gross failure due to negligence, etc.

    I assume also that there is no evidence CIA (or Mossad) did target Rosatom executives in the jet liner crash or Russia would not want that to get out, clear act of war.

    Of course, sadly, American Deep State is at war with Russia. They just use duplicity and proxies and it’s too bad since we could have been friends and not enemies. So many voted for Trump hoping for the best.

    American Deep State won’t change (neocons) until they get a bloody nose. Not sure when or if that will ever happen.

  224. The thing with “neocons” is that they’re pathological liars and narcissists. And the first victims of their dishonesty are themselves. In fact even describing them as “liars” who’ve deceived themselves is being generous. To put it another way, they’ve created a false reality for themselves. Actual facts and reasoned arguments, especially any kind of moral reasoning, bounce off such creatures like bullets bounce off Superman.

    • Agree: Andrei Martyanov
    • Replies: @Andrei Martyanov
  225. kemerd says:
    @peterAUS

    My contention is that the factions are not so clear cut and most people that matters can switch sides. That is why I think, the compradors will eventually win if a sweeping cleaning is not done as such a setup is open to external manipulation for tipping the balance on one side.

    Currently, the wind is blowing from the side of patriots so many people that are influential position themselves on this side. But as said before, a patriot billionaire is an oxymoron and they would switch sides when they feel themselves or their wealth are threatened. That is why the military-security bureaucracy that spearheads the Russian nationalist faction will eventually have to make a choice if they want to sustain their power: either clean them up or try to juggle a a difficult balancing act while also not completely alienating western elites. In my view, this cannot be done. But, since the difference among them is not day and night for many an reverse transition of power in a similar manner like the smooth transition from Yeltsin to Putin is most likely.

    • Replies: @peterAUS
  226. US military budget.
    All those bases US has around the world, upkeep of them is considerable chunk of US military budget.
    And it is nothing except burned money.

  227. kemerd says:
    @peterAUS

    I don’t have any military experience except for 8 months as a conscript tanker. I can still see disobeying orders from above even if those orders involves killing millions is not thinkable.

    However, by the same token, if the order is coming from above and while the soldiers are thinking they are saving their country, I believe that could have been done. Besides, the american soldiers would be greatly outnumbered and they themselves would probably feel relief when they think that they don’t have to drop atomic bombs on civilians. So, I don’t see them resisting.

    At any rate, since the other option is watching complete destruction of your country, I don’t see why a patriotic leadership would not try.

    • Replies: @peterAUS
  228. FB says:
    @Y.L.

    Thanks for the link to the Doctorow article…an eminently sensible Russia scholar with bona fide creds…here’s a couple of interesting excerpts…

    ‘…Putin’s address was a “shock and awe” event. I leave to others, more competent than I in military technology to comment on the specific capabilities of the various systems rolled out yesterday…’

    Well…yes…that’s what some of use are trying to figure out here…the nuts and bolts of these technologies…what the technical challenges might be…and how they might be tackled…

    I had focused my attention here on one particular weapon system…the MiG31-launched Kinzhal hypersonic antiship missile [M10]…with a range of 2,000 km…

    I noted that this type of performance is technically quite feasible given the available buildiing blocks of the high supersonic MiG31 which can carry 9,000 kg of weapons load…and the Iskander ground-launched missile…which features the kind of maneuvering capability throughout its flight path and flies at M7 and reaching a height of 50 km…[ie it never leaves the atmosphere]…

    To my view…the Kinzhal is a very real possibility…adn Putin has stated it has entered initial operational status in the southern military district…

    I had discussed this in more detail in my #60 comment… and followed up with some calrification in my #99 comment…

    And Doctorow makes another good point or two…one that Putin is not and has never been known to be a ‘bluffer’…and two that the scientific and engineering potential of Russia is vast…

    ‘…And it is not only blindness to things Russian. It is a fundamental failure to grasp that state power anywhere is not dependent only on GDP and demographic trends but also on grit, patriotic determination and the intelligence of thousands of researchers, engineers and production personnel…’

    Now back to the gliding warhead…here is a quote from Putin’s speech on Mar. 1…as cited in a good article by William Engdahl…

    ‘…In moving to its target, the missile’s gliding cruise bloc engages in intensive maneuvering – both lateral (by several thousand km) and vertical.

    This is what makes it absolutely invulnerable to any air or missile defense system. The use of new composite materials has made it possible to enable the gliding cruise bloc to make a long-distance guided flight practically in conditions of plasma formation.

    It flies to its target like a meteorite, like a ball of fire. The temperature on its surface reaches 1,600–2,000 degrees Celsius but the cruise bloc is reliably guided…’

    Now…here we see some specific numbers put to the temperature that the surface of the craft reaches…

    This is important to understand…while the temperature of the plasma [ie dissociated air molecules that have lost an electron and become electrically charged]…may be much higher…[as I said oxygen and nitrogen will lose an electron only above ~9000 C]…

    …the physical nature of heat transfer is that it takes time…

    This is evident by noting that a pot of water placed on a hot stove does not instantly begin to boil…and in fact the pot underside never reaches the red-hot temperature of the stove element…

    These are facts of the mechanism of heat transfer…a vital discipline of thermal engineering that is used in many fields…from heat exchangers like your car radiator…to much more challenging heat transfer applications such as nuclear power plants…

    Now my earlier point was to bring some light on this subject by looking at two specific applications of skin friction heating…one the re-entering spacecraft…which uses aerodynamic braking to slow down in the atmosphere…

    …and two the ICBM warhead…which is designed to plummet in at high speed…

    The ICBM warhead will typically enter the atmosphere at a speed of about 6 to 7 km/s…which is a Mach number of ~20 to 25…

    [The Mach number is the speed of sound...and it is a function of air temperature...ie at SL where the temperature is about 15 C...the speed of sound is ~340 m/s...at 85 km altitude where the temp is minus 100 C...the son ic velocity is only 275 m/s...]

    So Mach number is not a measure of actual velocity…it is extremely useful in actual technical and engineering applications because many important functions of aerodynamics and thermodynamics are a direct function of Mach number…

    But we must realize that saying something has a ‘speed’ of Mach ‘x’ does not give us an actual speed as in meters per second or mph or whatever…it depends entirely on the temperature…and hence altitude at which this object is flying…

    So we use meters per second or km/s to talk about speeds here…

    The point is that a warhead entering the atmosphere at 7 km/s will hit the ground in about 20 seconds…

    The atmosphere is realistically about 100 km thick…but is still quite thin at that height…so simple arithmetic tells us that 100 divided by 7 gives ~15 seconds…I give the approximate figure of 20 seconds because the warhead will indeed slow down some in the thicker reaches of the atmosphere…

    This aerodynamic breaking is inevitable even though the warhead is shaped like a cone…so that it slows down as little as possible…

    So we see that in that short 20 seconds the amount of heat that will be transferred to the surface of the warhead is going to be less than it might be for a craft that spends a lot longer time flying through the atmosphere…like a glider…

    Now Putin has done us a favor by telling us the actual temperature that the craft skin will reach…1600 to 2000 C is within the temperature that reinforced carbon carbon can withstand…

    This leads us to conclude that the craft is likely to not spend a lot of time gliding in the thicker portion of the atmosphere…

    Here we give some numbers to atmospheric density in order to get an idea…a passenger cruising at a height of 10 km [33,000 ft] will see an air density of about 1/3 that at sea level [SL]…

    At 85 km height near the top of the atmosphere…the air density is just 6 millionths that at SL…

    At a height of 20 km where some military jets can fly…the air density is just 7 percent that of SL…

    The collisions with air molecules increase as the air density gets thicker and the skin heating increases…[those molecule collisions can also be calculated and here is a good atmospheric calculator that does this...]

    The bottom line is that…given the temps cited by Putin…it is likely that the maneuvering is going to take place quite high in the atmosphere…in fact…in order to avoid interception by missile defenses which are designed to shoot down ballistic warheads in space…the ‘glider’ is likely to start maneuvering as soon as they are released…

    Ie as we see in the picture above…those multiple warhead are carried on a ”bus’ which does in fact have small thrusters which are used to position the bus so that each of those warheads can be released separately and can hit separate targets…

    This is already well used technology…the warheads and bus shown above are from the US Minutman ICBM…

    Those warheads are released soon after the carrier rocket reaches space [ie exits the atmosphere]…which is only a few minutes after launch…ie at rocket burnout…

    From that point of release…those warheads fly the remainder of their flight on a completely ballistic trajectory…just like an artillery shell…

    This is the longest part of the ICBM flight…the initial boost phase which gets the bus to outside the atmosphere takes on a few minutes…the terminal phase only takes a few seconds as we have calculated above…

    So basically 90 percent of the time is the midcourse phase of the flight…as seen below…

    This gives the most opportunities for intercepting the warhead as it is incapable of maneuvering and is following a ballistic trajectory…

    So the point here is that in order to evade missile defenses…the ‘glider’ needs to start maneuvering while it is still in space…ie change is lateral trajectory and its vertical trajectory…

    In space this can be accomplished quite easily with thrusters mounted to the warhead…

    Once that ‘glider’ warhead comes into the thick part of the atmosphere where heat loads become intense…obviously it needs to spend as little time there as possible…

    I really don’t believe that there is going to be much maneuvering going on in the atmosphere itself…maybe some…but not a whole lot…as that would increase the time the glider is exposed to those high heat levels and allow the heat to ‘soak in’…

    Perhaps from about a height of 50 km where the air density is still low enough…the glider may just plummet in at a high speed…at a speed of 5 or 6 km per second that would only be about 10 seconds…very little time for ‘terminal’ missile defenses [ie THAAD] to do anything about it…

    • Replies: @Y.L.
    , @FB
    , @FB
    , @Y.L.
  229. @Erebus

    … Russia’s “lean” strategy, adaptable tactics, and coordination of military and diplomatic initiatives offer important lessons for the conduct of any military intervention in as complex and volatile an environment as the Middle East

    Then we go even more back, to 1989 and from Leavenworth Army and General Staff College:

    “There is a literature and a common perception that the Soviets were defeated and driven from Afghanistan. This is not true. When the Soviets left Afghanistan in 1989, they did so in a coordinated, deliberate, professional manner, leaving behind a functioning government, an improved military and an advisory and economic effort insuring the continued viability of the government. The withdrawal was based on a coordinated diplomatic, economic and military plan permitting Soviet forces to withdraw in good order and the Afghan government to survive. The Democratic Republic of Afghanistan (DRA)managed to hold on despite the collapse of the Soviet Union in 1991. Only then, with the loss of Soviet support and the increased efforts by the Mujahideen (holy warriors) and Pakistan, did the DRA slide toward defeat in April 1992. The Soviet effort to withdraw in good order was well executed and can serve as a model for other disengagements from similar nations.”

    https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/13518040701373080

    I am not going to go deep into the naval warfare but there are still huge operational and technological lessons to be learned there too. Yet, NONE of them was learned, that is internalized, and this inability to learn goes back to WW II and how it was taught in the US. It is not a recent phenomenon.

    Putin’s announcement represents a massive FAIL on the part of a $1T’s worth of intelligence agencies, military think tanks, political analysts and military planners who collectively didn’t see it coming.

    Exactly, they didn’t see it despite the fact that it was in a front of their eyes constantly, by the time SS-N-19 (P-700 Granit) started to fly regularly early-1980s they should have taken a note that those technologies were a precursor to what is unfolding today–they didn’t. So, also do not forget another multi-billion “industry” of American “Russia studies” which is staffed with armies of pseudo-scholars and ignorant people with agenda. Media? Sure, look at their Russian “analysts”. You are talking here about a set of industries, all extremely lucrative, which employ armies of freeloaders whose only task is to produce BS about Russia. I am wondering when the 2-Minute Hate sessions will be introduced in US Universities “Russian Studies” Departments. I am sure soon–it is all moving there.

  230. peterAUS says:
    @kemerd

    That is why I think, the compradors will eventually win if a sweeping cleaning is not done as such a setup is open to external manipulation for tipping the balance on one side.

    Could be.
    Could also be:
    That is why I think, the compradors will eventually, with the help of “external manipulation” get the Team Putin into position to either step down or escalate.
    Escalate as combination of, say, 70/30 crushing internal dissent by iron fist and sending a strong message to “external manipulation”. Like pulling “Wagner treatment” on S.A.S. guys in Syria.
    From then on anything is possible.
    The Team Putin wins and gets its power consolidated for foreeseable future.
    Or….
    The internal instability of RF increases……….all parties upping the stakes. Keyword “instability”.
    Instability with fault lines very “touchy” oh so easy to start shooting war there. Conventional, of course. For a week.
    After that week things could get really interesting.

    So, as

    But as said before, a patriot billionaire is an oxymoron and they would switch sides when they feel themselves or their wealth are threatened. That is why the military-security bureaucracy that spearheads the Russian nationalist faction will eventually have to make a choice if they want to sustain their power: either clean them up or try to juggle a a difficult balancing act while also not completely alienating western elites. In my view, this cannot be done.

    Agree with “In my view, this cannot be done.”

    And as for

    …like the smooth transition from Yeltsin to Putin is most likely.

    NO.
    I’d rephrase it into

    …like the transition from Milosevic to Kostunica is most likely

    or from dictatorship into democracy Iraq type. Putin as Saddam.
    Unlikely to see Lybian scenario, but, taking into account hysterics we’ve been seeing re “Russian preventing progs to own the White House” can’t really discard that.

    In the current paradigm, I believe, should the Team Putin see they are going down/out, they will initiate ………”something”.
    I’d leave that something to imagination.

  231. Y.L. says:
    @FB

    Thank you! That’s a superb explanation, even if I’m disappointed more science fiction tech doesn’t exist.

    Please weigh in on my comments to author Andrei: I am sad about the Russians killed in the crash and hope it wasn’t an op by the Deep State but really bad news in any event.

  232. @Harold Smith

    And the first victims of their dishonesty are themselves.

    A very good point.

  233. FB says:
    @FB

    My picture of the flightpath of a ballistic missile did not come through…here it is…

    We see here some useful numbers as to distances and time…

    Ie we see a flight of an ICBM of 10,000 km…the total flight time is given as about 2,000 seconds…which is 2000/60 = ~33 minutes…

    The boost phase is that part of the flight from launch…until the rocket motor burns out and the rocket separates from the warhead bus…this phase is given as a range of between 180 to 320 seconds…which is 3 to 5 minutes…

    The boost phase usually ends when the rocket has reached space…

    The apogee is the highest point in the parabolic trajectory of the ballistic missile…and is the half-way point between burnout and atmospheric reentry…

    This segment of the flight is depicted here as taking greater than 1,000 seconds…ie about 16 minutes for an ICBM flight of this range…

    The midcourse phase of flight is the one of greatest interest…

    This is the longest phase of the flight…about 90 percent as I said and as these numbers support…this entire portion of the flight occurs outside the atmosphere…ie in space…

    It is of interest because here is where the ICBM is most vulnerable…the warhead bus has separated right after burnout and is now on a ballistic trajectory without any means to change its course…

    If the missile defense can accurately track its flight path…an intercept is possible in this phase of flight…

    We note here also that the midcourse phase consists of three distinct phases…the ascent portion…which begins right after burnout and where the warhead or bus is climbing due the momentum imparted by the rocket…

    The apogee which is the highest point in the parabola…

    And then the descent phase of the midcourse flight…

    In physical terms…the ICBM rocket is fighting gravity as it accelerates to space…the rocket burns out after about three to five minutes…but the warhead/bus continues climbing due to its momentum…

    At the apogee…the earth’s gravitation equals the centrifugal force on the warhead/bus…and then gravity starts pulling it down…

    Finally the warheads enter the atmosphere and make a quick descent that takes about 20 seconds…

    Also meant to say ‘passenger jet’ in my comment about a ‘passenger’ flying at 10 km altitude [33,000 ft]…

  234. FB says:
    @Carlton Meyer

    ‘…The small SM-3s haven’t even half the range to reach IRBMs or ICBMs…’

    I agree with you that the evidence suggests that the SM3 doesn’t work…

    However…I don’t agree with your technical statement that it cannot reach an IRBM due to range…

    The SM3 Block 1A/B has a range of 700 km…and has shown that it can go as high as 250 km by knocking out that defunct US satellite in 2008…

    ‘…On February 21, 03:26 GMT an SM-3 missile was fired from the Ticonderoga class missile cruiser USS Lake Erie, and intercepted USA-193 about 133 nautical miles (247 kilometers) above the Pacific Ocean.

    The satellite was traveling with a velocity of about 17,500 mph (around 28,000 km/h or 7.8 km/s). The velocity of the impact was about 22,000 mph…’

    The important point here is that the flight path of the satellite was well known to the intercept crew…this is not the case with an enemy ballistic missile…whether IRBM or ICBM

    In this case…the Aegis radar system must attempt to calculate the ballistic missile trajectory…this is the hard part…

    And this is likely why the system doesn’t work…and why no attempt was ever made to intercept the North Korean IRBMs which overflew Japan on several occasions…

    From the Missile Defense Agency website…

    ‘…Regional Defense – Aegis BMD Engagement Capability…

    Defeats short- to intermediate-range, unitary and separating, midcourse-phase, ballistic missile threats with the Standard Missile-3 (SM-3)…’

    My emphasis there on midcourse phase…

    Here we see another graphic [I had already posted a similar one previously] that shows how the ballistic missile flight trajectory works…

    Here we see that the midcourse phase takes place outside the atmosphere and consists of the ascent…apogee…and descent portions of the flight…

    The DPRK launched two intermediate range ballistic missiles last year that overflew the Japanese island of Hokkaido…

    One in August that flew for a total distance of 2,700 km and reached an apogee of 550 km…

    And another in September that flew for 3,700 km and reached an apogee of 770 km…

    Now a lot of so-called ‘experts’ said that was too high for the SM3 to reach…and that is correct if you are only going to intercept the missile at its exact midpoint…the apogee…

    Otherwise it is quite clear that there are many opportunities for intercept as the missile is ascending…and descending…

    I have highlighted the ascending part of the midcourse phase because of the geography involved…ie the missiles were fired from the Pyongyang area which is about 200 km west of the Sea of Japan…in which sea we have as many as 17 Aegis ballistic missile defense ships [BMD] of the USN…plus five more from the Japanese navy…

    By simple trigonometry we can calculate the missile trajectory angle…ie the apogee height divided by the apogee distance from the launch site is the arctangent of the missile trajectory angle…

    So…since the flight is 2,700 km and the apogee occurs at the midpoint…it means the apogee is at a distance of 1,350 km from Pyongyang…

    Dividing the known apogee height of 550 km by 1,350 gives a trajectory angle of 22 degrees…

    [550 / 350 = 0.4...arcantegnt (0.4) = 22 deg...]

    Knowing the trajectory angle we can easily compute the height of the missile at any point over the Sea of Japan…by simply taking the tangent value of any particular straight line distance from Pyongyang…

    Ie…let’s say that USN ships are 100 km off the coast of Korea…meaning they are 300 km east of Pyongyang in international waters…

    At 300 km distance the height of that missile flight is going to be 122 km…half the height of that US193 sat that the SM3 took out in 2008…[300 * 0.4 = 122]…

    Even at 500 km from Pyongyang…the height of the missile would be only 200 km…[500 * 0.4 = 200]…

    We see here a map of the area showing the Sea of Japan…

    We also note that the flight distance from Pyongyang to Tokyo is 1,285 km…so a ship smack dab in the middle of that route…ie 640 km east of Pyongyang is going to be able to reach that missile…which height at that point would be 260 km…

    So clearly a ship 500 or even 600 km east of Pyongyang in middle of the Sea of Japan is right in the ideal position to take a shot at a missile flying from Pyongyang to Hokkaido…

    But no shot was taken…a month later in September the DPRK fired another shot over Hokkaido…

    We can do the same trajectory angle computations as before and find again that all those Aegis BMD ships in the Sea of Japan would have been in a perfect place to intercept…

    But they did not attempt…again…

    Clearly the conclusion is that the system doesn’t work and they know it…

    But like I said…the challenge is for those Aegis radars to calculate the trajectory of that missile in flight…

    The challenge is that they would have only a few minutes…the launch would certainly be detected by US satellites with infrared sensors [heat sensors] due to the massive amount of heat generated by a rocket launch of that size…

    The Aegis radars would pick up the rocket as it climbs to an altitude above the radar horizon…

    Once the rocket exits the atmosphere and burns out…the boost phase is complete and the rocket is then basically a ‘glider’…ie it continues climbing due its momentum…until…at the apogee its momentum is exceeded by the pull of gravity and it starts descending…

    The Sept flight is said to have lasted 17 minutes which is 1,020 seconds…it covered 3700 km so its speed would be about 4 km/s…if we deduct the three minutes or so of the boost phase…

    So we can estimate that the midcourse phase lasted about 14 minutes…which means each of the ascent [over the Sea of Japan] and descent phases of the midcourse flight lasted about 7 minutes…

    At our calculated speed of 4 km/s [about right for an IRBM]…the Aegis crews would have had about 600 km of midcourse flight time divided by 4 km/s = 150 seconds or 2.5 minutes to get a fix on its trajectory…

    Two and a half minutes is not a lot of time…and my guess is that they probably would have had a calculated intercept fix…but they simply were not confident enough to launch…

    A miss would make US technology the laughingstock of the world…

    However…these challenges of computing a very precise radar fix will probably eventually be solved…once that happens the SM3 should work…just like it did in hitting that satellite…

    We note also that the in-development Block 2A of the SM3 has a range of 2,500 km…more than three times greater than the current Block 1…and flies at 50 percent higher speed…4.5 km/s compared to 3 km/s…

    We can agree that the SM3 was a scam in terms of military procurement…the system is clearly not ready for action…as demonstrated in the Sea of Japan…

    It succeeded in delivering a lot of pork to the MIC parasites…I agree with that…

    But sooner or later the system will work…the Russians have to assume that…

    • Replies: @Carlton Meyer
  235. FB says:
    @FB

    Just reflecting a bit on my comments about the glider…

    Two major points I noted were…one that the glider warhead while still in space would need to begin maneuvering…

    This is crucial…as I have pointed out the best opportunity to intercept an ICBM [or any ballistic missile] is during the midcourse phase of the flight…which is entirely outside the atmosphere…and is the longest portion of the flight by far…

    This is what ballistic missile defense is designed to do…intercept the warhead while it is flying in space on a ballistic trajectory…ie it is already a ‘glider’ in that it cannot change its trajectory once the boost phase is over and the launch rocket has burned out…

    Now I noted already that changing the flight path of the warhead while flying that long midcourse phase can be done using small thrusters…these can even be compressed gas…since there is no air outside the atmosphere and the only force acting on that warhead is gravity…

    The bus that carries multiple warheads has such thrusters…but the warheads themselves don’t…

    Now this is all well and good…but a hypersonic glider as described by Putin is clearly going to be gliding within the atmosphere…and changing its direction while in the atmosphere…

    This is not possible with small thrusters…because the air resistance on an object flying that fast is a much greater factor than gravity…so a small amount of thrust that could easily change the warhead’s direction while in space…would do little to overcome that air resistance…

    We note here that fighter aircraft in a tight banking turn can generate a load factor of 10 g…ie ten times the force of gravity…

    An air to air or surface to air missile can generate as much as 60 g…

    They do this by using deflecting control surfaces…ie flipper like tailfins that can move…

    So there is actually a second challenge here…in the upper reaches of the atmosphere where the air is very thin…those kinds of movable control surfaces do not work…

    There is simply not enough air density for those ‘flippers’ to ‘bite…’

    This might be the case even at altitudes as low as 30 km [~100,000 ft]…here the air density is just 1.5 percent of that at sea level…

    So there is another conundrum for the designer…the spaceflight portion of the flight is the easiest to implement maneuverability…ie with small gas thrusters like on a warhead bus…

    But once in the atmosphere…even at heights as high as 50 km…those small thrusters will not be able overcome the air resistance…but at the same time…movable control surfaces are not yet effective here either…

    There is kind of a no-man’s land where neither the small gas thruster…nor the movable fins will work…

    The only thing that would work in this portion of the atmosphere is a much larger thruster such as a rocket motor…

    This was no doubt one of the challenges that the designers of the Iskander missile faced in order to make it maneuverable throughout its flight…[it reaches a maximum altitude of 50 km [~160,000 ft]

    But the Iskander solid-fuel rocket motor is running throughout its flight…and in the upper parts of the atmosphere where movable fins won’t work…it likely uses ‘paddles’ that are moved into the rocket exhaust stream in order to effect a change in direction…

    The old Scud missile used this method…as seen in this photo…

    https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/6/64/Wz8K14_RB3.jpg\

    Once down in the thicker part of the atmosphere…say below about 30 km…the tailfins on the Iskander would probably become effective enough for maneuvering…

    Of course the Scud only reaches a maximum velocity of 1.7 km/s…less than a third of what an ICBM warhead will reach…

    Even the Iskander only reaches 2 km/s…and those rocket motors are quite heavy…clearly that is not a solution for a warhead that needs to be thrown great distances…[10,000 km or more...]

    So there are a lot of challenges to a hypersonic glider even being able to maneuver…and that’s not even taking into account the heat load…

    But Putin also said this about the Avangard…

    ‘…make a long-distance guided flight practically in conditions of plasma formation…’

    So he is talking clearly about a fairly good length of time spent in very high-temperature conditions…ie the lower reaches of the atmosphere…maybe below 30 km height…

    Considering the above about the ability to even steer a missile or ‘glider’ in this altitude regime…it is almost certain that the steering would be done aerodynamically…ie with movable control surfaces…

    We also note that besides the heat there is also the slowing down that will take place due to the air drag…

    So a possible scenario might be for this glider to pop up into thinner air and then descend again to regain speed…

    Certainly a very challenging concept…if this technology is ready to go then it would mean truly a massive breakthrough…

    • Replies: @Y.L.
  236. Y.L. says:
    @FB

    See I was right, F.B. The Russians have perfected anti-grav propulsion. ;) Maybe it is the small nuclear reactor from the cruise missile on board generating electrical fields to manipulate the plasma environment. Think about it. Or generating thrust in a Newtonian fashion. So 19th century so I hope for more.

    Seriously though perhaps this explains all the meteor sightings in Siberia. :)

  237. peterAUS says:
    @kemerd

    I don’t have any military experience except for 8 months as a conscript tanker. I can still see disobeying orders from above even if those orders involves killing millions is not thinkable.

    Am I reading you correct:
    You believe that disobeying orders is unthinkable?

    If …if I read you right, well, you are wrong. You could not be more wrong actually.
    Enlisted men disobey orders all the time. Commissioned officers resign their commissions all the time, admit, rare in the current US military.
    Depends on orders…………………oh, yes, definitely depends on orders.

    Then, if I am reading you right, you are talking about disobeying orders to LAUNCH a nuclear weapon?
    So, again, if…if I read you right, well, I do agree there. That weapon, if order given, will be launched.
    The crews will execute that order, yes, I do believe that.

    However, by the same token, if the order is coming from above and while the soldiers are thinking they are saving their country, I believe that could have been done. Besides, the american soldiers would be greatly outnumbered and they themselves would probably feel relief when they think that they don’t have to drop atomic bombs on civilians. So, I don’t see them resisting.

    Now, you are talking about British Army, effectively, during Cold War, capturing US bases in UK?
    No. Just no.
    The British troops wouldn’t have done that.
    As for American troops defending bases, yes, they would’ve done that. I see them resisting a lot…
    Just didn’t work that way then.
    Now….I doubt it.
    You really underestimate the system in place.

    At any rate, since the other option is watching complete destruction of your country, I don’t see why a patriotic leadership would not try.

    Haha…no….not really.
    Take a look at that movie again. Or get a couple of good fiction books. See how all that works.
    From rising tensions between superpowers to the actual Armageddon.

    I’ll tell you what works in such scenario.
    Common people getting off their arses and doing something about it.
    Stopping being focused on shopping and social media and getting organized, in millions, to send a strong message to TPTBs to stop their bullshit.
    And doing it NOW, just NOW, before we get into state when real tensions start rising.

    I am not holding my breath.

    • Replies: @kemerd
  238. kemerd says:
    @peterAUS

    What was stunning is that how quickly the conflict turned nuclear. And, I find that the most striking and also realistic part of the film.

    So, I don’t believe people in millions mobilizing in such a short time. Besides, they still cannot control foreign soldiers. In the case of US population doing anything resembling a real resistance: well, remember what happened as recent as few years back in California: curfews, shoot to kill orders (as I remember over 40 people killed by police, etc.) I am positive that they would be murdered in millions by the US military before launching if any serious resistance is formed. BTW, this has been the main feature of US state since its foundation: any and all resistance is met with overwhelming force by the police, involving machine guns against striking workers in many occasions.

    • Replies: @peterAUS
  239. Dragon says:

    nice article, thanks,
    I didn’t realize the strategic importance of the Kinzhal, but I could tell that Putin was quite proud, emphasized it.

    In simplified terms, correct me, Kinzhal offers different tactical options because it’s air-borne, can be delivered by (an array of) aircrafts, which in turn extends the range and above all flexibility (it can be launched from anywhere). All that at Mach 10, i.e. success near guaranteed, time/reaction is in minutes. And I guess surprise factor is not negligible (enemy can’t really tell if some craft is ‘carrying’).

    Dagger seems appropriate.

    What made the biggest of impressions on me was the submersible drone (nuclear powered), I thought that was the real game changer. There is really very little you can do to defend from it. I trust that what VVP is telling is true (mostly at least), air doesn’t work, naval defense is too slow, it can sit at the bottom for days, and turn out at any point on their shore. That is scary (made the real shock and awe type of impression).

    Also first-strike, second strike wise.
    I can see that Kinzhal is interesting in defending from the first-strike (after), i.e. the strategic component. But isn’t the submersible/drone quite as interesting in that respect? You can have them active (when the times are ‘stressed’) and ‘patrolling’ the seas, just waiting for the signal to do the damage, it’s not a defense but quite a detterent IMO.

    And one more thing, story now is (per VVP) that Russia is not going to use the first-strike option. But if I remember right, at some point, months or few yrs back at most, he mentioned, left that option open (when the east EU shield was being put in place), i.e. reserved the option to strike first if the situation warrants it. Am I missing something, isn’t that still the case, as that is the deterrent on its own, though hardly something I can imagine RF doing in reality.

    Thanks!

  240. Dmitry says:
    @FB

    That’s not what I heard…lots of US and Israeli equipment and training…

    Look at Georgia’s GDP, then consider how much US and Israeli equipment they could afford to buy. A couple billion dollars over years at best – not necessarily enough to replace even old stuff that was wearing out. They didn’t buy any new armor or planes for example. Just a few artillery systems.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_equipment_of_the_Georgian_Armed_Forces

    Georgian armed force are no match for the armed forces of Russia. The one area they excelled in the war was in the drones – which were later caught up (even some same models imported) by Russia.

  241. FB says:
    @Y.L.

    Well…I have said this many times already but so-called aerospace ‘analysts’ in the US popular media are neither pilots nor engineers…

    Which makes them qualified to ‘analyze’ missiles and aircraft exactly how…?

    Here is Tyler rogoway’s bio…

    ‘…Tyler Rogoway is a defense journalist and photographer who maintains the website Foxtrot Alpha for Jalopnik.com…’

    Now how many ‘journalists and photographers’ are employed at Nasa…Lockheed ‘Skunk Works’…etc…

    Exactly zero…

    Journalists and photographers write ‘stories’ and take pictures…they do not test fly combat jets or design missiles…or design anything for that matter…

    These are completely unqualified individuals who have not the slightest idea of what they are yapping about…

    Would you go to a ‘journalist and photographer’ for brain surgery…?

    Yet it is somehow perfectly normal to go to a ‘photographer and journalist’ to get an explanation of rocket science…?

    Here is an example of the nonsense spouted by Rogoway and his ‘team of analysts’ [unnamed] spout…

    ‘…The hard maneuvers shown in the computer generated footage appears much more like that of an anti-ship cruise missile than a ballistic missile…’

    And…

    ‘…by all the imagery we have it looks like this is indeed an air-launched Iskander ballistic missile that may have some additional targeting capabilities, like being able to hit moving ships at sea…’

    Well…if this ‘journalist’ had bothered to look up the definition of the word ‘ballistic’ he would find that it means a ‘projectile’…with no ability to change its flight path [trajectory]…

    ‘…Ballistics is the field of mechanics that deals with the launching, flight, behavior, and effects of projectiles, especially bullets, unguided bombs, rockets, or the like…’

    The Iskander missile is not a ballistic missile…by virtue of its maneuverable flight characteristics…here is what it says in wikipedia…

    ‘…The Iskander-M system is equipped with two solid-propellant single-stage guided missiles, model 9M723K1.

    Each one is controlled throughout the entire flight path and fitted with an inseparable warhead…’

    I had already talked about changing flight path at various flight regimes and altitudes in my above comment #241…

    And talked specifically about the Iskander which is designed to maneuver during all phases of its flight…

    Here is how that maneuvering is accomplished…

    ‘…The 9M723K1 missile has one stage with a solid propellant engine.

    The trajectory of the movement is quasi-ballistic, the missile is controlled throughout the entire flight by means of aerodynamic and gas dynamic controls…’

    I had already talked about this in my above comment where I mentioned that aerodynamic control…ie moving control surfaces…does not work well at high altitudes where the air is extremely thin…

    The Iskander flies up to a height of 50 km…where aerodynamic control is ineffective…and where gas dynamic control is required…ie thrust vectoring…

    The ‘gas dynamic control’ is accomplished by means of movable paddles in the engine exhaust stream…

    We see here from the engine view how those movable paddles work on a Scud missile…as a paddle is moved into the exhaust stream…the engine’s exhaust is deflected which causes a change in the missile flight direction…

    I had already explained in my #60 and subsequent posts here that the Kinzhal is indeed likely an Iskander variant that is designed to be air-launched at high speed and altitude from a MiG31…which has a top speed of Mach 2.8…

    Now these so-called ‘analysts’ would have us believe that the Iskander is a ballistic projectile…which, by definition, once launched has no ability to change its flight path…just like a bullet…

    Incredible…no wonder the US is going down the tubes…

    • Replies: @Y.L.
    , @Arioch
    , @Sparkon
  242. peterAUS says:
    @kemerd

    What was stunning is that how quickly the conflict turned nuclear. And, I find that the most striking and also realistic part of the film.

    Well….can’t say I agree with that part of the movie.
    Those things didn’t just start out of blue. There was a buildup. And, well, each time, THEN, that buildup was stopped before The Launch.
    We had, I believe, rational leaderships then. US and USSR.
    Look at the leaderships of Western world now. Just…look at them. Worse. Imagine The Bitch in the White House. Supported by this…..hysterical…..species that just can’t stop.

    That is the thing. And, well…democracy………We got what we deserve.

    But, during the Cold War people, civilians, really didn’t have proper information to act upon. Hell, anyone below 3 star general in military didn’t have such information either.

    But now…………for fuck’s sake we have the President of the Hyper-power tweeting……..Admit, I don’t get it but everybody keeps telling me that I am a relic from the past and things changed.
    Agree on both. Especially the change. I believe it’s for worse.

    So

    So, I don’t believe people in millions mobilizing in such a short time.

    you mean NOW?
    Tell you what. Imagine a white cop shoots down a black teenage girl. Tell me….how many millions of Americans would, instantly, get onto that? Especially the”progs”. Those…species……..that just can’t stop this “Russia took our victory from us” shit?

    Besides, they still cannot control foreign soldiers.

    Let’s stick to the Americans here. They “own” this process.

    In the case of US population doing anything resembling a real resistance: well, remember what happened as recent as few years back in California: curfews, shoot to kill orders (as I remember over 40 people killed by police, etc.) I am positive that they would be murdered in millions by the US military before launching if any serious resistance is formed.BTW, this has been the main feature of US state since its foundation: any and all resistance is met with overwhelming force by the police, involving machine guns against striking workers in many occasions.

    Disagree. A lot.
    Don’t want to hijack this thread; take a look at a decent discussion re/below the article, here:
    I’m Not Giving Up My Guns—Time to Dump Trump?

    • Replies: @kemerd
  243. Y.L. says:
    @FB

    F.B. another brilliant analysis. Don’t worry about my other questions on theoretical Science Fiction physics on the glider. Too much Star Trek in my past.

    But here you are an “ordinary” guy making monkeys out of the so-called experts. How do they get these jobs? Being whores and shameless? Right, ballistic means no ability to steer, it’s passive. Idiots.

    Shameful. Thank you again.

  244. @bjondo

    Excellent point – one must always remember with government “budgets” – it is all sleight of hand. On-budget spending, off-budget spending, black ops spending, etc., etc.
    No GAAP allowed!

  245. pogohere says: • Website
    @AndrewR

    If the brief bio of the author comes close to representing his position and by inference his expertise, the US is in deep doo doo. Beam me up Scotty. Please.

    Tom Nichols is a professor of national security affairs at the U.S. Naval War College and an adjunct professor at the Harvard Extension School. His latest book is “The Death of Expertise: The Campaign Against Established Knowledge and Why It Matters.” You can follow him on Twitter @RadioFreeTom. The views expressed in this column are his own.

  246. pogohere says: • Website
    @kemerd

    “I am also not fun of Peter’s position of “might makes right” type of thinking but his analysis here is simple and sound.”

    No, his analysis is pure Hollywood. We’re doing contemporary Moscow just now. See comment #205 re realism.

    It’s more realistic to see it this way: Can you hear me now? Can we talk?

  247. @FB

    There is also doubt that the Aegis radar is powerful enough to track small objects that far in space. And all of these test results are “trust us” data provided by those whose jobs and careers depend on successful tests. And note that due the curvature of the Earth, its horizontal detection range is limited. In an update at the end of my article I noted:

    Experts know this, but always backtrack when pressed and mumble about engaging during the launch or terminal phase. The same could be said of shoulder fired RPGs. One could fire a $50 rocket at a launching ICBM from 200 meters away and “shoot it down.” One could fire a $50 rocket at an ICBM just before it strikes the ground 200 meters and may “shoot it down.” Likewise, an SM-3 should be able to hit an ICBM soon after launch if within 50 miles, and may be able to hit an ICBM just before it hits if within 50 miles. Small SM-3s cannot provide broad missile defense simply because they cannot reach bigger high-flying missiles.

    And your range calculations assume the missile will fly almost directly over the ship. The MDA pretends SM-3s at one base in Poland can cover all of Western Europe! But I agree, it is possible to hit something in a carefully laid out test script. The full crew is ready, alert, and told when the missile is launched, and exactly where and when it will appear on their radar. In the real world only a watch is on duty, and the radar operators are looking at dozens of different targets as they worry about aircraft too. There will be several minutes of delay as a junior officer on deck and the duty crew chatter about the “possible” IRBM target until an SM-3 is launched, but then its too late.

    They never fired at those North Korean missiles because they were certain they would miss. Finally, they’ve already fully developed the SM-3 to its maximum size and range, all this talk of more is BS. A few years ago they talked about real things like using liquid propellants or longer missiles sticking six feet above the deck. Those ideas were dismissed so all talk about improving the SM-3 range is just talk; smoke and mirrors. The last target that the newest SM-3 missed was called in IRBM, but was really a slow cruise missile flying less than 20 miles high.

    Thank you for your carefully organized thoughts.

    • Replies: @FB
  248. @TT

    It has launched many aircraft, without bombs. It still fails overall.

    http://navy-matters.blogspot.com/2018/02/ford-problems-continue.html

    “Here’s an update on the Ford’s continuing problems as documented in the DOT&E 2017 Annual Report. Some of these problems are stunning and strongly suggest that the Ford is not even capable of routine operations.

    · “As of June 2017, the program estimates that EMALS has approximately 455 Mean Cycles Between Critical Failures (MCBCF) in the shipboard configuration, where a cycle represents the launch of one aircraft. While this estimate is above the rebaselined reliability growth curve, the rebaselined curve is well below the requirement of 4,166 MCBCF. At the current reliability, EMALS has a 9 percent chance of completing the 4-day surge and a 70 percent chance of completing a day of sustained operations as defined in the design reference mission without a critical failure.” – This means that the Ford is currently unable to conduct high intensity – meaning war – operations.

    · “The reliability concerns are exacerbated by the fact that the crew cannot readily electrically isolate EMALS components during flight operations due to the shared nature of the Energy Storage Groups and Power Conversion Subsystem inverters onboard CVN 78. The process for electrically isolating equipment is time-consuming; spinning down the EMALS motor/generators takes 1.5 hours by itself. The inability to readily electrically isolate equipment precludes EMALS maintenance during flight operations, reducing the system operational availability.” – EMALS doesn’t work reliably and can’t be readily fixed. That’s a disturbing combination. How did a system that can’t be isolated and repaired on the fly ever get past the first conceptual design meeting? This is Navy engineering design incompetence on an almost unimaginable scale. Yes, I understand that the Navy didn’t design the EMALS but they did review it and failed utterly to spot a major, major flaw.

    · “In June 2017, the Program Office estimated that the redesigned AAG had a reliability of approximately 19 Mean Cycles Between Operational Mission Failures (MCBOMF) in the shipboard configuration, where a cycle represents the recovery of one aircraft. This reliability estimate is well below the rebaselined reliability growth curve and well below the 16,500 MCBOMF specified in the requirements documents. In its current design, AAG is unlikely to support routine flight operations. At the current reliability, AAG has less than a 0.001 percent chance of completing the 4-day surge and less than a 0.200 percent chance of completing a day of sustained operations as defined in the design reference mission. For routine operations, AAG would only have a 53 percent chance of completing a single 12 aircraft recovery cycle and a 1 percent chance of completing a typical 84 aircraft recovery day.” – Are you kidding me?! A zero percent chance of conducting war operations and only a fifty/fifty chance of recovering 12 aircraft???? Who let this abomination get this far? This, alone, renders the Ford non-operational even for routine operations.”

    I’ve noticed that recent spin too. Whenever a project fails, fake news is put out that China is building the same system, so we must push on and spend even more on failures! They just did this with bogus railguns and hypersonic programs.

  249. pogohere says: • Website
    @likbez

    You raise many interesting points that lack details that would establish them as well-founded. This is what weakens your many cases. I could contest many of them as written, but would rather see the basis for your assertions.

    This weakness reduces your analysis to a species of linearity that lacks irony and paradox. E.g., I suggest the sanctions imposed on Russia accelerated its autarchic development. Another instance: prior to the “loss of Ukraine” the Russians sourced military necessities such as gas turbines from the Ukraine, but this may well be on the way to being solved:

    Serial production of Russian engines for ships of the Russian Navy will begin in 2018

    Подробнее на ТАСС:

    http://tass.ru/armiya-i-opk/4209929

    I suggest a more basic issue that you didn’t address is that the Russians have overcome their trust of western adversaries and have come to realize Russia needs to come to a gun fight with a gun. Putin suggested this was on his agenda back in 2007 at Munich:

    Speech and the Following Discussion at the Munich Conference on Security Policy

    February 10, 2007

    We are seeing a greater and greater disdain for the basic principles of international law. And independent legal norms are, as a matter of fact, coming increasingly closer to one state’s legal system. One state and, of course, first and foremost the United States, has overstepped its national borders in every way. This is visible in the economic, political, cultural and educational policies it imposes on other nations. Well, who likes this? Who is happy about this?

    In international relations we increasingly see the desire to resolve a given question according to so-called issues of political expediency, based on the current political climate.

    And of course this is extremely dangerous. It results in the fact that no one feels safe. I want to emphasise this – no one feels safe! Because no one can feel that international law is like a stone wall that will protect them. Of course such a policy stimulates an arms race.
    . . .

    Plans to expand certain elements of the anti-missile defence system to Europe cannot help but disturb us. Who needs the next step of what would be, in this case, an inevitable arms race? I deeply doubt that Europeans themselves do.
    . . .

    I think it is obvious that NATO expansion does not have any relation with the modernisation of the Alliance itself or with ensuring security in Europe. On the contrary, it represents a serious provocation that reduces the level of mutual trust. And we have the right to ask: against whom is this expansion intended? And what happened to the assurances our western partners made after the dissolution of the Warsaw Pact? Where are those declarations today? No one even remembers them. But I will allow myself to remind this audience what was said. I would like to quote the speech of NATO General Secretary Mr Woerner in Brussels on 17 May 1990. He said at the time that: “the fact that we are ready not to place a NATO army outside of German territory gives the Soviet Union a firm security guarantee”. Where are these guarantees?

    In answer to questions:

    Regarding our perception of NATO’s eastern expansion, I already mentioned the guarantees that were made and that are not being observed today. Do you happen to think that this is normal practice in international affairs? But all right, forget it. Forget these guarantees. With respect to democracy and NATO expansion. NATO is not a universal organisation, as opposed to the UN. It is first and foremost a military and political alliance, military and political! Well, ensuring one’s own security is the right of any sovereign state. We are not arguing against this. Of course we are not objecting to this. But why is it necessary to put military infrastructure on our borders during this expansion?
    . . .

    Question: “The USA are not developing strategic weapons but Russia is. Will Russia use force in the future if it is not sanctioned by the UN? Russia is developing a system of strategic weapons”.

    Fine question, excellent! I am very grateful to you for this question. It will give me the opportunity to talk about the essence of what is happening. . . . Yes, the United States is ostensibly not developing an offensive weapon. In any case, the public does not know about this. Even though they are certainly developing them. But we aren’t even going to ask about this now. We know that these developments are proceeding. But we pretend that we don’t know, so we say that they aren’t developing new weapons. But what do we know? That the United States is actively developing and already strengthening an anti-missile defence system. Today this system is ineffective but we do not know exactly whether it will one day be effective. But in theory it is being created for that purpose. So hypothetically we recognise that when this moment arrives, the possible threat from our nuclear forces will be completely neutralised.
    . . .

    And of course we should react to this. How? Either the same as you and therefore by building a multi-billion dollar anti-missile system or, in view of our present economic and financial possibilities, by developing an asymmetrical answer. So that everybody can understand that the anti-missile defence system is useless against Russia because we have certain weapons that easily overcome it. And we are proceeding in this direction. It is cheaper for us. And this is in no way directed against the United States themselves.

    http://en.kremlin.ru/events/president/transcripts/24034

    That is now 11 years ago. If you accept Martyanov’s thesis, and that Russia made clear that it was aware of the trends as of 2007 and was taking steps to address what it thought was happening, then how do you (if you do) explain Russia’s ability to accomplish what it has achieved today in the face of the arguments you mooted?

  250. kemerd says:
    @peterAUS

    Agree, let’s not hijack this thread.

    But, my last paragraph was not mostly my opinion but statement of historical facts, as such not subject to being agreed or not. I just projected what has been done by the US government in the past without fail to the future, that was all.

    • Replies: @peterAUS
    , @peterAUS
  251. Y.L. says:
    @Andrei Martyanov

    Andrei, @F.B., Paul Craig Roberts writes “the cat has been belled.” In other words, America has been put on notice.

    https://www.lewrockwell.com/2018/03/paul-craig-roberts/a-stalinist-purge-in-america/

    Yet officially the “Deep State” is still threatening to attack Syria.

    Maybe anything is worthless speculation, but I think they do not believe Putin, as per his statement, will use force unless Russia faces nuclear attack.

    Hence my hope for Russian “shock and awe” in Syria using the laser tech (if a laser pointer blinds commercial jetliners per news reports in the U.S.) if America’s ISIS supporting air force bombs Syrians again; I’m an American but this military that supports mass murderers should be stopped. Hence my earlier concern did America have anything to do downing the prop plane that allegedly carried Russian pilots stationed in Syria.

    On a more optimistic note, Donald Miller writes “Bomb-dropping airplanes made battleships obsolete in World War II, and hypersonic nuclear-powered cruise missiles and nuclear-powered underwater drones will do the same thing to aircraft carriers in World War III.”

    https://www.lewrockwell.com/2018/03/donald-w-miller-jr-md/the-day-u-s-military-supremacy-ended-and-naval-warfare-became-obsolete/

    So we have good news, but I still think the evil Empire will provoke, fight dirty, use terror and won’t talk.

    If only millions of Americans phoned to White House leaving Trump a message to stick to his campaign promises of putting America first.

    But as Giraldi wrote here the other day, we know whose slave army and air force America is.

    • Replies: @Andrei Martyanov
  252. @Y.L.

    So we have good news, but I still think the evil Empire will provoke, fight dirty, use terror and won’t talk.

    Possible, in fact highly probable. But all that is not related to MAD and general balance of power which emerged recently. As per won’t talk–the more it doesn’t talk, the more it is going to sink, in fact, the process accelerates. For now empire needs to sabotage Russia’s elections and, if possible, unleash full blown hostilities in Donbas preferably with Russia’s direct involvement.

    Maybe anything is worthless speculation, but I think they do not believe Putin, as per his statement, will use force unless Russia faces nuclear attack.

    My feel is quite opposite. From what I gather the system is in a shell-shock–a first indication of message being delivered, now it is being internalized.

    • Replies: @Y.L.
  253. FB says:
    @Carlton Meyer

    ‘…And your range calculations assume the missile will fly almost directly over the ship…’

    I should have clarified that the map of the Sea of Japan I presented and the flight distance between Pyongyang and Tokyo were merely for illustrative purposes…in order to get a scale of the distances involved…

    I did not assume the missile would overfly the ship directly allowing for a straight-up launch…[or near to it...]

    The SM3 has a burnout velocity of 3 km/s which is quite fast…and could reach a maximum altitude of 600 km if fired straight up…

    Let me try to be more precise in presenting the geometry of a potential engagement between the Aegis SM3 and the DPRK Hwasong 12 IRBM…

    Here is a better map showing the flight path of those two missiles that overflew Hokkaido…

    Note that the map shows paths of two other DPRK missiles that overflew northern Japan…the first back in 1998…and the second in 2009…[also two others that flew south in the direction of Guam...one in 2012 and another in 2016...]

    But there was a third Hwasong 12 IRBM flight last year which did not overfly Japan but flew very high on a loft trajectory and landed in the Sea of Japan…the below graphic shows the trajectories of those three 2017 flights…

    So we have all of those flights before 2017…plus three flights in 2017 alone…two of which overflew Japan and one which landed in the Sea of Japan…

    Clearly there is some sort of game going on here…it looks very much like the DPRK is testing the US response…not only politically…but militarily…vis-a-vis those BMD ships…

    The pattern of DPRK launches suggests that they are not worried about a US intercept…and they have been proved correct…

    ‘…There is also doubt that the Aegis radar is powerful enough to track small objects that far in space…’

    Yes…I strongly agree with that…the range given is ‘up to’ 310 km…

    That seems woefully inadequate…considering how the SM3 is supposed to work…

    ‘…The ship’s AN/SPY-1 radar finds the ballistic missile target and the Aegis weapon system calculates a solution on the target…’

    How is it going to find a target that may be 500 km away…? the SM3 range is said to be 700 km…so clearly the radar is not able to match the missile performance…

    Just as an example…even if that Aegis ship is just off the DPRK coast by anything more than 100 km…that gives a distance from the ship to Pyongyand of 300 km…just barely within the radar range…

    From that distance the Aegis would pick up the DPRK missile after it reaches a height of about 5 km…

    If the ship was 500 km east of Pyongyang as we had postulated…it would have no chance of picking up the missile until it was already about 200 km into its flight…

    That really does seem rather odd…especially if we consider that the comprable Russian seach and acquisition radar for the S400 SAM has a range of 600 km…

    Carlo Kopp has a comparison of the aperture sizes of the two…we see the Russian radar with a bigger aperture size…[although the electrical power available on a ship would be greater...]

    Here’s what the mobile Russian SAM radar looks like…

    That showing the newer version 91N6E…

    • Replies: @Y.L.
  254. peterAUS says:
    @kemerd

    I just projected what has been done by the US government in the past without fail to the future, that was all.

    True.
    The same applied to the Communist Block, up to , say, Romania December 1989, Latvia, January 1991, Estonia 20 August 1991 etc.

    The all powerful system with state security apparatus, nuclear armed military etc. vs unhappy people.
    Works as a charm until it doesn’t.

    Internal rot, especially within the security system and military, is a…. peculiar thing.

    Often, at surface, it looks and feels as terrifying force. Until that moment of truth when it has to pacify domestic population….and simply falls apart.

    • Replies: @Sergey Krieger
    , @kemerd
  255. Y.L. says:
    @Andrei Martyanov

    Dear Andrei,

    Thank you for your kind reply, which explains a great deal.

    I found the article about the pilots; bad judgment if this is true to have so many on a single plane:

    https://russia-insider.com/en/huge-blow-russia-transport-plane-crashes-syria-all-39-onboard-dead-possibly-20-were-experienced

    I have hope because our “rulers”, the Deep State do not represent all the American people. Putin knows many Americans realize he has made Russia great again, and it’s becoming more Christian and not everyone has the sociopathic hate of the elites, especially so many ordinary people in America, not just Russians–look how Soros funds ANTIFA in the U.S. that proves the elites hate the “deplorables”, i.e. Christians, patriots, etc.

    And Christians in America have reached out to Christians in Russia, e.g. home schooling. Individuals can make connections. Just like on this site. So there is hope because Russia and Putin respond not in malice but with wisdom and strength. All Putin requested is for America to listen.

    However, as Orlov wrote, America is in worse shape than Russia in the 1990s after the Deep State central banks took over using Yeltsin and “shock therapy” to plunder her. So I hope we Americans change our ways.

    https://russia-insider.com/en/russias-new-nukes-check-mate-war-happy-us-make-world-safer/ri22723

    I agree when Orlov said:

    “I hope that the US doesn’t plan to attack anyone either, because, given its recent history, this won’t work. Threatening the whole planet and forcing it to use the US dollar in international trade (and destroying countries, such as Iraq and Libya, when they refuse); running huge trade deficits with virtually the entire world and forcing reserve banks around the world to buy up US government debt; leveraging that debt to run up colossal budget deficits (now around a trillion dollars a year); and robbing the entire planet by printing money and spending it on various corrupt schemes—that, my friends, has been America’s business plan since around the 1970s. And it is unraveling before our eyes.”

    # # #

    And so I pray America does not attack Syria. Only more suffering will result. America has defeated itself; Russia didn’t need to fire a single shot.

    As you see here, fools like Kagan won’t shut up and keep pushing for war:

    http://thehill.com/opinion/international/377195-the-united-states-must-take-swift-action-to-stop-russias-aggression

    Quote: “Putin’s campaigns are insidious, operating under cover of bombast and exaggerated threats. We can and must counter the many ways in which Putin prepares for and conducts aggression. We must disrupt Russian efforts to co-opt disgruntled minorities and to infiltrate Moscow’s agents and messages among them freely, even as we prepare to stop Russian armored columns. But we must move swiftly lest we see the armored forces meant to deter Russia from invasion forced to watch helplessly one day as Putin devours his victims from within.”

    Question: why no cyber war against Neocons and Soros’ power centers by Russia? Not that you’d know but they’ve been very nice by not asymmetrically attacking the IT infrastructure of these creeps.

    Thank you again. It’s nice to have a “Russian” friend in cyberspace. That’s the tragedy. Americans and Russians could be great friends and the Deep State, Zionist cabal have ruined things for generations.

    • Replies: @Y.L.
  256. @peterAUS

    What you just described sounds exactly like USA.

    • Replies: @peterAUS
  257. Y.L. says:
    @Andrei Martyanov

    Andrei, I forgot my key point why the laser should be deployed to Syria.

    As The Saker has written, the S-400s and S-300s and Pantsir can be overwhelmed since there is a finite supply of ammunition.

    However, the S-600 laser, if either nuclear or diesel powered, relies on electricity. It can’t be overwhelmed. It can just keep firing unless a drone swarm or something goes after it or Snowden hacks it, which I think highly unlikely.

    I feel Syria will be the target first, not Ukraine but U.S. will open two fronts. See:

    https://www.strategic-culture.org/news/2018/03/08/us-ponders-strike-against-syrian-government-forces-behind-aggressive-approach.html

    I know you haven’t commented on the laser so that’s fine but let me put this out there for anyone to consider. Again, I’ve no expertise on such technology, just brainstorming perhaps in ignorance. I wish F.B. who has engineering background will comment. Are you out there, @F.B.

    • Replies: @Andrei Martyanov
  258. peterAUS says:
    @kemerd

    And, to the heart of the matter.

    Where is that “internal dissent” trouble more likely to happen, in USA or Russia?

    Say, New Mexico, Washington…..or one of these:

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Republics_of_Russia

    Rhetorical question?

    • Replies: @kemerd
  259. peterAUS says:
    @Sergey Krieger

    A little bit, probably.

    Russian Federation much more I am afraid.

    Say, 20/80.

    Just my impression, of course.

    I am sure that the resident “Team Russia” would go 95/5.

    One way to find out, and I have a feeling rather soon.

    Fear not; all that laser/particle/plasma high tech weaponry will fix that, in RF space, in a minute.

    Looking forward to seeing that.

    • Replies: @Sergey Krieger
  260. Y.L. says:
    @FB

    Please see my recent post about the “S-600″ (my name) laser, F.B. and let me know your thoughts.

  261. @Y.L.

    As The Saker has written, the S-400s and S-300s and Pantsir can be overwhelmed since there is a finite supply of ammunition.

    Both Saker and me roughly shared the same assessment till October-November last year, since then additional S-400 plus new sensors such as radar Garmon’ were deployed to Syria, plus it is confirmed now that there are numerous Buk-M2s in Syria too. This increases AD capability there dramatically. But I made a very explicit point that even in previous configuration the US attack on Russian (I underscore–Russian) forces there would be suicidal for a whole range of US assets in the region. Here:

    http://www.unz.com/article/russia-the-800-pound-gorilla/

    The discussion of those scenarios was conducted in a classic “What If” manner. Per lasers.

    1. I have no idea in what state of readiness they are–I assume they are operational but, see pp.2
    2. Present force in Syria (and beyond) provides reliable cover for Russian forces there and allow to control escalation.

    • Replies: @Y.L.
    , @Y.L.
    , @Y.L.
  262. Y.L. says:
    @Y.L.

    Another great Orlov quote from his article cited above:

    “I have the audacity to hope that the dismantling of the American Empire will proceed as copacetically as the dismantling of the Soviet Empire did. (This is not to say that it won’t be humiliating or impoverishing, or that it won’t be accompanied by a huge increase in morbidity and mortality.) One of my greatest fears over the past decade was that Russia wouldn’t take the US and NATO seriously enough and just try to wait them out. After all, what is there to really to fear from a nation that has over a 100 trillion dollars in unfunded entitlements, that’s full of opioid addicts, with 100 million working-age people permanently out of work, with decrepit infrastructure and poisoned national politics? And as far as NATO, there is, of course, Germany, which is busy rewriting “Deutschland, Deutschland, über alles” to be gender-neutral. What are they supposed to do next? March on Moscow under a rainbow banner and hope that the Russians die laughing? Oh, and there’s also NATO’s largest Eurasian asset, Turkey, which is currently busy slaughtering America’s Kurdish assets in Northern Syria.”

  263. Y.L. says:
    @Andrei Martyanov

    Yes, great points. I’d forgotten your “Gorilla” post. Then I just hope they don’t let America kill Syrians with impunity.

    Otherwise, Syria would prove a Pyrrhic victory for Russia if it’s destroyed all the same.

    • Replies: @Alberto Campos
  264. @peterAUS

    You forget about few things that make the difference. Russians are far more patient and accustomed to hardship and there is population cohesion. USA on the other hand resembles diverse monkey Zoo with various primates throwing dung at each other already now and on the whole population is not accustomed to hardship and is rather pampered.
    You have also got those weapons so it remains to be seen.

    • Replies: @peterAUS
  265. kemerd says:
    @peterAUS

    I assume the US would be the one which escalates to the breaking point. Indeed, during the cold war it was always US that looked for a weak spot to hit; USSR was almost always (except perhaps SS-20 crisis) on the defensive. So, I assumed it would be the US which would launch first. Hence, I did not consider what the soviet people would have done.

    • Replies: @peterAUS
  266. peterAUS says:
    @Sergey Krieger

    Wow….a measured reply by a member of the resident “Team Russia”.
    Ah, yes, I remember, you actually haven’t spent too much time there. That’s a compliment actually; some of that, say, “robust communication attitude” hasn’t infected you. Yet.
    Nice, for a change.

    You forget about few things that make the difference.

    Quality of life for lower 60 %, perhaps, middle and working class in particular?
    O.K.

    Russians are far more patient and accustomed to hardship and there is population cohesion.

    You mean patient and accustomed as in the events in ’91 and ’93? Reaction to the coup and events
    around White House in Moscow I mean.
    O.K.
    Not to mention that Caucus region. Bad place re that patience some would say.

    ….there is population cohesion.

    Cohesion as in all those regions?
    O.K.

    You have also got those weapons so it remains to be seen.

    Ah. An interesting topic, but not for this article I am afraid.
    But people in all those regions don’t have weapons? Or, more importantly, can’t get it “somehow”?
    Like those “not patient” in Libya and Syria?
    O.K.

    • Replies: @Sergey Krieger
  267. @Carroll Price

    The UK, Germany and even France not only pay their way in NATO but send big checks to the US for compulsory equipment purchases Where are those F35′s by the way. The US bribes most of the smaller NATO countries to vote it’s way. NATO wasmformed to suppress the Western European Union – UK, FR, DE & NL – a defence against the USSR.

  268. kemerd says:
    @peterAUS

    I don’t know the details of Latvia or Estonia but Romania was almost exactly like Libya. The president was summarily executed by some “citizens” who somehow managed to organize and got weapons including helicopter gunships.

    • Replies: @peterAUS
  269. peterAUS says:
    @kemerd

    I assume the US would be the one which escalates to the breaking point.

    Assume?
    It’s given. Like the sun setting in the evening today.

    Indeed, during the cold war it was always US that looked for a weak spot to hit; USSR was almost always (except perhaps SS-20 crisis) on the defensive.

    Yup.
    Well, and Afghanistan.Anyway.

    So, I assumed it would be the US which would launch first.

    God knows. Maybe. My feeling is that’s He’s busy somewhere else for the moment.

    The problem is not who would launch fist. The problem is who would launch out of an error or mistake. First or second, does not matter.

    The point I have been trying to make is very simple:
    TPTBs , The Empire’s, keep pushing until there is an ENVIRONMENT created for a high likelihood of that mistake.
    That is what worries me.
    Well, good thing, it doesn’t worry the resident “Team Russia” apparently.
    I mean, should any exchange happen the RF defence will shoot down all those MIRVs , mid rangers and cruisers and then retaliate and get rid the world of The Evil DC Empire. Lucky them to believe that. I don’t.

    So, the scenario that worries me is:
    The tensions of direct confrontation rise->both Gumbints keep raising the state of readiness->men and material get overstressed and exausted-> an ERROR, just one wrong judgement or just one malfunctioning system and just one little nuke explodes somewhere. After that, well, two options:
    1. The both players simply calm the fuck down and we all go back to our lives.
    2. The nukes keep blowing up………..until the end.
    And, somehow, I’d go, 30/70 there.

    Just can’t see it differently when looking at Washington D.C. Them, all of them, handling, properly that type of crisis….nahhh….can’t see it. Nobody there.
    Just look at them.

    Hence, I did not consider what the soviet people would have done.

    That’s a different conversation.
    The only what matters here is the Deep State in West. For the “nuke” option.

    The peoples of RF matter, in this game, IMHO, only as one of steps towards that point above. As creating more trouble for the regime in Moscow and, consequently, raising the stakes.
    Say, just as a tool to create an internal dissent which could destabilize the regime in Moscow.
    Heavily nuclear armed regime that is. Unstable

    What could go wrong there?

  270. peterAUS says:
    @kemerd

    ….Romania was almost exactly like Libya.

    How to put this………………no.
    I believe that Miro23 would be able to provide some accurate picture there.

    As for me, well, I was watching, in real time, all that. Or so I say.
    And, no, it was not like Libya. Actually, not at all I think.

    Now, the execution of the couple was………an interesting event. The lady was quite a character.

    In any case, the “Case Romania” could be a very interesting to dig into. Layer upon a layer there.
    A real rabbit hole.

    My impression, anyway.

    • Replies: @Aedib
    , @Seraphim
  271. Y.L. says:
    @FB

    FB, I forgot to mention that Putin himself defined Mach in his speech. The link is from East-West Accord:

    https://kek.gg/u/Nrj9 (Kek.gg secure link shortening site)

    Here’s the excerpt:

    “Countries with high research potential and advanced technology are known to be actively developing so-called hypersonic weapons. The speed of sound is usually measured in Mach numbers in honour of Austrian scientist Ernst Mach who is known for his research in this field. One Mach is equal to 1,062 kilometres per hour at an altitude of 11 kilometres. The speed of sound is Mach 1, speeds between Mach 1 and Mach 5 is called supersonic, and hypersonic is above Mach 5. Of course, this kind of weapon provides substantial advantages in an armed conflict. Military experts believe that it would be extremely powerful, and that its speed makes it invulnerable to current missile and air defence systems, since interceptor missiles are, simply put, not fast enough. In this regard, it is quite understandable why the leading armies of the world seek to possess such an ideal weapon.

    “Friends, Russia already has such a weapon.”

  272. VY says:

    For all those who find the Western MSM story that Putin’s speech was timed to meet his election campaign needs plausible, here are some relevant facts:

    The speech was prepared for delivery at the end of December 2017, but its delivery was deferred until after the publication of the American Nuclear Posture Review, in January 2018. Had the contents of that document been different — a document which the editor-in-chief of The Nation has said “signals a new arms race, — Putin’s speech would have been duly revised.

    That’s the only pertinent immediate context of the timing of Putin’s announcements on March 1.

  273. Aedib says:
    @peterAUS

    Eleven times “Team Russia” and counting.

    More and more butthurt every day.

    • Replies: @FB
  274. FB says:
    @Aedib

    I wouldn’t say ‘butthurt’…

    Our little Petey usually gets a little grumpy when his mom/caregiver takes the game console away for a while…

    Old hands here usually recognize the symptoms…

  275. bvgp says:
    @Carlton Meyer

    Thank you for the link to your Blog and your analysis. Valuable. Articles by the Saker always bring out the Intelligentsia

  276. @peterAUS

    Your thinking seems to rely a lot about American luck. Hope yet about another miracle circa 1991. Sweet dreams. Looks like your luck had run out of which your pathetic track record and rising debt levels are a good sign. I lived in the Soviet union aka Soviet Russia and it makes no difference where I lived there most of the time. Have a nice weekend.

    • Agree: FB, Kiza
    • Replies: @peterAUS
  277. peterAUS says:
    @Sergey Krieger

    Your thinking seems to rely a lot about American luck.

    Not really.
    My thinking relies on facts from recent history and, more importantly, on inherent weaknesses of Russian society.
    Lack of vision that takes care of lower strata of society, corruption and last but not least, ethic diversity in parts bordering with other countries.

    Hope yet about another miracle circa 1991.

    Not a miracle.
    Just an inevitable result of the core weakness of a society.
    Then, communism for top, serfdom for bottom.
    Now, grotesque opulence for top and even worse serfdom for bottom.

    Looks like your luck had run out of which your pathetic track record

    Like Ukraine, for example.
    More of the same to come soon.

    Fear not, though. All these superweapons will take care of that. And make those rich fat cats even richer.

    • Replies: @kemerd
  278. anon • Disclaimer says:

    You can see a parallel if you look back in history.
    1941.
    Russia is in many respects a relatively poor and backward country.
    In 1939, it produced just 6,000 motor cars to America’s 4.5 million.
    But when the invasion takes place, Russia immediately starts to field markedly superior weapons that come as a complete surprise to the invader.

    Main German tank: Mark III. 20 tons, 50mm gun firing 5 lb. shell, 30mm armour plate, 300 hp. petrol engine. Not a bad tank by contemporary standards.
    T-34. 26 tons, only slightly heavier, but with a 76mm gun firing a 14lb. shell, 45mm sloped armour giving three times the protection of the German vehicle. Virtually immune to German anti tank guns. 450 hp. diesel engine giving a higher speed and over twice the range. Tracks twice as wide as the German vehicle, giving lower ground pressure and greater mobility. Suspension system gives a good cross country ride. Relatively cheap and simple to maintain and produce. Overall, a vehicle that is not just slightly better, but streets ahead of its opponent.

    The same could be said of the KV1 and 2 heavy tanks, BM13 rocket launchers, 120mm heavy mortars, PPSH sub machine guns, Ilyushin ground attack aircraft.

    This is history repeating itself.
    Putin is not a hot air merchant given to bluffing, unlike pompous western windbag politicians.

    • Replies: @Avery
  279. @Russia is the best

    You say that everyone is shell-shocked and stunned. I suspect that most Americans are neither shell-shocked nor stunned. The level of engagement with the real world is more than shockingly low in America. I suspect that most Americans have heard little at all about President Putin’s speech and that those who have heard of it have no idea of its implications.

    • Replies: @Kiza
  280. @Anonymous

    The idea that the U.S. is not a real nation is powerful. Nation is from the Greek word ethnos.
    Unless we are all ethnic Jews?

  281. Give me a break! Go watch Dr. Strangelove.

  282. JohnnyRVF says:
    @padre

    I’m not someone who has access to top secrert military technology. I do however understand, to a certain extent, Russian thinking. Which is very distinct in several important ways than U.S. thinking. This basically means that whilst the west falls about laughing at the failures of Russian prototypical weapons systems whilst in development, eventually they don’t anymore and work with an enviable reliability. E.G. You can leave any Russian attack helicopter out in the open overnight in minus 20 degree celcius and the thing will start up the following morning, try that with an Apache. Likewise they can be fixed with limited field tools because a grounded weapon is a useless one. Did you knoiw that EVERY U.S. military sattelite launched since 2000 has been with Russian Rocket motors? I wonder why that might be.

  283. Anonymous • Disclaimer says:
    @Cyrano

    You are a blind ignorant of the reality

  284. Kiza says:
    @Macon Richardson

    You are both right and wrong. You describe the US people well, but Putin’s speech was not for the US people. You can rest assured that those who Putin spoke to understood the message extremely well. Let us see how they will react – will they force Putin to demonstrate that he was telling the truth (not another mother of all battles)?

    BTW, Putin must have taken into account that once he made a speech such as this, his opponents may seek a demo.

  285. Kiza says:
    @Trmist

    A great set of questions on implications, although no-one has clear answers. Naturally, your last question/challenge is by far the most important:

    without the threat of military action against them how many countries (will) stop using the US dollar for trade and US treasuries for reserves

    The whole US house of cards would come tumbling down. This would actually be much quicker and much worse than selling your oil in non-petro dollars, the crime for which Hussein was hanged and Ghadafi was bayoneted in the ass.

    Maybe 1 March will be marked in history as the true beginning of the end of an era.

  286. Arioch says: • Website
    @FB

    I wonder if Kinzhal might get equipped with ramjet propulsion.
    Grantes, M2+ (some say even M3 for short timespans) launcher of Mig-31 seem to remove the most complex part from ramjet problem: working on subsonic and low supersonoc speeds.

  287. Great now we will see some real changes in the global geopolitical sphere of things. The USA was a great nation but a small group of crazy neo cons, full of hubris, got control and has gone off the rails. Putin and the new Russia along with a powerful China and emerging India are shifting the game to the East. Interesting times ahead. Regarding North Korea. Don’t know if I would trust USA and Trump on any deal. Look what happened with Regan and Gorbochov. USSR got shafted and what followed was the NATO military build up on the Russian western boarder along with a USA neo Con backed Ukrainian coup that signalled war preparations. Kim better watch out after what the west did to Sadam and Kadaffi.

  288. Just Wow says:
    @Y.L.

    Yeah that guy is off his nut. Look what Russia has done for Syria against all that terrorist support. Nothing short of a miracle with a skeleton force. Smart people love VVP. He’s still human, but damn he gets shit done.

  289. Just Wow says:
    @Michael Kenny

    Kinda sounds like you’re a delusional butt-hurt yankmedoodledandy. Stay home and don’t threaten other countries. You will be allowed to grow fat in peace.

  290. Just Wow says:
    @Regnum Nostrum

    Юз”Here is a short list of the countries which really disintegrated. USSR, Yugoslavia, Iraq, Syria,Lybia,Ukraine,”

    Those are the exact countries that the US of Arrogance destroyed! Guess why Syria isn’t destroyed yet. Oh that’s right, Russia! Hezbolla! Iran! Assad!

    Take your yankme idiotic attitude and go straight to the Anus of history where you belong!

    • Replies: @Regnum Nostrum
  291. kemerd says:
    @peterAUS

    I am not part of a”team russia”, regardless of whatever you mean by that. But, I think you make a fundamental mistake when you assess the Russian society. In the 90s, it appears that even the leadership was in awe of west and its consumer products. Not any more! Not only that but also the generation that experienced the 90s are still alive, the humiliation that they had to endure at the hands of their comprador elites and their western handlers are unmistakable, even by the idiots. That is the reason why so called liberals in Russia gets on 1-2% of votes at most. And the oligarchs in Russia is hated by everyone.

    Another example is Iran. There are even more reasons for Iranians to be unhappy about their government than Russia; in addition to living under a theocracy, they also have to endure the same neo-liberalism at the hands of the mullahs. Yet, they immediately went home when they felt the hands of external forces that stirrs unrest. They simply returned home because they know the alternative: there are too many examples already.

    So, internal unrest ship has sailed for most countries which do not have some shaky balances and/or powerful state security services. Iran is not subject to such manipulation as was demonstrated by its resilience, neither is Russia. Turkey, on the other hand, for example is subject to manipulation. It is also clear that Syrians also got the point: they were able to resist for 5 years against the might of the empire. This might have not been possible if the Syrian people did not support resistance.

    Regarding nukes vs. conventional forces: I am surprised that you seem not to understand the real purpose of nukes as a former officer as you insuinated: they are built for not to be used. On the other hand, one needs weapons if have to defend his interests by force. Case in point is Syria: if Russia did not have sufficiently powerful conventional forces, do you think it could have intervened in Syria? Or, do you think that against the destruction of Russian forces in Syria, Russia in 90s would have retaliated with strategic nuclear weapons, having its conventional forces decimated during the chaos of 90s? No, they would simply have taken losses and sit tight. But, since they apparently even have an advantage against US forces thus can control the escalation and, they can retailate in kind if needed. Thus can protects its perceived interests wherever it is.

    So, of course, the Russia does not need to worry about an conventinal attack on its own soil (at least not now) but certainly there are dangers for their forces deployed elsewhere.

    • Replies: @FB
  292. peterAUS says:

    And the oligarchs in Russia is hated by everyone.

    My point exactly.
    Before top Nomenklatura and masses. Now, top oligarchs and masses.
    At least before the masses did have some benefit of that type of socialism. Not anymore.
    Unhappy middle-class and working class.

    Russia has state capitalism with heavy corruption at its core actually; the rest is window dressing for the same masses.
    The conflict we are seeing is between top echelons of society in West and Russia.
    And, always central authority. Always emphasis on heavy security and military.

    And, based on all above, and more, you believe that “the ship has sailed” re internal unrest in Russia.
    O.K.

    As

    I am surprised that you seem not to understand the real purpose of nukes…

    I am not surprised that you seem not to understand the real purpose of the arms race Russia has been engaged in, as a person who remembers “Pershing/SSN-20 crisis”, hence 80s, as you insinuated.
    The expression is: arms race. Not “conventional forces”, “nuclear weapons”, “space stations” and such.
    The very same thing that brought down Soviet Union.
    State capitalism with structural heavy corruption, obscene difference in material wealth between top and bottom, centralized multi ethic state….and diverting resources to the arms race.Again.
    What can go wrong there.

    Some people do not want to learn from history.
    Good.

  293. @Just Wow

    Thank you for your extremely intelligent reply. I would not expect anything less from a contributor to this blog who are known by their high level of education. Just explain to me what is your definition of destruction if in your highly erudite opinion Syria is not a destroyed country.

    • Replies: @peterAUS
    , @Erebus
  294. annamaria says:
    @peterAUS

    “…with Putin regime… the regime in Moscow…”
    You mean, similar to Bibi regime, Trump regime, Macrom regime? — Why the unnecessary drama?
    Fortunately, we have a competent, experienced, and moral person to explain the current state of affairs: https://www.paulcraigroberts.org/2018/03/10/newly-revealed-russian-weapons-systems-political-implications/
    “Russia needs to continue to walk a very narrow path: to act in a sufficiently evasive manner as to avoid provoking a direct military confrontation with the USA while, at the same time, sending clear enough signals to prevent the US Americans from interpreting Russia’s evasiveness as a sign of weakness and then doing something really stupid. The Russian end-goal is simple and obvious: to achieve a gradual and peaceful disintegration of the AngloZionist Empire combined with a gradual and peaceful replacement of a unipolar world ruled by one hegemon, by a multipolar world jointly administered by sovereign nations respectful of international law.”
    — Another illuminating statement:
    “Just like Russia in the 1990s, the USA is nowadays ruled by corrupt incompetent cowards who simply don’t have what it takes to embark upon a real, meaningful, military reform and, as a result of that, the US armed forces are suffering from problems which are only going to get much worse before they get better again. For the time being the difference between Putin’s Russia and Trump’s USA is as simple as it is stark: Russia spends her money on defense, the USA spends its money on enriching corrupt politicians and businessmen. With that set of parameters, the USA doesn’t stand a chance in any arms race, irrespective of the talent and patriotism of US engineers or soldiers”.

  295. peterAUS says:
    @Regnum Nostrum

    I’ll try to help:

    First and foremost you must accept that The Empire is in death thrones. That’s the foundation of all that.
    Then, you must realize that Russia is simply a greatest country today.

    When you have those two sassed out all the rest is easy, like Syria.

    The Empire has been working on destruction of Syria. Russia has been working in the opposite.

    How can the entity in death thrones prevent the greatest country on Earth to achieve its goal?
    Can’t….hence…Syria is not a destroyed country.

    Remember: when in doubt what’s really going on in the world simply start from the premise 1 and 2 and the truth will be revealed to you.
    And the cult will welcome a new member.

    • Replies: @NoseytheDuke
  296. JaninaG says:

    AMERICAN EXCEPTIONALISM will be its downfall, if they dont get off the KOOKAID and realise their deep state has screwed them over.

    RUSSIA is smart, they shut up and used the little money they had and put it to good use.

    Guess Americans werent listening years ago when Putin said exactly that.
    Now Russia is self sufficient thanks to USA sanctions. the farmers/producers DO NOT WANT USA SANCTIONS lifted as they dont depend on anyone anymore…. They can produce what they need…

    BUT AMERICANS were not listening to fact they preferred the daily soap opera episodes of CRAP.

    RUSSIA has bunkers for its citizens – does USA?
    Russia can live without the world – can USA? and dont blame the Chinese or Asia as they did not twist USA arm to have products made in Asia… I was there ….

    THE MONEY HUNGRY WESTERN CORPORATIONS were more interested in profit than their country or people… and moved industry off shore for MONEY and destroyed their countries in the process and it is everyones fault but their own….

    AMERICAN EXCEPTIONALISM stops Americans from facing reality and many still live in the fake crap given them by the people who run corporations and gov..

    WTFU AMERICANS YOU HAVE BEEN HAD BY YOUR GOV, same as UK/AUSTRALIA/GERMANY etc, etc….. facing facts is hard, but you end up free

  297. kemerd says:

    You seemed to miss my point. My contention is that Russians would prefer their own oligarchy if the alternative is disintegration of their country. And, gave Iran as an example, don’t you agree with that? And, I further posit that would be the case for all nations with a long history of unity or a well-functioning state/security apparatus, just because the alternative is chaos with a bloody internal fight. Who would want that?

    In any case, the revolutions (or counter-revolutions) have always been work of a small but “organized” group of people. There is so many examples of how few daring people changed the flow of the history. Russia’s own October revolution is an excellent example. A counter example was the turkish unrest in 2013; literally millions of people were on the streets everyday but Erdogan managed to suppress them eventually as they were not organized (and not armed)

    Besides, I think your assessment of why USSR collapsed is way off the mark, and close to what Americans like to think. The fact is in the USSR everyone more or less had equal income and living standards. The corruption charges the west could come up with was on the level of some senior party members having a summer house on the black sea shores. Looks pathetic now, when we consider the looting in the 90s and the current corruption levels of Russian, or indeed all former USSR republics. No, my contention is that instead of Gorbachev if there were someone else at the helm, USSR would have continued to exist, perhaps also most of eastern European socialist republics.

    Arms race is also meaningless concept, when one considers that USSR was always on the defensive. Although one must admit that they had an unwarranted urge to match and surpass whatever US had in many occasions. But, when you consider the weapon systems each had in a broader view, you can see that their priorities and thus weapon systems selection was based on defense which is a lot less expensive. It also appears that their early investments on cruise missile technology starting from 50s paid back very well.

    And, one more point: even if the arms race was real it really does not matter much (even positive) economically as long as the said arms are designed and produced domestically. In fact, it can result in great technological breakthroughs that can be used in civilian industry in addition to providing jobs for many people and helps cutting edge engineers to be trained. FB in these threads gave examples of rocket engines which apparently had a great positive impact on soviet metallurgy.

    • Replies: @peterAUS
  298. peterAUS says:
    @kemerd

    Coherent and moderate reply upon a disagreement. Rarity in related topics.

    You seemed to miss my point. My contention is that Russians would prefer their own oligarchy if the alternative is disintegration of their country. And, gave Iran as an example, don’t you agree with that? And, I further posit that would be the case for all nations with a long history of unity or a well-functioning state/security apparatus, just because the alternative is chaos with a bloody internal fight. Who would want that?

    Hehe….very good point, on the surface. Can’t disagree with that.
    My contention is, though, that people would prefer a country without oligarchy. So, they could move to get rid of that oligarchy.
    Will that disintegrate the country or not is another matter actually. Maybe, probably, who knows?

    Besides, some minorities in RF wouldn’t mind that. RF disintegrating that is. Or at least their part of RF.

    The fact is in the USSR everyone more or less had equal income and living standards. The corruption charges the west could come up with was on the level of some senior party members having a summer house on the black sea shores.

    Let’s say that we’ll absolutely disagree on that and move on.

    No, my contention is that instead of Gorbachev if there were someone else at the helm, USSR would have continued to exist, perhaps also most of eastern European socialist republics.

    I see. You are one of those guys who believe it’s all on Gorbachev and not on deep, structural, problems of Soviet society.
    Let’s disagree again and move on.

    Arms race is also meaningless concept, when one considers that USSR was always on the defensive. Although one must admit that they had an unwarranted urge to match and surpass whatever US had in many occasions.

    I’d suggest re-reading this paragraph a couple of times. Try to relate that “meaningless concept” with “unwarranted urge to match and surpass whatever US had in many occasions”.

    As for

    And, one more point: even if the arms race was real it really does not matter much (even positive) economically as long as the said arms are designed and produced domestically.

    that sounds even more……..interesting.

    In fact, it can result in great technological breakthroughs that can be used in civilian industry in addition to providing jobs for many people and helps cutting edge engineers to be trained.

    Yeah.
    As in 70s and 80s. My point: worked well then and there for a certain side in that race.
    No reason not to work again.

    • Replies: @kemerd
  299. kemerd says:
    @peterAUS

    USSR having no significant corruption is a fact, as such not subject to disagreements. Are you asserting that there was a big inequality in soviet union and enormous levels corruption? This is not true and furthermore cannot be true: there were no houses to buy, luxurious yachts on sale, stock market to park funds, government bonds to place all those money gained from corruption, etc. When there is no place to store and means to exchange money, means to spend it, there is also no possibility for large scale corruption. End of story.

    Of course, there could be other forms of “corruption” mostly in forms of exchanging favors. Or, like I mentioned using position to indulge on some luxury like unwarranted foreign trips, dachas on the black sea, etc. But, they are nothing: they cannot even make a blip in the statistics that matters. You can perhaps make a “moral” case on the number of people indulging in such activity but when you think a bit more about it, you can also see that everyone have more or less the same opportunity for exchanging favors and thus not harmful for the society. There is, of course, still no excuse for having dachas in the black see coasts for your family only.

    • Replies: @peterAUS
  300. You sound … um American.

  301. @peterAUS

    I’ll try to help you too…

    I think you meant throes rather than thrones and sussed rather than sassed, unless you were simply being sassy.

    You’re welcome.

    • LOL: FB
    • Replies: @Ilyana_Rozumova
    , @FB
  302. @NoseytheDuke

    Did you go to Rome to see those blast furnaces Romans had?

  303. peterAUS says:
    @kemerd

    USSR having no significant corruption is a fact….

    Stopped reading there.

    Let’s just agree to disagree on most things related to this topic and move on.

    • Replies: @Kemerd
  304. @Anonymous

    This “Russia as uber threat w/ hidden super weapons” is a FARCE. Please stop it. Economy size of Spain. Borders are 10s of 1000s miles wide open to infiltration/attack, low population density and cohesion. Just messing with daily oil barrel sales would be enough to wipe them dry without firing a shot. The rest is HYPE to create that enemy we need for WW3 military budget buildup. In Syria? Their best ICBMs have been abject FAILURE. Not buying this latest attempt at Cold War renewed meme. First Cold War was FAKE- this one more so. Carroll Quigley the god on this tired issue. Also Antony Sutton

    • Replies: @anon
  305. Kemerd says:
    @peterAUS

    you stop reading a reply on the gist of contention! OK, as you wish

  306. Excellent realistic article.
    knowing very well closely .. the Anglo-Zionist warmongers and some US intelligence men …, I have not doubt about the total inferiority of the quality of the US military arsenal.
    The world unfortunately forgets that when a representative of the US government or the Pentagon or the CIA speak to the public, 80% of the things said are lies and maybe only 10% corresponds to the truth.
    I had known for years that the intelligence of Russian scientists and Russian military is much higher than that of Americans. So I firmly believe in Putin’s great speech. In fact, if I were in Putin, I would do a quick and practical demonstration. Kiev is the new capital of European neo-Nazism with the new headquarters of Langley transferred to Ukraine. Good . I would use Kiev as a test target with a new Russian superfantastic missile, which can not be intercepted by any radar. So in 30 minutes the new capital of neo-Nazism would be erased from the face of the earth. The world will be quiet, the Anglo-Zionists will be literally traumatized by the enormous firepower of the new Russian weapons that will fall into a great geo-political depression and give up their desire for aggression and death against innocent people, as they have from 1946 to present .
    But Putin is a gentleman and will never do such a thing. Besides being a gentleman, Putin is a great strategist and a great statesman. So my thinking does not count for anything.

    • Replies: @Cyrano
  307. Remi Adams says: • Website

    If you are interested in the outcome of WW3, then PLEASE
    follow the link.

    http://www.futureofmankind.info/Billy_Meier/The_Henoch_Prophecies

    let me have your comments after you have read it.

    [email protected]

  308. Rzhevskiy says:
    @Cyrano

    You seem to experience the stage 1 of shock syndrome – denial.
    And here’s the spoon of reality for you – whether you are convinced or not is irrelevant. What’s relevant is that Russia is superior to US in technology – the stagnation of 90’s is far behind. The work of USSR era has resurfaced and the new breakthroughs tha are made. For decades, US dependent on foreign brains to continue R&D. Russia has historically produced domestic talent. US education system is in ruins, not only it can’t produce value, it has no chance of catching up. This article spells the truth – US is a self-proclaimed hegemony that resorts to bullying to disguise the gaping lack of gray matter. An improvement can be made – for US to stop the pretense and direct it’s respurces to domestic improvement. That accomplished, you wouldn’t need to be a bully. Equal partnership is always better than a war and brought to world standards, I don’t see why US couldn’t be a trustworthy contributor to humanity.

    • Replies: @Andrei Martyanov
  309. Rzhevskiy says:

    To those touting the mythical US superiority in this comment section, I have but one advise. Live for a year in Moscow and St. Petersburg. While you do that, travel through the adjacent cities and towns and get a feel of modern Russia.
    Then follow that experience with the equal time in NYC and Washington DC, similarly, visiting the asjuscent locales. As a Russian, a native of St. Petersburg who had lived in US for 12 years, including copious life experience in NYC and DC, and who has returned back home 5 years ago, I’m sure that you’d experience shock. Very similar with the western community’s denial, when faced with the facts of Russian technological superiority. To the point that you’d think that Moscow and St. Petersburg aren’t real.

    • Agree: Andrei Martyanov
    • Replies: @Andrei Martyanov
    , @utu
  310. @Rzhevskiy

    You seem to experience the stage 1 of shock syndrome – denial.

    I have to defend Cyrano here–his comment is tongue in cheek and is sarcastic. There are several giveaways in it.

    • Replies: @Cyrano
  311. anon • Disclaimer says:
    @Cyrano

    Don’t blame the Jews!
    Blame the oil companies!!
    Blame Shady Wahabia!!!
    Blame the pixies!!!!
    Blame the aliens!!!!!
    Just don’t mention the Jews!!!!!!

  312. @FB

    A good post. I wouldn’t be quick in dissmissal of the nuclear powered missile though. The theoretical tech of NRE (nuclear rocket engine) is something that was in R&D in USSR starting in late 60’s. The work on the principles has not even been so secret, if you are familiar with Soviet Sci-Fi, you’d notice that the works of 70’s very realistically describe the 3 types of nuclear propulsion system: anameson (anti-meson), pulse (series of micronuclear explosions) and for specifically atmospheric applications – superheating of ambient atmosphere by the means of a small nuclear reactor. The actual R&D work has however been classified in early 80’s – there was a technological breakthrough made in USSR that made the theory possible for practical implementation. In early 90’s, some of the work has leaked to US and NASA had announced its “own” breakthrough in creation of 2 models of NRE – both closely resembling what has been described in USSR since the 70’s. It is a known publicized fact that Russia has made great breakthroughs in the materials resistant to pressure and temperature. Russia is also the world leading powerhouse when it comes to nuclear technologies and has been that for over 2 decades. Connecting the dots, I wouldn’t doubt for a second the existence of a tested and practical NRE solution based on at least one of the principles. My guess it is the one based on superheating of the atmospheric air.

    • Replies: @FB
    , @FB
  313. anon • Disclaimer says:
    @Shit Doctrine

    “We only have to kick in the front door and the whole rotten structure will come crashing down! We will be in Moscow in six weeks!!”

    “T-34, KV-1, KV-2 tanks, BM13 rocket launchers, Sturmovik ground attack aircraft – ALL HYPE!!!”

    “Jawohl, mein Fuhrer!!!!”

  314. @Rzhevskiy

    Mere comparing public schools’ text books on math and physics could have given some a clue. But it, obviously, didn’t. For many policy-makers and “analysts” in the West the news that Russia produces own processors, CNC, has advanced high-precision machine building complex or doesn’t really depends on Western, much touted, extraction technology can give an aneurysm.

    • Replies: @Y.L.
  315. Cyrano says:
    @Andrei Martyanov

    Thanks, my man. Most of the people got me. Sometimes my Balkan sense of humor can be difficult to understand.

  316. Cyrano says:
    @LeonardoDaVinci

    I was thinking along those lines too – that it’s time for someone to go Stalin on the Ukrainians again. But nuking them might be a step too far. As stupid as they are, they’ll probably just come up with another “clever” nickname like nukleardomor – and they’ll cry about it for generations to come.

    • LOL: yurivku
    • Replies: @LeonardoDaVinci
  317. @Carlton Meyer

    Soviet/Russian jet propulsion technology was and is superior to the US. IE: Remember when songbird Hanoi McCain was insisting on Russian sanctions back in 2015-2016 . US private and military contractors did not have any equivalent tech to put on their satellite launchers. They were suggesting to use the Indian one cheaper but not as reliable.

  318. Erebus says:
    @Regnum Nostrum

    A nation is more than a collection of buildings.

    During the 7 year attack on Syria, the Syrian government functioned, supplying services to its citizens even in “head-chopper” occupied territories, maintaining its diplomatic and international obligations, and the Syrian people, in aggregate, remained loyal to and supportive of their nation and their government.
    Unless their attackers manage a reversal in their fortunes, Syria will come out of this as a legally constituted, socio-politically stable and functioning entity, the same or a reformed version of what it was when it was attacked.
    That is what is meant by “not destroyed”.

    I don’t know if the above adequately meets your requirements for erudition, but I hope your capacity for comprehension overcomes whatever shortcomings there may be.

  319. utu says:
    @Rzhevskiy

    I can agree with this: “for US to stop the pretense and direct it’s respurces to domestic improvement. That accomplished, you wouldn’t need to be a bully. ”

    But this “the facts of Russian technological superiority” I would need some evidence.

    Could you be more specific on the differences? Give us example of technological differences you can see in St. P. and Moscow versus NYC and DC.

    If you won’t I will assume that you wrote it under the influence of technologically superior Russian ethanol and fell into not uncommon and not only among Russians boasting mode.

  320. Seraphim says:
    @peterAUS

    Romania was rather a classical ‘coup d’etat’ from inside the power structures. The perpetrators resumed control swiftly and practically never relinquished it ever since.

  321. BobbyTar2 says:

    This discussion insinuates, that vvp is leaning out of the window and has given full disclosure. If show of force for offensive capabilities and deterrent took western IC by suprise, what makes them assume, the RF isnt hiding much more terrifying missile defense tech brought in the way in the 2000s by the same guidelines of asymmetrical approach.

    Of course, diplomacy doesnt tell, officially Russia seems afraid of MAD.

  322. Sam J. says:
    @Reverend Spooner

    “…Many people have commented on these futuristic weapons and have given very logical and lucid reasons why these weapons cannot and will not function in the Earth’s dense atmosphere…”

    I don’t think this is true. I read, somewhere can’t remember where, that by expelling hydrogen gas from the front of a hyper-sonic missile it would keep the nose cone cool. Think about air curtains in theme parks keeping people cool with raging fires right next to them. Another example is film cooling in jet engines.

    http://articles.latimes.com/1992-06-24/entertainment/ca-900_1_theme-park

    I suppose the hydrogen could be generated on board. Maybe you could split water in the air. Maybe plasma curtain generated in front of the missile. Lots of ways to do this.

    https://www.physicsforums.com/threads/plasma-as-a-heat-shield.261559/

    • Replies: @Ilyana_Rozumova
  323. Y.L. says:
    @Andrei Martyanov

    And Unz readers, this just posted on RT: The “Empire” doubles down, believes Putin is bluffing, tech doesn’t exist.

    See: https://www.rt.com/usa/421009-mattis-pompeo-russian-weapons/

    “The Pentagon and the CIA see “no change” in Russia’s strategic military capability following new strategic weapons systems presentation, saying they believe that President Putin “says lots of things that are without foundation.”

    The five new Russian systems unveiled by Vladimir Putin “are still years away” from threatening the US, Defense Secretary James Mattis noted Sunday, stressing that Russian military capabilities are unable to change the military balance in the world.

    Sadly, that makes war with Iran with the assumption Russia won’t offer indirect help more likely, I think.

    http://mondoweiss.net/2018/03/america-lawrence-wilkerson/

    We’re looking at them taking on, and this is a point that all military people understand, a country that couldn’t beat Iraq in eight years of brutal bloody war– an Iraq that we beat in 19 days.
    So this is the colossal threat that they’re up against.

    And men such as [National Security Adviser] HR McMaster are helping them. The much-heralded author of Dereliction of Duty—great title– and a man who knows about as much about Iran as I do about the 8th planet in the 95th solar system in the 50th galaxy past our own.

    Here’s a hope I have. Let’s hope that the chessmaster-in-chief, old Vladimir Putin who ruins elections from Paris to Peoria is smart enough once again not to let this happen.

    I fear he will not be, and we might have the stirrings of 1914, as utterly stupid as we now know now those stirrings to have been.

    People to whom I mentioned such possibilities, people who are critically analytical and normally fairly sound in their thinking respond, Don’t you regard that dreary prognosis as a little bit overdrawn?

    I look at this from the perspective of the political parameters. What is it that we are confronting today in this country? And this took me down an entirely different path as I tried to figure out just how this team of McMaster Tillerson Kelly et al and Trump at the top of it will face this sort of decision-making process. The only place I could find that remotely resembled where we are today in our past was the period 1850 to 1860. And so about six months ago I started reading as voraciously as I could on that period… It is stunning the similarities between that period and now, particularly in the political situation, where one side of the country wouldn’t talk to the other side of the country and vice versa. And I was struck today by some of the comments that were made that resemble the comments made by my region– my state fired on Fort Sumter, after all– back in those days.

    If that is the political situation in which this government will do its national security decision-making, then we are in deeper trouble than even the prospects of a region wide and perhaps even bigger war in the Middle East.

    • Replies: @Y.L.
    , @Andrei Martyanov
  324. Y.L. says:
    @Y.L.

    Sputnik had this today, which I’ve no doubt the Pentagon and CIA will consider false:

    https://sputniknews.com/military/201803121062436333-kinzhal-missile-capabilities/

    Russia’s deputy defense minister has offered new details on the new hypersonic missile announced by President Putin in a recent speech to lawmakers.

    The Kinzhal hypersonic air-launched missile system, capable of rendering useless all existing and prospective anti-missile systems, is also able to destroy large, moving sea-based targets such as aircraft carriers, destroyers and cruisers, Russian Deputy Defense Minister Yuri Borisov has confirmed.

    “This is a class of precision weapons which has a multifunctional warhead capable of striking at both stationary and moving targets,” Borisov said, speaking to Krasnaya Zvezda, the defense ministry’s official newspaper.

    Confirming that the Kinzhal (‘Dagger’) system is based on the MiG-31 supersonic interceptor aircraft, the general explained that that plane “takes off into the air, accelerates to a certain speed at a high altitude, and then the missile begins its own autonomous movement.”

    According to Borisov, the system’s capability to reach speeds of about Mach 10 “allows [the missile] to approach its target quickly, in contrast to cruise missiles, which fly at an average cruising speed of about 850-900 km/h.”

  325. @Y.L.

    And Unz readers, this just posted on RT: The “Empire” doubles down, believes Putin is bluffing, tech doesn’t exist.

    What do you expect Mattis to say, I surrender? Of course not. It is damage control.

    • Replies: @Y.L.
  326. Y.L. says:
    @Andrei Martyanov

    What do you expect Mattis to say, I surrender? Of course not. It is damage control.

    Of course not. But as I noted with Iran, which perhaps either you or The Saker can cover in a future piece for Unz, the situation is very dangerous. I think they truly think they’re exceptional and invincible.

    BTW, this is a good piece on the F-22 vs. the Su-35.

    http://theduran.com/american-fighters-f-22-raptor-air-niche-too-thin/

    The reports are disputed, but there are at least two incidents accounted for in which the Russian planes were successful in driving the F-22’s out of the areas they were in. Stealth capabilities are terrific for military action at a distance, but things are different when the pilots can actually see each other:

    • Replies: @Andrei Martyanov
  327. @Y.L.

    I think they truly think they’re exceptional and invincible.

    Some of them do. Not all. Many real American military and intelligence professionals don’t think this way. There are rules of PR which must be obeyed. Plus, as Saker described in his excellent article–there are several stages of grief.

    BTW, this is a good piece on the F-22 vs. the Su-35.

    I don’t read that kind of analyses. Wars are not fought as one weapon system vs another, it is way more complex than that, plus no US fighter since Vietnam faced real serious AD and EW system. Nor did it face competent pilots. Today these are networks which fight, not just separate weapon systems. F-22 is a good aircraft but that’s about it.

    • Replies: @Y.L.
  328. Y.L. says:

    I don’t read that kind of analyses. Wars are not fought as one weapon system vs another, it is way more complex than that, plus no US fighter since Vietnam faced real serious AD and EW system. Nor did it face competent pilots. Today these are networks which fight, not just separate weapon systems. F-22 is a good aircraft but that’s about it.

    You’re right; you’re the expert. So much of what I read on the WWW is presented as being from authority. But half the time the commentators have no idea what they’re talking about.

    I guess it just makes for fun click-bait videos on YouTube. Thanks for the clarification.

  329. Bianca says:
    @Cyrano

    I suggest re-reading the announcement, and grasp implications. So far, very few analysts have tackled the technological gap. Scientific gap. And battlefield implications. Just the sub drone at such depths and speed insures that no missile carrying submarine can outrun it, ir endanger it. All subs encircling Russia are put on notice. All aircraft carrier groups, cruisers and destroyers, put on notice. All coastal facilities, ports, docks, shipyards, command and control centers on notice. And no known vulnerability of the drone. Kinzhal is putying on notice all land based missile defence, cun offence installation. Cruise missiles with unlimited range and supersonic capabilities made possible by miniturizing submarine nuclear reactor 100 times, and the new alloys that allow for the meteor like winged missiles fall in a near plasma state, while still being under remote control.
    The advance in hypersonic capabilities is in itself groundbreaking. These are all changes in warfare as we know it.

    And it is also not wise to assume that it will take years for all these technologies to be available — as announced, all existing lauchers, sylos etc have been retrofitted to handle new weapons. It will be wise to assume that the ling range cruise missiles are already skimming ocean surfaces.

    First, some heads should roll, and intelligence taken back from the privatized, profitmaking corporate airheads. It looks like we have been flying blind.

    Only weeks ago, Biden made a speech at Munich Security conference, where he ridiculed Russia and its economy, as if Western sanctions have done the damage. Such silly messages may have worked knce, when Rusdia’s population did not travel, and know anything about outside world. Now, any Russian knows about the epidemic of homelessness in UK, or a catastrophy of EU membership that is Greece. And the fact, US rating agencies have just jncreased Russia’s rating. How stupid these biasts look like now — as Russia’s grain exports are supplying nearly half of the workd’s import demand. And non-GMO to boot.

    But we are not done with nation building yet. In Syria, planning to sit around and nation build Kurdistan. Planning to sit around in Iraq — just in case. Planning to stay gorever in Afghanistan and Lybia, in Somalia and Niger, and over 800 bases around globe. Just supplies cost millions per solldier a year. Nd sll the forward deployment resulting in wear and tear in both equipment and people. This 19th century empire building is meeting 22nd century warfare. Knowing that we have swamp bittom feeders in bureacracy — not just military — we are facing some dangerous times. We have Nikki Haley in UN screeching for some military action, as a drunk gambler not being fully cognizant of the enormity if his loss.

    Now looking back at Trump’s idea to engage Russia — it is clear ghat he was right all along.

    • Replies: @Cyrano
  330. Cyrano says:
    @Bianca

    Just when I was starting to have delusions about a possible career as a stand-up comedian, everybody decided to piss on my parade. You are all good people, you just don’t have any sense of humor (those of you who didn’t get the joke).

  331. Erebus says:

    Now looking back at Trump’s idea to engage Russia — it is clear ghat he was right all along.

    Of course he was. What’s also now clear is that he had (and still has) a lot of crap to jettison before he can get the political running room needed to engage meaningfully.

  332. FB says:
    @kemerd

    In your reply to ‘PeterAus’ you said…

    ‘…I am surprised that you seem not to understand the real purpose of nukes as a former officer as you insinuated…’

    Hey…what do you mean by that…don’t you know our Petey commanded a ‘battalion’ of potatohead soldiers…[and I believe he is still in the 'reserves'...so to speak]

  333. FB says:
    @NoseytheDuke

    [Too many stupid cartoons---This isn't 4chan. Including cartoon images will greatly increase the likelihood that your comment will get trashed.]

    In your reply to ‘PeterAus’ you said…

    ‘…I think you meant throes rather than thrones…’

    I’m not sure about that one…

    Remember Erebus deciphering Petey’s puzzling references…?

    He figured out that it was about ‘game of thrones…’

  334. FB says:
    @Ржевский

    You misunderstood my remark about nuclear propulsion…it is very possible…and I have been meaning to get to posting a thorough technical explanation of what is involved…stay tuned…

  335. FB says:
    @Ржевский

    Ok…so we are finally going to get around to the nuclear propulsion subject…

    Our purpose…again…is to consider technical aspects of known capabilities in order to ascertain whether such a ‘nuclear-powered’ cruise missile is indeed feasible…

    Now you will notice the italicized part…in reality…the ‘nuclear’ cruise missile would be powered by a perfectly conventional jet engine…as with all subsonic cruise missiles…such as the US Tomahawk and the Russian Kalibr…

    The ‘nuclear’ part in reality would be the fuel source…so we are talking more precisely about a nuclear-fueled cruise missile…not nuclear-powered…

    This may come as a surprise to some people who imagine that nuclear may involve some explosions or at least lots of radiation release…this is very far from the physical reality of how nuclear energy works…

    In order to understand this concept fully…it is necessary to understand first how a conventional cruise missile works…as well as how nuclear energy works…let’s start with the cruise missile…

    Below is the Russian 3M54 Kalibr…

    We note first that this vehicle has wings which support it in flight…like any aircraft…its tail fins provide aerodynamic control of the flight path about all three axes…again…as with an aircraft…

    The missile flies at a subsonic speed of about 500 mph…[800 km/hr] again about the cruising speed of a passenger jet…

    And finally the cruise missile is powered by a turbojet or turbofan engine that burns kerosene jet fuel and is functionally identical to the kind of engine we see on a passenger jet…

    Let us examine the US T-hawk…which is powered by a Williams F107 turbofan engine…

    Let us now consider the basic working principles of a jet engine of the type as seen here…

    Here we see a schematic of a turbojet engine…which illustrates the basic operating principle of this type of engine…

    We notice that air flows continuously into the inlet at the front…and is then compressed by the compressor to a higher air pressure…and then flows into the burner where fuel is added…

    The hot gas exiting the burner flows into the turbine section…which we note is connected to the compressor by means of a common shaft…which means the power to spin the compressor comes from the turbine…

    After exiting the turbine section…the gas is ejected out the aft end of the engine through a nozzle [ie a passage of converging cross-section area...just like a garden hose nozzle]…

    The nozzle accelerates the gas flow to a high speed…by converting the gas pressure energy into kinetic [ie speed] energy…

    The result is that the efflux of hot gas from the nozzle…creates a thrust force in the opposite direction…on the principle of action-reaction from Newton’s Third Law of Motion…[this is why jet and rocket engines are often called 'reaction' engines...]

    We note that the engine is a constant-flow device…ie the flow throughout the engine…from front to back is constant…just like the flow of water through a pipe…[unlike a car piston engine where the air comes in through valves that open and close...]

    We also note that there is basically a single moving assembly…the compressor=shaft-turbine…which motion is purely rotational…

    This simplicity of design allows for light weight while making large amounts of power [ie thrust]…

    A cutaway view of a turbojet engine shows the details…in this case the GE J85 engine…

    We see here the compressor section in front which consists of several wheels [aka 'stages'] with aerodynamic blading…designed to compress the air as it flows throoug those blade rows…

    We see two turbine wheels [stages] at the aft end…which are driven by the hot gases flowing from the burner section immediately forward of the turbine section…

    We also see that the compressor section and turbine section are rigidly connected together by means of an axle shaft…

    Finally…we see at the aft end the converging area nozzle that accelerates the gas in the aft direction…thus creating thrust in the forward direction…

    To understand why this all works…we need to just touch on some basic principles of thermodynamics…a branch of physics that deals with energy…and how energy works in heat engines…

    We note that there are two types of energy involved in any heat engine…whether jet like this one…or a piston engine…or even an air conditioning/refrigeration unit [also a heat engine]…

    Those three types of energy are pressure energyheat energy…and work energy…the first two combine to create the desired end product work energy…which is the thrust…or shaft power…in the case of other types of engines…

    [With a jet engine an additional turbine wheel or wheels can be added that will drive a shaft that can turn a propeller, fan, or electrical generator...rather than expelling gases as thrust...]

    We note that…according to the physical laws of thermodynamics only pressure energy can be converted to work energy in a heat engine…which is why every kind of heat engine needs compression…

    The heat energy that is added in the burner means that a given amount of pressure energy can make more work…

    This is the key to why this type of device works…if you did not add the fuel to make heat energy…then there would not be enough power even to drive the compressor…nor to make any work with the energy that is left over…

    At this point it is important to stop and point out an important fact…a nuclear ‘powered’ cruise missile would use exactly the same kind of engine as we have discussed here…

    The only difference is that the heat energy added inside the burner…[see the schematic above with the arrow showing heat energy added]…comes not from burning kerosene…but from a nuclear fission type reactor of a type similar used in electric power plants submarines, aircraft carriers etc…

    Obviously this kind of powerplant would have to quite small and light…

    Let’s first put some numbers to the temperatures inside that cruise missile turbojet [or turbofan] engine…[running on kerosene]…

    The maximum engine temperature will be inside the burner where fuel is mixed with the flowing air and burned…this will reach about 1,000 C…

    This temperature is limited by the metallurgy of the turbine wheel…and on this type of small and simple engine the maximum temp will be less than that seen inside the burner of a large and sophisticated engine seen in passenger jets and combat aircraft…where the turbine inlet temperature [TIT] may reach to 1,500 C or even higher…

    We note also that the temperature of the air exiting the compressor will be about 300 C…this is due to the fact that compressing air increases its temperature…

    So the burner needs to increase the temperature of that airflow by 700 C…

    It does not matter where that temperature increase comes from…in the case of this jet engine that comes from burning fuel…but it could just as easily come from the heat produced by a small nuclear reactor…

    Now let us examine exactly how a nuclear reactor works…and how that heat could be used in a jet engine…

    Here is a useful schematic of a nuclear reactor…

    We see here that there are two distinct and separate loops to this system…

    One is the yellow/red loop whereby a coolant circulates through the reactor vessel and picks up heat from the nuclear fission taking place there…

    We see that this coolant circulates in a closed loop…and the circulation is provided by means of a pump seen turning at the bottom of the loop…

    We also see the blue loop which is plainly an open loop…here we see that the steam generator gets heat energy from that closed coolant loop that passes right through the steam generator…thereby transferring its heat to the steam generator…

    Here is the crucial point…the two loops are not in direct contact with each other…they never mix…the reactor coolant is obviously highly radioactive and is shielded completely…

    As the shielded coolant passes through its own shielded passage inside the steam generator…no radioactivity is transferred…

    Only heat is transferred between the two separate loops…which never mix…

    We see by looking at the rest of the blue loop that it gets its water from a nearby large water source like a river or lake…and then returns that water right back to the same river or lake after completing its cycle…

    Obviously…there can be no radioactivity dumped overboard…

    We see that the heat energy from the reactor that is passed to the steam generator then spins a turbine that, in turn, spins an electric generator…

    The coolant used in that closed loop in the reactor can be many different things…ie pressurized water…some kind of gas…or even liquid metal [ie mercury, lead, tin etc...]…

    So we see the basic concept coming together for transferring heat from a small nuclear reactor to the burner of a jet engine…two separate loops where the radioactive coolant loop is closed and shielded…

    …and the airflow through the engine burner which is simply heated just like the steam generator in that schematic…[if we think of the steam generator as the burner in the above jet engine schematic we have the exact configuration...]

    Here is what this schematic would look like…

    We see here that air exiting the compressor is diverted to a heat exchanger which transfers the heat from the nuclear reactor to the engine airflow…

    The hot airflow exits the heat exchanger and returns to the engine to drive the turbine section and to continue to the nozzle to make thrust…

    We note that just like the nuclear power plant…the two separate flow loops do not come into direct contact with each other and no radioactivity is transferred…

    The only difference is that we are heating air instead of water…

    Now we have heard from certain ‘quarters’ that this very idea is ‘Putin wishcasting’…and that this type of nuclear propulsion would…

    ‘…result in irradiating everything in the flight path…’

    Clearly this is not the case…

    We heard from the same ‘quarters’ that…

    ‘…The US looked at such things and saw they were too dangerous to even test…’

    It is true that nuclear-fueled aircraft propulsion has been experimented with in the past…[as has nuclear thermal rocket propulsion...which works on the same principle...]

    …but we also note that the Wright Brothers first flight was about 150 ft…and technical progress did not stop there…

    Let’s review some of the past programs…

    Both the USSR and the USA experimented with nuclear fuel propulsion…a brief overview…

    Here we see the HTRE-3 design…

    We see two conventional jet engines at bottom [GE J87]…with a rather large nuclear reactor at top…with pipes feeding air to and from the engines to the nuclear reactor…

    ‘…The J87 was a large turbojet…engine of conventional layout, save for the combustion chambers being replaced by a nuclear reactor where half of the total air-flow through the turbojet sections was used for direct-cycle cooling of the reactor…’

    This is an open-loop cycle where the air from the two engines is used to directly cool the reactor…and hence heat the airflow for the jet engines…here is a schematic of that type of configuration…

    We see here that the air in direct contact with the nuclear fuel will in fact absorb radiation…hence the problem of emitting a radioactive trail…

    Here is a description of that direct air cycle…

    ‘…Direct cycle nuclear engines would resemble a conventional jet engine, except that there would be no combustion chambers.

    The air… from the compressor section would be sent to a plenum that directs the air into the nuclear reactor core.

    An exchange takes place where the reactor is cooled, but it…heats up the same air and sends it … into a turbine, which sends it out the exhaust.

    The end result is that instead of using jet fuel, an aircraft could rely on the heat from nuclear reactions for power…’

    The US had a plan to create an indirect cycle as well…which was assigned to Pratt and Whitney…

    This would work on the exact principle illustrated in the schematic of the closed loop shown above…

    ‘…Indirect cycling involves thermal exchange outside of the core with compressor air being sent to a heat exchanger.

    The nuclear reactor core would heat up pressurized water or liquid metal and send it to the heat exchanger…

    That hot liquid would be cooled by the air; the air would be heated by the liquid and sent to the turbine. The turbine would send the air out the exhaust, providing thrust.

    The Indirect Air Cycle program was assigned to Pratt & Whitney, at a facility near Middletown, Connecticut.

    This concept would have produced far less radioactive pollution…’

    So we see that the two approaches are fundamentally different…it is indeed possible to design an indirect cycle…ie closed dual loop…where the two streams are kept physically separated and heat is transferred without transferring radioactivity…

    There is of course a need to shield the reactor as well…but with an unmanned aircraft such as a subsonic cruise missile…pilot irradiation [a major concern of those manned aircraft] is not an issue…

    Here are some of the major engineering challenges…

    The main one is to make the reactor small and light enough to fit on a cruise missile that is only about 20 inches in diameter…the fuel load carried by a cruise missile is about one pound for each mile of range…for a range of 1,000 miles that means 1,000 lb of fuel…

    The Kalibr is said to have a range of 2,500 km…which is ~1,500 miles…that means that a reactor maximum weight of 1,500 lb would be possible…

    The other major challenge is in heat exchanger technology…this is not trivial…it is in fact a major challenge to transfer heat with high effectiveness…

    However…we note here that Russia is the undisputed world leader in nuclear power technology…Rosatom holds one third of the world nuclear industry…

    Russia was a leader in small reactors for satellites…like the Topaz nuclear reactor…

    So we see that a purely technical evaluation of the nuclear cruise missile announced by Putin on March 1 is indeed a very real possibility…there is no insurmountable engineering challenge…certainly there are a number of very large challenges…but it is doable…

    This seems to be the view of some observers…

    ‘…A RAND Corporation researcher specializing in Russia said “My guess is they’re not bluffing, that they’ve flight-tested this thing. But that’s incredible.”..’

  336. yurivku says:
    @FB

    Thanks, interesting and informative.

  337. orionyx says:

    Putin’s speech really caught the USA on the back foot.
    I would have thought that with all our alphabet soup agencies, our prescient and telepathic information gatherers, our huge budgets, we could have (a) had all this information at hand, with complete blueprints of every device and (b) simply pre-empted Putin’s speech by printing it in WaPo the day before, along with said plans.
    That we didn’t do this probably means that we are as useless and vainglorious in the spy business as we are in the military business.
    America – stick a fork in, it’s done.

  338. @Y.L.

    Y.L., Are you writing from one of the NSA troll farms or from home?
    Just curiosity.

  339. IG says:

    Really, with Kinzhal, all’s you need is to get 10 missile carrier ships, line them with em, and spread em accross any part of open ocean, 2000km apart. And you block whole continents.

  340. @Sam J.

    Any gas will do. Probably Hydrogen is the most efficient.
    The gas has to be compressed to very high pressure. Decrease of temperature happen by Gas increasing the volume.

  341. Sparkon says:
    @FB

    Now how many ‘journalists and photographers’ are employed at Nasa…Lockheed ‘Skunk Works’…etc…

    Exactly zero…

    Wrong. Engineers are notoriously poor writers, and that fact accounts for the widespread employment of tech writers to produce documentation and publications in a wide variety of engineering, manufacturing, and scientific companies.

    NASA employs no small number of both photographers and tech writers.

    While NASA astronauts have ready-made opportunities to take photographs of unique value, NASA’s on-the-ground professional photographers also have contributed to a record of images that never cease to inspire awe and wonder. Some of their favorite pictures are featured in this section.

    https://www.nasa.gov/50th/50th_magazine/photographers.html

    Meanwhile, one job search engine returns 27 current openings at NASA for technical writers:

    ES171 Senior Science Writer
    Work with us to help NASA teach people about their Planet.
    The successful candidate will provide science writing and outreach support to the NASA Goddard Spaceflight Center Solar System Exploration Division.
    Summary of job duties:

    • Research and write feature stories, press releases, advisories and tip sheets [t]o highlight the work done by scientists in the Solar System Exploration Division (SSED) at NASA’s Goddard Space Flight Center. Develop products that meet a high standard for storytelling, reporting and accuracy.

    https://www.indeed.com/q-Nasa-Technical-Writer-jobs.html

    Just as the proof of the pudding is in the eating,¹
    So too the proof of the writing is in the reading.² ³

    ¹ William Camden
    ² Sparkon
    ³ http://www.nytimes.com/2008/10/19/magazine/19wwln-safire-t.html

    • Replies: @FB
  342. FB says:
    @Sparkon

    There is a big difference between a technical writer…and a journalist…

    ‘…Engineers, scientists, and other professionals may also be involved in technical writing…’

    I can attest that this is the case in that many of the best technical writers I know have a formal background in the hard sciences…

    You clearly have no experience in a technical profession…I know many engineers and scientists who are excellent writers…

    Publishing a technical paper in a peer-reviewed journal requires good writing skills…

    The technical writer who does not have a formal hard science background is still going to work closely with technical people to get up to speed…

    So I find the gist of your comment incredibly presumptuous and quite ignorant…and you are conflating two vastly different professions…

    My point in that comment that you responded to was that laymen do a very poor job of discussing technical matters…simply because they do not have the educational or practical background…

    This is a problem of epic proportions in the pop-sci press…like ‘The Drive’…National Interest…Business Insider etc…

    These are not technical writers by any stretch of the imagination…

    You listed a number of technical writer job openings at Nasa…those require quite specific qualifications…none of the people writing for the above type of publications would come close to qualifying for a technical writer position…

    I also mentioned the problem that these types of ‘fanboy’ publications are driven by massive PR spending by big corporations in the defense and aerospace sector…the PR industry is all about media manipulation…

    Journalists often move into PR and vice versa…

    The same is not true for technical writing…especially in the engineering field where solid technical credentials are often a must…journalists simply do not have those…

    • Replies: @Sparkon
  343. Sparkon says:
    @FB

    There is a big difference between a technical writer…and a journalist…

    That depends on the individual writer, but both professions require mastery of standard English, and many if not most tech writers have a journalism background. Note the requirements for that NASA job listing — no engineering degree required, but journalism degree is required:

    Minimum Requirements:
    • Bachelor’s Degree in Space, Planetary Science, or Science Journalism
    • 3+ years experience in reporting science with non-scientists
    • Ability to work independently as well as within interdisciplinary teams
    • Exemplary organizational skills and careful attention to detail
    • Time management skills to balance multiple projects at once
    • Excellent communication and interpersonal skills…
    • Experience using the Microsoft Office suite
    • Must be US citizen or Permanent Resident

    Desired:
    • Master’s degree in Space, Planetary Science, or Science Journalism
    • Experience in science or technical writing for the public
    • Experience in copy, editing, proofreading, and knowledge of AP Style
    • Experience with graphic design and design software
    • Experience in developing videos or other broadcast-quality content

    I noticed you didn’t backtrack on your incorrect claim about no photographers at NASA, but you did try your hand at a little creative but deceptive editing, where you left out the important part:

    ‘…Engineers, scientists, and other professionals may also be involved in technical writing…’

    Here is that full description of technical writing from Wikipedia, with my bold:

    Engineers, scientists, and other professionals may also be involved in technical writing (developmental editing, proofreading, etc), but are more likely to employ professional technical writers to develop, edit and format material, and advise the best means of information delivery to their audiences.

    You wrote:

    You clearly have no experience in a technical profession…I know many engineers and scientists who are excellent writers…

    Some are; many are not. If all engineers and scientists could write well, there would be no need for technical writers. Of course, a counterclaim might be that the engineer’s time is best spent on engineering, and hire a writer to do the writing, and in my long experience, that’s the way it usually works.

    You’re wrong again about my professional experience, as well, as it includes many years producing various technical publications for engineering and manufacturing concerns, including but not limited to tech writing, tech illustration, and photography.

    Bottom line: What matters is the message, and not the messenger.

    • Replies: @Philip Owen
  344. @FB

    I hope this message reaches you.

    I just want to apologize for being wrong.

    I had in my head for some reason that for the missile to intercept the aircraft that its horizontal speed must match or exceed that of the aircraft.

    That is true eventually, but not initially.

  345. FB says:

    No apology necessary Thor…

    There is nothing wrong with making a mistake…the smartest people I know make them all the time…it’s inevitable…

    I have made numerous mistakes here also…although I try to catch them upon reviewing what I put up…it’s the nature of this rapid-fire internet format…

    I’m planning to discuss aircraft turning performance in an upcoming post about the Su57s…which recently saw some flight time in Syria..,

    Regards,

    FB…

  346. @Sparkon

    I preferred tech writers who weren’t engineers. They took less for granted.

  347. @FB

    I’d like to thank you for this informative article, like many others already have.
    However, I’d like to raise some additional questions.

    In your analysis you seem to omit an essential aspect of conversion of heat energy to pressure and eventually to work output. I refer to the change of state of the matter used in the energy conversion cycle.

    Let’s take the steam turbine as an example. The operating pressure of a steam power generating turbine is around 50 – 60 [bar] (715 – 850 psi). This pressure is than converted to kinetic energy (at the steam turbine nozzle) which turns the generator wheel (useful work output) so eventually we get electricity.

    When water changes its state, its specific volume increases by a factor of almost 1000 : 1. This expansion is what “creates” the bulk of the pressure in a steam turbine plant. Additional heat is then used to increase the vapor temperature to super-heated levels of 300 -350 oC and increase the steam pressure to 50-60 [bar]. Super-heating of water vapor is also needed to eliminate any traces of water liquid droplets in the vapor stream which can be catastrophic to turbine vanes.

    Similar thing, on a much larger scale, occurs in a jet engine. The pressure energy is obtained by transforming the chemical energy in the fuel through combustion. The combustion creates gases with higher specific volumes to the liquid fuel, with specific volume ratios going as high as 20000 : 1 .

    In your description of the nuclear fuel powered missile, I note that a change of state is missing. Cold air enters the heat exchanger, heated air leaves it and enters the “combustion chamber” of the missile with no change of state.

    The air expansion ratios obtained are modest – up to 10 : 1 (obtained by heating the air from -20 deg C to 1500 deg C). This does not seem nearly sufficient to provide the required thrust to a missile.

    (I have not been able to find online data for air specific volume changes at temperatures in excess of 1500 – 1600 deg. C.)

    So, just heating the air, absent the change of state, does not create high expansion rates to provide propulsion to a missile.

    PS. Unless air is heated to plasma state temperatures above 5000-7000 deg. C, but I will stop here since I do not have any experience in this area.

    With due respect.

    • Replies: @FB
  348. FB says:
    @Simpleguest

    Ok…first off glad you appreciate my simplified explanation…

    Second…thanks for raising a serious technical question…

    I do appreciate that…and will use this opportunity to delve a little more deeply into the technicalities…and hopefully provide a satisfactory clarification…

    Let me refer first to this part of your comment…

    ‘…In your analysis you seem to omit an essential aspect of conversion of heat energy to pressure and eventually to work output. I refer to the change of state of the matter used in the energy conversion cycle…’

    Ok…so as I mentioned in the original comment…I had only touched briefly on the thermodynamics of heat engines…now we need to drill down a little more…

    Now…what you are referring to here, specifically with regard to change of state…applies specifically to one type of heat engine cycle…

    This is of course the Rankine Cycle…on which all steam plants work…

    Now…we first note that the Rankine Cycle is a fundamentally different type of cycle than the ‘gas cycle’ on which jet engines run…

    The Rankine is a vapor cycle…where change of state is an important factor…ie the change of water from its liquid state to a vapor…and the reversing of that in the subsequent part of the cycle where the steam vapor is condensed back to liquid water…

    No such change of state occurs in any gas cycle…either the Brayton cycle… on which jet engines [gas turbines] run…nor with the Otto [spark ignition...ie petrol car engine]…nor the Diesel [compression ignition] cycles…

    ‘…When water changes its state, its specific volume increases by a factor of almost 1000 : 1. This expansion is what “creates” the bulk of the pressure in a steam turbine plant…

    Similar thing, on a much larger scale, occurs in a jet engine…’

    Here is where your analogy goes astray…

    Nothing remotely similar happens in the jet engine [Brayton Cycle]…

    Notice I have italicized the ‘specific volume’ part of your sentence…

    Here is where people get tripped up about jet engines…the combustion chamber of the jet engine [aka 'burner'] operates at constant pressure…

    There is no increase in pressure…

    [In fact there is a slight decrease in pressure due to entropy losses]…

    This is because the jet engine is a constant flow device that is open at both ends…I had mentioned this in my original comment…like water flowing through a pipe…

    It is not a constant volume cycle like the Otto most people are familiar with…ie the air is delivered into the cylinder…the valves close and we have a constant volume…the burning of the fuel therefore greatly increases the pressure in that closed space…

    This is clearly what you are referring to here…

    But there is no closed space in a jet engine…it is always open at both ends and the flow is constant…I had also mentioned this difference in my original comment…[no valves opening or closing]…

    To fully understand this let us present some visuals…here is the basic schematic of a gas turbine engine…

    Notice here the four stages of the cycle…compression from 1 to 2…combustion from 2 to 3…and expansion from 3 to 4…

    Now let us look at the pressures and temperatures associated with each step in the cycle…

    Here are the temperature-entropy and pressure-volume diagrams of a jet engine…

    We note first in the T-s diagram that the combustion portion of the cycle…ie 2 to 3…is labeled ‘constant pressure’…

    And we see this affirmed by looking at the P-v diagram at bottom…where pressure is shown in ordinate axis [vertical axis] rather than temperature…

    So the assumption that the Brayton Cycle works like a Rankine cycle is unfortunately not correct…but this is an important distinction…

    Let us now look at how a constant volume gas cycle works…ie the Otto cycle used in car engines…here is the pressure-volume diagram…

    We see here that compression takes place from 1 to 2…and combustion takes place from 2 to 3…

    And we see here that as heat is added by combustion…ie q in…the pressure rises significantly…

    This is due of course to the cylinder being closed at this point…so the addition of heat causes the increase in the gas specific volume [inverse of density]…

    Ie the gas becomes less dense…but since it has nowhere to go…the pressure inside that closed chamber must increase…

    This is the fundamental difference between a ‘closed system’ such as a piston engine cylinder…and a ‘control volume’…such as a jet engine…

    Also to clarify your thoughts on the Rankine Cycle…

    ‘…Water enters the boiler as a compressed liquid at state 2 and leaves as a superheated vapor at state 3.

    The boiler is basically a large heat exchanger where the heat originating from combustion gases, nuclear reactors, or other sources is transferred to the water essentially at constant pressure.

    The boiler, together with the section where the steam is superheated (the superheater), is often called the steam generator…’

    So we see that in actuality…the Rankine cycle does not actually work on the constant volume basis either…

    Ie the change of state does not appreciably increase the pressure…

    The above illustrations and quotes from Cengel…Thermodynamics: An Engineering Approach…

    Thanks for your good question…and I hope other technically inclined participants will likewise inquire as to anything that may not be clear from any of my discussion…

  349. So, then really the best option for the NATO rebellion against having a magna carta for the rulers of the world, is probably to sneak a secret thermonuke into Moscow and detonate.. Financing ISIS is the reveal for NATO, you just can’t survive as a democratic social construct once everyone knows. The system would be reformed out at best. Would be psycho crazy but then you actually maybe could think that you could hold the world to ransom..

  350. Y.L. says:
    @Andrei Martyanov

    Andrei, I am not asking you to speculate given recent news, but I wonder if Paul Craig Roberts’ comments here have any technical merit:

    https://www.paulcraigroberts.org/2018/04/10/last-days-hell-breaks-loose/

    It is difficult not be be pessimistic when we learn that the Washington Insane Asylum has sent a Carrier Strike Group accompanied by seven missile ships to join the one missile ship already offshore the Russian base in Syria. Whether any of these sitting ducks survive or are permitted to launch a single missile or the carrier to launch a single fighter is entirely up to the Russians.

    The Russians know that they can, at will within a few minutes, sink the entire US fleet, destroy every US airplane and ship in the Middle East and within range of the Middle East, completely destroy all of Israel’s military capability and wipe out the military of the two-bit punk state of Saudi Arabia. All the sitting ducks have been set up for Russia by the arrogant and stupid Americans. Just a few minutes of Russian attack and all ability to conduct war would be stripped from the Middle East. This would be a good thing.,

    All Russia has to do to insure that the US has no choice but to accept instant defeat is to put Russian nuclear forces on red alert. Any resort by the idiots in Washington of a nuclear nature would mean the end of the United States and all of Western Europe along with the UK. It would mean the total end of the West for all time, an event the rest of the world would consider to be a good thing. Hopefully the US military, the last and constantly besieged source of honor in the US, understands this and would not comply with a suicidal order from an insane war cabinet.

    In my opinion the Russians will not go so far and will deny themselves a decisive victory, because they do not comprehend the total evil that is concentrated in Washington and Israel. There are enough naive Atlanticist Integrationists left in the Russian government to argue that Russia must give Washington and Europe one more chance to come to their senses. One more chance is what Russia and the world cannot afford.

    Now, are his thoughts about “sitting ducks” and “sink the entire US fleet” born out by facts? As to putting nuclear forces on red alert, that sounds like a Soviet tactic and Putin is (far too?) restrained.

    Thanks if you’re reading these still. I appreciate your thoughts. We all do.

    • Replies: @Andrei Martyanov
  351. @Y.L.

    Deployment of Kinzhal in Southern Military District (and I speculate–possible redeployment of Mig-31BMs which carry it to Crimea), the same as a possibility (how probable? I don’t know) of SSGNs to carry 3M22 Zircon effectively annuls any NATO naval asset in Med. That is why desperate plea from Macron not to retaliate against French naval assets, as one of the examples of awareness of the consequences. The US bluff effectively has been called and it has everything to do with my earlier piece about 800-pound gorilla which effectively described such a scenario but without (at that time unknown) factor of Kinzhal and Zircon.

    http://www.unz.com/article/russia-the-800-pound-gorilla/

    So, PCR’s comment has a technical merit. I do disagree, however, with his military-political conclusion about Russia “denying herself a decisive victory”. What happened this morning testifies to the contrary.

    • Replies: @Y.L.
    , @Y.L.
    , @Y.L.
  352. Y.L. says:
    @Andrei Martyanov

    So, PCR’s comment has a technical merit. I do disagree, however, with his military-political conclusion about Russia “denying herself a decisive victory”. What happened this morning testifies to the contrary.

    What happened this morning? I’ll have to turn on the TV.

    I did cite your 800 Pound Gorilla on The Saker’s site yesterday answering other people’s questions.

    Thanks so much for your expertise and kind reply.

    • Replies: @Andrei Martyanov
  353. Y.L. says:
    @Andrei Martyanov

    What happened this morning? I’ll have to turn on the TV.

    Wait, do you mean Germany?

    https://sputniknews.com/world/201804121063479088-germany-syria-strikes-merkel/

    “Germany will not take part in possible military action — I want to make clear again that there are no decisions — but we see, and support this, that everything is being done to send a signal that this use of chemical weapons is not acceptable,” Chancellor Merkel said on Thursday.

    Is that the news?

  354. @Y.L.

    What happened this morning? I’ll have to turn on the TV.

    I explain it here:

    http://smoothiex12.blogspot.com/2018/04/are-we-there-yet.html

    • Replies: @Y.L.
  355. Y.L. says:
    @Andrei Martyanov

    I explain it here:

    http://smoothiex12.blogspot.com/2018/04/are-we-there-yet.html

    Including:

    Basically, Trump not only humiliates himself and the country, whose geopolitical weight is dwindling on hourly basis, he destroyed any chance of meaningful discussion with Russia on any serious geopolitical issue. From here Russia will take it alone and I really doubt that Vladimir Putin will lower himself to traveling to Washington for an alleged summit. There is no reason for it anyway. Russia called Trump’s bluff and the picture is going to be increasingly ugly from now on. He still, probably, will launch some kind of salvo at some point of time to indicate relevance but, I think, Trump’s presidency is finished and once mid-term elections of 2018 are held, who knows where it will go from there.The rest is for political pseudo-scientists and talking heads to decide. He and his “team” really chose wrong people and country to fvck with. Just to demonstrate the cultural abyss in relation to real war. Yesterday’s broadcast on one of the major TV networks. No panic, just business.

    Thank you!

  356. Y.L. says: • Website
    @Andrei Martyanov

    Andrei, SouthFront just posted this video. Saker reposted.

    What do you think?

    Syria Escalation Scenarios: US Military Options, Russian Responses

    • Replies: @Andrei Martyanov
  357. @Y.L.

    What do you think?

    I usually do not watch that kind of videos.

    • Replies: @Y.L.
  358. expat47 says:
    @Carlton Meyer

    I recall, a post around two years or so, of a column related to the Russian rocket engine. I believe it was written by Lockheed-Martin {not sure if they were the author} that they had purchased 100 Russian rocket engines, stating that we were, at a minimum, at least decade behind the Russian system. Seems to me we just never admit that anyone, anywhere could be better than us. It is not only foolish, it is top limit dangerous.

  359. Y.L. says:
    @Andrei Martyanov

    I usually do not watch that kind of videos.

    Very well. I don’t think it says anything I’m not reading from The Saker.

    I notice you just commented on your blog on Trump’s true nature.

    And perhaps it’s pointless to try to predict the future.

    But The Saker just posted on Unz today here: http://www.unz.com/tsaker/what-price-for-collapse-of-the-empire/

    But there are also posts on ZeroHedge. President Carter issued a warning to Trump. And there’s this:

    https://www.zerohedge.com/news/2018-04-13/taking-world-brink-annihilation

    Today there is the imminent possibility of a major attack based on the allegations of a clearly biased source. What ever happened to international law and legal due process? Why is violence being threatened before there is a serious objective investigation of the chemical incident? If the accusations against Syria are true, why not have a serious investigation, especially now that the area has been liberated today (9 April) and safe access can be provided?

    The drums of war are pounding. After over one year of incessant Russia bashing and disinformation, is the public ready to go to war with Russia over Syria? Neoconservative hawks and their Israeli and Saudi allies seem to want this. Their plans and predictions for Iraq, Libya and Yemen were delusional fantasies with the price paid in blood by the people of those countries and in treasure by Americans as well. Sadly, there has not been any accountability for the media and political establishment that promoted and launched these wars. Now they want to escalate the aggression by attacking Syria, causing vastly more blood to flow and risking confrontation with a country which can fight back.

    And I just found out Prof. Stephen Cohen was on Tucker Carlson last night:

    Here’s Haley:

    It looks to me that only prediction of the future I can make that is accurate is that there will be war.

    And even if the majority of Americans want to stop it, the demon possessed won’t listen to us. May the wrath of God and eternal torment be their future.

  360. Kyay says:
    @Aedib

    INF treaty.

    Quote -” This failure to bargain does explain Gorbachev, Shevardnadze and their “team” being extremely unwelcoming of Soviet military professionals during April 1987 negotiations with Americans. In fact, the Soviet military was excluded from negotiations altogether—a first indicator of shady intentions on Gorbachev’s part. The compromise reached was so one-sided that even Gorbachev himself started to feel very uncomfortable. He expressed his concerns to…US Secretary of State George Shultz, instead of conferring with his own military.

    In fact, Gorbachev’s behavior was absolutely bizarre and betrayed for any trained eye his desperate desire to be liked by the combined West regardless of costs for his own country.”

  361. Walt says:

    Hi all,
    I quote the last sentence: “After all, Russia did try a kind word alone, it didn’t work and the United States has only itself to blame.
    I don’t agree fully : The US can blame the Zionists that exhausted the US after the GB, and many others before since antiquity. Read Douglas Reed, The Controversy of Zion to understand how GB and US diplomacies where enslaved to Zionist interests during the XXth century.
    Free pdf download:

    https://www.controversyofzion.info/Controversybook/reeedcontrov.pdf

    Kind regards,
    Walt

  362. Gleimhart says:
    @DESERT FOX

    Yes, thank God for Russia. The world enjoyed their nearly a whole century’s worth of keeping everyone on edge and their KGB poisoning U.S. institutions. Unfortunately for them, the poisoning of those institutions is largely why the U.S. is currently so sick, and therefore incapable of reassessing its relationship with Russia in a more positive direction.

  363. eah says:

    If these weapons systems are not used, and everyone, including and especially the US, knows they will not be used, then that’s the most important ‘implication’ right there, isn’t it?

  364. windwaves says:

    fact is, Russia should not leave the US/UK/France (and wtf is France doing in there) agression unanswered. Sadly, as dangerous as it is, Russia must respond with actions that, if at all possible, are comparable to what was done in Syria by the three israel slaves.

    Doing nothing is not an option.

  365. @Anonymous

    The U.S. is ramping up defense spending — to build more ships for the navy that are sitting ducks for hypersonic anti-ship missiles.

  366. Frankie says:

    The biggest problem for every empire is arrogance, corruption and culture of stagnation. That has happened to Roman Empire, Soviet Union and more likely in USA. The “victory” (1991) bred that arrogance and since it things have getting worse and worse.

    It looks like all empires are doomed – sooner or later. Nowadays we don’t have to wait for 500 years. Things goes at least 10 times faster. But here’s the point: when Empire had done, there is chance for better America for Americans. I doubt does any American really love their military industrial complex if prize is destruction of civil society.

    • Replies: @RadicalCenter
  367. US government debt now about $21 TRILLION, (That’s $60,000 per person) and rising at about $1.5 trillion a year. So something’s gotta give. We are talking here about an economic collapse being bequeathed to our children. Military spending, at about $0.9 trillion a year must be on the list of cutbacks.

    Wait for it……… the dollar will lead the way.

  368. @Y.L.

    Dear Y.L.,

    I believe you are missing the whole point here. The US left the ABM treaty (one of the keystones of world peace) and started the missile defense initiative both of them unilaterally. This was obviously viewed by Moscow as a threatening act, since is already proven, a Soviet era ICBM can in fact be intercepted. Moscow offered so much the West: after giving up to 20% of its territorry, bringing back home all of its troops from abroad and closing almost all of its bases abroad, it even proposed the US for Russia to join NATO in order to end any potential future competition again, but the US did not recognize the gesture from a “gentle man” who literally recognized the US as the winner of the Cold War and was willing to work together even by US terms. Instead of accepting the offer, the US decided to put try to put Russia in check (as in chess), jeopardizing its defense abilities by putting interceptors on its border, encircling Russia with bases, and pointing a gun on it with the prompt global strike proposal. Now after 17 years we see the exact opposite scenario, now the US is on check. Russia can defend itself with S-500 and other redundant system including lasers, plasma weapons and defense against hypersonic missile. And can overcome any air defense existing now or to be bild on the next 30 years. You missed the point of the cruise missiles with infinite range: they fly low enough to overcome existing radars and are much cheaper than ICBMs (that are detectable). By the way, you will be able to check it on the World Cup, Russia’s economy is going well indeed: thanks to the West sanctions, products that were imported before are now produced in Russia, developing internal economy.

    • Agree: Mike P
  369. @Cyrano

    The teeter-totter of dissemination of the masses… political BS that separates us from our humanity!?^%… The elite Machiavellian illuminati…the chosen ones and the hyper dense filaments of light… who are they…? the untouchables of the golden spoon in mouth group…royals of history that have raped pillaged and controlled humanity from every the seat of power…yes the unseen hand of political-economic warfare…they only want wars they can live through….( they sit around a round table)…yes planning using us as vessels to exterminate in mass… :)

  370. Reagan’s Star Wars bankrupted the USSR. Putin and Xi are applying what they learned.

  371. robss says:

    All of this scary bullshit is a great way to encourage more wasteful spending on the MIC

    • Replies: @Herald
  372. Herald says:
    @robss

    You might be right if it actually is bullshit. I wouldn’t want to gamble on that myself but you and others might feel lucky.

  373. @Frankie

    I’m American, and you’re right.

  374. Y.L. says:
    @Andrei Martyanov

    Hey, Andrei, I don’t have your email. Mine is posted on Lew Rockwell.com feel free to say hello. I wanted to share your comments with a wider audience. And get you publicity for your book. I would’ve sent you an email and let you know.

    I see your comment on this video on your Smoothie site.

    https://southfront.org/video-israeli-missile-destroys-syrias-pantsir-s1-air-defense-system/

    A Classic example of idle, not in combat mode, system being hit by, obviously, Spike. Pantsir was not operational when hit, with crew doing something else (smoking?)

    I’m no expert, but seeing the guy on the right running to it, even to a non-expert like me it was obvious the fools didn’t turn the Pantsir on. “Smoking” on the job; bad for your health in more ways than one.

    http://smoothiex12.blogspot.com/2018/05/ha-it-was-inerview-after-all.html

    I hope you blog over here or your site what you think is going on in Syria. I heard about something posted on The Times of Israel saying Assad was taken aback and Iran fired but other posts state that no, Syria fired after being hit.

    I don’t think Russia wants war with Israel-America so perhaps this article (source notwithstanding) is accurate. And no, I won’t write anything new for Lew with this response unless he want to direct to your site if you blog about it. Oh, source is Agence France Press

    https://www.timesofisrael.com/russia-seeks-mediator-role-between-israel-and-iran/

    Analyst Alexei Malashenko said Russia would do everything possible to maintain relations with both Israel and Iran without taking a stand, especially since Israel’s strikes “do not threaten” Moscow’s position in Syria.

    “If Israel were to defy Russia’s dominant role, Russia would react and take a stand. This is unlikely to happen because Israel knows Russia defines the rules in Syria,” said Lukyanov.
    ‘Anti-Iranian sentiment’

    But if escalation continues, Moscow will find it difficult to keep playing a mediator’s role.

    “Even with the best intention, nobody can bring Iran and Israel to the same table,” said Malashenko.

    He added that Russia is also closely watching Washington’s exit from the Iran nuclear deal, which the Kremlin has opposed. On Thursday Moscow said it would continue a “close collaboration” with Iran on the agreement.

    Lukyanov said it may not have been coincidental that the Israeli strikes took place shortly after US President Donald Trump announced his country’s withdrawal from the deal.

    “Iran’s enemies can only be inspired by this decision: there is a very strong anti-Iranian sentiment,” Lukyanov said. “Increased US pressure on Iran has certainly helped Israel fulfill its agenda.”

    And thanks. Warm wishes. And no, I don’t agree, that:

    “I am also very thankful to Yvonne for such a flattering introduction to my rather mostly unremarkable persona. ”

    You are an officer, gentleman, scholar and remarkable in your depth of knowledge of history, military and technical matters, IMHO.

  375. Y.L. says:
    @Andrei Martyanov

    Andrei, my brother found this article and maybe this explains Russia and Syria best; but as always, I appreciate your insight (on your blog to get a wider audience).

    http://www.atimes.com/article/with-a-wink-and-nod-to-russia-israel-says-it-struck-all-iranian-infrastructure-in-syria/

    With a wink and nod to Russia, Israel says it struck all Iranian infrastructure in Syria.

    Moscow shows all signs it is content to sit back and watch the show – up to a point

    • Replies: @Andrei Martyanov
  376. @Y.L.

    I would be very accurate with Israel’s statements since they do have same propensity as their Arab neighbors to exaggerate, use hyperbole and such. Malashenko is generally correct–Russia is already a mediator in the region and, obviously, Russia is not seeking any war with anybody there. What is also constantly missed from all that is the fact that Russia and Iran are NOT “allies” in general. Iran has a very specific agenda in the region and this agenda often contradicts what Russia pursues in the region. Russians also have a good memory and they remember very clearly how when sanctions on Iran were eased she ran to European Union immediately. Now that Trump exited Nuclear Deal there is a degree of schadenfreude on Russian part. Russia has no problems with Iran being taught a lesson and, I am sure, sees it as being to her advantage. Many forget the fact that earlier in Russia’s deployment in Syria (2015-early 2016) there was a lot (and I mean a lot) friction within even Syria’s military large parts of which were extremely Iran-oriented and sometimes even sabotaged Russian advisers. A lot is in play there including simple human (and national) ambitions, greatly amplified by the overall culture of the region. And yes, it is confirmed, Israel does inform Russian forces in Syria about her attacks.

    • Replies: @Y.L.
  377. @Y.L.

    Yes, good article.

    • Replies: @Y.L.
  378. Y.L. says:
    @Andrei Martyanov

    Thanks, Andrei. It’s obviously a complicated situation.

    I fund this on The Duran by Mercouris, who’s a guest (sometimes) on RT’s Crosstalk.

    http://theduran.com/israeli-missile-strike-reversing-shift-military-balance/

    In my opinion it is the growing potency of the Syrian air defence system, and its increasing success in shooting down Israeli aircraft, and US and Israeli missiles, which is almost certainly the true reason for the latest Israeli strike.

    The revelation of the growing potency of the Syrian air defence system, and its recent successes against both the US and Israel, appears to be sending shockwaves throughout the US and Israeli defence establishments, which have become accustomed to taking their hitherto unchallenged air superiority in the Middle East for granted.

    The result is a petulant decision to impose sanctions on those Russians the US thinks are responsible, and series of ever bigger Israeli strikes on Syria intended to reverse this and to restore at least the semblance of Israeli aerial primacy over Syria.

    It seems that the latest strike – involving no fewer than 28 aircraft and launched against a far larger range of targets than the earlier US led strike – was principally intended to defeat the Syrian air defence system.

    And no S-300s for Syria; I got an email today responding on our article screaming about Putin’s “betrayal” etc. but I think he is (and his government) a realist.

    Russia is neither supplying S-300 surface-to-air missile systems to Syria, nor negotiating a potential delivery to Damascus, Vladimir Kozhin, presidential aide for military technical cooperation, told Russian media, adding that the Syrian forces had “everything they needed.”

    Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov declined to comment Mr. Kozhin’s remarks, stressing that it would be wrong to connect those statements with Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s visit to Moscow.

    “We never announced these deliveries as such. However, we said that after the strikes [by the US, France and the UK on Syria], Russia reserves the right to do whatever it deems necessary,” Peskov explained.

    https://sputniknews.com/military/201805111064353749-russia-s300-supplies-syria/

    Thanks again, hope you blog on your site too.

    • Replies: @The Scalpel
  379. @Y.L.

    Hey, Andrei, I don’t have your email.

    [email protected]

  380. The Scalpel says: • Website
    @Y.L.

    ” Mr. Kozhin’s remarks, stressing that it would be wrong to connect those statements with Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s visit to Moscow.”

    Looks like the US does not have a monopoly on shameless government lying

    • Replies: @Y.L.
  381. Y.L. says:
    @Andrei Martyanov

    Andrei, my last question. Do you think that Russia’s decision not to provoke Israel by supplying S-300s to Syria is part of a strategy that will allow Syria instead of shooting down Israeli pilots and provoking a wider conflict, instead giving them the means to intercept the missiles launched by those same jet fighters?

    Does that make sense?

    I know The Saker is upset in his latest essay and often you are of the same mind:

    There have been major developments this week, all of them bad, including Putin re-nominating Medvedev as his Prime Minister, and Bibi Netanyahu invited to Moscow to the Victory Day Parade in spite of him bombing Syria, a Russian ally, just on the eve of his visit. Once in Moscow, Netanyahu compared Iran to, what else, Nazi Germany. How original and profound indeed! Then he proceeded to order the bombing of Syria for a second time, while still in Moscow. But then, what can we expect from a self-worshiping narcissist who finds it appropriate to serve food to the Japanese Prime Minister in a specially made shoe? The man is clearly batshit crazy (which in no way makes him less evil or dangerous). But it is the Russian reaction which is so totally disgusting: nothing, absolutely nothing. Unlike others, I have clearly said that it is not the Russian responsibility to “protect” Syria (or Iran) from the Israelis. But there is no doubt in my mind that Netanyahu has just publicly thumbed his nose at Putin and that Putin took it. For all my respect for Putin, this time he allowed Netanyahu to treat him just like Trump treated Macron. Except that in the case of Putin, he was so treated in his own capital. That makes it even worse.

    http://thesaker.is/the-skripals-will-most-likely-never-be-allowed-to-talk/

    And I wonder if Israel used a bunker buster as a threat/warning–the shock that registered on the Richter scale…

    https://caucus99percent.com/content/syrian-bomb-blast-26-richter-scale-thats-moab

    Then again, perhaps your guess is as good a mine. Israel Shamir has described Putin as “timid” in an older essay; perhaps he doesn’t like confrontation. Israel the nation is crazy enough as per last week’s post by The Saker to use nuclear weapons on Iran. And why should Russia go to world war for Syria? There are wiser options than military-to-military confrontation, e.g. 4G war.

    • Replies: @Andrei Martyanov
  382. Y.L. says:
    @The Scalpel

    Looks like the US does not have a monopoly on shameless government lying

    True; but perhaps Putin and his team (see above my most recent question to Andrei) are doing everything possible to avoid direct conflict with Israel, which would draw America in and the number of deaths on all sides would be terrible.

    Is Russia choosing a bad peace over a worse war? I just don’t know. I asked Andrei because he’s the historian and has the expertise to know.

  383. @Y.L.

    Andrei, my last question. Do you think that Russia’s decision not to provoke Israel by supplying S-300s to Syria is part of a strategy that will allow Syria instead of shooting down Israeli pilots and provoking a wider conflict, instead giving them the means to intercept the missiles launched by those same jet fighters?

    This too, but primarily Russia acts here for what Clausewitz defined as “Reasons of State”. The very info of Russia delivering S-300 to Syria has created a feverish activity on Israel’s part and proved that it is effective as a threat (in fact, very effective) and forced Israel to make arrangements. At this stage Russia is content with her position as a mediator and it is a long road of military-diplomatic efforts to “calm down” both Israel and Iran. Will Russia succeed? We’ll see, I guess. A lot, and I mean a lot, is at play here–just consider hysteria in US re: Turkey buying S-400 and this is just one factor out of many which form a complex reality in Syria.

    • Replies: @Y.L.
  384. Y.L. says:
    @Andrei Martyanov

    Andrei, on your blog you wrote:

    2. NATO commits suicide and does attack Russia, as some people in D.C. and Brussels are convinced they can. Well, in this case no amount of supplies will help them. US simply has no military hardware for sustaining a large conventional combined arms war against such peer as Russia. Why so–is a separate issue here.

    What did you think of “Hellfires” being sent over to Europe?

    https://www.zerohedge.com/news/2018-05-12/hellfire-missile-equipped-strykers-sent-europe-counter-russia

    In March, we reported how the 2nd Cavalry Regiment was actively testing a high-tech laser weapon in Europe, called the Mobile High Energy Laser (MEHEL) mounted on the M1126 Stryker armored personnel carrier for SHORAD purposes.

    “Given that counterinsurgency tactics have taken center stage during the last 15 years of ground wars in Iraq and Afghanistan,” said the Warrior Maven, the Army now recognizes that increased close-in air Russian threats of cruise missiles and small unmanned aerial vehicles could be a major problem when the next conflict breaks out.

    “We are looking for an end to end system that is able to detect and defeat the rotary wing fixed wing and UAS (drone) threat to the maneuvering BCT (Brigade Combat Team),” Col. Charles Worshim, Project Manager for Cruise Missile Defense Systems, told Warrior Maven in an interview.

    The Stryker MSL includes a Boeing unmanned turret mounted at the rear of the vehicle; this is where a cargo area replaces the “original infantrymen compartment. The turret is armed with four Longbow Hellfires located on the right side and another pod with four launchers for Raytheon Stinger short-range air defense missile,” said Army Recognition.

    I think just a way for defense contractors to make money and have no significant impact in any event.

    Glad you post something interesting every day.

  385. Y.L. says: • Website

    Hi, Andrei,

    We haven’t talked on this forum in a while. I hope readers can find it and your new book is finding an intelligent readership.

    This just posted on TASS. I am aware weapons systems integrate but it is clear that Russia is showing her “claws.” The Russophobia on display, not just from Democrats and Neocons but Trump’s own Intel people proves Putin’s statements that Russians are being treated like Jews under Hitler and the “elite” is intent on extermination.

    TASS: http://tass.com/defense/1014139

    When asked about capacities of the Peresvet laser complexes, which have already entered duty with Russia’s Aerospace Forces, the expert said that, in his opinion, the system is capable of “countering optronic systems, including those installed on satellites, planes and drones.” “Possibly, at shorter ranges, it is even capable of striking drones and cruise missiles,” Murakhovsky added.

    Russian military expert Viktor Murakhovsky, the editor-in-chief of the Arsenal Otechestva magazine also said:

    More:

    http://tass.com/defense/1014139

    Besides, a squadron (between 12 and 16 aircraft) of MiG-31 fighter jets armed with Kinzhal hypersonic missiles entered combat duty in the Caspian Sea region in April.

    “I think at least one squadron of those complexes should be deployed at any fleet, in other words – at all regions where we have fleets and flotillas. We need to deploy them in the regions of the Black Sea, the Baltic Sea, the Northern Fleet. The Pacific region also should not be forgotten,” Murakhovsky said.

    He said that such systems can become a “good instrument” against not only vessels equipped with high-precision weapons, but also for countering carrier attack groups.

    “We know how expensive a carrier attack group can be. By employing this asymmetric method, which is unbelievably cheap in comparison with building a carrier attack group, we can neutralize this threat almost completely,” the expert said.

    There’s more here:

    The crews assigned to the Peresvets have taken upgrader courses at the Alexander Mozhaisky Military-Space Academy in St Petersburg.

    “The cadres receive training in theory in specially equipped classrooms and get practical drills at combat equipment,” the report said.

    The crews are also getting trained in teamwork as part of commissioning of the Peresvets for combat duty, said Gen Anatoly Nestechuk, the chief of staff of the Aerospace Force’s 15th Army.

    Development and commissioning of new strategic systems aims to build up Russia’s defense capability and to prevent any aggression against it or its allies, the Defense Ministry said.

    The Peresvets are the first Russian combat complexes based on new physical principles. President Vladimir Putin mentioned the Russian combat laser for the first time in his address to both houses of parliament on March 1.

    http://tass.com/defense/1014121

    ***

    My question for you is whether the Star Trek Peresvet will be part of what The Saker wrote in his recent post here, i.e. ASAT.

    http://www.unz.com/tsaker/the-other-new-revolutionary-russian-weapons-systems-asats/

    And whether the number of troops and weapons NATO is fielding are a concern, given Shoigu’s recent interview in the Italian Press.

    Thanks, SmoothieX12

  386. My question for you is whether the Star Trek Peresvet will be part of what The Saker wrote in his recent post here, i.e. ASAT.

    This, I don;t know. Judging by the energy “package” for Peresvet it seems that this system is a combat laser–not just some optronic’s dazzler. Meaning that this thing is designed and manufactured for shooting targets, not just disable their optronic parts.

    • Replies: @Y.L.
    , @Y.L.
  387. Y.L. says:
    @Andrei Martyanov

    Judging by the energy “package” for Peresvet it seems that this system is a combat laser–not just some optronic’s dazzler. Meaning that this thing is designed and manufactured for shooting targets, not just disable their optronic parts.

    Thanks Andrei.

    Best that it be kept secret.

    As someone who personally cannot imagine, despite the flaws of Washington, selling secrets (which since I’m not part of military-industrial complex I have none) I am nevertheless dismayed by recent news by a betrayal by Russian scientists/engineers as per the below article.

    https://southfront.org/russian-hypersonic-weapon-files-leaked-to-foreign-intelligence-investigation-launched-russian-media/

    Russia’s Federal Security Service (FSB) has reportedly launched an all-out search for a mole who leaked top secret files on the cutting-edge hypersonic weapon systems to Western intelligence, the Russian newspaper Kommersant reported on July 20 citing intelligence sources.

    Earlier on July 20, FSB operatives searched the quarters the Central Research Institute of Machine Building (TSNIIMASH) and the United Rocket and Space Corporation (URSC). TSNIIMASH and the URSC are a part of Russian Space Agency Roscosmos, which was involved in the development of hypersonic weapons.

    Can you way what the implications are for America-Russia relations or was this always expected? I suspect normal relations have become more difficult.

  388. Y.L. says:
    @Andrei Martyanov

    Andrei, Strategic Culture had this post on Trump’s SPACE FORCE.

    Technically speaking, isn’t it highly unlikely that the Avangard can get a signal from the earth within its plasma sheath? In other words, it has to guide itself and doesn’t receiver or can receive any earth based signal.

    https://www.strategic-culture.org/news/2018/08/12/creation-us-space-force-introduction-new-anti-russia-sanctions-interrelated.html

    The sensor layer will serve the BMD components of all branches to make the creation of combatant command a better option in comparison with the Air Force-headed architecture, which has existed since 1982. On the other hand, reforming the structure is more of a cosmetic change, it does not alter the substance – the US is adamant in its desire to weaponize the space and make it not only a part of global BMD but also a part of defense against hypersonic missiles Russia and China are close to arm their military with.

    The US is lagging behind in hypersonic arms race. It pins hopes on space-based layer to enhance its capability to counter the threat. And it’s not only sensors. US officials know well that putting mini satellite-based jammers into space is also the most effective way to prevent hypersonic weapons from being guided with the desired accuracy.

    I don’t think the author knows what he’s talking about or the U.S. Military knows what it’s doing either.

Current Commenter
says:

Leave a Reply - Comments on articles more than two weeks old will be judged much more strictly on quality and tone


 Remember My InformationWhy?
 Email Replies to my Comment
Submitted comments become the property of The Unz Review and may be republished elsewhere at the sole discretion of the latter
Subscribe to This Comment Thread via RSS
PastClassics
Are elite university admissions based on meritocracy and diversity as claimed?
The evidence is clear — but often ignored
What Was John McCain's True Wartime Record in Vietnam?
Hundreds of POWs may have been left to die in Vietnam, abandoned by their government—and our media.