Current Nuclear Weapons Development

NMaude said:
Which ICBM design is that missile that was just launched?
Click to expand...
Looks like a DF-31 I think??
missilethreat.csis.org

DF-31 (Dong Feng-31 / CSS-10) | Missile Threat

The DF-31 (Dong Feng [East Wind]-31 / CSS-10) is a Chinese intercontinental ballistic missile (ICBM). The three-stage, solid-fueled missile has an estimated range of 7,000 – 11,700 km. China first deployed the DF-31 in 2006, and has developed two successive variants: the DF-31A and DF-31AG...
missilethreat.csis.org missilethreat.csis.org

www.twz.com

First Chinese ICBM Test Into The Pacific In Decades Is A Big Deal (Updated)

China last fired an intercontinental ballistic missile into the Pacific in 1980 and its latest launch highlights its rapidly evolving nuclear posture.
www.twz.com www.twz.com

Scott Kenny said:
A good start, anyways. Can still always blow up outside the silo (or in this case, above the TEL)
Click to expand...
Which case?
 
Last edited:
www.bbc.com

China test-fires intercontinental ballistic missile into Pacific

Beijing said the test was "routine" but other countries in the region expressed strong concerns.
www.bbc.com www.bbc.com

www.bbc.com

Putin proposes new rules for Russia using nuclear weapons

Russia's leader says strikes by a non-nuclear state aided by a nuclear power can be considered a joint attack
www.bbc.com www.bbc.com

www.telegraph.co.uk

Putin rewrites nuclear doctrine in new threat

Conventional attack on Russia with the help of a nuclear power will be seen as ‘joint strike’
www.telegraph.co.uk www.telegraph.co.uk
 
Grey Havoc said:
www.bbc.com

China test-fires intercontinental ballistic missile into Pacific

Beijing said the test was "routine" but other countries in the region expressed strong concerns.
www.bbc.com www.bbc.com

www.bbc.com

Putin proposes new rules for Russia using nuclear weapons

Russia's leader says strikes by a non-nuclear state aided by a nuclear power can be considered a joint attack
www.bbc.com www.bbc.com

www.telegraph.co.uk

Putin rewrites nuclear doctrine in new threat

Conventional attack on Russia with the help of a nuclear power will be seen as ‘joint strike’
www.telegraph.co.uk www.telegraph.co.uk
Click to expand...
I think expanding the scope just makes it less realistic. It's supposed to be a defensive weapon of last resort, nobody will take it seriously or acccept it as a tool for the convenient reshaping borders.
 
Scott Kenny said:
Seems so.

USN hasn't been doing nuclear cruise missiles or bombs since the 1990s.
Click to expand...

There is a hard push on for the return of sea-launched nuclear cruise missiles (SLCM-N). Personally, I think it's a mistake. Lowering the threshold for nuke usage seems like a bad idea all around, but Congress insisted.


www.atlanticcouncil.org

The US is building a nuclear sea-launched cruise missile. Congress must make sure it’s built right.

There are forces at play—bureaucratic, budgetary, and programmatic—that could stymie the SLCM-N if US lawmakers do not pay close attention.
www.atlanticcouncil.org www.atlanticcouncil.org
 
www.spacewar.com

China, Brazil urge against nuclear threats over Ukraine

United Nations, United States (AFP) Sept 27, 2024 - China and Brazil led a joint call Friday against any use or threat of nuclear weapons over Ukraine, in a thinly veiled criticism of Russian President Vladimir Putin's saber-rattling.
www.spacewar.com
 
TomS said:
There is a hard push on for the return of sea-launched nuclear cruise missiles (SLCM-N). Personally, I think it's a mistake. Lowering the threshold for nuke usage seems like a bad idea all around, but Congress insisted.


www.atlanticcouncil.org

The US is building a nuclear sea-launched cruise missile. Congress must make sure it’s built right.

There are forces at play—bureaucratic, budgetary, and programmatic—that could stymie the SLCM-N if US lawmakers do not pay close attention.
www.atlanticcouncil.org www.atlanticcouncil.org
Click to expand...

I just think it is a mistake because it is such a drain on the crews of ships and boats that have to carry them, for little additional deterrent effects beyond what LRSO provides.
 
Josh_TN said:
I just think it is a mistake because it is such a drain on the crews of ships and boats that have to carry them
Click to expand...

Would it be a drain if they were only loaded into the SSN's VLS modules? As I understand those are only accessible for loading and unloading when the submarine is in port.
 
Forest Green said:
www.spacewar.com

China, Brazil urge against nuclear threats over Ukraine

United Nations, United States (AFP) Sept 27, 2024 - China and Brazil led a joint call Friday against any use or threat of nuclear weapons over Ukraine, in a thinly veiled criticism of Russian President Vladimir Putin's saber-rattling.
www.spacewar.com
Click to expand...

It's about time Putin was publicly called on nuclear threats bullshit, like the Big Bad Wolf (From the Three Little Pigs) he's been Huffing and Bluffing.
 
TomS said:
There is a hard push on for the return of sea-launched nuclear cruise missiles (SLCM-N). Personally, I think it's a mistake. Lowering the threshold for nuke usage seems like a bad idea all around, but Congress insisted.


www.atlanticcouncil.org

The US is building a nuclear sea-launched cruise missile. Congress must make sure it’s built right.

There are forces at play—bureaucratic, budgetary, and programmatic—that could stymie the SLCM-N if US lawmakers do not pay close attention.
www.atlanticcouncil.org www.atlanticcouncil.org
Click to expand...
Congress always wins.

Even when they're wrong. I'd support nukes on carriers long before a nuclear "Tomahawk" again.



Josh_TN said:
I just think it is a mistake because it is such a drain on the crews of ships and boats that have to carry them, for little additional deterrent effects beyond what LRSO provides.
Click to expand...
Agreed.

NMaude said:
Would it be a drain if they were only loaded into the SSN's VLS modules? As I understand those are only accessible for loading and unloading when the submarine is in port.
Click to expand...
The sub crew still needs to be cleared for nuclear weapons, and that is an epic pain in the ass in terms of paperwork. They also need to have two personnel on watch in Radio and at the VLS control panel 24/7, which means more bodies on watch than standard. If they're doing ANYTHING involving the VLS, there will need to be security guards for the area (which is another chunk of training and paperwork).
 
Josh_TN said:
I just think it is a mistake because it is such a drain on the crews of ships and boats that have to carry them, for little additional deterrent effects beyond what LRSO provides.
Click to expand...
Agreed, SLCM-N makes very little sense. My preference would have been for a Zumwalt specific missile, so you could use the Zumwalts for messaging ala bombers, while only require nuke cleared personnel on 3 additional ships, while giving the Zumwalts a clear mission.
 
Desertfox said:
Agreed, SLCM-N makes very little sense. My preference would have been for a Zumwalt specific missile, so you could use the Zumwalts for messaging ala bombers, while only require nuke cleared personnel on 3 additional ships, while giving the Zumwalts a clear mission.
Click to expand...

CPS seems like the Zumwalt missile, just because they do not have a mission otherwise. And three ships is not enough for a deterrent anyway. I suspect all three get based out of Hawaii and they generally try to keep one in the westpac. Or maybe even Guam; they would be in range from pier, if rather more vulnerable.
 
Josh_TN said:
CPS seems like the Zumwalt missile, just because they do not have a mission otherwise. And three ships is not enough for a deterrent anyway. I suspect all three get based out of Hawaii and they generally try to keep one in the westpac. Or maybe even Guam; they would be in range from pier, if rather more vulnerable.
Click to expand...
They would be for messaging like the B-52s. North Korea or China gets antsy, send one to the West Pacific. Russia starts threatening the Baltics, send one to the North Atlantic. The goal is to deter a low-level singular nuclear strike, the rest of the triad is there to deter a massed nuclear strike. A Zumwalt would be a very visible way to send a signal.
 
Desertfox said:
They would be for messaging like the B-52s. North Korea or China gets antsy, send one to the West Pacific. Russia starts threatening the Baltics, send one to the North Atlantic. The goal is to deter a low-level singular nuclear strike, the rest of the triad is there to deter a massed nuclear strike. A Zumwalt would be a very visible way to send a signal.
Click to expand...

I would rather just B-52s. Faster to deploy, message received. I see no purpose for USN nukes outside the boomers.
 
bobbymike said:
View: https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=HYasjXS2FKQ
Click to expand...
They've been threatening "transparent oceans" for more than 20 years.

Laser scanning to find a submarine directly is limited to subs above 200m deep and requires a blue-green laser color for best depth penetration in deep water. Close to shore, the light penetration limit is more like 50m and you'd need a yellow-green laser for that depth.

As to detecting a sub by its wake on the surface, well, the ocean has two major sources of surface movement, waves caused by the current wind direction, and swell caused by winds that were blowing a different direction. To picture what causes swells, blow over the top of your coffee cup, then stop blowing. The waves that continue after you stopped blowing are swells. The Atlantic ocean has big waves and small swells, while the Pacific ocean has small waves and huge swells. Then you have the waves caused by all the other ships on the ocean to account for. And then you need to find a wake that is potentially only millimeters taller than the surrounding waves. I'm pretty sure that the optical sensor limit due to the atmosphere is ~2"/50mm. So if your submarine wake is less than 50mm, you're not detectable by wake.
 
Transparent oceans has been a holy grail since the 60s and the theme of a Bond movie from the 70's.

The act of detection also ignores the fact that you would still be hard pressed to do anything about it - unless you have a ballistic missile with a nuclear depth charge, how would you even engage an SSBN even if you knew its course, speed, depth, and the captain's wife's bra size? How easy is it to reach out a couple thousand miles outside your own border to conduct ASW for any country that is not the US? Or for that matter, how would the US even manage to capitalize on that information?
 
Josh_TN said:
The act of detection also ignores the fact that you would still be hard pressed to do anything about it - unless you have a ballistic missile with a nuclear depth charge, how would you even engage an SSBN even if you knew its course, speed, depth, and the captain's wife's bra size? How easy is it to reach out a couple thousand miles outside your own border to conduct ASW for any country that is not the US? Or for that matter, how would the US even manage to capitalize on that information?
Click to expand...
Well, if you have Poseidon-type underwater UAV, you could send them to hit enemy boomers with nuclear warheads...
 
Dilandu said:
Well, if you have Poseidon-type underwater UAV, you could send them to hit enemy boomers with nuclear warheads...
Click to expand...
Assuming they were not subject to the same detection methods, or any other detections methods, sure. Though AFAIK Poseidon is a strategic system with no capability against a moving target and no capacity to be retargeted, so I am not sure it matters anyway.
 
One new rule in particular sticks out. If a proxy of a nuclear power starts striking deep inside Russia nukes can now be used. This one was clearly opening up the avenue for nuclear strike if Ukraine strikes too far in on too many important targets.
 
www.telegraph.co.uk

Israel-Iran war latest: Biden tells Israel to seek ‘alternatives’ to striking Iran oil sites

Joe Biden has urged Israel against striking Iran’s oil facilities, a day after he said the United States was discussing the possibility of such strikes with its ally.
www.telegraph.co.uk www.telegraph.co.uk
Joe Biden has urged Israel against striking Iran’s oil facilities, a day after he said the United States was discussing the possibility of such strikes with its ally.

“If I were in their shoes, I’d be thinking about other alternatives than striking oil fields,” Mr Biden told reporters on Friday, adding that he believed Israel had not yet decided on its response.

Israel has vowed to retaliate to Tehran’s ballistic missile attack on Tuesday, which Iran had carried out in response to Israel’s offensive in Lebanon and the assassination of Hezbollah leader Hassan Nasrallah.

Iran’s supreme leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei made a rare sermon on Friday, describing Iran’s missile attack on Israel on Tuesday a “legitimate” act, pledging that Iran and its terror proxies would “not back down”.

Israel’s adversaries in the region should “double your efforts and capabilities... and resist the aggressive enemy,” Mr Khamenei said.
Click to expand...
:rolleyes:
 

Similar threads

Please donate to support the forum.

Back
Top Bottom