Catastrophic degradation of the strategic nuclear forces (SNF), United States

Declining strategic nuclear forces. Dying nuclear industry. The collapse of the Strategic Air Command. Rusty missile submarines. Antediluvian ballistic missiles. We all know what country in question. Of course — this is the United States.

Although it is believed that the basic information about the U.S. nuclear arsenal of secrecy, some key points are already widely known. Hold on to the chair — for what you now know, for many will be an eye-opener and break the template. And you will realize that destvitelno, not the country called Honduras.

If you assess the state of the strategic nuclear forces (SNF) United States over the past 20 years, it can be concluded to be a complete and profound degradation, which since 2005 has taken an irreversible and uncontrollable. Under the uncontrollability of this process means that it is no longer controlled by the military and political leadership (CDF) and the United States can not be stopped by them.

Warheads

And now the facts. So:

The last nuclear warhead was made in the USA in 1991. And with that — everything.

Even more amusing that the last nuclear test explosion was carried out in 1992. And this despite the fact that the average age of U.S. nuclear warheads — more than 30 years, there are many of them were produced and deployed before the Reagan presidency. Where is the confidence that the warheads are still able to explode?

Or do you think that these systems are so stable that 30 years for them — no time? So you are very wrong. Thermonuclear device — a piece is extremely complex and rapidly degrading. Still decay of fissile material, whereby the active material is reduced. Even worse — the radiation emitted during this lead to the degradation of other system components from fuses to electronics.

Goes and degradation of another kind. U.S. scientists specializing in nuclear weapons, grow old and retire at an alarming rate. Already by 2008, more than half of the nuclear scientists in national nuclear laboratories in the United States were older than 50 years, and among those under fifty, very few have the know-how. And where will the know-how, if the nukes are not built for more than 20 years — and the new ones that are not designed and longer?

An estimated U.S. Secretary of Defense Gates, in a few years, approximately three quarters U.S. nuclear reach retirement age and retire. But it is already a mess and a disgrace to the U.S. national laboratories have reached such a level that the government was forced to take out of the Los Alamos National Laboratory all fissile material — they are simply plundered and sold to God knows who.

Components of U.S. nuclear warheads are aging even more rapidly than scientists. United States no longer have the technological capabilities and the ability to produce some of the key elements for warheads. So much so, that the older the charges are a source of spare parts for the maintenance of others in any working condition.

DELIVERY SYSTEMS

U.S. nuclear weapons delivery vehicles are also in decline.

Strategic avaitsiya

Assuming the year 2000 to have at their disposal a modern strategic bombers, 230 (130 — B-2 (ATV) and 100-1B), by 2011, the U.S. managed to keep only 65, of which 44 are ancient B-52, koi should be retired back in 1996! But they and today sostyavlyayut backbone of the U.S. strategic aviation.

B-52 are the only ones in the U.S. Air Force carry long-range cruise missiles (CD database) with a nuclear warhead (YABCH). But these machines are very old. Last B-52H serial number 61-0040 came out of the assembly hall October 26, 1962 — almost 50 years ago. For the B-52 no engines or spare parts — to maintain at least some instances in a flying aircraft technicians able to disassemble the parts written off bombers. There was even a project of remaking the B-52 for engines and avionics part of the civilian Boeing 747 — but the project did not come out victorious from the United States.

B-52 has yet to fulfill its task. Americans suggest to exploit them until 2040. But the park is reduced. The next upgrade will have only 44 of the 68 board.

In addition, the U.S. has 19 strategic bombers B-2 and B-67 intercontinental 1B. The funny is that using them to strike at the enemy can not be strong.

In the development of the supersonic B-1B bomber was allowed constructive fatal miscalculation. This machine can carry a free-falling bombs and short-range missiles. Therefore, the development of air defense has made the B-1B meaningless target even before the deployment. Production of cars was discontinued, and the already released useless rusting on parking.

Then the United States had hoped for a stealth bomber B-2. But the opportunities to carry long-range missiles it is also not laid — was calculated that the air defense zone it will be overcome through their "invisibility". However, the price of B-2 (by $ 2.1 billion apiece) was unaffordable even for the U.S.. And most importantly — after the collapse of the Soviet Union to the United States from the former GDR, then delivered the latest MiG-29 radar N-019, and in the course of their tests with horror the Americans found out that these radars perfectly see the "invisible» B-2, even against the background of the earth . This suggested that a more modern radars on Russian MiG-31 and Su-27 is also capable of finding such a goal, with a much greater range. In other words — the invisibility does not happen, and America was not clear — why pay $ 2 billion for such quite vulnerable bombers. Their release was stopped.

So, B-2 and B-1B can not carry long-range cruise missiles with YABCH. And for the use of tactical missiles or bombs svobodnopadayuschih (including nuclear), these fantastically expensive aircraft must be in the area of air defense. The effectiveness of inversely proportional to the level of enemy air defenses. Papuans against both aircraft are good. But when you try to attack Russia or China, they instantly turn into a fabulously expensive scrap.

In general, over the past 20 years, the U.S. fleet of strategic bombers dropped more than 80%, indicating a complete decomposition of the components of U.S. strategic nuclear forces. And there is no prospect of its recovery. Replacements drevnik-52 there is not expected, now is a discussion of the requirements for a new perspective bomber.

In comparison with the United States in Russia everything is just perfect. In addition to the Tu-160, we have a Tu-95MS ("Bear"), the main components of the strategic aviation fleet. The "Bears" just a little younger than the B-52, but recent ekzemplyaryTu-95MS released in the early 90's — our park is still quite young. And most importantly, our aircraft carriers equipped with nuclear weapons missiles Kh-55 and Kh-55SM, long-range. That is, the adversary does bomber nuclear attack from a distance of 2500-3000 kilometers without getting in range of enemy air defenses.

Intercontinental ballistic missile

In the U.S., there is only one type of intercontinental ballistic (ICBM) land-based. This is the "Minuteman-3" — items from the Vietnam Won, morally and technically outdated.

Americans attempt to create in response to our "Satan" ICBM heavy type "Peacekeeper" ("Peacemaker") failed miserably. Missile system, the creation of which has been spent, according to various estimates, up to a trillion dollars (including the costs of production and staging for combat duty 50 ICBM), lasted less than 20 years and was removed from combat duty, without any change!

Just a failed attempt on the basis of the "Peacekeeper" Battle railway missile system (similar to Russia's "Stiletto").

Ended in failure and widely publicized campaign to build 500 light ICBMs such as "Midzhitmen" — an analog of our "Poplars." There have been only two test launches, one of which was completely unsuccessful — the rocket was destroyed by a signal from the control center trials in connection with the release of her out of control, the second was only partially successful.

After that, all the work on this project were completely frozen.

The bottom line is in service with the strategic nuclear forces (SNF) in the United States of terrestrial component 450 is completely outdated ICBMs without decoys. And given the recent failure of the test launches of "Minuteman", it can be concluded that the U.S. ICBM probably just gone.

Confirms this version and the decision to cancel scheduled for 2012 modernization of the "Minuteman" — apparently, there is nothing to upgrade, the Rockets simply not prepared for combat.

It is no coincidence in the U.S. as there is talk about the need for early development of fundamentally new next-generation ICBM and frantic attempts to establish a missile defense system, which it hopes the United States will protect them from a nuclear missile attack at a time when America itself is no longer able to put pre-emptive strike, not to mention — on a return.

Ballistic missiles on submarines

By 2000, the United States planned to have 480 submarine-launched ballistic missiles (SLBMs), placed on the 20 nuclear submarines (SSBN). But for now, the U.S. Navy, only 14 SSBNs with 336 SLBMs. It is undoubtedly the most efficient part of the U.S. nuclear triad.

However, the class submarines "Ohio" were designed and were built well even during the Vietnam War. A little later a missile Trident-II D-5, standing on these submarines — but they have more than a quarter century. When the established norm in the U.S. Navy on combat duty (60% of the time) in the next ten years, the U.S. SSBN will be enclosed in databases because of the inability to go to sea. Readiness SLBM "Trident»-II at this time, too, is highly questionable, due to the fact that, as a solid-fuel, they carry the same weakness as the "Minutemen."

Where does the giant U.S. military budget

Many people will ask the question: How is it that the Americans decrepit nuclear forces, surface fleet reduced the deficit aircraft for aviation is growing. But because of their defense budget for the past 15 years, more than any other military budgets combined? Where to spend money?

Compare the U.S. military budget with Russian military budget, and other countries directly correctly.

In dollar terms, make a unit of Russian weapons is much cheaper than in the U.S., and the U.S. military wages are much higher. What we need is a correction factor.

Plus you need to consider that the U.S. is simply enchanting cut military money. We are the cuts did not dream. An illustrative example — the story of good-for-nothing B-2 bombers on more than two billion dollars apiece. A program for the creation of F-35 fighter aircraft from them, like a black hole. There are tens of billions gone, and the car is still not fly, nor how to shoot do not know how.

We may recall the recent scandal involving the theft of six billion dollars to supply U.S. troops in Afghanistan.

But some of the money the huge military budget comes to destination … and dissolves in the vast expanse of endless wars in Afghanistan, Iraq-Serbia-Liviyah. The money goes for salaries and insurance, on ammo and repair, fuel and transportation. And also supply — from rockets to toilet paper. Naturally, all corruption, kickbacks, purchases at inflated prices.

And, of course, a lot of money to spend and spend technological development of non-nuclear strike forces — UAV, digital battlefield, robots, protivosnayperskie detectors — optical and sound, and more.

But what about the development of new strategic weapons, and the development and maintenance of the alert that is not used, this is where cash float away in mysterious ways.

That is a bit done, but in the end it is not flying as it should, it does not go as it should, then killing the pilots. And the result is the following: to U.S. producers tore back from Facebook and Twitter and do something normal and high quality, it is necessary to increase the budget several times. BUT! Nowhere to have increased. And so the cost of production exceeds the value of U.S. producers of similar weight of gold ingots. Resource stimulate R & D by increasing the budget is exhausted.

Perhaps it happened because Americans nuclear deterrent and are not needed. That we, as a country at peace, "Bulava", "Topol-M", "Yars", "Blue," and "Governor" — the last guarantors of freedom and independence. And the United States — the aggressor in nature. They do not need a defensive weapon — no one in their right mind, and without it, now will not dare to attack them. They need a weapon of aggression — as it is for him descend groups carrying cruise missiles.

And what have we?

Vladimir Putin has revived the first thing our nuclear forces. And now restores the rest of the army. Work is still very much.

However, now, according to available data in the public domain Russia — the world's only power that is actively updating and modernizing their strategic nuclear forces.

Only today we design and build the latest nuclear submarines carrying ballistic nuclear missiles. Once we develop and launch a new production of these missiles for submarines. Only we have over the years developed and started mass-produced fundamentally new ballistic missile mobile home. Only in Russia there is a program of radical modernization of strategic bombers.

The chief designer of the Moscow Institute of Thermal Technology (MIT), the creator of the sea-based missile "Bulava" Yuri Solomonov, speaking on February 16 this year in the Federation Council, said on Russia's strategic nuclear weapons by 10-15 years ahead of "everything that can be done in the West and the East. "

Solomon said: "In 2011, we fully coped with the tasks: developed and put into service strategic missile" Topol-M "land-based in two versions, as well as the missile system" Yars ", with the first solid-fuel missile with multiple heads, and completed missile flight tests sea-based missile "Bulava" — listed Solomon's our last dostizheeni I obopronki.

"For 10 years in the construction of nuclear weapons production efficiency was achieved, which was not even in the years of the Soviet planned economy", — said the chief constructor-MIT.

Nikolai Makarov, the Chief of Staff said recently that our military-industrial complex is not yet able to produce many kinds of weapons needed by the army. Gunsmiths still needs to work. Fully recover the potential MIC planned in the next 5 years.

Breaking — easily and quickly. More difficult to recover.

In the early 90's on someone's instructions precisely liquidated enterprise-holders unique technologies. For example, plants that produced conformal fuel tanks for rockets, a unique brush for heavy-duty motor torpedo. As well as hundreds of other such like, small and little-known but critical for defense technologies.

Now they are as much as restored. Why all of a sudden we have now moved on to the solid rocket? Because the technology is not yet restored the development and manufacture of fuel tanks for ICBMs.

Already very much recreated anew. Closed technological and industrial gap of almost all types of weapons, with the exception of large surface ships. Defense industry exports rescued — when our Defense did not procure arms, our arms were quite in demand overseas and other countries pay for the import of Russian combat coin, allowing more or less, and human capacity to save, and production support.

Nuclear sneakers over America

It seems that the U.S. government knows that soon lose nuclear bludgeon. This is evidenced by the fact that is the latest. American Fox News Channel on February 15 this year, reported the sensational news: the United States can reduce its nuclear arsenal by 80%.

While the final decision on this point is not accepted, but the White House is considering reducing the number posted on the carriers of nuclear warheads from 5,000 to 300 units, which approximately corresponds to the nuclear arsenal of China.

In the Russian arsenal has about 6,000 nuclear warheads.

It seems that the U.S. is not a gesture of goodwill, but an attempt to save face. Like, it's not that we are "pro @ @ if all polymers", while they themselves have decided to give them up.

Of course, and 300 warheads enough to turn into radioactive ruin even a country like Russia. But the fact is that these bombs America will soon have nothing to deliver on our territory. Then, as we have, and with warheads and the means to deliver them, and now all is well and will be — even better.

This implies good news for Russia. Our sovereignty, nobody in the world will not shake. If the U.S. really stop to see the coast and send us their largest armed forces in the world, we simply answer prihlopnem Pindostana nuclear sneakers like a cockroach.

www.vg-news.ru

Like this post? Please share to your friends: