Cuban Missile Crisis

terrywhite · 09-14-11, 08:54 AM

Red November by W.C. Reed (Harper Books) is not only a mine of information about Soviet subs (nuke or diesel) but makes it stunningly clear how close the world came to destruction during the Cuban Missile Crisis.

JU_88 · 09-14-11, 09:19 AM

Yeah Im glad I wans't around for all that.... 'Duck and cover' indeed!

Radioshow · 09-14-11, 09:35 AM

At the time the Soviets were massivley outgunned on the ICBM front. They only had a handfull of SS7's/8's(maybe a couple dozen) and they were liquid fueled and took a long time to prepare for launch. This is why they needed Cuba to get their shorter range IRMB's within reach of the US.

The Soviets still had a large bomber force but few if any SLBM submarines and those that had SLBM's were limited in number(3 each i think) and had to surface to launch because the missiles were in the sail.

The Soviets backed down because the US caught them before they were ready and had no choice. It may have turned out different though if the Soviets had another 3-4 days to get all the missile regiments ready as only 1 I believe was operational at the time of the UN slam dunk by Adlai Stevenson.

Kapitan · 09-15-11, 01:42 PM

The bit your missing is that the USA came to an agreement with the soviets to remove missiles from turkey which they did.
at the time the russians had a mixture of zulu V and golf and hotel class boats so a good mix

Stealhead · 09-15-11, 03:55 PM

Very true it seems that many people like to forget about the missiles in Turkey which was why the Soviets put the missiles in Cuba in the first place.

They may have had the weaker nuclear force at the time but it still would have killed millions of people had the USSR and US used them against each other.I know a few old guys that where on active duty in the military during the crisis and they said it was by far the worst times in their careers even worse than Vietnam.

Radioshow · 09-16-11, 10:15 AM

Ya I didnt forget about the old Thor and Jupiter misslies in Italy and Turkey.

They were obsolete and were to be retired soon anyway. That was the kicker. They made a deal to remove them and they were going to remove or replace them anyway.

And yes if it came down to launch time the Soviets still could have done some damage. They had a massive bomber fleet and some of the biggest warheads around. They're warheads were generally of a higher yield than the US by a couple MT or more usually.

09-14-11, 08:54 AM	#1
terrywhite Nub Join Date: Nov 2010 Posts: 2 Downloads: 30 Uploads: 0	Cuban Missile Crisis Red November by W.C. Reed (Harper Books) is not only a mine of information about Soviet subs (nuke or diesel) but makes it stunningly clear how close the world came to destruction during the Cuban Missile Crisis.

09-15-11, 01:42 PM	#4
Kapitan Sub Test Pilot Join Date: Mar 2005 Location: UK + Canada Posts: 7,130 Downloads: 77 Uploads: 7	The bit your missing is that the USA came to an agreement with the soviets to remove missiles from turkey which they did. at the time the russians had a mixture of zulu V and golf and hotel class boats so a good mix __________________ DONT FORGET if you like a post to nominate it by using the blue diamond Find out about Museum Ships here: https://www.museumships.us/ Flickr for all my pictures: https://www.flickr.com/photos/131313936@N03/ Navy general board articles: https://www.navygeneralboard.com/author/aegis/

09-14-11, 09:19 AM	#2
JU_88 Silent Hunter Join Date: Jan 2006 Location: UK Posts: 3,803 Downloads: 11 Uploads: 0	Yeah Im glad I wans't around for all that.... 'Duck and cover' indeed!

09-14-11, 09:35 AM	#3
Radioshow Bosun Join Date: Apr 2007 Posts: 64 Downloads: 27 Uploads: 0	At the time the Soviets were massivley outgunned on the ICBM front. They only had a handfull of SS7's/8's(maybe a couple dozen) and they were liquid fueled and took a long time to prepare for launch. This is why they needed Cuba to get their shorter range IRMB's within reach of the US. The Soviets still had a large bomber force but few if any SLBM submarines and those that had SLBM's were limited in number(3 each i think) and had to surface to launch because the missiles were in the sail. The Soviets backed down because the US caught them before they were ready and had no choice. It may have turned out different though if the Soviets had another 3-4 days to get all the missile regiments ready as only 1 I believe was operational at the time of the UN slam dunk by Adlai Stevenson.

09-15-11, 03:55 PM	#5
Stealhead Navy Seal Join Date: Feb 2009 Location: Kentucky Posts: 5,421 Downloads: 85 Uploads: 0	Very true it seems that many people like to forget about the missiles in Turkey which was why the Soviets put the missiles in Cuba in the first place. They may have had the weaker nuclear force at the time but it still would have killed millions of people had the USSR and US used them against each other.I know a few old guys that where on active duty in the military during the crisis and they said it was by far the worst times in their careers even worse than Vietnam.

09-16-11, 10:15 AM	#6
Radioshow Bosun Join Date: Apr 2007 Posts: 64 Downloads: 27 Uploads: 0	Ya I didnt forget about the old Thor and Jupiter misslies in Italy and Turkey. They were obsolete and were to be retired soon anyway. That was the kicker. They made a deal to remove them and they were going to remove or replace them anyway. And yes if it came down to launch time the Soviets still could have done some damage. They had a massive bomber fleet and some of the biggest warheads around. They're warheads were generally of a higher yield than the US by a couple MT or more usually.