How far off the US Coast for a Russian sub to achive totoal surprise?

[miker42]

Greetings all. I'm new to the subsim community. I've been doing reserach for an "analog" game I'm designing and I have a couple of questions:

1. By today's standards, how close the US coast would a Russian Sub driver try to get to launch nukes and achive maximum surprise with as little reaction time as possible from the US. In other words, total surprise.

2. How would the US react and deal with such a threat?

3. What kinds of systems does the US have in place to fight off such an attack?

4. How would it be dealt with if the US had, say 30-60 minutes before any kind of MIRV seperation or impact?

Thanks,
Mike

[Chock]

Well, supposedly, the latest Soviet SS-NX-30 Bulava nuclear SLBM has a 10,000km range, up to ten MIRV'd warheads, is impervious to EMP damage, has decoy systems on board, and can perform evasive flight course changes too (They started building it last month BTW).

So if all that is true, then the answer would be: He could probably be tied up at the dock in Sevastapol, the US would react by firing a load back at Russia and then bend over and kiss its ass goodbye, because stuff like the Patriot system wouldn't be able to intercept it, and depending on whether they had 30, or 60 minutes, they would probably choose between watching an episode of the Simpsons, or maybe Star Trek.

Chock

[antikristuseke]

Nuclear war is going to suck for those who survive the initial fury.

[Etienne]

Originally Posted by miker42

1. By today's standards, how close the US coast would a Russian Sub driver try to get to launch nukes and achive maximum surprise with as little reaction time as possible from the US. In other words, total surprise.

That's beyond my area of knowledge, sorry.

Originally Posted by miker42

2. How would the US react and deal with such a threat?

Mutually Assured Destruction. I'm sure you've heard of the term - Nuke goes off from one side, all the nukes from the other sides go off. There have been talk of a measured nuclear response, but that's not likely if the russians are involved.

That's why in every worldwide conflict story that happens in the modern time, there's a reason why nobody shoots off a single nuke. See Red Storm Rising.

Originally Posted by miker42

3. What kinds of systems does the US have in place to fight off such an attack?

At present time, a bunch of missiles to be shot back at whoever started it. There isn't, at this time, a functionning ABM system. That we know off, anyway.

Originally Posted by miker42

4. How would it be dealt with if the US had, say 30-60 minutes before any kind of MIRV seperation or impact?

Once they'd know for sure who shot the missile, they'd shoot back. And everybody'd hide.

Duck and cover, like the turtle said.

[miker42]

What about Conventional Warheads then? Same Scenario, less damage?

[Etienne]

Why put a conventionnal warhead in an ICBM?

When someone sees an ICBM launch, they'll assume nuclear until proven otherwise.

[Camaero]

This thread makes me want to watch "A Boy and His Dog".

[miker42]

Now that I think about it, I guess the point really is to use that kind of threat as a deterrent more than anything else. It's what we do with our boomers on patrol. Peace through superior firepower, I suppose.

[Etienne]

Exactly. That's where the concept of MAD came from : You can destroy me, but if you do, I'll destroy you as well... And that makes the whole ordeal pointless.

It's a political game altogether. There's no tactics to it at all; until the order to fire is given... And then, the tactics only last for an hour at most. After that, well, it's a worldwide disaster.

[Kapitan]

Originally Posted by miker42

Greetings all. I'm new to the subsim community. I've been doing reserach for an "analog" game I'm designing and I have a couple of questions:

1. By today's standards, how close the US coast would a Russian Sub driver try to get to launch nukes and achive maximum surprise with as little reaction time as possible from the US. In other words, total surprise.

2. How would the US react and deal with such a threat?

3. What kinds of systems does the US have in place to fight off such an attack?

4. How would it be dealt with if the US had, say 30-60 minutes before any kind of MIRV seperation or impact?

Thanks,
Mike

1) SS-N-20 SS-N-23 SS-N-X (buluva) can be fired from russian ports and still hit mainland america so the russian subs dont need to even leave port.

2) not alot they can do once they have hit apart from posibly retaliate which is known as MAD mutually assured distruction.

3) they have a few systems in testing such as the star wars programes, i do believe that standard SAM missiles may be able to destroy a warhead thats in bound but the likely hood is slim as most russian warheads will detonate in mid air.

4) seperation takes only a minuet or two and from space to ground less than 10 minuets so to engauge those missiles before they come well into range you would have to attack the launcher before they can get off the first missile.

[Kapitan]

Originally Posted by Chock

Well, supposedly, the latest Soviet SS-NX-30 Bulava nuclear SLBM has a 10,000km range, up to ten MIRV'd warheads, is impervious to EMP damage, has decoy systems on board, and can perform evasive flight course changes too (They started building it last month BTW).

So if all that is true, then the answer would be: He could probably be tied up at the dock in Sevastapol, the US would react by firing a load back at Russia and then bend over and kiss its ass goodbye, because stuff like the Patriot system wouldn't be able to intercept it, and depending on whether they had 30, or 60 minutes, they would probably choose between watching an episode of the Simpsons, or maybe Star Trek.

Chock

bulava has been in testing for about 3 years and in production 11 months as there have been so many tests of them lately, due to SALT II they are limited to 10 warheads but reality is like all russian missiles and american they have a far greater capibility, trident D5 can have upto 14 warheads and the SS-N-20 also 14.

[fatty]

Originally Posted by miker42

Now that I think about it, I guess the point really is to use that kind of threat as a deterrent more than anything else. It's what we do with our boomers on patrol. Peace through superior firepower, I suppose.

Not even superior firepower but equal. No nukes have been used in anger since 1945 because of NATO-Soviet nuclear parity - the system that if either side launched on the other, retaliation (or "second strike") was guaranteed and both sides would be obliterated.

Historically, you run into problems when the scales start to tip to give the advantage to one side or the other. The Cuban Missile Crisis put nuclear forces uncomfortably close to American soil and heightened the potential of a "decapitating" strike on U.S. command structure with negligible warning, providing a threat comparable to the U.S. missiles in Turkey. That's part of the debate against anti-ballistic missile systems; the dissuasion to avoid using nuclear weapons shrinks if you become impervious to counter-strikes, and your opponent has less incentive to hold anything back because he wants to overwhelm your ABM system. It tips the scales and makes people sweat.

Boomers exist[ed] to eliminate the chance of a decapitation strike because while the enemy may easily locate and then attack and destroy your nuclear assets on land, he can never be 100% sure in practice where your nuclear assets at sea are located.

[geetrue]

US submarines can fire from refit docks if they had to ... the Russians report to have such a good range that the melting of the ice caps are revealing their hiding places via satellite (just guessing on that one).

Sure the Russians have the edge with range, but do they have ice cream, pop corn, Clint Eastwood, Star Trek, and "R" rated movies on board? Casino night, half way day, cable grams from home, Xbox 360 games make USN submarines a better place to live for (90) days.

Not to mention a supply corps that has and will continue to keep US Naval forces the leader in ship maintence no matter where they may hover.
Yes, folks the boomer I was on didn't steam we just hovered around the same area all day staying out of the shipping lanes.

[Kapitan]

Originally Posted by geetrue

US submarines can fire from refit docks if they had to ... the Russians report to have such a good range that the melting of the ice caps are revealing their hiding places via satellite (just guessing on that one).

Sure the Russians have the edge with range, but do they have ice cream, pop corn, Clint Eastwood, Star Trek, and "R" rated movies on board? Casino night, half way day, cable grams from home, Xbox 360 games make USN submarines a better place to live for (90) days.

Not to mention a supply corps that has and will continue to keep US Naval forces the leader in ship maintence no matter where they may hover.
Yes, folks the boomer I was on didn't steam we just hovered around the same area all day staying out of the shipping lanes.

they have computers, email services (not the sort your thinking of), family mail (incoming only) rest area, shop, hot showers, gym, hot tub, small splash pool.

these obviously on boats like the Oscar II and typhoons and deltas, immagine it on one of thoese alfas ! be a tight squeeze.