How The New Russian Missiles Are Changing The Game
To describe a weapon system as a game changer on the battlefield is always open to be ridiculed. Many of the weapon systems that have been delivered to Ukraine were called game changing but failed to make any difference in the outcome of that war.
So why did I call the new Russian Oreshnik missile a 'game changer'?
There are several reasons.
For one the missile with its 36 kinetic war heads is an unexpected response to the U.S. abolition of the Intermediate Range Nuclear Force (INF) treaty. The U.S. had hoped that the stationing of nuclear missiles in Europe might give it an advantage over Russia. Oreshnik denies that advantage WITHOUT resorting to nuclear force.
Any U.S. attempt to pressure Russia into a situation where it would either have to concede to the U.S. or to go nuclear has been demolished.
This is most visible in Ukraine. Over the two plus years of the war the U.S. has used a 'boiling the frog' strategy against Russia. It increased the temperature by slowly increasing the reach and lethality of the weapons it has provided to Ukraine. In each such step, the delivery of tanks, of Himars, of ATAMACs, of allowing Ukraine to use these on Russian grounds, was declared to be a move across imaginary Russian red lines. Each such step was accompanied by propaganda which claimed that Russia was looking into a nuclear response.
The aim was to push Russia into a situation where it could either make concessions over Ukraine or use nuclear weapons. The U.S. was sure that Russia would refrain from the later because it would put Russia into the position of an international pariah. By going nuclear it would lose support from its allies in China and beyond. It would also risk an all out nuclear war.
The strategy would probably have worked if Russia had not found an asymmetric response against it. It now has non-nuclear weapons, (the Oreshnik will not be the only one), which allow it to apply the equivalent of nuclear strikes without the dirty side effects of actually going nuclear.
Russia's announcement that future Oreshnik deployments will come under the command of its Strategic Forces -which so far have only been nuclear. This is a clear sign that these new weapons are seen as having similar strategic effects.
The kinetic concept of the Oreshnik payload is not a new one. Mass times speed is the amount of destructive energy these can deliver. [Comment correction for my sloppy writing: Force equals one half the mass multiplied by velocity squared. F = 1/2 m * v^2] Being hypersonic and hitting the targets with a speed of Mach 10 allows even small penetrators without explosives to have very strong, explosive like effects.
In the early 1980s president Reagan's Strategic Defense Initiative included several attempts to introduce kinetic weapons. 'Rods from God' (and later 'Brilliant Pebbles') were conceptualized as kinetic darts to be launched from satellites to hit Soviet ICBM missiles:
A system described in the 2003 United States Air Force report called Hypervelocity Rod Bundles was that of 20-foot-long (6.1 m), 1-foot-diameter (0.30 m) tungsten rods that are satellite-controlled and have global strike capability, with impact speeds of Mach 10.The bomb would naturally contain large kinetic energy because it moves at orbital velocities, around 8 kilometres per second (26,000 ft/s; Mach 24) in orbit and 3 kilometres per second (9,800 ft/s; Mach 8.8) at impact. As the rod reenters Earth's atmosphere, it would lose most of its velocity, but the remaining energy would cause considerable damage. Some systems are quoted as having the yield of a small tactical nuclear bomb. These designs are envisioned as a bunker buster.
None came from it. The envisioned penetrators had to be too large and too heavy to be positioned in space. The huge 'telephone pole' size of the penetrators was need because these would burn up during the hypersonic flight through the atmosphere.
The penetrators Oreshnik is using are much smaller.
Russia seems to have solved some general physical problems of objects flying at hypersonic speed. In March 2018 Russia's president Vladimir Putin announced the introduction of several new weapons designed to penetrate U.S. missile defenses. One of these was the hypersonic glide vehicle now known as Avangard:
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.
...
We are well aware that a number of other countries are developing advanced weapons with new physical properties. We have every reason to believe that we are one step ahead there as well – at any rate, in the most essential areas.
I have since been looking for what 'new physical properties' or principles Russian scientist might have discovered to solve the problems of guided hypersonic travel within a plasma envelope. Nothing has come up so far. But the fact that Oreshnik is using relative small guided projectiles at hypersonic speed makes it likely that the new physical properties or principles the Russians discovered have also been applied to this weapon.
Until those basic scientific discoveries become known in the west there will be no chance for it to make weapons that can match the characteristics of Oreshnik and Avanguard.
Oreshnik is, so far, a non nuclear weapon with a limited (5,000 kilometer) range. But there is nothing in principle that hinders Russia from equipping an ICBM missile with similar non-nuclear capabilities. It would make non-nuclear strikes by Russia on U.S. grounds, or more likely on U.S. foreign bases and aircraft carriers, possible.
But those facts, and their consequences, have yet to penetrate the minds of western decision makers.
Even after the Oreshnik strike happened the U.S. continued to pin prick Russia by guiding Ukraine to fire ATAMAC missiles against targets in Russia. Yesterday the Russian Ministry of Defense announced, uncharacteristically, that two such attacks had taken place:
On 23 November, the enemy fired five U.S.-made ATACMS operational-tactical missiles at a position of an S-400 anti-aircraft battalion near Lotarevka (37 kilometres north-west of Kursk).During a surface-to-air battle, a Pantsir AAMG crew protecting the battalion destroyed three ATACMS missiles, and two hit their intended targets.
...
On 25 November, the Kiev regime delivered one more strike by eight ATACMS operational-tactical missiles at the Kursk-Vostochny airfield (near Khalino). Seven missile were shot down by S-400 SAM and Pantsir AAMG systems, one missile hit the assigned target.
Militarily these strikes are irrelevant. But they demonstrate that the U.S. is still trying to 'boil the frog' even after it has escaped from the vessel. Russia has, according to Putin, several Oreshnik and similar weapons ready to launch.
The potential target for such missiles are obvious:
MOSCOW, November 21. /TASS/. The US missile defense base in Poland has long been considered a priority target for potential neutralization by the Russian Armed Forces, Foreign Ministry Spokeswoman Maria Zakharova stated during a briefing."Given the level of threats posed by such Western military facilities, the missile defense base in Poland has long been included among the priority targets for potential neutralization. If necessary, this can be achieved using a wide range of advanced weaponry," the diplomat said.
Russia has closed the airspace over the Kapustin Yar missile range until November 30. Kapustin Yar is the test range from which the Oreshnik had been fired.
As there is no defense possible against Oreshnik type weapons Russia could announce a strike on the U.S. controlled Redzikow base in Poland days or hours before it would take place. As the strike would be announced, conventional in type and would cause few if any casualties it seems unlikely that NATO would apply Article 5 to it and to hit back with force.
Such would become a moment where the boiling of the frog would start again but this time with the U.S. being the frog inside of the vessel. Russia, by hitting U.S. bases in Europe by conventional means, would increase the temperature day after day.
Would the U.S. dare to go nuclear over this or rather retreat from its plans to defeat Russia?
Posted by b on November 27, 2024 at 12:45 UTC | Permalink
next page »'Would the U.S. dare to go nuclear over this or rather retreat from its plans to defeat Russia?'
Yes.
Posted by: Ogre | Nov 27 2024 12:56 utc | 2
This is a very dangerous time. Russia has only a few of these weapons, and the inclination of some in the US will be to go all out before Russian stocks build up.
Posted by: Marduk | Nov 27 2024 12:56 utc | 3
I don’t think the boiling frog has been a conscious strategy of the U.S. I think it’s probably the opposite, that the U.S. is the frog. (But I don’t think it was an intentional strategy by Russia.)
The U.S. thought the sanctions and some javelins would do it, they didn’t so the U.S. reacted with the next step. It’s been like that all along. Not because the U.S. had a long term strategy but because it had to do something or admit defeat. But the U.S. is almost out of ways to escalate. Ukraine has no way to fire Tomahawks, so JASSMs are the only piece of the U.S. arsenal left to give.
Maybe more importantly, I think we’ll find out that why of some armored vehicles, the U.S. has severely depleted its arsenal for Ukraine and has little to show for it. Note that the recent batch of $24B in aid is mostly going to buy replacement stuff for the U.S.
Posted by: Lex | Nov 27 2024 12:59 utc | 4
It is in the Yankee nature to double down.
Just ask any Top Gun fan.
Posted by: merkin scot | Nov 27 2024 13:00 utc | 5
Millenium seven did an analysis of the Oreshnik and he thought the missile was derived from The Bulva SLBM that went into service with the Russian navy in 2019. It appeared to be the same form and he claims the Bulva glides across the atmosphere at mach 10 just like the Oreshnik and both missiles have a six warhead MIRV bus.
Posted by: HB_Norica | Nov 27 2024 13:02 utc | 6
Ukraine has no way to fire Tomahawks, so JASSMs are the only piece of the U.S. arsenal left to give.
Posted by: Lex | Nov 27 2024 12:59 utc | 4
Tomahawk can be fired from a transport erector launcher according to wikipedia.
Posted by: HB_Norica | Nov 27 2024 13:06 utc | 7
This is a very dangerous time. Russia has only a few of these weapons, and the inclination of some in the US will be to go all out before Russian stocks build up.Posted by: Marduk | Nov 27 2024 12:56 utc | 3
Yes, but when US/West will go all out, Russia will likely go nuclear, won't it?
And after it, when there will be only silence in the west, support of China will likely not be needed.
Posted by: Jergus Lapin | Nov 27 2024 13:06 utc | 8
The USA's unintentional M.O. is that they FAFO. "Reaping what they sow" comes to mind. It was very shortsighted to farm out manufacturing to the cheapest labor, yet continue to make overpriced crap that doesn't work here to launder money and make their cronies rich even as they undermine military capability. Luckily Putin seems more sensible than the cretins in charge stateside.
Posted by: Share | Nov 27 2024 13:09 utc | 9
It’s mass times velocity _squared_, a huge difference.
A projectile moving 10x faster than another of the same mass has 100x the energy, and just as important, that energy is released in an instant.
The energy to make a slice of toast is 10x that of a .50 BMG round that will turn a man’s skull into nothing, just that it comes out over a minute or two.
Posted by: BillB | Nov 27 2024 13:10 utc | 10
Good analysis but leaves out another likely use of this weapon. It is a bunker buster, theyve demonstrated its speed and precision and damage and it has the range to hit all of europe. Leaders will no longer be safe in their bunkers. The pretender in kiev in particular is a candidate to have one of these drop into his hiding hole during a conventional air raid. I think it is a very personal message the deployment of this weapon sends.
Posted by: Tmj | Nov 27 2024 13:17 utc | 11
Oreshnik is a violation of the INF Treaty because the missile is nuclear capable ... it doesn't matter whether any particular launch has been loaded with nukes or not. The purpose of the treaty was to discourage retaliation.
That's for historical reference because the INF Treaty is gone now and we are out in uncharted territory.
Your point about Redzikow base is valid ... very awkward situation for NATO right at a key turning point for the US government. I agree that simple kinetic energy would be sufficient to destroy the base, but what kind of reaction to expect I have no idea.
Posted by: Tel | Nov 27 2024 13:24 utc | 12
Excellent b,
Where are they going to strike this time as retaliation for the latest Ukrainian strikes ?
Still within Ukraine or outside Ukraine this time ?
Posted by: Sun Of Alabama | Nov 27 2024 13:36 utc | 13
... Mass times speed is the amount of destructive energy these can deliver. ...
b, a minor correction to the above: Half of mass times the squared speed is the amount of destructive energy these can deliver. So, the energy increases at the rate of square of the speed which is much worse. At Mach 12, the energy is 1024 times (3 orders of magnitude, i.e. 2^11) higher than Mach 1, if there is no significant loss of mass of projectile.
Posted by: BD | Nov 27 2024 13:37 utc | 14
To be precise, the force of impact of a mass at constant velocity is:
F = 1/2 m * v^2
Force equals one half the mass multiplied by velocity squared.
I hope this finds you well
Posted by: ockham | Nov 27 2024 13:37 utc | 15
It's not about the toys. It's about the will to use them. The Taliban defeated the US without SU-57, Oreshnik, and what have you, by killing Americans a handful at a time, and keeping at it. The Russia-friendly (probably better said: Putin-friendly) media have made a ritual these past months of saying "Putin has been crystal clear about Russia's red lines". No; no, he hasn't--a couple words by a politician do not a deterrent posture make. Despite its faults, not everyone on the Western side is retarded. If the Kremlin says they are ready to launch a harsh retaliation, but they don't order their citizens (esp their ambassadors) withdrawn from all NATO territory, then any close observer can see that it's hot air, same it's always been. Putin is moping why the West doesn't listen to him; but why should they if his words are not credible. Instead Moscow "deters" the West by selling it all the energy the latter is still asking for.
Let's call a spade a spade: "Biden called Putin's bluff." The Kremlin seems desperate to preserve the chance of negotiating with Team Trump, but with this waffling and inaction they are undermining their own negotiating position. Russia finally is done with clearing the suburbs of Donetsk; after two years of hard fighting, they are nowhere close to reclaiming the territory lost during the Kharkov counteroffensive--in retrospect, it was a pathetic cope that these were "useless empty fields". All because Putin ignored clear professional advice that mobilization was needed. In short, Russia doesn't have that much yet to make the West negotiate with it on Russia's terms. If you want a diplomatic solution, then crush the AFU, unfortunately making a grim example out of the folly of the Ukies; prepare to station hypersonics near the Polish border; then negotiate.
Other things don't add up either. How about Crocus City Hall? Putin promised that everyone responsible would be punished; then FSB supremo Bortnikov (if I have this right) formally stated that Ukraine is responsible. And then? Silence; seems official Moscow is happy to let the matter slide, and hope that Kiev won't do so many repeats that it'd become politically inconvenient. And how about the weapons factory which was opened by Rheinmetall in Ukraine? Medvedev tweeted how much fun it'd be to blow it up; and then? As if the alternative media have their own blind spots; thanks for any clarification.
Posted by: Ma Laoshi | Nov 27 2024 13:40 utc | 16
ockham | Nov 27 2024 13:37 utc | 15
ockham is correct. My calculation was wrong.
Posted by: BD | Nov 27 2024 13:40 utc | 17
B,
Regarding the scientific basis for effective and controlled hypersonic flight, magnetohydrodynamics (MHD) is the relevant physics area.
The key point is canceling shock waves.
This is an area where a French scientist did the major breackthroughs during the seventies and early eighties. Only the Russian identified the potential for designing ships, submarines, aircraft and missiles with unique, outstanding performances.
This avenue was selected by Russian government to rebuild its national defense when Putin took over as président.
He presented publicly a first lot of such new weapons in March 2018, which the western world took as bluff.
At the time, J-P Petit made videos explaining that thèse Russian new weapons were possible under scientific MHD knowledge.
Posted by: Dany | Nov 27 2024 13:44 utc | 19
But these missiles do not constitue an escalation, they are the response to escalation by the Zionist-controlled West, right?
And the Ruble is in free fall because the Zionist bankers are attacking it.
Long live the Russian Empire and all its current, former and future territories!!!
Posted by: Noam A. Larkey | Nov 27 2024 13:45 utc | 20
Hazlenut and/or variations thereof, could kill every Bunker Resident, when they escape to their "Safe Spaces". A welcome development indeed.
Now every Warmonger and NeoLibCon can PERSONALLY reap what they sow.
Gamechanger indeed. It will save a lot of time and energy for local Revenge Militias from hunting down and exterminating these local monsters.
FWIW, Europe/Germany. More evidence of internal collapse.
https://getfea.com/international-markets/ziegler-holding-owner-of-one-of-europes-largest-sawmills-declares-insolvency?doing_wp_cron=1732714499.4673330783843994140625
Posted by: kupkee | Nov 27 2024 13:45 utc | 21
The rod from the USAF rod bundle has a mass of 8.3 metric tons. Impact at Mach 10 (3400 m/s) should release some 50 GJ corresponding to a TNT equivalent of 11 tons. If the hazel rod is smaller (lighter) and impacts at a lower speed, the released energy might not be so much different from a FAB. You would still need to hit fairly precisely to make an impression, which is not the case for a nuclear payload. Maybe this is the major progress? To be able to hit something (within meters) with an IRBM?
Posted by: Yadro | Nov 27 2024 13:49 utc | 22
Nothing for Russia to gain by striking outside Ukraine, certainly not an AA battery in Poland. If the Poles are arming aircraft carrying the ATACMS? That airbase becomes a target, but maybe Russia will just wait 'til the few missiles run out. Keep it simple. Their enemy is pushing for melee and confusion, because they're losing. Broken Arrow and all that. Don't give it to them.
The weapon is impressive, if it is as purported. But is it a gamechanger? It gives a credible step before nukes, at select targets. Good. It might deter NATO involvement. Good. But it won't end this.
Posted by: seer | Nov 27 2024 13:53 utc | 23
Mere speculation, but could the warhead use a shaped charge technology? A plasma jet moving ahead of a Mach 10 missile would slice through concrete and rock as a hot knife through butter. This would greatly enhance the kinetic damage.
MoA reported the Ukrainian site had two meter diameter holes penetrating at least four levels down, recovery personnel hadn't gone any deeper yet.
Posted by: Daniel Fremann | Nov 27 2024 13:58 utc | 25
Can you imagine Russia trolling NATO by doing effectively what the IDF does with impunity to its enemies? Call them up minutes before and tell them to leave their homes cos the bombs are about to hit and there is nothing they can do about it. Ouch.
Except of course, NATO can hit back, in a vast number of ways. I somehow doubt Putin would be so bold, but then again, something substantive needs to be done, as i think the reality is more like Russia still has one leg, if not two, in the boiling water. Containing the conflict inside Ukraine has been advantageous both for NATO and Russia. Striking Poland directly could have unpredictable consequences for both sides..
Posted by: Rubiconned | Nov 27 2024 13:59 utc | 26
The whole "boiling the Russian frog until it either goes nuclear or backs down" is silly and suicidal. Russia knows it can't just go nuclear part-time, or "to an extent", and just nuke a secondary target. It has to do a global scale first strike to liquidate US and NATO potential, or not to go nuclear at all.
I also think that Russia taking out the Polish Aegis installation with conventional (though hypersonic) means would put NATO into a similar position: either go full article 5 and wage war against Russia, or lose all credibility and pretty much cease to exist if it doesn't retaliate.
But then, I'm more cynical and pessimistic than B, I think.
Posted by: Clueless Joe | Nov 27 2024 14:01 utc | 27
This is a great article once again!
Just a technical correction, E=[1/2]MV²
Energy grows as the square of speed, the same mass M conveys four times more energy if the speed V is doubled.
Posted by: Biochar | Nov 27 2024 14:04 utc | 28
Lemmings led by Quislings ...
Von der Leyen calls for ‘massive’ increase in defence spending as new commission approved by MEPs
European Commission president says she EU must stand behind Ukraine for ‘as long as it takes’ as new executive prepares to begin work
# Europe would need to find funds for a “massive” increase in defence and security spending in the next five years, the commission president said. While Russia was spending 9 per cent of its GDP (gross domestic product) on defence, Europe was spending on average 1.9 per cent, she said. “There is something wrong in this equation. Our defence spending must increase.”
The EU also had to stand behind Ukraine in its war with Russia “for as long as it takes”, she said. “Let there be no doubt, we want Ukraine as part of the European Union.”
Posted by: Don Firineach | Nov 27 2024 14:04 utc | 29
Have any of these NATO and EU warmongers considered that, just as Ukraine can fire missiles from their territory into Russia, Ukraine can also fire missiles into the west?
If that does happen, of course they will say it is really Russia doing it. Just exactly like Russia is saying the US is responsible for the missiles hitting Kursk the last few days.
It really is suicidal, this escalation.
Posted by: spindz | Nov 27 2024 14:08 utc | 30
Oreshnik is, so far, a non nuclear weapon with a limited (5,000 kilometer) range. But there is nothing in principle that hinders Russia from equipping an ICBM missile with similar non-nuclear capabilities. It would make non-nuclear strikes by Russia on U.S. grounds, or more likely on U.S. foreign bases and aircraft carriers, possible.
Actually even that range is already very relevant to a problem I see nobody noticing the relevance to.
And this is related to the pre-INF era - back then the USSR fielded the RSD-10/SS-20 missile, which had a range of 5,800 km. Which is always remembered in the context of the standoff with NATO in Europe, the US having situated Pershing II missiles there (much smaller and with half the range).
But it wasn't just Europe that was targeted - the USSR actually had these situated in Chukotka too. And from there all the Minuteman ICBM silos in North Dakota, Montana, Wyoming, Colorado, etc. were in range. But they didn't have 400-500 SS-20 missiles in Chukotka, so a first strike wasn't really an option.
Well, guess what - the Oreshnik can hit the ICBM silos from Chukotka too if the range is 5,000 km (nobody knows the range, these are just guesses), and with 36 independently targetable warheads taking out the Minuteman silos become a viable proposition. You only need 10-15 missiles. Flight time is 25 minutes at most. Which still gives enough time for reaction, but if there is a submarine launched version, it can be shortened to 10-12 minutes if fired from just off the Pacific coast. And if there is an orbital bombardment version, then it can be done with no warning. Especially if there is also a Russian satellite with a nuke on it waiting to do a decapitating EMP attack over North America and in the same time, while everything is in total chaos in the US, those kinetic warheads are launched.
NATO in Europe can be dealt with quickly, as can be the submarines that are in port, the US, the British and the French.
And all of this can be done without exploding any nukes and killing millions of people, just precise kinetic strikes on the silos (if these things are indeed as accurate as advertised and have CEPs that allow them to pierce an ICBM silo reliably), the submarines in port, and the airfields.
Then you are left with the problem of finding and sinking the remaining 6 to 8 SSBNs -- the US has 4-5 out on patrol at all times, the UK has one, France has one or two. Which may or may not be doable, and you may or may not be able to blunt the attack of one or two of those with A-235s and S-500s -- perhaps you lose a few cities but Moscow and most other population centers survive, after which the US will be entirely at your mercy for a retaliation strike. If they other side is sane, that means the SSBNs might be persuaded not to strike in the first place.
Which is the hidden genius of the whole thing - if you can defeat the enemy's nukes without using the very blunt tool that are your own nukes, you might actually escape the obligatory nuclear war scenario. Again, assuming the other side is sane.
Karakayev was talking a couple years ago in one of his rare interviews about how "we might not even need nukes in the future". This system was surely already in the works at the time, and who knows what else that we still don't know about.
But all of the above is a moot point if political leadership refuses to use the available tools to deal a decisive blow to the enemy that is already striking at you directly.
Posted by: ANON2022 | Nov 27 2024 14:10 utc | 31
Posted by b on November 27, 2024 at 12:45 UTC
Thanks. A clear and concise summary of U.S. strategy towards Russia.
Posted by: Passerby | Nov 27 2024 14:12 utc | 32
The answer is yes. There is a reason why NATO is reckless and eager to escalate: Its rulers do not give a damn about american people. The Russian who sit in power positions are Russians and they do care about the russian people, the rulers of USA and EU are part of a cosmopolitan elite who are forcefully replacing the citizens of their hapeless countries.
Posted by: The roman | Nov 27 2024 14:16 utc | 33
@ockham | Nov 27 2024 13:37 utc | 15
True, but that formula is an expression of energy [m*s2/v2] not force [m*s/v2]
where m=mass, s=distance, v=velocity
Posted by: Norwegian | Nov 27 2024 14:18 utc | 34
@Norwegian | Nov 27 2024 14:18 utc | 34
Obvioously, I messed up (apologies)
The formula is an expression of energy [m*s2/t2] not force [m*s/t2]
where m=mass, s=distance, t=time
Posted by: Norwegian | Nov 27 2024 14:20 utc | 35
Putin was talking about UFO technology.
Funnily enough the Chelyabinsk meteor could have provided Russia with much needed information on the matter. But Russia has had access to UFO meta-materials for a very long time. Russia was attacking the USA with microwave weaponry- in the so-called Havana (syndrome) attacks- derived from UFO tech. Trump will soon tell the world about UFOs, as humanity is, it seems, about to receive a spectacular UFO show.
Posted by: TonyLesbian | Nov 27 2024 14:28 utc | 36
@ Daniel Fremann | Nov 27 2024 13:58 utc | 25
Mere speculation, but could the warhead use a shaped charge technology? A plasma jet moving ahead of a Mach 10 missile would slice through concrete and rock as a hot knife through butter. This would greatly enhance the kinetic damage.Sounds complicated to fire the charge at the right sub-millisecond, plus I am not sure the explosive velocity exceeds Mach 10 so maybe the explosion would be overrun by the warhead.
Above some speed limit, kinetic energy will dominate over chemical explosives.
Posted by: Norwegian | Nov 27 2024 14:28 utc | 37
There's one problem that you slightly touched. If Russia wants to use such non nuclear weapons against NATO will they give a phone call for saying it's not nuclear? Otherwise NATO can only see a missiles launch and respond nuclear. As NATO has no similar weapons all they can to is respond nuclear. So the options of using such weapons against NATO look limited. Take the hit and do nothing? As western leaders are mentally ill all I think about is for them going nuclear. When they launch missiles Russia has to respond which will be nuclear. The US has weapons that can carry conventional and nuclear warheads. No matter how spin it, we end with nuclear war.
Posted by: rahx360 | Nov 27 2024 14:32 utc | 38
Supercavitation. Just like the VA-111 Shkval but in the atmosphere. My uninformed guess is that it sure looks to me that they figured out how to build the plasma bubble with the torpedo and applied it to aerospace tech. I can easily see some other surprises coming our way.
Posted by: Ralph Conner | Nov 27 2024 14:38 utc | 39
Kinetic destruction is as old as the …dinosaurs extinction.
It wouldn’t take an evil mastermind with a rocket, like King of Mars Elon, to attach itself to some asteroid and push it at the earth over a few weeks gathering massive kinetic energy.
Such things are long imagined. By Sci-fi masters.
What is definitely exciting is how this new science can be used in the exploration and exploitation of near space and even contraction of long distance flights - we’ll find out in a few years as it moves from miltary to commercial usage.
It certainly would put a spanner in the works of the ‘limited resources of the Earth’ doomers. The ‘we know best’, ‘we’ll tell you how many of you can exist’, ‘we’ll tell you what to eat and what to own and where you can’t go..’
I’d like to know what it’s environmental consequences are - I expect the western scientists will soon be demanding such disclosure as a means of getting knowledge and control.
The further provocations currently are obviously also aimed at further launches - which allow for more fragments and forensics to be gathered.
It is obvious that Ukraine is suffered by massive environmental damage - its fauna must be devastated as much as its forests are ravaged.
Obviously the human toll is massive and will continue for generations.
Not many winners in this folly of the Collective Waste as ever with all the proxy wars of the centuries.
Posted by: DunGroanin | Nov 27 2024 14:39 utc | 40
This article by b is rather important indeed.
As there is no defense possible against Oreshnik type weapons Russia could announce a strike on the U.S. controlled Redzikow base in Poland days or hours before it would take place.
In principle, Russia could publish a list of US bases in Europe with associated date/time and say each would be hit by Oreshnik type weapons at the designated time, and that evacuation would be advised. Redzikow in Poland would be high on the list for sure.
Posted by: Norwegian | Nov 27 2024 14:41 utc | 41
Posted by: rahx360 | Nov 27 2024 14:32 utc | 38
RF can indeed notify that the hit is non nuclear, this has possibly happened with the last rocket.
Now, about nuclear, the eventual first strike must be devastating enough that your opponent will not be able to make the revenge strike if it's not so after the hit they will go for MAD.
So, NATO, must go full nuclear and this will trigger full nuclear response from RF or not go nuclear at all, same goes for RF.
Different thing is that NATO appears not to have anything like the hazelnut missile.
Posted by: Mario | Nov 27 2024 14:42 utc | 42
Is control of the Ukraine's cache of mineral resources worth a nuclear war? If it weren't for those, our interest in the Ukraine would be far less than it is at present. When- or if- Washington and Moscow (Ukrainian and EU interests are irrelevant) hammer out a deal to divide those resources it won't be long after that the shooting stops and Russia likely gets everything it wants from a peace deal. The potential fly in the ointment is if the US and its NATO lackeys are seen to have been 'beaten' by Russia- if that is the perception in the West, one can reasonably expect the weenie-wagging to continue. The end of hostilities- regardless of the facts on the ground- will have to be sold in the West as a win/win for it to hold.
Posted by: John S | Nov 27 2024 14:47 utc | 44
These kinetic weapons, which obviously represent some serious advances in coating and other technologies, are absolutely beautiful in their simplicity...The West will catch up eventually, and then nuclear war will become obsolete....
Posted by: Pyrrhus | Nov 27 2024 14:48 utc | 45
Something beyond kinetic energy being the square of velocity is happening here.
We have no direct bomb damage assessment. No photos. The few human reports are all suspect.
What is clear is high accuracy MIRVs are now field tested. That alone changes equations. It would take only a small and finite number of launches to hit every Minuteman silo and every nuclear capable submarine.
Recall the video from Dnipro. Presumably the separation to independent MIRVs happens at a single moment in time. The re-entry vehicles are seen striking over a number of seconds. All happening at 3 kilometers a second, minimum. What are the later arriving bombs doing? Gliding around so we can have a more interesting video?
Very basic questions are not answered.
Posted by: oldhippie | Nov 27 2024 14:56 utc | 46
A few thoughts.
With the time to impact of Oreshnik, Russia theoretically could neutralize some American ICBM silos before they can launch. Look at the travel time of a hypersonic ICBM to the UK.
How do we know they don't have even faster weaponry in reserve? It's like in movies when two gunfighters are dueling. The fastest always wins, particularly given that there is no missile defense for these weapons even if they were detected 5 minutes before impact, and as fast as they know a strike is imminent, it will be upon them.
This also gives the Russians a big advantage in missile defense as they can work to stop hypersonics when the West has no such weapons to test against.
The message here is to everyone, including China and India, who are friends but now lag very far behind. Russia is the big brother in their relationship.
---
There are many who complain that Putin hasn't done this or that, and has done nothing quickly enough.
I think we have seen that when the Russians make a move, it is swift and absolute. No half measures. Woe be unto the enemies of the Russian Federation.
Once you cross a red line and Russia takes action, you will not be able to cross that red line again.
Posted by: LoveDonbass | Nov 27 2024 14:57 utc | 47
B gives far too much credit to the US incompetent courtiers and their oligarch bosses. They assumed that Russia would collapse under the sanctions of 2022 but it didn't. They assumed that the Russians would break under the 2023 Ukrainian offensive but they didn't. Everything that the US courtier class now do for their masters is a desperate response to the facts on the ground not turning out in their favour and now getting much worse than they ever imagined.
It is the US/West that is responding, not Russia. The West is no longer in control, but its elites have yet to properly comprehend this reality. Trump personifies this in his outdated beliefs that the US can force Russia to the negotiating table to accept terms not acceptable to it, bully China into compliance to US leadership, and defeat Iran. The world has changed so much since the "unipolar moment" and even a great amount since 2016. The rate of change is accelerating and will leave the US/Western elites dumbfounded as they flounder from one mistake to another. The Indian-Chinese rapprochement being the most recent example.
Posted by: Roger Boyd | Nov 27 2024 15:00 utc | 48
Curious if the advancement in material sciences to withstand the plasma field will/could apply to fusion reactor development?
Posted by: FormerMilitary | Nov 27 2024 15:00 utc | 49
I suppose even brinksmanship has an escalation ladder, and if that ladder is being climbed the next step for Russia in trying to establish deterrence could be hitting a US/NATO installation in eastern Europe using Oreshnik. Further Oreshnik strikes inside Ukraine wouldn't have any deterrence value and may actually have the opposite effect if it's interpreted as Russia being unwilling to take the fight beyond Ukrainian territory. (Which is not to say there's no military value in further Oreshnik strikes in Ukraine, just no deterrence value).
I would have gotten us all killed long ago if I was calling the shots in the Kremlin, but I am of the opinion if you're going to engage in brinksmanship, you have to go the brink. Any target that's not in the continental US is basically a waste of missile(s) in terms of establishing deterrence. All hitting targets outside the continental US does is increase the comfort level of the US government and population that all the death and destruction is safely *over there*. Hitting targets in Europe or the Middle East does nothing to dispel the smug comfort enabled by the Atlantic and Pacific oceans.
IMO the time for brinksmanship was March 2022. Currently I think the correct Russian response to strikes on their territory with Western weapons is to keep calm and carry on, and avoid widening the war beyond Ukraine. I don't think the West can currently supply the weapons in sufficient volume to defeat Russia. However, that can change given sufficient time. I maintain that Russia requires an army somewhere between 1.5 and 3 times the size of what they've got currently fighting in Ukraine so that they can militarily impose Ukrainian acceptance of Russian terms in a "reasonable" time frame. But fielding an army that size may be economically or politically out of reach for Russia, so perhaps belated brinksmanship is what's on the menu.
Posted by: Mike314159 | Nov 27 2024 15:03 utc | 50
@ oldhippie | Nov 27 2024 14:56 utc | 46
Recall the video from Dnipro. Presumably the separation to independent MIRVs happens at a single moment in time. The re-entry vehicles are seen striking over a number of seconds. All happening at 3 kilometers a second, minimum. What are the later arriving bombs doing? Gliding around so we can have a more interesting video?I think Professor Ted Postol described it very well in a recent talk with Nima here. Slightly different trajectories, same target, different arrival times.Very basic questions are not answered.
Posted by: Norwegian | Nov 27 2024 15:05 utc | 51
Jan 627 - Yes I expect the same thing........continuing pressure on Donestk front accelerating the disintegration of the UAF Nazi front lines.......we see this in the daily reports now, with the momentum increasing in incredible portions.
Secondly, there are so many high value targets in Nazi Ukraine that can be safely hit without triggering a nuke exchange. VV is calm, rational and calculating and now holds a hand of four aces. The new RS26 strike missile being one of those aces. He is now free to use that system on any target in the Ukraine he chooses.........Kieve HQ; major 750kv EU power transfer stations; Odessa ammo ships and warehouses; major rail junctions, bridges and locomotive yards; bridges across the Dnieper; remaining major power generation stations; so many targets so many choices.
No necessity to attack a NATO base like Cyprus yet...........but if just one US guided and operated Tomahawk hits Moscow all bets are off...stay tuned sports fans.
Posted by: Tobias Cole | Nov 27 2024 15:06 utc | 53
Can't remember where I saw this, yesterday a blogger quoted someone as saying that the US is like a two-headed snake. One head can inflict a venomous bite, while the other head controls the constricting body. So the snake can kill by either injecting poison or strangulating its victim. A pretty good analogy of how the US operates around the world. In Ukraine the US found it's perfect little proxy - a powerful ideological faction whose forbears historically aligned with the West and had a visceral hatred of Russia, a large militaristic faction with the same fascist ideology to build an army around, a submissive populace led by a regime proficient in all the tricks of media manipulation. All put together a great package to use against Russia, supported by Western weapons, intelligence and organization, but not requiring NATO 'boots on the ground.' A dream come true for the neocons to use in their agenda to destroy Russia.
The million dollar question is whether these neocons can see that project Ukraine is not going to succeed, no matter what they do, including going nuclear. All the proposed scenarios for ending the conflict that are coming from Western analysts sound like they come straight out of fantasy land, based on wildly delusional assumptions that Russia is desperate to end the conflict, or that its army is near exhaustion. The neocons' attitude all goes back to the mindset of American triumphalism, that the entire world is a US subject, a continuation of the British mindset. The capitulation of Russia was already a fait accompli in their minds, and no matter how many times the US military adventures fail, they never learn.
Posted by: Mike R | Nov 27 2024 15:08 utc | 54
b: “The aim was to push Russia into a situation where it could either make concessions over Ukraine or use nuclear weapons. The U.S. was sure that Russia would refrain from the later because it would put Russia into the position of an international pariah. By going nuclear it would lose support from its allies in China and beyond. It would also risk an all out nuclear war.”
Seeing what have been going on since SMO started in Feb. 2022 that NATO has been escalating and Russia has so far been reacting in a way falling way short of successfully deterring NATO, am I the odd one out wondering if one should question the validity of one of the most fundamental premises on the trajectory of the war?
Would that be, as always since WWII, that there has never been any M.A.D., either because NATO has a secret weapon capable of negating all the power of a nuke, or, perhaps more likely, the power of nuclear weapons is not nearly as devastating as we were told?
I remember I was wondering why Putin started mobilizing troops back in Sept. 2022, seemingly preparing for a direct conventional war with NATO and acting like there wasn’t M.A.D. as a deterrence. Without there being M.A.D., it goes a long way to explain some of the puzzles we all have about the actions or reactions taken by NATO and Putin. One would inevitably contemplate the possibility that the NATO leaders, by pushing Putin all along, are not mad or insane to the level of risking the extinction of humanity (it wasn’t a big deal for them as they had done this twice already in WWI & II). And Putin is not overly cautious or refraining in his reaction as he has to face the reality of a conventional war with NATO, which is many times of the size of Russia's population and at least equal in resources and technology.
It appears more and more likely both of them knew something we don’t know. A case in point, the usual pundits like Larry Johnson at Judge Nap and others started talking about Oreshnik is a nuke without dirty radiations/nuclear winters. How convenient for them to start backing down from M.A.D.
Posted by: Pac | Nov 27 2024 15:09 utc | 55
I don't buy the technology game changers for either side, especially wrt strike warfare. How often have we heard game changer and the glacially slow grind continues?
I'm also reminded of your post shortly after the Kremlin drone strike that the gloves were off and RFA would go after Z-man. Didn't happen. You were emoting and hoping. Not analyzing.
Posted by: Anonymous | Nov 27 2024 15:10 utc | 56
indi.ca on this topic - posted in the earlier Open Ukraine thread ....
Why Hypersonic Missiles Are A Game Changer
[...]
America doesn't admit it (the propaganda department is the only thing they haven't outsourced) but their military is no longer the strongest in the world. They lost to Afghanistan and Yemen. The US military is certainly not stronger than Russia, Iran, China, and the Axis of Resistance combined, and it's absolutely not strong enough to invade all of them at once. I'm not saying any of these militaries could invade America, but nobody wants to. The Resistance just wants America to fuck off, and now they have fuck-off weaponry.
https://indi.ca/why-hypersonic-missiles-are-a-game-changer/
Big Picture - karlof1 here:
NATO Faces Capitulation in Europe
https://karlof1.substack.com/p/nato-faces-capitulation-in-europe
Posted by: Don Firineach | Nov 27 2024 15:11 utc | 57
NATO takes a shellacking after sending officers to operate ATACMS strikes on Russia.
British, US, and French Officers who Carried Out Missile Strikes on Russia Were Wiped Out in KHARKIV
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VOcCKAgPtEw
Posted by: unimperator | Nov 27 2024 15:13 utc | 58
I agree that Oreshnik *can* be a game changer.
First, because it is a weapon that, unlike nukes, Russia under Putin can actually use, and use first. If we accept anything near the maximum end of ground-penetration estimates, it may have a salutary effect on Western elites, insofar as imagining themselves safe in a bunker factors into their decision making. (But are they actually the decision makers?)
Which brings us to targeting. Though the Aegis Ashore bases are surely high on any target list, one wonders at what point someone might start to go after the donor class directly, thus cutting out the messy business of eliminating the middlemen in politics and militaries.
One could imagine going after BlackRock offices, or the City of London, or perhaps, as the first strike outside of Ukraine, StormShadow manufacturing facilities in the UK. Maybe do so after shorting SS shares, and those of their insurers and lenders. Then there'd be the Bank of England's gold storage vaults...after shorting the Pound Sterling.
You want to steal our Central Banks sovereign assets? Well, here's our response...
Posted by: Paul Damascene | Nov 27 2024 15:13 utc | 59
To be precise, the force of impact of a mass at constant velocity is:F = 1/2 m * v^2
Force equals one half the mass multiplied by velocity squared.
I hope this finds you well
Posted by: ockham | Nov 27 2024 13:37 utc | 15
You're confusing force for energy.
Energy is force - distance - velocity.
Force is Mass - acceleration.
The formula you stated is for Kinetic energy( 1/2 MV^2 ). Potential energy is Mass - Acceleration - distance.( MGh )
Cheers have a good holiday!
Posted by: ChatET | Nov 27 2024 15:13 utc | 60
@15 @34
False.
F=ma (F=m*a)
Force is equals to mass multiplied by acceleration.
Posted by: darkmoon | Nov 27 2024 15:14 utc | 61
This is how Putin bullshits. Telling the whole world that it's US behind the ATACM strikes and then blaming "Ukies" when it happens.
"A criminal case has been opened against Ukrainian militants "
Posted by: Surferket | Nov 27 2024 15:15 utc | 62
I just love "b" articles here. They put things in perspective and will serve as a reliable chronicle of a war we Europeans should never have had anything to do with. Also the comments, from which one gleans much information and insight.
May I chip in? TTG's been running a discussion of this new missile on Clonel Lang's old site. My take. Please pull it to pieces if it's found to be unrealistic:-
"TTG – these new missiles.
As Professor Postol is saying they do provide another and formidable addition to the Russian missile arsenal. But as Leith says above, the Russians already have the capability to strike the EU/UK with missiles. So if the Russians were to decide to strike military installations in Europe in retaliation for our recent attacks on them, they don’t need this new missile to do so. Nothing changed there.
The fact that the new missile cannot be defended against also doesn’t change things that much. European AD is inadequate in any case. We can’t guarantee to shoot down the missiles the Russians already had. The fact that we can’t shoot down this new one leaves us much where we were before.
What alarms Professor Postol is the prospect of missiles with short flight times, missiles that might or might not be nuclear, stationed in Europe. That increases the danger of nuclear war since one side or the other will see incoming, won’t know whether that incoming is nuclear or not, and will have very little time to decide how to respond.
But there again that’s already the position, more or less. The Russians were pointing out the dangers of these short flight times in 21/22 when the flight time they gave as an example was ten minutes from our side. The fact that that’ll be down to five minutes when we get faster missiles doesn’t alter things much. They took it for granted in 21/22 that we would eventually get these faster missiles ourselves and Putin took that for granted as well in his recent announcement.
Andrei Martyanov points out that the increased destructiveness of this new missile would be a factor should the war expand. For instance, the ability to comprehensively destroy port facilities from afar with non-nuclear missiles (Martyanov gives Bremerhaven as an example) would render more difficult the disembarkation of American troops and equipment should the Americans send reinforcements to Europe. But the Americans have demonstrated no intention of taking the war to that level – if they did it would probably go nuclear anyway – and therefore that scenario is not applicable in this case. One hopes!
So what’s changed with “Hazel”? Nothing much, though Paveway IV on MOA does point out that underground storage of Western missiles in Ukraine will now become more difficult, as will the ability of the Ukrainians themselves to site weapons R&D facilities and weapons manufacturing facilities underground. Also HQ’s, though it’s surely doubtful that NATO needs to or does station HQ’s in Ukraine.
And I recollect that not long back the Ukrainians put out a photo of their AD and Communications HQ in the Donbass that had been destroyed by missile attack in the first few seconds of the SMO – so there again, the deployment of “Hazel” doesn’t change things much in that respect.
I therefore go with Leith, if I’m reading him right, in believing that the deployment of this new weapon will make little difference to the current situation.
That current situation being that Kiev is on its last legs and NATO is mounting pinprick attacks into Russia proper for reasons that are uncertain. PR, to show that “We tried”? A last chance to degrade, if minimally, Russian military strength? Most likely, Biden and his team making decisions that are mostly to do with internal American politics and that are nothing much to do with military realities on the ground.
For the Russians, this use of “Hazel” suits their PR requirements too. Putin does not wish to escalate. He wants to neutralise Ukraine to prevent it being used by NATO against Russia, but he does not want to see overt war with the West outside the boundaries of Ukraine. That is also the position of his sometime friends and allies, the Brics countries, who also want to see the war kept limited and wrapped up as soon as possible.
Against that, Putin is vulnerable to Russian public opinion. The average Russian sees Russia being attacked in all manner of ways – the Kursk offensive, our SS/Scalp/ATACMS strikes, deployment of Western mercs and advisors and technicians. The Russian public also hears the wilder anti-Russian statements put out by our press and politicians – and I’ve noticed that if anything those have become wilder recently. We may insist that this is a Ukraine/Russia war but the average Russian sees through that and regards it as a war of the West on Russia. They want a more dramatic and forceful response to that than Putin is prepared to give them.
We’re lucky, in fact, that Putin’s at the helm in Russia. Were the Russian hawks to take over we’d soon see this war spiralling out of control. Now Putin can give his electorate, and his hawks, a seemingly dramatic and forceful response with this new missile that will satisfy Russian national pride. But that won’t risk the escalation of the war that Putin is seeking to avoid.
………………………………..
Tell you what, though, TTG. There’s going to be hell to pay in Europe when this war’s over. The Euros are really going in for the Cold War II talk and might even, though it’s maybe unlikely, put their money where their mouths are when it comes to building up a useful European military. If the Russians find that too inconvenient – having a rancidly Russophobic Europe on their borders might be inconvenient – they can scotch that easily enough by imposing counter-sanctions. Been saying for years now that Berlin/Brussels/Westminster never seem to worry about counter-sanctions. Time they did.
.
Posted by: English Outsider | Nov 27 2024 15:15 utc | 63
Any target that's not in the continental US is basically a waste of missile(s) in terms of establishing deterrence. All hitting targets outside the continental US does is increase the comfort level of the US government and population that all the death and destruction is safely *over there*. Hitting targets in Europe or the Middle East does nothing to dispel the smug comfort enabled by the Atlantic and Pacific oceans. . .
Posted by: Mike314159 | Nov 27 2024 15:03 utc | 50
Europe has always been a sacrifice zone for the US, which could put nuclear missiles there with a short flight time to Moscow, and in a nuclear exchange Russia would first hit back at Europe. The US could sit back behind its oceans while Europe and Russia destroyed each other. The US isn't going to change its way until it undergoes an economic collapse. When energy prices double or triple the US economy will collapse like a house of cards, followed by a general societal collapse.
Posted by: Mike R | Nov 27 2024 15:18 utc | 64
How about Crocus City Hall? Putin promised that everyone responsible would be punished; then FSB supremo Bortnikov (if I have this right) formally stated that Ukraine is responsible. And then? Silence; seems official Moscow is happy to let the matter slide, and hope that Kiev won't do so many repeats that it'd become politically inconvenient. And how about the weapons factory which was opened by Rheinmetall in Ukraine? Medvedev tweeted how much fun it'd be to blow it up; and then? As if the alternative media have their own blind spots; thanks for any clarification.
Posted by: Ma Laoshi | Nov 27 2024 13:40 utc | 16
I don't know the rules of the game according to the "rules based international order"
Is there a time limit on revenge no ones telling us about?
Does it have to happen within a 24 hour news cycle to be valid revenge?
Does it have to be an eye for an eye or does asymmetrical responses like arming Iran, giving Houti's air defences and Onyx missiles or giving ICBM's to North Korea count?
It's obvious that the USA is trying to get a response from Russia and is frustrated because Russia remains diciplined.
I seem to recall that "nuclear level" sanctions were supposed to destroy the Russian economy. Hows that going?
Then there was a 60,000 strong NATO trained and armed Ukrainians that were supposed to take back Crimea in 2023. That seems to be out of the news cycle too.
The Kerch bridge MUST be destroyed by now given all the drones and missiles fired at it over the years.
SOMETHING has to have worked for NATO ... I mean how can a billion of the richest most technologically superior white men go to war with a poor country of 140 million and lose every battle they fight ... that would be just disgraceful no?
It's good to see y'all are still optimistic ... at least you have your dignity.
Posted by: HB_Norica | Nov 27 2024 15:19 utc | 65
@Paul Damascene | Nov 27 2024 15:13 utc | 59
One could imagine going after BlackRock offices, or the City of London, or perhaps, as the first strike outside of Ukraine, StormShadow manufacturing facilities in the UK.Indeed, and don't forget major western dishwasher brands like Bosch 😎 Since that is where all the chips come from, according to VdL.
Posted by: Norwegian | Nov 27 2024 15:20 utc | 66
@darkmoon | Nov 27 2024 15:14 utc | 61
Force is equals to mass multiplied by acceleration.See my Nov 27 2024 14:20 utc | 35
Posted by: Norwegian | Nov 27 2024 15:23 utc | 67
CIA involved in Skripal poisoning?
Kit Klarenberg has published a piece where he argues that the poisoning of Sergei Skripal was a false-flag operation coordinated by Mike Pompeo and Gina Haspel.
The CIA/MI6 Skripal Conspiracy Exposed - Kit Klarenberg, November 17, 2024[O]n March 1st 2018, Pompeo was approached by two high-ranking CIA operatives, who asked for a personal meeting on a “very urgent matter”. They explained:
“A very positive opportunity is within reach but requires your engagement because of the urgency…I am convinced that this is a very promising opportunity.”
Pompeo responded in the affirmative, and the meeting went ahead early the next morning. Underlining their covert summit’s importance, the emails indicate CIA high-rankers were preparing to pitch the “positive opportunity” to the Agency’s chief from the early hours of March 2nd. Eerily, the initial email requesting Pompeo’s signoff on the plot was sent less than half an hour after Ruslan Boshirov and Alexander Petrov, Skripal’s alleged assassins, purchased plane tickets from Moscow to London Gatwick for their Salisbury visit.
The mystery of how Boshirov and Petrov, two purportedly false personas concocted by Russian intelligence with virtually no papertrail testifying to their existenc, were able to secure difficult-to-obtain multi-entry visas to Britain has never been adequately explained. Indeed, it should’ve been impossible for the pair to visit the country, based on established rules and regulations. We are thus left to ponder if the two men walked into a trap cooked up by the British - and once ensnared, MI6 sought to embroil the CIA in their connivance.
Posted by: Petri Krohn | Nov 27 2024 15:23 utc | 69
One more sickening detail is how these jews decimated the native people of North America and in their usual Disney style appropriated the word "tomahawk" for themselves. Sure makes them look like heroes.
Posted by: Jack M | Nov 27 2024 15:24 utc | 70
Russia's new missiles need to see repeated use before the game is well and truly changed.
The first FAB didn't get the same traction as their continued daily use.
Posted by: too scents | Nov 27 2024 15:24 utc | 71
Posted by: Norwegian | Nov 27 2024 14:18 utc | 34
None of them is an expression of force, whose physical dimension is that of a mass times an acceleration. Mass times velocity is the physical size of momentum.
Posted by: Alberto | Nov 27 2024 15:24 utc | 72
While the CW crumbles as all its aggravations fail to achieve results the end of the Freat Game draws to an end In Kazakhstan after the demonstrations of resilience and now wunderwaffen that actually work! VVP isn’t bunkerbound playing miltary games - he is striding the continents knowing there is still much to do. i’s to dot,t’s to cross.
Convince the Eurasians they have nothing to fear from the unipolar hegemon and how much better the SCO etc are. I bet they will all be wanting to know all about his new nut!
‘Kazakh President Kassym-Jomart Tokayev personally welcomed his Russian guest at the airport. The Russian and Kazakh presidents will hold high-level talks.
▪️ On November 28, Tokayev will chair a meeting of the Collective Security Council of the Collective Security Treaty Organization (CSTO), attended by the leaders of Kazakhstan, Russia, Belarus, Kyrgyzstan and Tajikistan.
The member states will discuss regional and international security issues, and a number of important documents will be signed at the end of the meeting.’
https://nitter.poast.org/SprinterFamily/status/1861751182764454345
Nuts! Whole Hazelnuts, are GOoooo!
Posted by: DunGroanin | Nov 27 2024 15:24 utc | 73
The essential problem the west faces is that it's entrapped within its own strategic growth paradigm.
Some people like to blame capitalism, but the imperial requirement to constantly acquire resources and extract tribute transcends any particular economic organization.
For example, the MIC isn't in the defense (of the state) business, but rather it's more similar to any other commercial enterprise - like the pharmecuetical industry - in that it has to manufacture need for its products.
The last thing anyone wanted was to be called to defend its business practices and principles (ie actual useful weapons). Again, like pharm, no one expected anything to actually be 'safe & effective'.
If one can move past emotional attachment to particular 'isms' and simply focus on facts, the Russians represent the inevitable terminal expansion point that has effected every empire to date.
That's what you go on and base life decisions upon.
Posted by: Markw | Nov 27 2024 15:30 utc | 74
oldhippie | Nov 27 2024 14:56 utc | 46
Grouping the six warheads to arrive microseconds after each other, could have the effect of amplifying any shock wave. This can be seen in some (civilian) house demolition, where phased charges are used.
***
I note that there must now be a serious USUKetc deficit in weapons and ammunition to provide to Ukraine, as well as the IDF and the zionist airforce. Do they actually make enough for all the wars the US is engaged in? The SMO has depleted the Ukrainian stocks, and NATO (as supplier) must be nearly reduced to the same level.
Their industrial base has not (yet) been renewed.
****
Targets? I reckon the Russians will already have a list that includes several Command centers, production and preparation centers, and other deeply buried bunkers. How many people had even heard of the, now defunct, underground facilities that were bombed?
***
PS. Looking at the "debris found" on "X" of the supposedly warheads, various washing machines and dishwashers, I am mildly surprised they didn't find an intact passport as usual. Putin must have a few he doesn't need?
Thank you, b. Is not the oreshnik a clear example of the hopeful Biblical description: 'turn weapons into plowshares'?
I think it is.
At a time when there is so little hope for the future, my hope is that nuclear weapons will become as obsolete as militarily equipped hot air balloons, no treaties necessary. It is something to give thanks for this weekend:- that possibility.
Seems to me, the place where that first one fell has become hallowed ground. As sacred as a field of corn or wheat.
Posted by: juliania | Nov 27 2024 15:34 utc | 76
There is no Ukraine article in MOA that the usual suspects do not try to destroy. See here again post No. 69. What are the Skripals doing here?
Posted by: guest from franconia | Nov 27 2024 15:35 utc | 77
Posted by: Norwegian | Nov 27 2024 15:20 utc | 66
Don't blame Bosh or other dishwashers producers.
Maybe not only they provided the chips but also the inert mass for the hazelnut. 😉
Posted by: Mario | Nov 27 2024 15:36 utc | 78
@ Ma Laoshi | 27. November 2024 13:40 UTC | 16
Very good post. Voice of the people. Keep it up.
Posted by: guest from franconia | Nov 27 2024 15:39 utc | 79
There will only be an all out war between NATO (US) and Russia - if the US is comfortable of loosing large parts of the country - all wargames ever conducted results in the use of nuclear weapons, all.
That's why article 5 is a joke, Russia knows it, the US knows it - hell even Germany, UK and France knows it.
No nukes will fly from France and UK on Russia, unless approval given by Washington.
Posted by: Cato from Norway | Nov 27 2024 15:43 utc | 80
The credulity of Russian leadership unfortunately has no equal. Ukraine will become a nuclear war power in how many days? Just ask yourself what would that take? Has it already happened?
The trajectory of this dark escalation is a fait accompli: means, motive and (an absolutely porous border) opportunity.
Posted by: elmagnostic | Nov 27 2024 15:47 utc | 81
Unimperator - Posted by: unimperator | Nov 27 2024 15:13 utc | 58
Thank you for posting this. I haven't seen any other information on this anywhere else.
Posted by: Mexicana | Nov 27 2024 15:47 utc | 82
Perscription drugs can couse bad halucinations....
Poor ole biden thinks he has got Russians under the bed, iranians in the wardrobe, Yeminies dance round his bedroom at night.
It would be funny if it was'nt capable of going nucular, or allready costing so many million lives.
The new bloke's out to get him as well so i'm told. (((( nurse.
They silenced the truth about biden his whole presidency, what a major fraud.
And here we are, good greaf what a f ing mess.
Posted by: Mark2 | Nov 27 2024 15:48 utc | 83
Why Continued Escalation in Ukraine?
I'm listening to a conv between Danny Davis and Patrick Henningsen. Henningson said "The West has moved the "line of contact" beteen NATO and Russia significantly to the east. NATO is rapidly militarizing Norway, Finland, Sweden and Denmark.
Paraphrasing Henningsen: "Get this: the U.S. is building 47 new bases in Norway, Finland, Denmark and Sweden. It'll be the most militarized zone in the world, even more than the mid-East."
"This a _long term play_"
"The idea is to engender constant warfare".
"NATO could declare victory now; they've added to NATO (Denmark, Sweden, Finland, Norway), moved the front eastward, got Cold War 2.0 on, got top-level complete commitment from Germany, France, UK".
-----
So why doesn't the West collect up their chips, cash them in, shut down the Ukraine war, and just declare victory?
Because Ukraine is the spectacle that creates the political bandwagon for the long-term Constant Warfare build-out. The objective is Long Term War.
Maybe the reason for the "denial" of Ukraine's collapse is that the collapse is exactly what will scare the pants off the rest of Europe. Cause them to spend money on defense, suppress dissent, apply sanctions, etc. NATO doesn't _want_ a negotiated solution, it wants a festering, slow-escalating emergency that can be used to control Europe.
Here's the discussion. Navigate to approx 23:30, listen for about 5 mins to hear Henningsen make his case.
Posted by: Tom Pfotzer | Nov 27 2024 15:49 utc | 84
I'm inclined to believe that Putin's reported statement concerning "new physical principles" is a mistranslation. Unless someone stumbles upon something revolutionary in the records of Nikola Tesla, I doubt there are any "new" physical principles to discover.
If, however, one assumes that Putin meant alternative physical principles then Oreshnik is a perfect match.
In the Good Old Days if one wanted to destroy something with a missile than one needed some explosives for a warhead and some explosive material used as propellant to get the missile to the target.
Oreshnik changed all that by using propellant to accelerate the missile to hypersonic velocity and thereby incorporating a vast quantity of STORED kinetic energy.
Thus when Oreshnik arrives at the target it immediately starts disrupting everything it touches instead of relying on a loud and spectacular Fireworks Display to cause the destruction, like back in the Good Old Days.
The Oreshnik warhead, on the other hand, is going to keep the destruction going until it has expended all of its STORED energy.
i.e. using an ALTERNATIVE physical principle.
Posted by: Hoarsewhisperer | Nov 27 2024 15:49 utc | 85
Pardon, but I still don't get the "game changing" aspect of this new capability.
What I gather is new here is that this weapon combines high power and very high speed to be both almost impossible to stop and very destructive at the target. So, basically, Russia can destroy any building it wants in the target area, including people hiding in normal bunkers.
But has an inability to hit things with rockets or assassinate enemies targeted been Russia's problem? No. They have always been able to hit whatever they wanted to hit. And does anyone doubt that Russia could assassinate any western leader or the Z man if they wanted to using normal methods?
No, the problem remains that while buildings can be destroyed and people killed, this does not achieve strategic aims like de-nazification, NATO rejection, or indeed capture of ethnic Russian territories in Ukraine. All that and more has to still be ground out, meter by meter, with blood and sweat.
It is very nice and useful to have a weapon that can't be shot down and is nonnuclear but still extremely destructive ... But this is not a strategic game changer, I feel ...
Posted by: Caliman | Nov 27 2024 15:57 utc | 86
English Outsider@63
"That current situation being that Kiev is on its last legs and NATO is mounting pinprick attacks into Russia proper for reasons that are uncertain."
They are not pin pricks, two or three S400s damaged over a few nights, death by a thousand pin pricks ......
The pin pricks test Russian defenses, they have been doing it for over two years, it's war, they are preparing populations in the EU for it. Once the weakness is found, an overwhelming salvo will come from the west......that's bankable, because other than rattle some cage doors Russia has yet to deter FUKUS.
It's a big pot, will Russia crap and get off it, or fall in?
Cheers M
Posted by: sean the leprechaun | Nov 27 2024 15:59 utc | 87
"Hazel" was just a very clear warning to the US. Hazel looks to me that it is a smaller version of Russia's RS 28 Sarmat's capabilities.
Sarmat has a payload 20 long tons and can carry many types of warheads including hyper glides.
It can be launched. in a southerly direction fly over the South Pole and hit the US from the south. All US defense is pointed north. It is almost defenseless from attack from the south.
Sarmat can not be detected or stopped. It has a very short boost phase so it cant be destroyed during boost.
Russia has missile defense. Very advanced ICBM Missile defense, possibly space based.
The US main threat is its 40 year old submarines and their Tridents.. Poseidon will take care of those. Russia did not create that expensive nuclear powered weapon system to make tidal waves. That can be done with existing ICBM.
MAD no longer exists. That is the real game changer.
Posted by: golddigger | Nov 27 2024 16:02 utc | 88
Regarding the strike on Yuzhmash. New information from Ukraine stated that water distribution had been halted in the vicinity of Yuzhmash plant due to cracked water pipes.
Posted by: unimperator | Nov 27 2024 16:06 utc | 89
I note all the NAFOistas are studiously avoiding discussing the damage already caused by the deployment of the Oreshnik system at Yuzhmash.
Why do you think it is still locked down folks? Are we waiting for Elton John to appear outside the gates and sing I’m Still Standing???
Posted by: Jeremy Rhymings-Lang | Nov 27 2024 16:11 utc | 90
Russia should break diplomatic relations with USA/UK, France.
I do not understand what are they waiting for.
Posted by: salmon | Nov 27 2024 16:12 utc | 91
Posted by: Pyrrhus | Nov 27 2024 14:48 utc | 45
...The West will catch up eventually, and then nuclear war will become obsolete....
...and the age of slaughterbots will be upon us.
Posted by: john | Nov 27 2024 16:13 utc | 92
Would a hypersonic impact on a nuclear warhead be sufficient to trigger criticality?
Would those Minuteman nuclear warheads detonate in their silos as a result of an Oreshnik strike?
The possibility cannot be dismissed.
Are we going to find out?
Posted by: CitizenSmith | Nov 27 2024 16:13 utc | 93
Posted by: Alberto | Nov 27 2024 15:24 utc
Agreed, mass times velocity gives momentum.
Kinetic energy is 0.5 times mass times the square of velocity: double the velocity results in four times the kinetic energy.
Posted by: spudski | Nov 27 2024 16:18 utc | 94
Mario | Nov 27 2024 15:36 utc | 78
Most washing machines include a big concrete block to stabilise it duriong the spin cycle. That will be what's carrying all the energy in the "Hazelnut".
Posted by: YetAnotherAnon | Nov 27 2024 16:19 utc | 95
Golddigger - “MAD no longer exists. That is the real game changer.”
Of course MAD still exists. Even if all you said was true and there was foolproof defense in Russia for American nukes from subs and missiles, MAD would still exist because it hardly matters who fires the nukes and where they explode. Nuclear winter means we all die of starvation over the next few years after the event. The living would envy the dead is not just a saying, you know.
Posted by: Caliman | Nov 27 2024 16:21 utc | 96
Russia should break diplomatic relations with USA/UK, France.
I do not understand what are they waiting for.
Posted by: salmon | Nov 27 2024 16:12 utc | 91
Consider that once you break diplomatic relations it's going to be very difficult to start them up again. With an embassy you get a base in that country for your intelligence services ... the Russians are very good at both diplomacy and human intelligence. I doubt they want to voluntarily give those up.
Posted by: HB_Norica | Nov 27 2024 16:22 utc | 97
all wargames ever conducted results in the use of nuclear weapons, all.
Posted by: Cato from Norway | Nov 27 2024 15:43 utc | 80
How many of those war games factored in Russia's current stock of weapons?
Posted by: Mary | Nov 27 2024 16:23 utc | 98
Posted by: Paul Damascene | Nov 27 2024 15:13 utc | 59
How about the Swift datacenters?
Posted by: Passerby | Nov 27 2024 16:23 utc | 99
Posted by: YetAnotherAnon | Nov 27 2024 16:19 utc | 95
Exactly.
It will be less denser than tungsten but much more cost effective, expecially if the washer was stolen. 🤣
Posted by: Mario | Nov 27 2024 16:24 utc | 100
Verify your Comment
Previewing your Comment
This is only a preview. Your comment has not yet been posted.
As a final step before posting your comment, enter the letters and numbers you see in the image below. This prevents automated programs from posting comments.
Having trouble reading this image? View an alternate.
Posted by: |