8 ms·

As I understand it, the so called KANYON/Poseidon nuclear torpedo is likely a real project, albeit with somewhat exaggerated capabilities. The Project 09852 / B

As I understand it, the so called KANYON/Poseidon nuclear torpedo is likely a real project, albeit with somewhat exaggerated capabilities. The Project 09852 / Belgorod submarine is certainly real, and there is some reason to believe it is being created in part to carry and launch those massive torpedoes. But supposing its claimed capabilities were accurate, 10,000 km at 100 km/h would take the torpedo over four days. The original claim of 185 km/h is much faster, but travel time would still be measured on the order of days. It's fast enough to be very noisy but slow enough to be seen coming days away; totally nonsensical for a first strike weapon. The conclusion is that if such a torpedo is in development, it's intended as a retaliation weapon.

AstralStorm 8y ago
Or perhaps covert local-ish deployment from places closer than 10 Mm. Essentially a medium range torpedo with higher top speed.
- darkpuma 8y ago
  Yes but used in such a role, there would be little that's special about it. Nuclear armed torpedoes and short range missiles aren't new. What's special about KANYON is specifically it's range and payload (but frankly the payload could be a tenth of what's advertised and it would still be a chilling weapon, so really the range is the real interesting part.) It's likely it would never be operated near it's maximum range, but would nevertheless be operated at few thousand kilometers. The reason for this is because its likely host, the Belgorod, would be safest operating under the polar ice cap where sonar is, relatively speaking, a clusterfuck.
- siffland 8y ago
  Would not that of violated the I.N.F treaty? This is a serious question because I am not sure.
  - SiempreViernes 8y ago
    No, INF treaty is about ground launched weapons, the same thing launched by boats are fine. On of the things the Russians did was to take a boat launched weapon capable of INF prohibited ranges, putting it on the ground but only testing it out to ranges allowed by the INF. )I think they put something heavier on it so it wouldn't go as far as the naval version.)
dilyevsky 8y ago
Did you read the wiki page? It would move in stealth mode for weeks until it gets close enough to strike at high speed. This is a deadmans switch kind of weapon more than anything designed to counter us anti ballistic initiative on a budget.
- darkpuma 8y ago
  The drone and/or stealth properties of it are likely overstated. The fact that Russia is constructing at least two incredibly expensive submarines (Khabarovsk and Belgorod) to carry them suggests that they aren't suited or intended for long term independent operation. For economically troubled Russia to construct two very costly host submarines suggests that these devices are more akin to torpedoes than autonomous submarines. Less significantly, the diagrams Russia "published" don't seem to have any room for ballast tanks, which means it would not have hydrostatic control over it's buoyancy (like a traditional submarine does.) Operating depth would therefore be controlled hydrodynamically (as a traditional torpedo does.) Unless it were doing laps, and thus easier to detect, it probably cannot loiter for very long. Despite all of the above, there are some rumors of a sea bed variant, however I still suspect the system cannot simply settle itself down on the sea bed. Rather it, along with supporting infrastructure, would be placed there by a submarine or surface ship. The Belgorod in particular seems the likely candidate for this sort of operation, since it is additionally reported to be the host for a Paltus-class midget submarine. > "This is a deadmans switch kind of weapon" e.g. for retaliation, not first strikes. On that we agree. SSBNs have traditionally served this role, since assuring their destruction during a preemptive strike would be virtually impossible. Advances in ballistic missile defenses threaten to make the inability to assure destruction of all SSBNs irrelevant, and this new torpedo is obviously a response to that.
  - dilyevsky 8y ago
    The cobalt payload is kind of giveaway too - it’s basically a dirtybomb torpedo designed to do most of its killing over decades which makes it bad for first strike.

AstralStorm 8y ago

Or perhaps covert local-ish deployment from places closer than 10 Mm. Essentially a medium range torpedo with higher top speed.

darkpuma 8y ago
Yes but used in such a role, there would be little that's special about it. Nuclear armed torpedoes and short range missiles aren't new. What's special about KANYON is specifically it's range and payload (but frankly the payload could be a tenth of what's advertised and it would still be a chilling weapon, so really the range is the real interesting part.) It's likely it would never be operated near it's maximum range, but would nevertheless be operated at few thousand kilometers. The reason for this is because its likely host, the Belgorod, would be safest operating under the polar ice cap where sonar is, relatively speaking, a clusterfuck.
siffland 8y ago
Would not that of violated the I.N.F treaty? This is a serious question because I am not sure.
- SiempreViernes 8y ago
  No, INF treaty is about ground launched weapons, the same thing launched by boats are fine. On of the things the Russians did was to take a boat launched weapon capable of INF prohibited ranges, putting it on the ground but only testing it out to ranges allowed by the INF. )I think they put something heavier on it so it wouldn't go as far as the naval version.)

dilyevsky 8y ago

Did you read the wiki page? It would move in stealth mode for weeks until it gets close enough to strike at high speed. This is a deadmans switch kind of weapon more than anything designed to counter us anti ballistic initiative on a budget.

darkpuma 8y ago
The drone and/or stealth properties of it are likely overstated. The fact that Russia is constructing at least two incredibly expensive submarines (Khabarovsk and Belgorod) to carry them suggests that they aren't suited or intended for long term independent operation. For economically troubled Russia to construct two very costly host submarines suggests that these devices are more akin to torpedoes than autonomous submarines. Less significantly, the diagrams Russia "published" don't seem to have any room for ballast tanks, which means it would not have hydrostatic control over it's buoyancy (like a traditional submarine does.) Operating depth would therefore be controlled hydrodynamically (as a traditional torpedo does.) Unless it were doing laps, and thus easier to detect, it probably cannot loiter for very long. Despite all of the above, there are some rumors of a sea bed variant, however I still suspect the system cannot simply settle itself down on the sea bed. Rather it, along with supporting infrastructure, would be placed there by a submarine or surface ship. The Belgorod in particular seems the likely candidate for this sort of operation, since it is additionally reported to be the host for a Paltus-class midget submarine. > "This is a deadmans switch kind of weapon" e.g. for retaliation, not first strikes. On that we agree. SSBNs have traditionally served this role, since assuring their destruction during a preemptive strike would be virtually impossible. Advances in ballistic missile defenses threaten to make the inability to assure destruction of all SSBNs irrelevant, and this new torpedo is obviously a response to that.
- dilyevsky 8y ago
  The cobalt payload is kind of giveaway too - it’s basically a dirtybomb torpedo designed to do most of its killing over decades which makes it bad for first strike.