4 ms·

Having read about this some years ago, I'd suggest that the majority are in a very poor shape because of lack on investment in maintenance, upgrades,etc. Howeve

Having read about this some years ago, I'd suggest that the majority are in a very poor shape because of lack on investment in maintenance, upgrades,etc. However, even if all their bombs are rusty and barely work, It'd be enough to drop just one of them on my country that would make it completely inhabitable.

chillingeffect 5y ago
This view of decaying Russian military predominates, but they're smart scientists and engineers. They also steal tech through spying. They're the pioneers of hypersonic weapons. https://www.19fortyfive.com/2021/08/russias-hypersonic-weapons-arsenal-all-four-platforms-explained/ https://www.19fortyfive.com/2021/08/russias-hypersonic-weapo...
spywaregorilla 5y ago
I'm not sure it's that simple. The bombs probably don't "barely work" at 10% of explosive power. It's more likely that 90% of them do not work at all, and 10% of them do. Numbers made up without basis. Russia starts to look very awkward if they launch a nuclear attack and it does not work. What happens next? The loss of credibility drops substantially with each attack. I think, for this reason, a nuclear attack on ukraine is not likely to happen.
- jopsen 5y ago
  > What happens next? Anything could happen.
- tpxl 5y ago
  Wont a conventional explosive wrapped around a nuclear payload (ie a dirty bomb) do a whole lot of damage from the radiation? The blasts don't concern me, cities can be rebuilt, but not if the land is radioactive for a hundred years.
  - spywaregorilla 5y ago
    Not an expert but I think no, that's not how that works. You can't detonate a nuclear weapon without the mechanism to enact the fission. A dirty bomb meaning just a normal explosion with some radioactivity in it, is probably... not actually that bad? At least, not in the context of how bad things are already. Hundred years sounds far too long.
  - gvb 5y ago
    Chernobyl was effectively a "dirty bomb." It was bad, but not nearly as bad as was predicted. Many people have visited the Chernobyl exclusion zone (legally and illegally) and found it is doing pretty well. (Most recent visitors were Russian soldiers - Russia actually invaded Ukraine through the Chernobyl exclusion zone.)
- gigglesupstairs 5y ago
  This is a better view. It’s not just about what happens if it works but also about what of it does not. In both the scenarios though, Russia itself be facing an existential crisis since nuclear powers are dime a dozen at this point in the world and they will fight back. Edit: As spywaregorillla corrected me, there are only a few countries with nuclear weapons. 8 in number other than Russia.
  - pixl97 5y ago
    It's very likely that Russia would cease to exist shortly after launching the first nuke after after a US retaliation strike. Now, what I do believe is that the Russian boomer subs have working nuclear weapons and represent the largest danger of all.
  - spywaregorilla 5y ago
    Very few countries have nuclear weapons and it hasn't changed much since the 70s.
- TMWNN 5y ago
  >Russia starts to look very awkward if they launch a nuclear attack and it does not work. What happens next? Yes, I've been thinking about this possibility for a while: * Putin fires tactical atomic weapon at some empty plot of Ukrainian land, and announces it as a "demonstration" of Russian might. * The weapon is a dud. I'm not sure whether this outcome might not be worse in the long run, in terms of geopolitical stability, than if the weapon performs as expected!
p_l 5y ago
Strategic Rocket forces as well as Long Range Aviation (the strategic forces that carry nuclear deterrent), and the boomer forces, all have much stricter overview and for years had priority over everything else in terms of funding (as resources dried up in wake of soviet union collapse, Russia fell back on nuclear deterrent as the method of ensuring nobody attacks, so they were first for everything). I expect that corruption endemic in the ground forces (especially infantry) is much more in check with nuclear forces.
lm28469 5y ago
> It'd be enough to drop just one of them on my country that would make it completely inhabitable. Which country ? Even the craziest nuclear bomb as a total destruction radius of 50-100km
- cosmodisk 5y ago
  Lithuania. Area:65000km2. Some mentioned Chernobyl plant explosion - we had identical nuclear plant that has been decommissioned since. If the same would have happened here,more or less entire country would be exclusion zone even today

chillingeffect 5y ago

This view of decaying Russian military predominates, but they're smart scientists and engineers. They also steal tech through spying. They're the pioneers of hypersonic weapons. https://www.19fortyfive.com/2021/08/russias-hypersonic-weapons-arsenal-all-four-platforms-explained/ https://www.19fortyfive.com/2021/08/russias-hypersonic-weapo...

spywaregorilla 5y ago

I'm not sure it's that simple. The bombs probably don't "barely work" at 10% of explosive power. It's more likely that 90% of them do not work at all, and 10% of them do. Numbers made up without basis. Russia starts to look very awkward if they launch a nuclear attack and it does not work. What happens next? The loss of credibility drops substantially with each attack. I think, for this reason, a nuclear attack on ukraine is not likely to happen.

jopsen 5y ago
> What happens next? Anything could happen.
tpxl 5y ago
Wont a conventional explosive wrapped around a nuclear payload (ie a dirty bomb) do a whole lot of damage from the radiation? The blasts don't concern me, cities can be rebuilt, but not if the land is radioactive for a hundred years.
- spywaregorilla 5y ago
  Not an expert but I think no, that's not how that works. You can't detonate a nuclear weapon without the mechanism to enact the fission. A dirty bomb meaning just a normal explosion with some radioactivity in it, is probably... not actually that bad? At least, not in the context of how bad things are already. Hundred years sounds far too long.
- gvb 5y ago
  Chernobyl was effectively a "dirty bomb." It was bad, but not nearly as bad as was predicted. Many people have visited the Chernobyl exclusion zone (legally and illegally) and found it is doing pretty well. (Most recent visitors were Russian soldiers - Russia actually invaded Ukraine through the Chernobyl exclusion zone.)
gigglesupstairs 5y ago
This is a better view. It’s not just about what happens if it works but also about what of it does not. In both the scenarios though, Russia itself be facing an existential crisis since nuclear powers are dime a dozen at this point in the world and they will fight back. Edit: As spywaregorillla corrected me, there are only a few countries with nuclear weapons. 8 in number other than Russia.
- pixl97 5y ago
  It's very likely that Russia would cease to exist shortly after launching the first nuke after after a US retaliation strike. Now, what I do believe is that the Russian boomer subs have working nuclear weapons and represent the largest danger of all.
- spywaregorilla 5y ago
  Very few countries have nuclear weapons and it hasn't changed much since the 70s.
TMWNN 5y ago
>Russia starts to look very awkward if they launch a nuclear attack and it does not work. What happens next? Yes, I've been thinking about this possibility for a while: * Putin fires tactical atomic weapon at some empty plot of Ukrainian land, and announces it as a "demonstration" of Russian might. * The weapon is a dud. I'm not sure whether this outcome might not be worse in the long run, in terms of geopolitical stability, than if the weapon performs as expected!

p_l 5y ago

Strategic Rocket forces as well as Long Range Aviation (the strategic forces that carry nuclear deterrent), and the boomer forces, all have much stricter overview and for years had priority over everything else in terms of funding (as resources dried up in wake of soviet union collapse, Russia fell back on nuclear deterrent as the method of ensuring nobody attacks, so they were first for everything). I expect that corruption endemic in the ground forces (especially infantry) is much more in check with nuclear forces.

lm28469 5y ago

> It'd be enough to drop just one of them on my country that would make it completely inhabitable. Which country ? Even the craziest nuclear bomb as a total destruction radius of 50-100km

cosmodisk 5y ago
Lithuania. Area:65000km2. Some mentioned Chernobyl plant explosion - we had identical nuclear plant that has been decommissioned since. If the same would have happened here,more or less entire country would be exclusion zone even today