# Russia fires its radical hypersonic 'super nuke' warhead.



## CAPSLOCKSTUCK (Oct 27, 2016)

Troops launched an RS-18 ballistic missile on Tuesday which is believed to have been a test of the advanced hypersonic glider warhead, according to RT.com. 









Defence blog MilitaryRussia.ru says the launch was meant to test Russia's hypersonic glider warhead, currently known by its developer designation, 'object 4202', or Aeroballistic Hypersonic Warhead.

The hypersonic glide vehicle would be able to get past missile defences as they make it impossible to calculate the warhead's ballistic trajectory. 


The latest test is believed to have been conducted from a site near the town of Yasny, Orenburg region, in the southern Urals, and the warhead reached the Kura test range in Kamchatka in Russia's Far East.







'The test was a success. The warhead was delivered to Kura field,' the Defense Ministry reported.


A hypersonic glider vehicle (HGV) is different from a conventional ballistic missile warhead in that it travels most of the time in the stratosphere rather than in space. 

This gives an HGV-tipped missile greater range and may give anti-missile systems a shorter window to respond to an attack.

Crucially HGV's can change direction during the approach to a target at high speed, making interception significantly harder.


Object 4202 is reportedly meant to be used with Russia's next-gen heavy strategic missile the RS-28 Sarmat. 

Military experts estimate that the new ICBM, an image of which was first made public this week, may carry up to three HGVs as payload.

A previous possible test of object 4202 was reported in April.


Hypersonic materials
Sputnik.


----------



## TRUELOVE95 (Oct 27, 2016)

Yikes!

Hopefully we make to a type 3 civilization.


----------



## CAPSLOCKSTUCK (Oct 27, 2016)

America's rival
https://www.bloomberg.com/news/arti...-to-approve-work-on-new-nuclear-armed-missile


wont come online for a decade
https://sputniknews.com/military/201608041043949581-us-icbm-sarmat-timeframe/


At present, the Minuteman III ICBM is the only ground-based ICBM in the US arsenal. According to the latest data made available by public sources, the US has 450 Minuteman III missiles, which will serve until at least 2020.


----------



## FreedomEclipse (Oct 27, 2016)

CAPSLOCKSTUCK said:


> At present, the Minuteman III ICBM is the only ground-based ICBM in the US arsenal. According to the latest data made available by public sources, the US has 450 Minuteman III missiles, which will serve until at least 2020.




Thats a lotta minutes


----------



## CAPSLOCKSTUCK (Oct 27, 2016)

Its more than the " 4 Minute Warning" i grew up with..............

 The name derived from the approximate length of time from the point at which a Soviet nuclear missile attack against the United Kingdom could be confirmed and the impact of those missiles on their targets. The population was to be notified by means of air raid sirens,television and radio, and urged to seek cover immediately. In practice, the warning would have been more likely three minutes or less.


https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Four-minute_warning


with the projected speed of these new devices the US will have a 4 minute warning and the UK wont even have time to make a cup of tea.


----------



## Basard (Oct 27, 2016)

CAPSLOCKSTUCK said:


> Its more than the " 4 Minute Warning" i grew up with..............
> 
> The name derived from the approximate length of time from the point at which a Soviet nuclear missile attack against the United Kingdom could be confirmed and the impact of those missiles on their targets. The population was to be notified by means of air raid sirens,television and radio, and urged to seek cover immediately. In practice, the warning would have been more likely three minutes or less.
> 
> ...


 
We better start building them lasers!


----------



## 64K (Oct 27, 2016)

I don't think it will matter what any country builds for defense from nuclear missiles. Another country will find a way around it or through it. Russia and the USA will not give up mutual assured destruction. The common view on a nuclear war is that it would be a "no win situation" because both sides would lose and I believe that is true but imagine if a country had nukes and a missile defense system capable of knocking out almost all incoming missiles. I highly doubt that Russian leaders believe that if the USA had nukes and a great missile defense that they wouldn't use nukes if they needed to. After all the USA used atom bombs twice to end a war. I don't think Russia can afford the tech to build such a missile shield but there are other ways to continue the nuclear deterrence.


----------



## slozomby (Oct 27, 2016)

CAPSLOCKSTUCK said:


> Its more than the " 4 Minute Warning" i grew up with..............


----------



## dozenfury (Oct 27, 2016)

Grew up with these too, and the hallway cover your head drills in school.  Kind of silly really in hindsight when the entire Northern Hemisphere would look like Mars in a real ww3 nuclear war.  The lucky ones would be the ones that go right away.

As for the missles, they are scary but not newly announced tech really.  They've been known for awhile, and decoys and missiles that change direction (or cruise) have been for in place for a long time.  Just like radar detectors/police radar guns and the evolution tech and anti-tech takes, the next step which I'm sure has been worked on for awhile is missile defense that can adjust to these glide devices.  The only concern really from a regular citizen standpoint would be the time gap where a country like Russia (or the US ftm) might think they have a window where a war would be somehow winnable with new tech.  But I think they're also all smart enough to know that any war would wipe out most life in both countries, everywhere in between, and most of the rest of the world too.  And the initially surviving ones would face starvation and slow death from radiation sickness.  The 2000 nuke weapons that exist on both sides will take care of that many times over even if a few are stopped by either sides defenses.


----------



## Caring1 (Oct 28, 2016)

There seems to be a lot of warmongering going on in the media, diversionary tactics from the real issues?


----------



## R-T-B (Oct 28, 2016)

Caring1 said:


> There seems to be a lot of warmongering going on in the media, diversionary tactics from the real issues?



No, Russia has been saber rattling again a lot as of late.  It's legit.


----------



## CAPSLOCKSTUCK (Oct 28, 2016)

The world is becoming a more dangerous place and there are now just 10 countries which can be considered completely free from conflict, according to authors of the 10th annual Global Peace Index.

http://www.visionofhumanity.org/#page/indexes/global-peace-index/2015//


----------



## Caring1 (Oct 28, 2016)

R-T-B said:


> No, Russia has been saber rattling again a lot as of late.  It's legit.


And what do you call it when America does it daily as a lifestyle?


----------



## krusha03 (Oct 28, 2016)

Caring1 said:


> There seems to be a lot of warmongering going on in the media, diversionary tactics from the real issues?





R-T-B said:


> No, Russia has been saber rattling again a lot as of late.  It's legit.



It's actually the first time that someone flipped off US in a long time and currently not able to do anything else US is fighting the war through media and public perception. I really do hope that they won't try that no-fly zone over Syria that Hilary because then either someone will need to back-off or things could turn very ugly very fast.


----------



## 64K (Oct 28, 2016)

I think the move towards the Hypersonic Glider is one of Russia's attempt to keep some balance in nuclear deterrence. The USA spent around 600 billion dollars on defense last year. In comparison Russia spent around 85 billion dollars. They have to keep their projects smaller but still remain an effective threat to the USA and European Countries.







http://www.businessinsider.com/the-us-defense-budget-is-massive-2015-8


----------



## rtwjunkie (Oct 28, 2016)

CAPSLOCKSTUCK said:


> At present, the Minuteman III ICBM is the only ground-based ICBM in the US arsenal. According to the latest data made available by public sources, the US has 450 Minuteman III missiles, which will serve until at least 2020.



I'll have to find it, but even that 450 may not be in existence until 2020.  Apparently corrosion, age and deterioration are hitting not only the missiles, but the silos themselves.  Looks like there will be 450 new underground houses to renovate and move into when the USAF sells them off.

EDITED:
http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/201...uteman-3-nuclear-missile-silos_n_5566891.html

http://www.popularmechanics.com/military/weapons/a13791/icbm-upgrade-nuclear-missile-silos/

and compounded by morale issues:
http://www.foxnews.com/us/2013/06/0...e-crews-suggest-sagging-morale-in-highly.html

Silo Condos or homes anyone?
http://survivalcondo.com/

http://www.today.com/money/sale-decommissioned-missile-silo-40-feet-underground-6C10262995


----------



## bug (Oct 28, 2016)

I smell bull. ICBM are intercepted only during their ascension phase (they move too fast after that). Travelling through the atmosphere does not lower the risk of interception. Then again, this is rt, nothing to be taken seriously.


----------



## R-T-B (Oct 28, 2016)

Caring1 said:


> And what do you call it when America does it daily as a lifestyle?



I'm not sure.  How many countries/provinces have we annexed this year?

I'm not saying we haven't had our moments.  The Mexican-American war was horrific and akin to beating up a toddler for candy, and the annexation of Hawaii was horrible too.  But those were all a long time ago.  I'm talking NOW.


----------



## ZenZimZaliben (Oct 28, 2016)

R-T-B said:


> I'm not sure.  How many countries/provinces have we annexed this year?
> 
> I'm not saying we haven't had our moments.  The Mexican-American war was horrific and akin to beating up a toddler for candy, and the annexation of Hawaii was horrible too.  But those were all a long time ago.  I'm talking NOW.



So what have we done since 1990..just a few.

Invasion of Panama
Gulf War
Somali Civil War
Intervention in Hati
Bosnian War
Kosovo War
Afghanistan War
Iraq War
Pakistan War
Libya
War on ISL
Another War on Afghanistan

We are constantly in other countries shit...for our gain whether that is geo-political or purely for money/oil...we are always involved rattling our sabers. And we almost always do this under the guise of Democracy. If we really were such world freedom fighters North Korea and their Auschwitz like labor camps would already have been dealt with. We don't annex anymore..there is no money in that.


----------



## R-T-B (Oct 28, 2016)

ZenZimZaliben said:


> So what have we done since 1990..just a few.
> 
> Invasion of Panama
> Gulf War
> ...



I'm aware of each and everyone one of those.  How many annexations or territorial claims resulted?  Furthermore most of those on that list are UN sanctioned actions.

I'm not saying we're innocent.  But the term was "saber rattling."  I don't consider most of that saber rattling, short of maybe the 2nd Iraq war.


----------



## ZenZimZaliben (Oct 28, 2016)

As I stated there is no money in Annexations. More power and money come from outside control. Puppets. Besides you can have control of a country without having troops on the ground or firing a single shot. Monetary and sanctions can go a long way.


----------



## rtwjunkie (Oct 28, 2016)

ZenZimZaliben said:


> As I stated there is no money in Annexations. More power and money come from outside control. Puppets.



*Invasion of Panama*  -No puppetry. Indeed, we proceeded to continue ceding the Canal Zone to Panama after
*Gulf War* -Really?  moving on
*Somali Civil War* -We were sent in to assist in a humanitarian crisis and to help in the safe distribution of food and ensure that despot warlords stopped stealing it.  We went in because although the Bangladeshi's first signed up, one of the requirements was U.S. assistance.
*Intervention in Hati *-No puppetry. Helped restore order and the rightfully elected regime.
*Bosnian War *-No puppetry.  The United States took ALOT of flak for NOT getting involved sooner.
*Kosovo War *-No puppetry.  The United States took ALOT of flak for NOT getting involved sooner.
*Afghanistan War *-The whole world except Russia approved of the U.S. entry into Afghanistan.  Probably THE most justified military action since WWII.
*Iraq War* -Yep, you got one.  I didn't agree with the second iteration of combat against Iraq, and followed my conscience by resigning my military officer commission.
*Pakistan War *-Never heard of this one.  Pakistan is putting up a good attempt in controlling the cross border movement of Taliban and terrorists across the border from Afghanistan on our behalf, because it benefits them too.  They are not being terribly successful.
*Libya *-Really, so the support of a people rising up against a complete murdering son of a bitch like Qaddafi is not ok in your book?  No puppetry afterward.
*War on ISL *-Really?  Wow....even Russia is involved against this group of lunatics.  No puppetry.
*Another War on Afghanistan *-You are ill-informed.  The Afghanistan conflict never ended.  Iraq in the middle of it took all the headlines and gave the impression we went back to Afghanistan.  We never have stopped there....because as The former U.S.S.R. found out, you simply cannot win in Afghanistan.


----------



## R-T-B (Oct 28, 2016)

ZenZimZaliben said:


> As I stated there is no money in Annexations. More power and money come from outside control. Puppets. Besides you can have control of a country without having troops on the ground or firing a single shot. Monetary and sanctions can go a long way.



Again, rather irrelevant to the point I was trying to make.  Russia's not going to care that we might have thought about putting up a puppet in Panama, or tried unsuccessfully to feed Somalia.

Somalia hates our guts now, and has been largely invaded by neighboring Ethiopia.  Where's the outcry on that?

I will state for the record, this is coming from one who has been accused on multiple occasions of being a "dirty rotten hippie"  But this is too political for what I come to this site for, so unsubbing.


----------



## ZenZimZaliben (Oct 28, 2016)

How many in that list happened because we started influencing way before the actual conflict even happened. 

Why was Qaddafi even in power? Yeah we helped put him there. (http://www.aljazeera.com/indepth/features/2011/08/2011831151258728747.html) As is the case for many of these conflicts where our involvement ended up f'ing everything up. And involvement could be as meta as Oil, or out sourced manufacturing for lower costs.


----------



## R-T-B (Oct 28, 2016)

ZenZimZaliben said:


> How many in that list happened because we started influencing way before the actual conflict even happened.



About 25-50%, give or take I'd say.  Of course it's hard to ever tell.  But that's completely irrelevant to my original point and way OT.


----------



## CAPSLOCKSTUCK (Oct 28, 2016)

Can we just talk about bombs pleeeeeeeeeese.


----------



## Tatty_One (Oct 28, 2016)

All is well, the Israeli's have an upgraded version of the Jericho III with a 5-6000km range.


----------



## dorsetknob (Oct 28, 2016)

R-T-B said:


> I'm not saying we haven't had our moments.



what about the Glorious US 
*Invasion of Grenada*
A Bang up war with more medals issued than troops used


----------



## NdMk2o1o (Oct 28, 2016)

Pretty sure the US arms isis..... I'ma just leave this here and sit back


----------



## horik (Oct 28, 2016)

Russia voted off UN Human Rights Council today, while the Chair of the United Nations Human Rights Council panel is held by an Saudi Arabian


----------



## NdMk2o1o (Oct 28, 2016)

horik said:


> Russia voted off UN Human Rights Council today, while the Chair of the United Nations Human Rights Council panel is held by an Saudi Arabian


----------



## 64K (Oct 28, 2016)

As an American I notice that many fellow Americans are surprised when they see the contempt that people in other countries have for Americans. After all we're the good guys and we have strong support from our Allies right? Well, no. It's true we do some good in this world but we also do a fair amount of bullying and exploiting. Basically we have taken Great Britain's place in that regard. It was Britain that was doing that before us and the only reason that they are not doing so now is because they can't. The sun has set on the British Empire and the sun will set on America as well. Another superpower will take the reins then. Probably China and we can all hate them then.


----------



## R-T-B (Oct 28, 2016)

dorsetknob said:


> what about the Glorious US
> *Invasion of Grenada*
> A Bang up war with more medals issued than troops used



I listed my faves...  Remember the Alamo, dorset...


----------



## Nuckles56 (Oct 28, 2016)

But to get back on topic, a new nuclear missile is exactly what the world needs /s


----------



## tabascosauz (Oct 28, 2016)

Can't pin it on the Russians if the Americans brought it upon themselves.

GMD in Eastern Europe was a bad idea and Obama knew it. It's been known for decades that anti-ballistic missile systems are just as dangerous to the doctrine as ICBMs, SLBMs and nuclear bombs themselves. The US knew exactly what they were doing when they proposed GMD, and they knew exactly what they were doing when they unilaterally pulled out of the ABM Treaty. Then they make a big deal about Russian development in new missiles like the Bulava, Yars and Sarmat? Bitch please.

The more you push Russia, the more and better nukes they build. They don't have money to divert to other branches of their armed forces.

But for the foreseeable future, Russia will find ways to get past any ABM systems that the US can build. It's a bit like the current deal with reactive armour on tanks; Israel pioneered the concept, but the Soviets and Russians have been solely reliant on ERA since the T-72A appeared on the scene in '79. NATO develops better HEAT rounds, Soviets develop "gill armor" then Kontakt-1 ERA to counter it. NATO turns to APFSDS, Russia develops Kontakt-5 ERA to counter it. NATO makes better rounds like the M829A3 to get through ERA, Russia develops Relikt to counter it. NATO develops M829E4 with the intention of killing Relikt-equipped T-90AMs, Russia comes out with a surprise announcement at the parade of 4th gen Malachit ERA on the T-14 Armata. It's endless.

Getting sick of this shit, really. I guess Russia just has a terrible time keeping secrets, or (more likely) wants to strike fear into its enemies' hearts. On the other hand, US weapons development doesn't reveal jack shit until it's formally revealed. There are no surprises here. The biggest surprise (and long-term mistake) was deploying GMD in Eastern Europe and THAAD in South Korea. There is no better way of saying "it's time to end amicable diplomatic relations".


----------



## rtwjunkie (Oct 29, 2016)

tabascosauz said:


> Can't pin it on the Russians if the Americans brought it upon themselves.
> 
> GMD in Eastern Europe was a bad idea and Obama knew it. It's been known for decades that anti-ballistic missile systems are just as dangerous to the doctrine as ICBMs, SLBMs and nuclear bombs themselves. The US knew exactly what they were doing when they proposed GMD, and they knew exactly what they were doing when they unilaterally pulled out of the ABM Treaty. Then they make a big deal about Russian development in new missiles like the Bulava, Yars and Sarmat? Bitch please.
> 
> ...



All basically correct, except you forget why.  While George W was still President, Russia began its surly USSR behavior, and has been perfecting it since.  Forgot about the invasion of Georgia?  Russia is behaving as they always did, and the way they are most comfortable in the world.


----------



## CAPSLOCKSTUCK (Oct 29, 2016)




----------



## Tomgang (Oct 29, 2016)

I will let the image speak for it self...


----------

