Nuclear war imminent

>>31805195
That shows the Russians are still deeply unserious about nuclear war.

40 megatons of cargo. About 2x times as much as its predecesor.

>>31805464
10 x 800 kt warheads.
16 x 550 kt warheads.

The media has no idea how to report nuclear weapons.

>>31805195

> gizmodo

lol

First-trike weapon.

>In the Soviet Union there are more than ten different types, amounting to approximately the same total as the Americans possess. Why this lack of coordination? Because not one of them is of really good quality. Some lack accuracy, and have too low a payload, and too short a range, but they are kept in service because they are more reliable than other types. Others are retained because their accuracy is more or less acceptable. Others are neither accurate nor reliable but have a good range. But there is one other reason for this untidy situation, for this multiplicity of types. The fact is that the rocket forces have been developed piecemeal, like a patchwork quilt. Soviet industry is unable to turn out long production runs of rockets quickly. For this reason, while the factories are familiarising themselves with the manufacture of one type and beginning slowly to produce it, another type is being brought just as slowly into service. Familiarisation with this new type starts, in a dilatory way, and a small production run begins, with equal lack of haste, and thus, year by year, the Rocket Forces expand, gradually and in leisurely fashion. Often a really good rocket can only be produced in small numbers because the United States will only sell a small quantity of the parts needed for it. For example, if the Americans only sell seventy-nine precision fuel filters, the Soviets will be unable to produce more than this number of rockets. Some of these will be allocated for experimental use and the number available for operational deployment therefore becomes smaller still. It is then necessary to design a new rocket without high-precision filters but with electronic equipment to control the ignition process. But then, perhaps, it is only possible to purchase two hundred sets of this electronic equipment from the US. A first-class rocket, but no more than two hundred can be produced

>>31805195
Isn't the RS-26 Rubezh more dangerous while the Sarmat is mostly for showing off?

>>31805195
Why are there threads on multiple boards about this all of a sudden? It smells like shill to me, I just don't know what kind.

>>31805771
/pol/ is having boners from just thinking about it. Not responding to these threads or saging will help stem the /pol/.

>>31805783
Wish OPpenheimer was still around

>>31805783
>implying /pol/ isn't /k/

literally the same bunch of people fantasizing about mass murder irl

>>31805195
No, we're fine.

North Koreans were threatening us with nuclear annihilation for decades (and threatening their populace that evil Americans are gonna nuke them at the same time to keep them in check), now that Russia is falling to the level of North Korea as the oil prices slide, we'll see the same rhetoric from them.

All they really want is to scare Russians enough so they don't go visiting the West, can't access information and can be controlled.

Relax and go back to your usual /k/ thing, whatever it is.

>>31805819
People on /k/ dont think:
The world is flat
Nuclear weapons dont exist
Moon landing was faked
The next wikileaks dump is always the one that will bring Hillary/DNC/Whatever down.
/pol/ is full of morons.

>Russian arsenal already concentrates too many warheads on too few missiles (above the New START warhead limit but heavily below the deployed launcher limit)
>Let's make it even more concentrated

>Supposedly worried about American "missile shield" blocking a retaliatory strike after an American first strike
>Wasting money on heavy silo based missiles that are guaranteed to die to depressed Trident shots instead of continuing with more survivable mobile launchers

Is Russian nuclear policy seriously just a matter of generating impressive sounding but meaningless propaganda?

>>31805915
>Is Russian nuclear policy seriously just a matter of generating impressive sounding but meaningless propaganda?
Yes.

I thought you liked weapons /k/. You dissapoint me.

>>31806051
This is not a thread about a weapon it is a fucking thread about some shitty /pol/ bait/propaganda thread who shits out an article regurgitated by idiot media companies like Gizmodo who cannot fact check to save their own company.

>>31805877
>The world is flat
This is a useful thing to think about because some of the evidence flat earthers bring up require thinking about to figure out why its not so.
>Nuclear weapons dont exist
i dont recall /pol/ ever suggesting this
>Moon landing was faked
It was, the one in 69. And we now have a moonbase :^)
>The next wikileaks dump is always the one that will bring Hillary/DNC/Whatever down.
Would be if people werent retards
>/pol/ is full of morons.
Yeah

Doesn't matter, the US possess technology that can deactivate their atoms.

>>31806104
from Russian reports
>50Mt payload
>10k km range
>Mach 20
this is actually pretty fucking serious stuff that the Russians will have over us within 5 years.

>>31805915
trident missiles aren't designed for silo attacks you'd need something with a lot greater yield or accuracy to disable an icbm silo. our pathetic minuteman IIIs and much more capable albms are tasked for silo attacks but then we'd have to swarm in close to get them off. russia might not be very impressive compared to the US military but their strategic 'defenses' are more than enough leverage.

this new missile could be the pretense for the inevitable nato suprise attack on russia. In order to secure it's hegemony.

File: bmwp.png (88KB, 588x451px) Image search: [Google]

88KB, 588x451px

>>31806398
>trident missiles aren't designed for silo attacks you'd need something with a lot greater yield or accuracy to disable an icbm silo.
Why lie so obviously?

http://www.designation-systems.net/dusrm/m-133.html
CEP of 90m with a 475kt warhead. That comes out to a superb SSKP.

>our pathetic minuteman IIIs and much more capable albms are tasked for silo attacks
What the fuck are blabbering on about? MMIII's (either Mk12/W78s or Mk21/W87s) have an inferior SSKP. ALBM? Is this fucking 1962? The US has never put into service any ALBM.


>this new missile could be the pretense for the inevitable nato suprise attack on russia.
Nevermind, you're just another worthless /pol/ shitposter. Only response you get troll.

wow.
this is because of the us warships on romanian sea with missile defense systems and possibly nukes
satan 2 is for balance of power
unless clinton thinks with her vagina she will understand this

File: im the captain now - putin.jpg (38KB, 376x819px) Image search: [Google]

38KB, 376x819px

Texas BTFOd

>>31805195
> destroy an area “the size of Texas.”

Is this a meme? 40 Mt is not enough to destroy the area of Texas. Novaya Zemlya is much smalles and was still inhabitable after the Tsar Bomba which was 50 Mt

>>31808347
Shut the fuck up, fat burger

>>31805819
>>31805877
Sup CTR.

>>31808353
Go eat a turnip.

>>31805195
liquid fueled? Top kek.

>>31808402
yeah i was wondering about that. why is it liquid fueled? what advantage does it have, if any?

>>31808347

It's probably the megaton sum of all MIRV in it. Multiple cities nuked at a time.