Originally Posted by RN7
Unfortunately the Russians do.
NATO if it had the political will could have an army of 50,000 troops with tanks and artillery in the Ukraine in a week backed by powerful air assets by simply marching through Poland. In a month they could have at least 250,000 troops including heavy US Army forces backed by the brunt of the USAF and NATO naval power. Given the high level of capabilities and technology that NATO could assemble this force would more than hold its own against the Russians despite being out numbered and out gunned. But they won't because of Russia's nuclear arsenal. Putin won't use or threaten NATO with nuclear weapons as he is not a buffoon and thug like Saddam Hussein, but he also knows that Russia has the capability to hurt NATO anywhere in Europe and North America without using nuclear weapons.
If NATO is planning to attack Russia they will know about it. Russia has 58 active military satellites in orbit including 6 known early warning and reconnaissance systems (1x Kobalt-M ISR, 1x Lotus-S ELINT, 1x Tselina-2 ELINT, 4x Oka EW). They also have 9 major long ranged ground radar stations (The ABM engagement system at Moscow, and radars at St Petersburg, southern Russia, the northwest Arctic, the Urals and eastern Siberia, and leased radar stations in Belarus, Kazakhstan and Azerbaijan). They also have a huge air defence network of over 2,000 long ranged SAM launchers (32x SH-11 Gorgon (stored), 68x SH-08 Gazelle, 1,900x S-300, 64x S-400) in addition to nearly 2,000 combat aircraft.
NATO has run down its ASW capabilities over the past 20 years to the point that NATO navies are almost embarrassed to request funding for ASW systems as they can't justify them. Russia on the other hand knew its navy was never going to match the US Navy and NATO, so it kept a smaller but very capable submarine force in service.
Nuclear Strategic Ballistic Missile Submarine
3x Kalmar (Delta III) with 16 RSM-50 (SS-N-18 Stingray)
6x Delfin ( Delta IV) with 16 RSM-54 (SS-N-23 Skiff)
2x Akula ( Typhoon) in reserve awaiting refit with 40 RSM-52 (SS-N-20 Sturgeon)
1x Akula ( Typhoon) in reserve for testing with Bulava (SS-N-X-32)
2x Borey on sea trials with Bulava (SS-N-X-32) (2x vessels in build
Nuclear Attack Submarine
8x Antyey (Oscar II) (of which 3 in reserve) with 3M45 Granit (SS-N-19 Shipwreck) (3x in reserve)
2x Schuka-B (Akula II) with 3M10 Granat (SS-N-21 Sampson) (one further boat leased to India)
8x Schuka-B (Akula I) with 3M10 Granat (SS-N-21Sampson) (2x in reserve)
2x Kondor (Sierra II) with 3M10 Granat (SS-N-21 Sampson) SLCM
1x Barracuda (Sierra I) with 3M10 (SS-N-21 Sampson) and RPK-7 (SS-N-16 Stallion)
4x Schuka (Victor III) with 3M10 Granat (SS-N-21 Sampson) (1x in reserve)
Diesel-Electric Submarine
15x Paltus (Kilo)
4x Varshavyanka (Kilo)
1x Lada (2x vessels in build)
This fleet would make mince meat out of any merchant ship or convoy in the Atlantic or elsewhere, and even NATO warships would be under treat. During the Cold War the US Navy didn't devoted enough resources to ASW as it could always rely on its NATO allies such as the British Royal Navy to do the job. Today the British no longer have the capabilities they once had; the VTOL carriers, ASW frigates and Nimrod are gone or are in storage; and other NATO fleets are only a fraction of what they once were. NATO's diesel-electric AIP submarines are good in shallow waters and littoral chock points, but in the open Atlantic and Arctic ocean's they will be outclassed by the bigger, faster, longer ranged and better armed Russians. This will leave the hard work to the US and British (maybe French) nuclear submarines, and the Russian submarine service still remains very good.
The Russians also have 79 long ranged bombers. Their all nuclear capable and armed with long ranged cruise missiles.
Russian Bomber Fleet
16x Tu-160 Blackjack each with up to 12 Kh-55 SM (AS-15A/B Kent) nuclear ALCM
32x Tu-95MS6 (Bear H-6) each with up to 6 Kh-55/SM (AS-15A/B Kent) nuclear ALCM
31x Tu-95MS16 (Bear H-16) each with up to 16 Kh-55 (AS-15A Kent) nuclear ALCM
NATO fighters (European) including the Eurofighter are short ranged and would have difficulty intercepting them. Russia also has another 132x Tu-22M/M-3/MR Backfire bombers. The best European NATO long ranged interceptor was Britain's RAF Tornado ADV and its now gone. USAF F-15's and F-22's would be needed.
Russian Strategic Missile Forces (Ground based)
60x RS-20 (SS-18 Satan) (mostly mod 5, 10 MIRV per msl)
120x RS12M (SS-25 Sickle) (mobile single warhead)
40x RS18 (SS-19 Stiletto) (mostly mod 3, 6 MIRV per msl)
52x Topol-M (SS-27) silo-based
18x Topol M (SS-27) road mobile (single warhead)
12x RS-24 (3 MIRV per msl)
The main reason why Russia remains the power that it is. They can hit any location in Europe or North America. Their all nuclear armed, but if I was Putin I'd replace the nuclear warheads on about 50 missiles and replace them with large high explosive warheads. A few of these landing on Washington DC, New York, Los Angeles, London, Paris and Berlin would unnerve the whole of NATO. Perhaps Putin is already doing it as we speak!
|