Australia Twilight War & After...

[Mohoender]

Originally Posted by Fusilier

I disagree. There is virtually nothing written about the naval events in the Pacific. Anything anyone says on the matter is merely opinion and any outcome you want can be said on the matter.

My mistake on that one, confused probably with something else. Nevertheless, given the US fleet in the Middle East the US still has some means of action while the fleet in the Atlantic is shatered.

For SSBN, the Soviets IRL at the time of T2K had at most 20 SSBN in the Pacific. 1/2 Delta and 1/2 Yankee carrying SS-N-8 (7000 km range) and SS-N-6 (2400km range) respectively. Having one sailing in Range of Australia is not that obvious, especially as these subs are much needed for retaliation on the US.

Moreover, giving the naval odd in the Pacific, having one closing unoticed within range of Australia is almost impossible (unless you consider, that US, China, Japan, Taiwan, Australia... are simply leaving the Soviet navy wander freely in the Pacific. What you say on soviet didn't escape the West and that may well be the reason explaining these comm centers down there). Sorry but if the Soviet forces in the Atlantic are more or less matching NATO, the Soviet Naval forces in the Pacific are fighting 1 out of 10.

A Soviet SSBN might get lucky but doing this on purpose, I doubt it. This sub would have to sail from 7000-10000 km in a fully hostile ocean. No support ships, no air cover, constantly chased down by hostile subs, destroyers, carriers, aircrafts and even petty boats. US was operating from Okinawa, Guam, Hawaii, Alaska, Washington, California... Why would you waste such a valuable asset when you need to hit your only true threat.

However, rumors states that the Soviets were pretty much advanced with EMP tech. If I were them I would try that instead. It would not destroy Australia, but it would disrupt the comm capablity when needed.

I agree with all of you that Australians target will be in the mind of Soviets but they are out of reach, simply and physically out of reach. By the way, how big was Pine Gap at the time (it seems that it wasn't fully grown until 1999)?

Of course, if you want so much nuking Australia, you can make a scenario for it. A lost Yankee, firing at it because it had no other target. Here are some sources but I'm not sure they are that convincing. The second document seems interesting but doesn't adress the problem of range. The last element is off-topic but I put for fun.

http://www.aussurvivalist.com/nuclear/index.htm
http://www.reasoninrevolt.net.au/pdf/a000700.pdf
http://untreaty.un.org/unts/60001_12...5/00054746.pdf

[RN7]

Which would suggest that he felt RAN was straying from the bounds of civil discussion.

That's RN7!

[RN7]

Your numbers are accurate at least for the SS-18 (204 in Russia and 104 in Kazakhstan). SS-11 were being retired by 1986.

But the SS-11 wasn't completely retired until 1996, and the main reason I mentioned it was because of its proliferation in the Soviet Far East and Siberia which is the closest part of the USSR to Australia.

Replace the SS-11 by about 500 Topol (SS-25) that are mostly road mobile (MAZ-547) and regularly moving in Russia. These eventually located at fix bases are to be about 200. That makes them harder to hit and despite a slightly smaller range and single warhead they are much more threatening. SS-25 were designed to counter ABM systems. The ability to penetrate ABM systems should be true also of the R-36M2 (SS-18).

Maybe they were aimed at North America as it was harder for the Americans to locate them.

About the SS-18, they are to be R-36M2 (99) and R-36MU (209) as R-36M were retired by 1981. R-36M2 are the only one with enough range to hit any city in Australia (outside Alice Spring, Darwin, Norse West Cape and Perth) if they carry a single warhead of 20Mt. Out of the 99 (more or less) R-36M2 a question remain: how many are equipped with that 20Mt warhead? Don't expect to find this answer until 2020 as the missile will remain in service until at least 2014. Nevertheless they represent such a threat that the Start II treaty which didn't come into effect was specifically designed for them. One last thing about the R-36M2, IRL their number has possibly been reduced to about 2 dozens.

In 2000 I believe there were a total of 122 R-36M2 with 20Mt warheads in Russian service, and another 58 with 10x MIRVs, although some of these were located in Kazakhstan. Today there are less but in the Twilight War timeline the Soviet Union or at least the Russian part of it depending on the version is still heavily militarised and beligerent.

Here is a good site about missiles and the most reliable source on nukes today:
http://missile.index.ne.jp/en/
http://www.nti.org/b_aboutnti/b_index.html

Here are a few more, and their Russian too!

http://www.russianspaceweb.com/index.html
http://warfare.ru/?lang=&catid=265&c...ace-to-Surface

Your research have been good but you should not rely on Globalsecurity (except as a starting point). As everyone I used them a lot until I got to the conlusion that they are among the worse source on the Web on military subjects.

I have some books too, I've been collecting them since the 1980s.

[Mohoender]

Thanks for the two websites.

I'm already using warfare.ru even as I'm not convinced of its reliability (interesting nonetheless). Then, real thanks for the other one as I had used it in the past and lost it. This time I put it in my favorites (an extremely good website IMO).

The main problem with Russia are secrecy, rumors and confusing serial numbers: UR-100 is both the SS-11 and SS-19.

Where did you get you figures for the warheads carried? I couldn't find that.

I also have books from the 1980's and so on. However, they are now proving to be mostly nice pieces of Science Fiction. Still usefull but authors writing on military issues have more imagination than novelists. I have a nice book from 1991 that I'm using to make OOBs (from a well respected author and a well respected editor) stating that despite the fall of the Berlin Wall there is no doubt that Russia will remain fully comited to its engagement abroad and that the army will remain an influencial force within Russia. No more than a year after the publication of the book the russian army started to shrink from 2 million to less than 400.000 (nowadays it can be back to about 1.2 million). Six months after the publication date, Moscow cut all military and economical aid to Afghanistan resulting in what we know today.

Not even talking of Russia, depending on sources you can't know how many SSBN are currently in French service. If you look at informations on BA103 "Cambrai". All sources states that the base had converted to Mirage 2000 by 1992. I was there in 1994 and at least one squadron was still flying Mirage F1C (not entirely retired before 1996). However, all pilots at the base had been qualified on Mirage 2000 by 1992 (an entirely different matter). Our ICBM base on the Plateau d'Albion (BA-200) was officially closed by 1999, may be. That's only for France, what about Russia?

[RN7]

The main problem with Russia are secrecy, rumors and confusing serial numbers: UR-100 is both the SS-11 and SS-19.

I think the UR-100N & UR-100NUTTkH models are SS-19s. The SS-17 was also called the MR-UR-100 as it was to be a replacement for the existing UR-100 missiles in service and designed to fit into existing UR-100 silos.

Where did you get you figures for the warheads carried? I couldn't find that.

Its on warfare.ru under information about the SS-18.

also have books from the 1980's and so on. However, they are now proving to be mostly nice pieces of Science Fiction. Still usefull but authors writing on military issues have more imagination than novelists. I have a nice book from 1991 that I'm using to make OOBs (from a well respected author and a well respected editor) stating that despite the fall of the Berlin Wall there is no doubt that Russia will remain fully comited to its engagement abroad and that the army will remain an influencial force within Russia. No more than a year after the publication of the book the russian army started to shrink from 2 million to less than 400.000 (nowadays it can be back to about 1.2 million). Six months after the publication date, Moscow cut all military and economical aid to Afghanistan resulting in what we know today.

Some books from the 80's and 90s are suprisingly accurate about force and equipment levels, orbats and technical information, and can also be better than online sources about the period than what is currently available online. Others have to be taken with a grain of salt as they were published before the end of the Cold War and their data on the Soviet Union and Warsaw Pact was largely based on western estimates, conjecture and rumour.

Not even talking of Russia, depending on sources you can't know how many SSBN are currently in French service. If you look at informations on BA103 "Cambrai". All sources states that the base had converted to Mirage 2000 by 1992. I was there in 1994 and at least one squadron was still flying Mirage F1C (not entirely retired before 1996). However, all pilots at the base had been qualified on Mirage 2000 by 1992 (an entirely different matter). Our ICBM base on the Plateau d'Albion (BA-200) was officially closed by 1999, may be. That's only for France, what about Russia?

I think the French were fairly notorious for upping their forces to confuse the Soviets and even the Americans during the Cold War. I would be fairly certain that France's IRBM force was retired in 1999, and I would be fairly certain that there are only 4 French Triomphant Class SSBN's at the moment. But France built 6 of the preceding Redoutable Class and it is possible that one or two were held in reserve for testing and training while the French Navy was switching over to the newer Triomphant Class which led to confusion during the transition period, and I'm sure the French where happy to go along with that. There were also rumours as late as the late 80s that Britain built 5 Resolution class SSBN's instead of the official 4 subs, which was never officially confirmed or denied during the Cold War by the British government.

[Mohoender]

Originally Posted by RN7

Its on warfare.ru under information about the SS-18.

Thanks I had overlooked that one. However, the Start 2 agreement is no longer into effect as US administration under Bush refused to comply with parts of the treaty (actually the ABM part). Nevertheless, Russia will comply as soon as US does and I suspect that this is at the heart of the current discussions.

Originally Posted by RN7

Some books from the 80's and 90s are suprisingly accurate about force and equipment levels, orbats and technical information, and can also be better than online sources about the period than what is currently available online. Others have to be taken with a grain of salt as they were published before the end of the Cold War and their data on the Soviet Union and Warsaw Pact was largely based on western estimates, conjecture and rumour.

I often find books from the 70's-80's more accurate than the ones from the 90's.

Originally Posted by RN7

I would be fairly certain that France's IRBM force was retired in 1999, and I would be fairly certain that there are only 4 French Triomphant Class SSBN's at the moment.

You right about the French Triomphant but I was only talking of the sources. However, one of the Redoutable remained in service until 2006 while another one was retired in 2004 (I think). About the IRBM force (sorry for writing ICBM), it is not retired but deactivated.