 |
Duration: 10:00 minutes Upload Time: 2007-04-30 19:05:35 User: filmsouth :::: Favorites :::: Top Videos of Day |
|
Tags:
First Strike nuclear missile Soviet surprise attack United States bomber ICBM strategic vulnerability
Description: The US bomber force is destroyed on the ground and the Minuteman missiles in their silos in this highly realistic dramatization filmed with the unprecedented cooperation of the US Air Force. The people shown are the actual men and women of the US Air Force and Navy who would have been targeted. This is a short version of the scenaio used in the 1979 documentary film, FIRST STRIKE, which examined how the Soviet SS-18 missile force together with submarine launched missiles might be used to destroy our strategic forces in a surprise, preemptive attack. |
|
Comments | |
| TalksWithDirt ::: Favorites 2008-01-05 20:38:23 No we would have had far more warning than that. Flight time from Russia is ~45 min. DSP would observe the IR plume of the missiles, and the old BMEWS would have given warning soon there after. From initial warning to confirmation we would have had about 30 min warning. We know this from history. When warning came, we hesitated. The Russians hesitated as well. History also shows, that to hesitate is the right thing to do. __________________________________________________ | |
| TalksWithDirt ::: Favorites 2008-01-05 20:27:03 Any American who would watch this video is probably quite informed. The warplan you refer to was called "Dropshot". You must be an adult about this. The USSR, and the USA both had plans to attack each other. That said, the RS-36M was a clear first strike weapon. The main counter the Russians have to American's ignorance is their immense ability to feel sorry for themselves and think that they are passive receivers of history's angst. __________________________________________________ | |
| TalksWithDirt ::: Favorites 2008-01-05 20:22:21 At the time this video was made, SLBM's did not have the accuracy to attack ICMB silos with enough accuracy to plan an attack around. The SLBM's would have been used to pin the ICBM's in their silos with X-Rays, attack the bomber fields, attack warships in port. Now with GLONAS operational Russian SMBM's might be able to attack silos just as the Trident II D5 can attack Russian silos. That said the Russians are still not deploying their SSBN's on a regular basis. __________________________________________________ | |
| ifukyouintheass ::: Favorites 2008-01-05 19:06:30 neglecting missiles shot from submarines... __________________________________________________ | |
| ifukyouintheass ::: Favorites 2008-01-05 19:05:11 well if you detected soviet missles on radar soon after they were launched the US would have at least 15 minutes to shoot off all its missiles before being hit. im sure they had things set up in such a way theyd have time. __________________________________________________ | |
| Primorsky ::: Favorites 2008-01-05 07:11:29 USA was 100% aggressor against Soviet Union. They always planned to use nuclear weapons first. Many people does not know, that americans after WW2 developed bloody plan for massive nuclear bombing murdering millions of soviet civilians. Soviet Union needed to defend itself from american aggressors. __________________________________________________ | |
| TalksWithDirt ::: Favorites 2008-01-04 23:24:44 Notice further in the series where the discussion focuses on whether an attack could be co-ordinated on a global scale involving thousands of systems. This was due to computer memory, and comm limits of the day. Also the small number of programmers to write and TEST the software. From the 1940's to the 1980's we made the transition from oil and cam logic being our best power and controls systems to nuclear power and digital controls. By 1979 all this was still in its extreme infancy. __________________________________________________ | |
| TalksWithDirt ::: Favorites 2008-01-04 23:17:19 For instance the SLBM attack in this video would not only need to be seen by PAVE PAWS, but it would need to be confirmed by DSP observing the heat plumes of the SLBM's as they ascended. Also Maritime patrol aircraft would visually observe the boost phase of an attack. A radar detection alone, or infrared observation alone, would not constitute a 'high confidence' detection. __________________________________________________ | |
| TalksWithDirt ::: Favorites 2008-01-04 23:13:46 Confidence is what they used. Sensor technology and signals amplification was a much less mature science. The systems you see in this video are 30+ years old. Not to mention communications and computing power were very limited and fragile. False alarms were constantly popping up. By saying the confidence was high it meant that they had multiple indicators of attack, and that confidence was high that the attack was real. __________________________________________________ | |
| cutterschoicenotmine ::: Favorites 2008-01-04 15:35:43 confidence is high means its pretty much assured that its go and sources are correct to say go for launch. In other words it aint a drill and its time to do your bit in killing loads of people. __________________________________________________ | |
| Degsy2 ::: Favorites 2008-01-04 11:15:33 What does "competence is high" mean? __________________________________________________ | |
| scotchdog5150 ::: Favorites 2008-01-04 02:32:36 no one survives a nuclear war dipshit. It is the end of humanity on this earth as we know it, if there is a full-scale nuclear war __________________________________________________ | |
| TalksWithDirt ::: Favorites 2007-12-29 07:57:37 Well then stop buying their products, and use your time to get a life. I suggest you start by reading 'The Effects of Nuclear Weapons' by Samuel Glasstone and Philip J. Dolan. It will relieve you of some of your sci fi induced sillyness. __________________________________________________ | |
| TalksWithDirt ::: Favorites 2007-12-29 07:52:59 I'm afraid you have no understanding of the way things work. Materials have nothing to do with orbital velocity, or a ballistic trajectory. And so long as a material is conductive, it can be used to shield ELECTRONICS from an EMP. Metals don't need shielding. Maybe you're having a fantasy about Pournelle's ideas on THOR, the kenetic energy tank killer. He wanted to use tungsten because it could sink the heat of reentry. __________________________________________________ | |
| sapgermany ::: Favorites 2007-12-28 22:32:41 I still can't find out how to get access to the You Tube videos on the Bobby Fuller Four Band shows that you had shown previously. They have even been taken off the internet completely! __________________________________________________ | |
No comments:
Post a Comment