Explain how a system that is going to be setting nukes off willy nilly over your own territory and can still be overwhelmed is useful. If you had one or two nukes headed for Moscow then sure, a nuke at 100 miles up is better than on the ground. But it’s still going to hurt. In the WWIII scenario you’ll have set off scores of nukes over your own territory (can you say “EMP effect”) and STILL end up losing Moscow. So what did you accomplish? IF they could just get the things accurate enough to use a HE warhead that changes everything. It’s the idea of setting nukes off over your own territory that’s the fly in the ointment.

You don’t have the minimal idea of what is the mission of the Moscow abm site, it were not aimed to flaw an american missile attack but an attack from second line nuclear power like china or france or UK. If you don’t know this it’s futile to continue the conversation.

The Moscow system is as worthless as the proverbial “**** on a boar” since if the US had ever wanted to take out Moscow they could have just used AGM-129s. Oops. Let’s also not forget that Moscow system is going to be launching NUKES into the air over the capital. You think the light show was intense over Baghdad in Desert Storm you haven’t seen ANYTHING yet LOL!

Your information are fatally flawed by inaccuracies, little knowledge of the argument ,too much patriotic sentiment, i will not spend more of the my little english skills with you, thanks for the stupid and futile conversation…

:confused: :confused: :confused: :confused:

Depends what’s behind the little hole now doesn’t it? Obviously just putting a tiny hole in a tank is worthless right? Guess you’ve never seen what happens to a tank when it gets slammed by a good sabot round. What do you think is going to happen to a missile in a silo once the silo lid has had a “little hole” punched in it- and then the sabot has continued on to even GRAZE the missile inside?
.

Who is the idiot that is building new missile silos? China and russia not for sure… Nk or iran?
They don’t need nuclear reinforced missile silos because they can’t imagine to compete with U.S.A. in couterforce scenarios. Are you sure that your brilliant conventional warhead icbm will not alarm the enemy or other nuclear powers to the the level that starts a nuclear retaliation? Your idea that destroying a nuclear bunker is like destroying a tank is quite strange, also destroying a ship is at all a different matter. According to many sources trident II d-5 missile has a throw weight of 2200 kg including the huge bus vehicle that you need to put in it 100 of this strange piece of stuff, an icbm can’t throw reentry vehicles wherever it want but usually within the limits of an elissoid of about 150x70km. This and other considerations tell me that this idea is a complete absurdity.

Let’s see, 2800kg (not 3000) is about 6200 pounds, divide that by 100 and you get a maximum 62 pound warhead if you don’t account for separation mechanisms, warhead buses, etc.

Now, the question is, what happens if I throw a 60-pound metal block at a building at well over 10,000 miles an hour?

Not too much i saw in tv some cases of little meteorites (2 or 3 kg) that had hit the roof of an house, the result has been some hundreds dollars of damage for the roof.

http://veiculosmilitares.vilabol.uol.com.br/2002/S-400.jpg

s-400 tel?

Whats the deal with all these photoshoped images with Chinese stuff ?!!!! : 😡

I have not seen this with any other country.

it’s a quite succesful disinformation technique. It curbs also serious attempts to evaluate the magnitude of chinese military power.

The missile that killed Dudaev was a ss-21 spider (tochka)