Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments

Superpolsen91 t1_ixubkz1 wrote

How much damage can those missiles when you take away the main purpose of those missiles?

6

PdPstyle t1_ixucl0n wrote

The rocket is simply a delivery device. You can put a different warhead on the end and still be devastating to whatever you hit.

42

LevHB t1_ixwnwsd wrote

I don't really buy that Russia has started using Kh-55 cruise missiles as just kinetic impact weapons. That's one hell of a waste of money to do relatively little damage. Yeah it'll still cause damage to whatever you hit, but it's going to be very very localised.

And have we seen anymore since then? I don't believe so.

This really seems like either a test, to see what the performance of the Kh-55 against Ukraine is like for a nuclear attack. Might be as a feint, or just training and decided to point it at Ukraine because why not (this is sadly the most hopeful), or worst of all because they might launch a nuclear attack soon.

I can't think of any other reasons. Some people have said by accident, but the Kh-55 is launched from a plane. Yeah ok I get that a pilot could accidentally launch it, but how do you accidentally load it? Training seems more likely given this, but that doesn't mean it also wasn't a test.

3

Submitten t1_ixwq2ht wrote

Saturate and deplete anti air missiles most likely.

2

LevHB t1_ixzvqhm wrote

Sure but on the night this one was launched there wasn't much else launched.

1

NarrMaster t1_ixx4tq6 wrote

Decoys, launched with missiles with real (conventional) explosives.

1

foodishlove t1_ixufgvi wrote

If large quantities of missiles are shot down by defensive systems then increasing the number of launched missiles is a strategy to overwhelm defensive capabilities to allow more missiles through. Defensive systems don’t differentiate between armed and inert missiles, so even the inert missiles can increase the effectiveness of the armed ones.

11

158862324 t1_ixuge0p wrote

Nuclear warheads vary widely in size, but I’d guess it’d be about the same as a tomahawk cruise missile. Like 500-1,000 lbs of TNT. Approximately 1/5 the force used in the Oklahoma City Bombing.

11

Todesfaelle t1_ixvumfo wrote

That's a impressive comparison I've never considered since I didn't think there was that much ordnance used in the bombing.

1

158862324 t1_ixw9hg8 wrote

As an American I feel it’s my patriotic duty to avoid metric.

2

LevHB t1_ixwp75u wrote

Huh? Where are you getting this number from?

This missile wasn't just a nuclear-capable missile with a normal warhead. This missile had no warhead, unless you count a lump of concrete ballast as a warhead. That's what made this so weird, Russia either launched a Kh-55 as a kinetic missile (+ whatever fuel is left behind), which would be really pathetic if true. Or they launched it as a test for how an actual nuclear armed one might go.

Or what I think might be most likely, perhaps this was a training exercise for the pilot, and they thought "why not fire it at Ukraine anyway". Which is still dangerous because they still got the data.

Or it's a pathetic feint. Or I've also heard it suggested that perhaps it was a distraction attempt, only problem is they barely launched much of an attack on that night.

So I don't know where you're getting the 500-1000lbs of TNT from?

Edit: the actual warheads are:

Nuclear: 5 to 150 kilotonnes of TNT

Conventional: 1000lbs HE (nice guess), or a few cluster bomb variants

Again so the Kh-55 can take a conventional warhead. So why the hell was a dummy nuke launched?

1

crazedizzled t1_ixum0m8 wrote

What would be the point of a nuke if it's the same yield as a tomahawk missile? That's just nonsense. Those warheads are likely 5-20KT, the typical yield of a tactical nuclear warhead.

−8

ElevatorRideWithNeal t1_ixuni5g wrote

I think he was saying if the nuc payload was replaced with TNT, the yield would be greatly reduced, and would only be a fraction of the capabilities of a Tomahawk.

11

crazedizzled t1_ixuobfl wrote

It was worded pretty weirdly if that is the case. But yes, the yield would be whatever conventional payload they have around that the missile can carry.

−12

darthmater t1_iy170k7 wrote

Must be their interpretation again, huh? Not you having two brain cells. It must be others that struggle, not you.

0

crazedizzled t1_iy192gv wrote

Lol are you stalking me now? Don't you have a dictionary to read or something?

1

darthmater t1_iy1gxxp wrote

I demanded an apology but I had not heard from you. So I looked if you were active, and laughed because you are suffering from the same fallacy here as you did with me.

So now I know you suffer from some sort of disability and will take the high road. I no longer request an apology from you.

0

crazedizzled t1_iy1pyux wrote

You're the one that sounds damaged. Take care friend

1