UK Limited Nuclear War Target List

[Orionblamblam]

If things get more interesting, what targets in the UK might Putin nuke? An interesting video, and some backup data:

UK Limited Nuclear War Target List​

View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FYWcgF4Wwog

 

[jeffb]

Well that was depressing.

Russia's on record as saying London's at the top of the list for a nuclear strike. There's no mention of a deliberate EMP effects strike which you'd think would be one of the options too.

 

[Orionblamblam]

Well that was depressing.

The thign far, FAR too many people refuse to recognize is that "depressing" is entirely separate from "wrong."

Russia's on record as saying London's at the top of the list for a nuclear strike. There's no mention of a deliberate EMP effects strike which you'd think would be one of the options too.

I suspect much of Europe, and probably the US, will catch some juicy EMP waves under such an eventuality. However, while an EMP strike could well trash the economy of a continent, it'll likely do FA against the actual military, which should be fairly well shielded. And now, quite enthusiastically pissed off.

 

[zebedee]

Second time this week I've heard Stanlow mentioned... would probably take out Cammell Lairds (Type 45 upgrades, RFA maintenance and Dreadnought block builds) and cripple Liverpool docks as well... given my proximity I wouldn't rate my chances either...

Zeb

 

[uk 75]

The ease with which one Russian submarine can take out the UK to a great extent illustrates the dilemma of our nuclear deterrent.
With only one Vanguard submarine at sea the UK would have to decide whether to take part in a NATO measured counter force response or use its national option of removing Moscow and St Petersburg from the map.
Opponents of the nuclear deterrent would be quick to point out that neither option would restore the UK to a functioning society and would make the destruction of London, Birmingham, Manchester etc by the same Russisn submarine inevitable.
This scenario really tests "deterrence theory".

 

[Zoo Tycoon]

To me, as a Brit, there’s only one response to such an attack, an all out U.K. counter value strike against Russia, together with sinking as many of their SSBN as possible….. with the suggested targets, the Royal Navy SSN crews will be properly motivated.

Although, with a quick check I can’t find the source, I’m sure I’ve seen that both France and the U.K. have two SSNB at sea during this crisis.

Also the former USSR euro war plan;- “14 days to the Rhine” specifically excluded nuclear weapon use against UK and France because of their strategic arsenals. In the current scary situation I would have thought a hit on say Rotterdam had more to gain ….. thereby really testing if the US (maybe others) really would trade it for one of their cities.

IAI Arrow 3 currently feels like good value for money.

Who would have thought that a year ago we would be thinking like this?

 

[zen]

Personally I suspect a atmosphere test first to ramp up the pressure short of combat use.

 

[Orionblamblam]

Personally I suspect a atmosphere test first to ramp up the pressure short of combat use.

An end to the Test Ban Treaties would itself be interesting. I know that the nuclear forces of the United States would certainly like the opportunity to set off some nukes... just to see if the damned elderly things still work. It would depend very much upon the President, but if the Russian popped a nuke somewhere out in the tundra, setting off a B61 seems a not unlikely response. I imagine the US would still do it underground, but above-ground testing would be interesting. hell, if the treaties are out the window... have USSF and SpaceX detonate the thing on the Moon.

Shortly after, it's a safe bet the Indians and Pakistanis and who knows who all will *also* start setting off "tests" designed to flex in front of their opponents.

 

[jeffb]

With only one Vanguard submarine at sea the UK would have to decide whether to take part in a NATO measured counter force response or use its national option of removing Moscow and St Petersburg from the map.

If the goal is to drive a wedge through NATO, the scenario works a lot better if the Russian's know where the UK's SSBNs are and take them off the board at the start.

Then the French and US presidents would be stuck with the decision whether to try to make a proportional response on the UK's behalf, which would bring their own Russian 'proportional' responses and probably tens of thousands of casualties on their own territories (on the way to full blown Armageddon) or, take a pause and effectively end the NATO alliance.

There's a bit of a WW1 vibe to the way that existing alliances might pull the whole continent into a devastating war.

 

[Hood]

Just an idle thought, I wonder if the SSBN (or SSBNs) currently on patrol have Liz's Letter of Last Resort aboard yet?

 

[Fluff]

To me, as a Brit, there’s only one response to such an attack, an all out U.K. counter value strike against Russia, together with sinking as many of their SSBN as possible….. with the suggested targets, the Royal Navy SSN crews will be properly motivated.

Although, with a quick check I can’t find the source, I’m sure I’ve seen that both France and the U.K. have two SSNB at sea during this crisis.

Also the former USSR euro war plan;- “14 days to the Rhine” specifically excluded nuclear weapon use against UK and France because of their strategic arsenals. In the current scary situation I would have thought a hit on say Rotterdam had more to gain ….. thereby really testing if the US (maybe others) really would trade it for one of their cities.

IAI Arrow 3 currently feels like good value for money.

Who would have thought that a year ago we would be thinking like this?

Re a strike on rotterdam, Fortunately, and unlike Russia, NATO has the ability to make a non-nuclear strike on Russia.

500 conventional cruise missiles strikes, should make Russia think again.

Mad is mad for a reason.

 

[zen]

What has been suggested is Russian Airforce is sustaining about 300 sorties a day and NATO patrols along the Eastern States are roughly equivalent in sortie rate.
This has devastating implications for a conventional assault, NATO is barely sweating to sustain fighter and ISR patrols and could easily ramp up to 1,500 sorties a day in actual war. Only hampered by coordinating such traffic and actually digging out the munitions to equip it.

 

[CJGibson]

Just an idle thought, I wonder if the SSBN (or SSBNs) currently on patrol have Liz's Letter of Last Resort aboard yet?

Probably still laughing at the 'pork opportunities' speech on their recordings of 'Have I got news for you'

Chris

 

[Hood]

On a related matter, last week someone on up a local Facebook group where I live found an Exercise Arc graph while insulating their loft. The diagram shows percentages of casualties from a range of MT blasts. Exercise ARC was conducted by Civil Defence in 1959.

Civil Defence Training Memorandum No. 3, “The Control of Civil Defence Operations under Fall-out Conditions,” issued by the Home Office in 1959 describes the chart as:

... which sets out, on the best evidence at present available [blast casualties from applying Blitz casualty data as a function of house damage to nuclear test data showing the amount of house damage versus distance from a nuclear explosion, which automatically takes account of the duration of the blast wave in nuclear explosions], the proportions of seriously injured, trapped and untrapped, to be expected at different distances from ground zeroes of bombs of varying power. ...

Kew holds a Home Office file which contains Arc as well as a host of other documents: HO 228/23 - Report of a conference of the Regional Scientific Advisers for Civil Defence held at the CD Staff College 12-14 May 1959: operation of the scientific team at region; training of scientific intelligence officers; local authority training and exercise `Arc'; radiation tolerance doses in civil defence; deployment of civil defence forces into the damaged areas contaminated by fallout; survey of protection against fallout afforded by houses and other buildings; radioactive decontamination; proposed food monitoring organisation; study of `Torquemada' fire problems after a megaton explosion.

 

[SeaslugMk2]

And just to make matters worse when the Royal Observer Corps and the UK Warning & Monitoring Organisation were stood down in '92, the government gave the tasks to County Councils...but no money to do anything. The emergency Planning Officer of one south coast County Council has a stock of 96 radiation monitors (FSM 3) but no budget to train any staff in their use. They just sit there in their cardboard boxes.

SRJ.

 

[uk 75]

This thread just got a whole lot more real watching missiles and drones fired against Israel and Ukraine.
With no Patriot batteries and only a handful of short range SAMs the bad guys don't need nukes to cause chaos in the UK too.

 

[Scott Kenny]

To me, as a Brit, there’s only one response to such an attack, an all out U.K. counter value strike against Russia, together with sinking as many of their SSBN as possible….. with the suggested targets, the Royal Navy SSN crews will be properly motivated.

Although, with a quick check I can’t find the source, I’m sure I’ve seen that both France and the U.K. have two SSNB at sea during this crisis.

They should have 3 each at sea 24/7. 4 ships with dual crews allows you to have (roughly) 3 ships at sea all the time. Though the French might have to suffer a lower number due to the LEU reactors needing to be refueled every 7 years or so.

Just an idle thought, I wonder if the SSBN (or SSBNs) currently on patrol have Liz's Letter of Last Resort aboard yet?

I'd be surprised if they ever went out to sea without it.

 

[Yellow Palace]

I'd be surprised if they ever went out to sea without it.

The point being made there was that the UK had just had a new PM (Liz Truss), so it was entirely possible, based on patrol schedules, that the duty bomber would have sailed before she was elected, so would still have been carrying Johnson's Letter.

It's also inevitable that either Liz Truss's Letter never went to sea, or that her instructions for nuclear retaliation outlasted her entire premiership by a factor of three or four.

 

[Scott Kenny]

The point being made there was that the UK had just had a new PM (Liz Truss), so it was entirely possible, based on patrol schedules, that the duty bomber would have sailed before she was elected, so would still have been carrying Johnson's Letter.

It's also inevitable that either Liz Truss's Letter never went to sea, or that her instructions for nuclear retaliation outlasted her entire premiership by a factor of three or four.

Ah, I'd missed that detail. Mea culpa!

Side note, there are usually 3 boats out at all times. (Roughly, the math is a bit different when you use days instead of months to track patrol and refit lengths)

 

[Yellow Palace]

Side note, there are usually 3 boats out at all times. (Roughly, the math is a bit different when you use days instead of months to track patrol and refit lengths)

That's not RN practice, largely because we don't double crew the boats any more. We can barely find enough people to provide one crew per boat, for that matter.