Any real world war 3 nuclear tactics?

General discussion about Defcon

Moderator: Defcon moderators

Cossack
level1
level1
Posts: 12
Joined: Wed Sep 13, 2006 12:32 pm

Any real world war 3 nuclear tactics?

Postby Cossack » Sat Sep 16, 2006 5:51 pm

I've been trying to find what tactics would be used in a nuclear world war just out of interest mainly between USA and Russia/USSR. I found a number on 1st strike strategies using subs and mobile land based SRBM's. I can't seem to find anything on what conventional forces would be doing in such a war. I know most land based stuff armies etc would be wiped out anyway but what about fleets and aircraft carriers?

I can imagine a lot maybe used to find and destroy enemy subs but there are also amphibious fleets would they be doing anything? What would everyone be doing after the initial barrage from missles is over assuming there's still a chain of command left i.e. doomsday plane or bunkers. Anyone got any links to what the USA or Russian strategy would be?
elDiablo
level5
level5
Posts: 3111
Joined: Thu Mar 14, 2002 12:23 pm
Location: London, UK

Postby elDiablo » Sat Sep 16, 2006 6:08 pm

Most of the armied force of any major nuclear power would probably be criticially destroyed by the enemies nukes in WW3. Say they have 4 minutes to prepare for a nuclear blast (which is what the US was giving it's forces as an estimate during the Cold War), they aren't going to get very far away. A fair few planes/helicopters/etc, ok, but if a nuke is aimed for a naval force, it will probably get them within it's blast. "WW3 will start and finish in a few hours", read that somewhere, but can't remember where :(
We dont stop playing cos we get old... We get old cos we stop playing.
User avatar
xyzyxx
level5
level5
Posts: 3790
Joined: Wed Jul 02, 2003 7:50 pm
Location: Iowa, USA
Contact:

Re: Any real world war 3 nuclear tactics?

Postby xyzyxx » Sat Sep 16, 2006 6:13 pm

Cossack wrote:What would everyone be doing after the initial barrage from missles is over assuming there's still a chain of command left i.e. doomsday plane or bunkers.
They'd be dying. Slowly.

http://www.exitmundi.nl/nukes.htm
Some people talk because they have something to say. Others talk because they have to say something.
nuk-a-bazooka
level1
level1
Posts: 20
Joined: Sat Sep 16, 2006 4:51 pm

Postby nuk-a-bazooka » Sat Sep 16, 2006 6:25 pm

Its all in the tag line of Defcon: "Everybody dies".

After the first bomb fell there would be a retaliation, and after that a retaliation in response to that retaliation, and another, and another... till they ran out of nukes. Nuclear war doesn't leave much strategic options. Its all about destroying them before they destroy you.
Cossack
level1
level1
Posts: 12
Joined: Wed Sep 13, 2006 12:32 pm

Postby Cossack » Sun Sep 17, 2006 1:21 am

doesn't really answer my question not talking about the years or even months after the the initial barrage. A nuke isn't going to sink a fleet either as the ships would not be close enough together. There are still going to be ships out there maybe even some bases e.g. in the pacific that may get missed. I'm wondering what the strategy would be in the hours and days after the main barrage.

I'm sure both the US and Russian military have one in place.
Zohn
level0
Posts: 7
Joined: Sun Sep 17, 2006 3:51 am
Location: In ur country, nuking ur dudez
Contact:

Postby Zohn » Sun Sep 17, 2006 4:12 am

Hmm, you know, there was actually one other theory on how to wage nuclear war other then MAD.

The idea is instead of nuking everything, you only nuke the things that will allow your enemy to fight, for example, nuking pretty much all of North Dakota to get the silos, sending a couple of death shots to Colarado to take care of NORAD, but leaving New York and Washington DC alone so there's someone left to negotiate with.

Also, why bother to nuke manufacturing citys like Omaha and Detroit, when the only units that will ever be engaged in any battle are already in the field.

And an intresting note on silo placement, they were built in clusters out in the middle of nowhere here in the states. The idea is, a Soviet bomber will knock out, say, one or two, and by the time the dust clears enough to get a fix on the remaining bunkers, the rest of the ICBMs will have had time to launch. It's kinda a neat idea, see. Silos protecting silos.

But the OP seems to be fishing for real life strategies that would still work in the game.
Bamelin
level2
level2
Posts: 90
Joined: Fri Jan 20, 2006 5:10 am

Postby Bamelin » Sun Sep 17, 2006 4:16 am

Personally I think any military ships left, would end up pirating for survival, as there would probaly be absolutely no unified military command structure left.
Disro
level1
level1
Posts: 40
Joined: Tue Jul 11, 2006 4:19 am
Location: Not where you think I am

Postby Disro » Sun Sep 17, 2006 4:22 am

A nuclear strike (assuming you have a generous amount of nukes), would target mainly:

nuclear silos
command centers (NORAD)
anything that could make a nuke
anything else that might have a nuke

The problem with a nuclear strike from the USA or Russia to the other is that neither is sure where enemy nuclear subs are, or which ships have nukes. Land installations can be spotted by satellite, but nukes on ships can't. Whichever side gets attacked first, retaliates by wiping out major cities and other more "oppurtunistic" targets.

So, everybody dies. The balance of death depends on the balance of nukes, and how close the nuke strikes on the four things listed above were to population centers.

So, WW3 would end pretty much before it started. All the strikes would be done within a few hours, then other nations would freak out, nuke each other, fall back into new alliances, and try to survive.
Zohn
level0
Posts: 7
Joined: Sun Sep 17, 2006 3:51 am
Location: In ur country, nuking ur dudez
Contact:

Postby Zohn » Sun Sep 17, 2006 4:42 am

Hmm, all this talk about tactics has me wandering..... can you launch ICBMs over the poles in the game? Cause' I've been looking at the screenshots, and all I see are little ballistic arcs.

It would be so badass to have my own little virtual DEWLINE of radar dishes across Canada. 8)

It doesn't really matter though, I'm already sold on the game.
jrbreen
level2
level2
Posts: 134
Joined: Mon Sep 04, 2006 7:15 pm
Location: SOS Brigade Strategic HQ

Postby jrbreen » Sun Sep 17, 2006 5:04 am

Zohn wrote:The idea is instead of nuking everything, you only nuke the things that will allow your enemy to fight, for example, nuking pretty much all of North Dakota to get the silos...

Umm... could I urge you to reconsider that one? *gulp*
User avatar
Hairy
level1
level1
Posts: 55
Joined: Sun Jun 25, 2006 3:04 pm
Location: Cleanup, aisle five

Postby Hairy » Sun Sep 17, 2006 12:27 pm

Try covering yourself in white paint - It might help deflect the blast of a nuclear attack :D
Gargantou
level1
level1
Posts: 12
Joined: Sat Sep 16, 2006 4:46 pm

Postby Gargantou » Sun Sep 17, 2006 12:36 pm

There's a ton to consider, I'm thinking primarily a nuclear war between the USSR and the USA in the late 80s, you have to take into consideration the communications eff, defense effectiveness, ASW effectiveness, the amount of strikes that are actually succesfull..
There's also an abundance of targets.. Air bases, soft silos, semi silos, hard silos, mobile MSLS, SSBN bases, strategic defenses, combat support assets, CBR facilities, CBR stands for Chem/Bio/Rad and finall Urban/Industrial Facilities.
In the nuclear war 'sim' Bravo Romeo Delta(It's an ol' DOS 'game'), I primarily usually go for striking out the pacific fleet HQ of Vladivostok and the northern fleet HQ in Murmansk.:) People thinking that incase of a nuclear war everyone will die, we can't really tell for sure unless it actually occurs, there's so many factors that count in..
maed
level1
level1
Posts: 68
Joined: Sun Aug 20, 2006 4:38 pm
Location: Hamburg, Germany
Contact:

Postby maed » Sun Sep 17, 2006 1:05 pm

Well, if the actual nuclear blasts won't kill you (good luck with that, M.A.D. is no PR gag), maybe the fallout will get you. If not the fallout, then cancer, radiation sickness, epidemics... If you survive that, you still have to get through nuclear winter. And when that is over, by some wonder you haven't died, well, good luck - you will die of your next major wound or sickness, cause there ain't gonna be any doctors around.
Gargantou
level1
level1
Posts: 12
Joined: Sat Sep 16, 2006 4:46 pm

Postby Gargantou » Sun Sep 17, 2006 1:17 pm

maed wrote:Well, if the actual nuclear blasts won't kill you (good luck with that, M.A.D. is no PR gag), maybe the fallout will get you. If not the fallout, then cancer, radiation sickness, epidemics... If you survive that, you still have to get through nuclear winter. And when that is over, by some wonder you haven't died, well, good luck - you will die of your next major wound or sickness, cause there ain't gonna be any doctors around.
You forgot the nuclear summer!

"the amount of water in the stratosphere would increase, causing greenhouse warming of the surface. The nuclear detonations would also produce oxides of nitrogen that would then deplete the ozone layer around the Earth. This layer screens out UV-B radiation from the Sun, which causes genetic damage to life forms on the surface. Possibilities of any existing species to survive in this extreme condition will be less. The absorption of ozone also results in a heating of the stratosphere, which results in a further contribution to greenhouse heating"

Oh oh oh!! And one of the most radiation immune animals, the cockroach will become the dominant intelligent lifeform on the planet!!:lol:
We need more specific details on a nuclear war to know for sure, some continents might be left fairly unscaved in terms of actual detonations and direct fallout and perhaps give them some small chance to survive and later on rebuild..

Important to remember is that both nuclear winter and nuclear summer are hypothetical scenarios, and we can't know for sure if they're true unless they actually occur.
User avatar
timonator
level2
level2
Posts: 184
Joined: Thu Sep 08, 2005 4:03 pm
Location: Germany
Contact:

Postby timonator » Sun Sep 17, 2006 1:20 pm

let's try it out!
i'm interested in that kid of stuff...

Return to “General”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest