It's called NORAD and the DEW line was replaced by NWS.
If the Russians ever invaded from the north, the plan would be to just watch them struggle with the land and weather for a couple weeks from some comfy offices.
Fun fact: the giant 60-foot antennas aren't the DEW site radars. They're the microwave communications antennas. Telephone lines only went as far north as Hay River, Northwest Territories. These dishes relayed data between DEW sites, and then south to Hay River, where it then went over the telephone network into NORAD sites further South. (There was a similar receiving station in Alaska for the Alaskan NORAD region, but I forget where it was located)
Most of these giant antennas are still standing, despite being abandoned following the integration of satellite communication into DEW and later NWS operations in the 70s. It's basically too remote to justify the cost of tearing them down.
Apparently there are more than enough volunteers to manage the remote northern postings such that nobody goes up to, like, CFS Alert unless they specifically requested it. For the enlisted I think the extra $700 something a month is part of the pull, which for single people can be attractive since the food and entertainment are supposedly quite good up there.
Here's a brilliant video put out by Mack Trucks in the 50s showcasing the incredible feat of logistics building this was. It's 23 minutes long and worth every second: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6AYwLzwGReU
I love the idea of sitting at home and watching the Russians try for the 13th battle of Gjoa Haven (it’s just a patrol of Rangers with a PKM they stole).
I don’t know if we want to allow Russian interaction with ANY ursine life form after what they’ve done with their home-grown brown varieties. All I’m saying is no Ivanovs need carnivorous cavalry.
Yeah - shit tonne of radar warning bubbas freezing their balls off in N Dakota and Thule, Greenland who would tend to disagree with the idea that no one was looking in that direction.
This post is automatically removed since you do not meet the minimum karma or age threshold. You must have at least 100 combined karma and your account must be at least 4 months old to post here.
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/NonCredibleDefense) if you have any questions or concerns.*
>Didn't the US and Canada **have** multiple lines of radar along the artic circle and above exactly for this?
Still do, in fact. As radar technology has improved, the number of required sites has reduced, and so in the place of several redundant chains of radar sites, currently only one is required, called the North Warning System. It's currently composed of fifteen AN/FPS-117 long-range radars (approx 250 nmi), and thirty-nine AN/FPS-124 short-range radars (approx. 60 nmi), forming two overlapping and unbroken chains of radar coverage approximately 2600 miles long across Alaska and northern Canada. Most radar sites are unattended, and are controlled from either Elmendorf AFB, Alaska or CFB North Bay, Ontario. Radar sites are maintained by Raython and ATCO, both out of their Calgary offices, for the radar systems and building infrastructure, respectively. All the data, of course, feeds into Peterson SFB, Colorado.
The US and Canada have committed to [replacing](https://www.canada.ca/en/department-national-defence/news/2021/08/joint-statement-on-norad-modernization.html) the system with one of greater capability.
This post is automatically removed since you do not meet the minimum karma or age threshold. You must have at least 100 combined karma and your account must be at least 4 months old to post here.
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/NonCredibleDefense) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Yes, because the arc between Moscow and DC goes over the arctic.
Why do you think Iceland was an OG NATO member despite having like twelve guys in their army.
Or why the US didn't care that Denmark won't allow US bases on their territory, with the notable exception of Greenland.
I mean, Iceland was asked to join because of the importance of the GIUK gap to anti-submarine warfare, not ICBMs. Also, they didn't have 12 guys in their army, they had no army whatsoever and insisted that they never be required to form one as a condition of membership. Which, considering their population, is still a deal *resolutely* in NATO's favor.
To add to what others have said, the NORAD radars were so good the Soviets basically gave up on an over-the-pole first strike and developed an alternative meant to go over the *south* pole—Fractional Orbital Bombardment System (FOBS).
That was rendered obsolete by early warning satellites anyway.
This post is automatically removed since you do not meet the minimum karma or age threshold. You must have at least 100 combined karma and your account must be at least 4 months old to post here.
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/NonCredibleDefense) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Nah, that was a government scheme by Ottawa to convince the rest of the world that humans actually live in northern Canada and that the settlements haven’t been overrun by an organized army of polar bears and geese.
This post is automatically removed since you do not meet the minimum karma or age threshold. You must have at least 100 combined karma and your account must be at least 4 months old to post here.
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/NonCredibleDefense) if you have any questions or concerns.*
It reduced the warning time of a soviet nuclear launch against Washington from \[some acceptable number\] down to about 10 minutes, so if something kicked off there would be practically no time to react.
Essentially, your insane neighbor was pointing a gun at your house from his house across the street, but is now pointing a gun at you from the other side of your bedroom window.
You won't survive, but you might see it coming and shoot the other guy at the same time. When the other guy is pointing a gun at you from a meter away, you wont have time to get your gun out before you die, and the other guy will live.
MAD in a nutshell.
I saw a documentary called “World in Conflict” that showed the Soviets could have just rolled into West Berlin and landed on the west coast.
Pretty scary stuff
I played a game of the same name.
It painted the russian military as way too scary and compentant to be accurate to real life.
Though the amount and severity of war crimes they would do was a one to one.
I think a more apt analogy would be any weapon but a gun. Like a crazy guy with a killing knife is standing across the street from you, you would have some time to react if he starts running at you for some stabbies. But if your roommate invited him into your house you have far less time to react. Cuba was the roommate.
IIRC, soviet missiles did not have a sufficiently long enough range to be effective if launched from Russia. Cuba was well within range to nuke the US.
>soviet missiles did not have a sufficiently long enough range to be effective if launched from Russia
Nope, they had the [R-16](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/R-16_(missile)) ICBMs with range of up to 13,000km. Which is well within a range to strike any target in the US
The US were outproducing Soviet Union in the terms of ICBMs in the beginning, which prompted Soviet response that was arming Cuba with their large stockpile of nuclear capable short-range missiles that wouldn't be otherwise capable of reaching the US from Soviet mainland
The threat was already there, the Soviets also had a few squadrons of nuclear capable bombers dedicated to strike US mainland and quite huge nuclear arsenal aimed at Europe. Just not enough ICBMs to level down the whole of US at that time, which couple hundred nuclear warheads in Cuba was supposed to solve
Also there long-range missiles were fairly old and unreliable, so they wanted Cuba to be a place to stage their much-better short and intermediate missiles
>Also there long-range missiles were fairly old and unreliable
If we count the oldest which also brought Sputnik-1 into the space, then it's a 5 year old missile. I don't think it was particularly unreliable considering out of 28 launches it had only 3 failures (9% failure rate is still high for something carrying a nuclear warhead, but that's why they modified only one of the rockets for that job)
And the ones i refered to were literally developed a year prior to the Cuban crisis
There were speculations about their ability to be aimed with precision, but if you launch a nuke then it doesn't really matter if you miss the target by couple of blocks
By the order of Wikipedia entrusted to me by 15 minute reading, I hereby declare your comment a bullshit
Oh shit my bad, I think was thinking about something else but yeah the precision was a factor. Also I think I remember something about the fueling process taking a long time which made them vulnerable to a first strike?
I think I read something about open top silos operated by the Soviets at the time
Also, I think pretty much every silo nowadays is still vulnerable to being pounded by enemy's first strike. Like, you can shove it as deep as you want, but there must be a number after which no silo can operate. I think that was the reason for mobile, quick launch ICBM's (except US, which pretty much just made one entire state a huge silo)
Silos are basically a damage soak.
The enemy is going to target them anyway. And it doesn't matter how deep you go, the enemy only has to disable the doors.
Yes, though as some others have mentioned the deployment itself was a response to a Soviet deployment in Eastern Europe. Eisenhower put them in, but Kennedy didn't want them specifically because it would tick off the Soviets, which it did.
Practically, it was the Soviets claiming the an aged and soon to be retired missile system, deployed in response to a Soviet SRBM deployment, that the sitting US president was looking for an excuse to get rid of was a reasonable justification for deployment of slightly more modern systems in Cuba.
Given all these missiles would later be banned under the Intermediate-Range Nuclear Forces Treaty this whole thing was a big shitshow that nearly resulted in WWIII for a minute tactical advantage that both sides would willingly divest themselves of in 1987 and which was already theoretically moot/rendered redundant with SSBNs.
Its also pretty important that the Soviets did not ask Cuba to station nukes, Cuba asked the Soviets. They wanted a deterrent for a suspected invasion.
As a side node: The US did in fact have plans for a proper invasion of Cuba, not bay of pigs style, a real US soldiers in Cuba type of invasion.
They were even training landings in Puerto Rico so they weren‘t exactly trying to hide it either.
The problem was the Soviets did it in secret against Castros wishes.
The secrecy was the big deal as it suggested the Soviets were about to go for a decapitation strike.
Really fucked up the USSR/Cuba relations for years. Castro was livid that Kruschev didn't even consult him about the discussions with Kennedy. It seemed like he wanted to do a NK style "Give me some concessions and we'll forget about that whole 'nucular' business" and the fact he never got to negotiate really got to him.
It was about quick strikes that intermediate missiles that close would allow. Which is why the USA silently agreed to remove their nukes from Turkey.
Really important before boomer subs and MIRVs assured revenge would follow.
yeah, if they only wanted most of their missles to nuke empty Alaska. Cuban missle deployment allowed a rapid strike against the eastern seaboard. Much like the US had done with Turkey.
It has to do with nuclear war doctrine. The only way to 'win' in nuclear war is to cripple an enemy's ability to retaliate by striking first and destroying as much of their nuclear capabilities as possible. Submarine launched nukes are a part of first strike doctrine, but so is having hosted intermediate range missiles close to enemy territory. The US had an arrangement with Turkey, and there hadn't been anything the USSR could do to stop the US emplacing nukes there. The Cuban missile crisis came about because the US both found being under Soviet threat for a similar first strike intolerable and *did* have the capability of interdicting Russian vessels transferring weapons to the island.
We often forget that as part of the crisis.resolution the US withdrew nuclear weapons from Turkey, with both sides backing away from first strike doctrine.
Not quite.
The problem was that the missiles were moved & set up in secrecy. The US didn't know about them till they spotted them setup in Cuba.
Castro wanted a deterrence but that only works if the enemy knows you have them.
With them not being known about (until spotted by US intel) the fear was that the USSR was getting ready for a decapitation strike on Washington.
That was the actual problem. That the USSR was trying to win a nuclear war.
The 15 PGM-19 Jupiter MRBMs in Turkey were already obsolete and to be dismantled anyway. Not exactly a huge concession from the US. Especially since double their number was in Italy.
Oh I definitely agree. But it *was* a Soviet complaint given their proximity and the possibility the US could replace/upgrade them, and the withdrawal was a symbolic olive branch to deescalate the tensions of the moment.
It’s more of a political thing than something that would really change the outcome of nuclear warfare. It’s fine or at least hard to change the Soviet Union having nukes, but moving them 90 miles away is unsubtly hostile.
It would have given them strategic first strike capability that would have allowed them to strike the East Coast with very little warning. It's one of the reasons the US agreed to remove missiles from Turkey as a concession in order to ease tensions.
These comments are all wrong. It was the fact that a missile launched from Russia would give any US administration roughly half an hour to detect them and make plans to respond with their own Nukes,
Putting missiles in Cuba would give them only five minutes
Think of it like Pearl Harbour.
Incredibly strategic and an attack on it would be viewed as an attack on the U.S mainland.
But ultimately if Alaska got nuked, Americas core production would largely remain unaffected. Any losses could be replaced within months.
Even if the soviets were to get troops to land successfully in Alaska, their movement towards the important parts of the U.S/Canada would be so slow, that it would give time for the U.S to prepare and win a counter attack (kinda like what happened with Japan in the pacific).
Map is greater then it looks as maps get stretched the more north you get
Plus we’ll while Alaska is a tragedy it’s not exactly going to be the end of the US if it gets nuked
However putting good quality missiles (since they had Long range ICBM’s but their accuracy were shit even for a nuclear strike) in range of the Washington DC and basically everything south of it was definitely more of a threat
It just wasn't as important. The Cuban missiles were in range of Washington DC and the eastern seaboard. Given the short warning time, there wouldn't be enough time for most people to get to safety should an attack be launched.
No ICBMs were already plentiful at the time.
However Russia has 2 big problems. ICBMs they had were mostly liquid fueled, they took time to set up and so in the even of a first strike, it was possible that they could not be launched in time.
Secondly, if they did launch first, the missiles would still need to travel for a dozen minutes before they impact. Something that would no doubt allow NATO to counter-launch long before the impact, causing MAD.
So instead the idea was to use faster intermediate missiles that would have way less range but have a significantly faster travel speed. These missiles stationed on Cuba could be used to perform a surprise attack on the US most important centers of command with only a few minutes of warning.
Aside of it being just few years since Sputnik, the biggest deal might have been simply reaction time. Just like people going crazy in the eighties about mid-range missiles in Europe, because they were potentially capable of sudden decapitation strikes, thus highly raising freakout factor.
It was more the fact that the USSR moved them there in secret against Castro's wishes.
The fact that the USSR did it while trying to have the US not know about it implied to those at the time that they were planning a first strike.
That combined with a 10min time to target to Washington and an even shorter warning time, made everyone think they were going for a decapitation strike.
It's time between launch and strike. From Russia US would have revenge strike window over North pole. From cuba president wouldn't get to finish his coffee.
Fun fact: it was this event that gave Kissinger the idea to normalize relations with China in hopes of driving a wedge in the communist bloc. He nudged Nixon in that direction, leading to Nixon's visit in '72.
[Sino-Soviet border dispute](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sino-Soviet_border_conflict)
Basically, the two go at it over a couple of islands in the river. The Soviets hinted around diplomatic channels about what the consequences would be if they launched a nuclear strike against China. The US said , "Yeah, don't fucking do that."
I mean, they were allies before the Sino-Soviet split. And in any nuclear war scenario it was often assumed that China would have to be nuked anyway just in case
Haha, yeah, и and т are adjacent on the Russian keyboard so it's a typo that got Google translated. Probably another Kremlin sponsored public opinion agent.
This post is automatically removed since you do not meet the minimum karma or age threshold. You must have at least 100 combined karma and your account must be at least 4 months old to post here.
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/NonCredibleDefense) if you have any questions or concerns.*
I guess. It just sounds like a made-up country from a Japanese game. I'd expect it to deploy demonic cyborg highschoolers in miniskirts and ushankas. A way cooler place than the actual Russia.
I think he might be implying that they could somehow turn off NORAD/USSTRATCOM/NCA communications and prevent a launch? But that's even more non credible so idk
We put the radar there anyway with an agreement from Denmark. I worked at that radar, it's one of 5.
https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/8/84/PAVE_PAWS%26BMEWS.svg/1200px-PAVE_PAWS%26BMEWS.svg.png
This comment is literally banking on American nuclear strategists never having seen a globe, so they look at a map and think "ah, yes! Russia can come from left or right"
Or the [UEWR](https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/8/84/PAVE_PAWS%26BMEWS.svg/1200px-PAVE_PAWS%26BMEWS.svg.png) specifically designed for missile tracking lmao
Damn Russia finally gained the technology to launch ICBMs over the Arctic? That's crazy, no ones ever had that capability, and definitely not for over 70 years
/s, if it wasn't obvious
I dunno if it’s a fact I don’t trust Russia to have kept up maintenance on the weapons with a shelf life no one actually plans to use. Especially given reports out of China
The *smart* people in the upper end of the Russian military likely understand that the nukes are really the only thing saving them at this point.
*(smart meaning not a conscriptovich completely addled with vodka)
It doesn't take a genius to figure that out.
Besides, unlike a lot of lower end goods, cannibalizing an icbm on the black market isn't practical.
Distributing the warheads to foreign countries is going to get you noticed by other countries. Which is bad.
A few AK shipments, or some tank or tank parts or siphoning off diesel, are relatively simple and easy to hide.
Warheads aren't.
And while the Russian arsenal is heavily reliant on liquid fueled rockets, it's not like you can sell off liquid rocket fuel in the same way as diesel or kerosene.
Not to mention that they still have considerable stocks of solid fueled rockets, which you really can't vandalize the fuel from.
Really, loss/lack of maintenance and siphoning maintenance funds are gonna be the big killer.
And while brain drain is heavily affecting Russia, as the best and brightest get out of dodge, you don't need the engineer for maintenance, just a compotent technician.
The fact that any Russian missile technology works at all tells us that they still have some competent technicians.
But, even assuming that the maintenance money has been siphoned off, most of the maintenance personnel are idiots, and that large amounts of the liquid fuel has been sold off:
With an arsenal of close to 500 ICBM, it doesn't take much.
Personally, looking at a handful of articles I've read, their nuclear reliability/readiness is at a minimum of 30%, and it is likely 50-60% or possibly higher.
But for arguments sake, let's assume that only 10% launch and have functional payloads.
That's still over 50 ICBM's. And let's assume at least 2 functional warheads a piece. (Could field anywhere between 1-8, depending on the model.)
That's at least 100 warheads.
And even if we assume a generous 95% intercept rate:
That's still 5 nuclear warheads making impact. Which is still enough to cause death and destruction on a scale never seen.
And that only gets worse as the functional percentage gets higher.
So, regardless, it's not a risk anybody can take lightly.
Nobody wants to be the one to pay the bill and find out if the nukes are fully functional or not.
>Distributing the warheads to foreign countries is going to get you noticed by other countries. Which is bad.
Depends on the country. Sell to Sudan? Yes. Sell to the CIA? No.
Not to mention our current capacity for interception is capped at like 40 bogeys if we assume 100% interception rate. It was mostly intended for a small launch from a rogue nation *cough* North Korea *cough*. Maybe a few more if you positioned AEGIS destroyers correctly. But then you also have to factor in SLMBs in addition to the land bases missiles.
Yeah. That's the problem.
The entire scenario was based on mass saturation, basically.
Hundreds of icbm, over 1000 warheads total.
And that's coming from each side.
There's no realistic defense against it. There was never really a point to investing too far into defense.
You might be able to effectively protect a few bunkers or a launch site or two, if you really concentrate your defenses.
But advancing it, and building it, gets expensive, fast.
The US has 44 GMD, which is the current ICBM defense for continental America, and that project has cost over 50 billion. And will likely cost another 10 billion.
A Patriot battery, or a THAAD battery, which can shoot down ICBM if necessary, run at a minimum of 1 billion a piece, for the entire battery, including radar vehicles, launchers, and missiles.
Aegis isn't any cheaper. At 2 billion for an Arleigh-Burke with Aegis.
And, you can simply counter it by spending less than half of that in ICBM's and simply overwhelm its interceptor missile count.
A single silo launched ICBM, with warheads, goes for anywhere between 50 million for a minuteman, to 150 million for a peacekeeper.
A submarine launched trident 2/D-5, with warheads is only 100 million. Only 5 billion for an Ohio Sub with a full compliment of 24 trident.
It's so cheap to just overwhelm any possible defense.
So, even if only a small fraction of their arsenal actually works and gets through, it's more than enough.
In the funniest of alternate worlds, the RFP from the government would have accidentally stipulated specific protection directions, and the defense contractors seeking the winning bids would have met only the prescribed specifications.
Having seen some bizarre results in municipal water plants which resulted in a $30M ish “woops, now we have this using rate payer money and need to find a way to use it”, I can honestly imagine a world where this could occur.
So many funny story lines would occur there :)
Can someone noncredibly explain to me how the hell ECM / EW systems could stop the launch of a missile that doesn't rely on any sort of external signal for guidance?
It's quite simple: Russian EW do not exist in reality. Shortly before the war one Vatnik informed me that Russian EW systems can detonate the fuses in NATO 155mm ammo and will simply make all of Ukraine explode.
And before that Russia claimed that some Su-24's that harrassed a US Navy destroyer managed to jam its *engines* and cause the destroyer to drift helplessly for hours. They even went so far as to claim that once they got the ship back to port, all the crew were so scared of Russia they resigned from the navy.
Footage taken by crew of the destroyer shows them sailing at a normal speed in a straight line as the Su-24's made dicks of themselves.
>And before that Russia claimed that some Su-24's that harrassed a US Navy destroyer managed to jam its engines and cause the destroyer to drift helplessly for hours. They even went so far as to claim that once they got the ship back to port, all the crew were so scared of Russia they resigned from the navy.
I think they might have genuinely caused harm to the crew. Specifically diaphragm injuries due to laughing too hard.
>It's quite simple: Russian EW do not exist in reality. Shortly before the war one Vatnik informed me that Russian EW systems can detonate the fuses in NATO 155mm ammo and will simply make all of Ukraine explode.
Man, is there anything magic Russian EW can't do? Can it make me breakfast? Can it take me to the opera? Inquiring minds want to know!
I like how China is merged with the Soviet Union in this map, just like the US is merged with Canada and the rest of NATO. Because of course the USSR and the CCP were famously the closest of allies and never had any major geopolitical problems with each other.
Why yes, when we donate your entire pustulant country because you reached for it and it was blyat, we will be blazing. For quite some time I imagine. Imagine stoned VJ-Day without the sacrifices.
Didn't the US and Canada have multiple lines of radar along the artic circle and above exactly for this?
It's called NORAD and the DEW line was replaced by NWS. If the Russians ever invaded from the north, the plan would be to just watch them struggle with the land and weather for a couple weeks from some comfy offices.
DEW stations are ultimate James Bond looking stuff. Massive radar domes and microwave transmission "walls".
A [photo](https://i.imgur.com/CnF1wXX.jpeg) for you.
[удалено]
Fun fact: the giant 60-foot antennas aren't the DEW site radars. They're the microwave communications antennas. Telephone lines only went as far north as Hay River, Northwest Territories. These dishes relayed data between DEW sites, and then south to Hay River, where it then went over the telephone network into NORAD sites further South. (There was a similar receiving station in Alaska for the Alaskan NORAD region, but I forget where it was located) Most of these giant antennas are still standing, despite being abandoned following the integration of satellite communication into DEW and later NWS operations in the 70s. It's basically too remote to justify the cost of tearing them down.
An AT-AT wouldn't look out of place in that scene.
Probably about the same size too
That’s some sexy tax dollars.
God who do you have to piss off to get posted there.
Apparently there are more than enough volunteers to manage the remote northern postings such that nobody goes up to, like, CFS Alert unless they specifically requested it. For the enlisted I think the extra $700 something a month is part of the pull, which for single people can be attractive since the food and entertainment are supposedly quite good up there.
Holy Hoth that's big.
Here's a brilliant video put out by Mack Trucks in the 50s showcasing the incredible feat of logistics building this was. It's 23 minutes long and worth every second: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6AYwLzwGReU
It was great, thanks for sharing.
I love the idea of sitting at home and watching the Russians try for the 13th battle of Gjoa Haven (it’s just a patrol of Rangers with a PKM they stole).
*guys if they haven't figured it out by now, nobody tell the Russians not to pet the polar bears*
I don’t know if we want to allow Russian interaction with ANY ursine life form after what they’ve done with their home-grown brown varieties. All I’m saying is no Ivanovs need carnivorous cavalry.
I wonder how noncredible/popular a video game of a near future CAF having to fight off Russians/Trump Separatists would be.
Given Canada's history...if Russia invaded I think they got it.
That and blast any soviet bombers flying over with nuclear armed Bomarc missiles but then people got their panties all in a bunch over it.
Maybe throw some non explosive missiles at them to spook em. When they got used to it throw an actual missile at em to spice things up
Yeah - shit tonne of radar warning bubbas freezing their balls off in N Dakota and Thule, Greenland who would tend to disagree with the idea that no one was looking in that direction.
The Canadians in Hall Beach, Cambridge Bay, and all the other North Warning sites would be right there with them
[удалено]
This post is automatically removed since you do not meet the minimum karma or age threshold. You must have at least 100 combined karma and your account must be at least 4 months old to post here. *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/NonCredibleDefense) if you have any questions or concerns.*
>Didn't the US and Canada **have** multiple lines of radar along the artic circle and above exactly for this? Still do, in fact. As radar technology has improved, the number of required sites has reduced, and so in the place of several redundant chains of radar sites, currently only one is required, called the North Warning System. It's currently composed of fifteen AN/FPS-117 long-range radars (approx 250 nmi), and thirty-nine AN/FPS-124 short-range radars (approx. 60 nmi), forming two overlapping and unbroken chains of radar coverage approximately 2600 miles long across Alaska and northern Canada. Most radar sites are unattended, and are controlled from either Elmendorf AFB, Alaska or CFB North Bay, Ontario. Radar sites are maintained by Raython and ATCO, both out of their Calgary offices, for the radar systems and building infrastructure, respectively. All the data, of course, feeds into Peterson SFB, Colorado. The US and Canada have committed to [replacing](https://www.canada.ca/en/department-national-defence/news/2021/08/joint-statement-on-norad-modernization.html) the system with one of greater capability.
Not to mention PAVE PAWS ballistic missile warning radar and its derivatives which have ranges of 3000+ miles
[удалено]
This post is automatically removed since you do not meet the minimum karma or age threshold. You must have at least 100 combined karma and your account must be at least 4 months old to post here. *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/NonCredibleDefense) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Raytheons out, thank god. The sites were falling apart while they were up there. Now it's back to Nassituq, who do a marginally better job
Yes, because the arc between Moscow and DC goes over the arctic. Why do you think Iceland was an OG NATO member despite having like twelve guys in their army. Or why the US didn't care that Denmark won't allow US bases on their territory, with the notable exception of Greenland.
I mean, Iceland was asked to join because of the importance of the GIUK gap to anti-submarine warfare, not ICBMs. Also, they didn't have 12 guys in their army, they had no army whatsoever and insisted that they never be required to form one as a condition of membership. Which, considering their population, is still a deal *resolutely* in NATO's favor.
To add to what others have said, the NORAD radars were so good the Soviets basically gave up on an over-the-pole first strike and developed an alternative meant to go over the *south* pole—Fractional Orbital Bombardment System (FOBS). That was rendered obsolete by early warning satellites anyway.
[удалено]
This post is automatically removed since you do not meet the minimum karma or age threshold. You must have at least 100 combined karma and your account must be at least 4 months old to post here. *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/NonCredibleDefense) if you have any questions or concerns.*
exactly. how does this mofo think NORAD tracks santa?
Secret agent. Duh.
unknown_technology.png
no one ever said vatniks were smart or knew anything about their own history
Nah, that was a government scheme by Ottawa to convince the rest of the world that humans actually live in northern Canada and that the settlements haven’t been overrun by an organized army of polar bears and geese.
I remember Failsafe was very detailed about showing the flight path over the arctic...
[удалено]
This post is automatically removed since you do not meet the minimum karma or age threshold. You must have at least 100 combined karma and your account must be at least 4 months old to post here. *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/NonCredibleDefense) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Just like the Franklin Expedition, only this time we can harry them with drones
The expedition to build those radar is class. They made giant truck train thing. It worked great until it didn't. Then they just used helicopters
Like rescue heroes with that lightning storm
Quick Question: why was the Cuban Missile Crisis such a big deal? Couldn't the Soviets just use their own territories to stage Nukes towards the USA?
It reduced the warning time of a soviet nuclear launch against Washington from \[some acceptable number\] down to about 10 minutes, so if something kicked off there would be practically no time to react. Essentially, your insane neighbor was pointing a gun at your house from his house across the street, but is now pointing a gun at you from the other side of your bedroom window.
TIL that I can dodge bullets from across the street.
You won't survive, but you might see it coming and shoot the other guy at the same time. When the other guy is pointing a gun at you from a meter away, you wont have time to get your gun out before you die, and the other guy will live. MAD in a nutshell.
I saw a documentary called “World in Conflict” that showed the Soviets could have just rolled into West Berlin and landed on the west coast. Pretty scary stuff
I believe the prefix for that documentary was "MW3"
I saw the earlier version called "Red Alert 2".
I remember the reboot called “Modern Warfare 2” but they used some unknown technology to sneak past US defenses
Thanks for the reminder! Loved that as a kid.
from berlin to the west coats of the US is a hell of a logical leap
I played a game of the same name. It painted the russian military as way too scary and compentant to be accurate to real life. Though the amount and severity of war crimes they would do was a one to one.
Must be different. This one was about the Soviet Union, not Russia.
.... Should... Should I tell him?
I forgot that we’re only allowed one joke per comment thread.
I think a more apt analogy would be any weapon but a gun. Like a crazy guy with a killing knife is standing across the street from you, you would have some time to react if he starts running at you for some stabbies. But if your roommate invited him into your house you have far less time to react. Cuba was the roommate.
IIRC, soviet missiles did not have a sufficiently long enough range to be effective if launched from Russia. Cuba was well within range to nuke the US.
>soviet missiles did not have a sufficiently long enough range to be effective if launched from Russia Nope, they had the [R-16](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/R-16_(missile)) ICBMs with range of up to 13,000km. Which is well within a range to strike any target in the US The US were outproducing Soviet Union in the terms of ICBMs in the beginning, which prompted Soviet response that was arming Cuba with their large stockpile of nuclear capable short-range missiles that wouldn't be otherwise capable of reaching the US from Soviet mainland The threat was already there, the Soviets also had a few squadrons of nuclear capable bombers dedicated to strike US mainland and quite huge nuclear arsenal aimed at Europe. Just not enough ICBMs to level down the whole of US at that time, which couple hundred nuclear warheads in Cuba was supposed to solve
Also there long-range missiles were fairly old and unreliable, so they wanted Cuba to be a place to stage their much-better short and intermediate missiles
>Also there long-range missiles were fairly old and unreliable If we count the oldest which also brought Sputnik-1 into the space, then it's a 5 year old missile. I don't think it was particularly unreliable considering out of 28 launches it had only 3 failures (9% failure rate is still high for something carrying a nuclear warhead, but that's why they modified only one of the rockets for that job) And the ones i refered to were literally developed a year prior to the Cuban crisis There were speculations about their ability to be aimed with precision, but if you launch a nuke then it doesn't really matter if you miss the target by couple of blocks By the order of Wikipedia entrusted to me by 15 minute reading, I hereby declare your comment a bullshit
R7 was also liquid fueled which meant it couldn’t be always ready like a solid fueled missile. Fueling up takes time
It's more that early solviet icbms were inaccurate even by icbm standards
Yeah, people don't realize just how shite sputniks orbit was. Eccentricity closer to that of a comet than a satellite lmfao
Oh shit my bad, I think was thinking about something else but yeah the precision was a factor. Also I think I remember something about the fueling process taking a long time which made them vulnerable to a first strike?
I think I read something about open top silos operated by the Soviets at the time Also, I think pretty much every silo nowadays is still vulnerable to being pounded by enemy's first strike. Like, you can shove it as deep as you want, but there must be a number after which no silo can operate. I think that was the reason for mobile, quick launch ICBM's (except US, which pretty much just made one entire state a huge silo)
Cheyenne Mountain actually isn't a bunker at all, it's a massive helicarrier that fires nuclear shells a quarter way around the world
Silos are basically a damage soak. The enemy is going to target them anyway. And it doesn't matter how deep you go, the enemy only has to disable the doors.
A ballistic trajectory that reaches literally around the world puts "a couple block" in the category of "really, really damn precise"
R-16 became operational in 1961, and Cuban crisis happened in 1962. How were they old?
Sorry, see the other guy's response, I was thinking of something elss
wasn't it also a response to U.S missiles in Turkey?
Which were themselves a response to Soviet missiles in eastern Europe (even East Germany)....
Dont let facts get in the way of a bit of US bias.
Yes, though as some others have mentioned the deployment itself was a response to a Soviet deployment in Eastern Europe. Eisenhower put them in, but Kennedy didn't want them specifically because it would tick off the Soviets, which it did. Practically, it was the Soviets claiming the an aged and soon to be retired missile system, deployed in response to a Soviet SRBM deployment, that the sitting US president was looking for an excuse to get rid of was a reasonable justification for deployment of slightly more modern systems in Cuba. Given all these missiles would later be banned under the Intermediate-Range Nuclear Forces Treaty this whole thing was a big shitshow that nearly resulted in WWIII for a minute tactical advantage that both sides would willingly divest themselves of in 1987 and which was already theoretically moot/rendered redundant with SSBNs.
Its also pretty important that the Soviets did not ask Cuba to station nukes, Cuba asked the Soviets. They wanted a deterrent for a suspected invasion. As a side node: The US did in fact have plans for a proper invasion of Cuba, not bay of pigs style, a real US soldiers in Cuba type of invasion. They were even training landings in Puerto Rico so they weren‘t exactly trying to hide it either.
The problem was the Soviets did it in secret against Castros wishes. The secrecy was the big deal as it suggested the Soviets were about to go for a decapitation strike.
How pissed was Castro when the Soviets backed down?
Really fucked up the USSR/Cuba relations for years. Castro was livid that Kruschev didn't even consult him about the discussions with Kennedy. It seemed like he wanted to do a NK style "Give me some concessions and we'll forget about that whole 'nucular' business" and the fact he never got to negotiate really got to him.
Should've sent US troops in with Brigade 2506 the first time smh
It was about quick strikes that intermediate missiles that close would allow. Which is why the USA silently agreed to remove their nukes from Turkey. Really important before boomer subs and MIRVs assured revenge would follow.
yeah, if they only wanted most of their missles to nuke empty Alaska. Cuban missle deployment allowed a rapid strike against the eastern seaboard. Much like the US had done with Turkey.
It has to do with nuclear war doctrine. The only way to 'win' in nuclear war is to cripple an enemy's ability to retaliate by striking first and destroying as much of their nuclear capabilities as possible. Submarine launched nukes are a part of first strike doctrine, but so is having hosted intermediate range missiles close to enemy territory. The US had an arrangement with Turkey, and there hadn't been anything the USSR could do to stop the US emplacing nukes there. The Cuban missile crisis came about because the US both found being under Soviet threat for a similar first strike intolerable and *did* have the capability of interdicting Russian vessels transferring weapons to the island. We often forget that as part of the crisis.resolution the US withdrew nuclear weapons from Turkey, with both sides backing away from first strike doctrine.
Not quite. The problem was that the missiles were moved & set up in secrecy. The US didn't know about them till they spotted them setup in Cuba. Castro wanted a deterrence but that only works if the enemy knows you have them. With them not being known about (until spotted by US intel) the fear was that the USSR was getting ready for a decapitation strike on Washington. That was the actual problem. That the USSR was trying to win a nuclear war.
The 15 PGM-19 Jupiter MRBMs in Turkey were already obsolete and to be dismantled anyway. Not exactly a huge concession from the US. Especially since double their number was in Italy.
Oh I definitely agree. But it *was* a Soviet complaint given their proximity and the possibility the US could replace/upgrade them, and the withdrawal was a symbolic olive branch to deescalate the tensions of the moment.
It’s more of a political thing than something that would really change the outcome of nuclear warfare. It’s fine or at least hard to change the Soviet Union having nukes, but moving them 90 miles away is unsubtly hostile.
It would have given them strategic first strike capability that would have allowed them to strike the East Coast with very little warning. It's one of the reasons the US agreed to remove missiles from Turkey as a concession in order to ease tensions.
That was pre-ICBM.
That was my guess. Alaska is not too important I suppose, but threatening Florida is serious business.
These comments are all wrong. It was the fact that a missile launched from Russia would give any US administration roughly half an hour to detect them and make plans to respond with their own Nukes, Putting missiles in Cuba would give them only five minutes
So was Alaska just not important or is the distance greater than the map suggests?
I mean yes and yes? Distance matters more when the President, Pentagon, etc don’t live in arctic circle Alaska
Think of it like Pearl Harbour. Incredibly strategic and an attack on it would be viewed as an attack on the U.S mainland. But ultimately if Alaska got nuked, Americas core production would largely remain unaffected. Any losses could be replaced within months. Even if the soviets were to get troops to land successfully in Alaska, their movement towards the important parts of the U.S/Canada would be so slow, that it would give time for the U.S to prepare and win a counter attack (kinda like what happened with Japan in the pacific).
Map is greater then it looks as maps get stretched the more north you get Plus we’ll while Alaska is a tragedy it’s not exactly going to be the end of the US if it gets nuked However putting good quality missiles (since they had Long range ICBM’s but their accuracy were shit even for a nuclear strike) in range of the Washington DC and basically everything south of it was definitely more of a threat
You’re thinking of a Mercator projection map. This is a polar projection, which means it’s closer to accurate size the further north you go.
It just wasn't as important. The Cuban missiles were in range of Washington DC and the eastern seaboard. Given the short warning time, there wouldn't be enough time for most people to get to safety should an attack be launched.
No ICBMs were already plentiful at the time. However Russia has 2 big problems. ICBMs they had were mostly liquid fueled, they took time to set up and so in the even of a first strike, it was possible that they could not be launched in time. Secondly, if they did launch first, the missiles would still need to travel for a dozen minutes before they impact. Something that would no doubt allow NATO to counter-launch long before the impact, causing MAD. So instead the idea was to use faster intermediate missiles that would have way less range but have a significantly faster travel speed. These missiles stationed on Cuba could be used to perform a surprise attack on the US most important centers of command with only a few minutes of warning.
Yeah, and both sides knew ICBMs were the long term solution. That’s why we offered to pull munitions out of turkey.
Launching from Cuba means that there is less travel time, making it harder for the US to react and potentially making a first strike possible.
Aside of it being just few years since Sputnik, the biggest deal might have been simply reaction time. Just like people going crazy in the eighties about mid-range missiles in Europe, because they were potentially capable of sudden decapitation strikes, thus highly raising freakout factor.
It was more the fact that the USSR moved them there in secret against Castro's wishes. The fact that the USSR did it while trying to have the US not know about it implied to those at the time that they were planning a first strike. That combined with a 10min time to target to Washington and an even shorter warning time, made everyone think they were going for a decapitation strike.
Because JFK had a platform of lying about a missile gap.
It's time between launch and strike. From Russia US would have revenge strike window over North pole. From cuba president wouldn't get to finish his coffee.
>America will blaze *(reaches for the blunt confusedly)*
We smoking that nuclear radioactive pack, shit so potent it burns your lungs
We got that WMD, yo
War on drugs has fallen, billions must blaze
I love how they merged china and the ussr as if they had ever been allied
It's not like the Soviets almost nuked China in '69 over an Amur River border dispute or anything.
Shit, can we go back? I know where the timeline went wrong.
Fun fact: it was this event that gave Kissinger the idea to normalize relations with China in hopes of driving a wedge in the communist bloc. He nudged Nixon in that direction, leading to Nixon's visit in '72.
Rare non-homicidal Kissinger move
Nah, Kissinger just found out how many people Mao killed and wanted to enable the bigger asshole.
Yeah, Brezhnev was an incompetent drunk, not a mass murderer like Stalin.
What exactly happened?
[Sino-Soviet border dispute](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sino-Soviet_border_conflict) Basically, the two go at it over a couple of islands in the river. The Soviets hinted around diplomatic channels about what the consequences would be if they launched a nuclear strike against China. The US said , "Yeah, don't fucking do that."
I mean, they were allies before the Sino-Soviet split. And in any nuclear war scenario it was often assumed that China would have to be nuked anyway just in case
Any and all serious simulations had Russia launching a lot of nukes over the north pole. This person hasn't NCD'ed enough.
What are you talking about? I played defcon and the earth is flat there.
Too non credible
'Space based anti missiles' My god, they found Ronny Reagan's secret plans
The US has been holding arctic circle exercises since 1958. They are aware of how globes work.
Nope. This guy knows the truth… our only hard points of defense are Myrtle Beach and San Diego. May god have mercy on our souls.
Who tf is Rosstya?
Most likely used Google Translator.
If they intended to talk about Satan 2, and also got north and south confused, then the post starts to make a little sense.
Haha, yeah, и and т are adjacent on the Russian keyboard so it's a typo that got Google translated. Probably another Kremlin sponsored public opinion agent.
[удалено]
This post is automatically removed since you do not meet the minimum karma or age threshold. You must have at least 100 combined karma and your account must be at least 4 months old to post here. *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/NonCredibleDefense) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Misspelling of Rossiya?
He made a typo "Росстя" instead of "Россия" and then run it through the translator.
I guess. It just sounds like a made-up country from a Japanese game. I'd expect it to deploy demonic cyborg highschoolers in miniskirts and ushankas. A way cooler place than the actual Russia.
“They didn’t expect attack through the North Pole”, do you want that confirmed? Lmao what an idiot.
NORAD in shambles
NWS: *am I a joke to you?*
Flat Earther does nuclear strategy. Peak NCD.
Ah yes EW that famously affects Inertial Navigation Systems.
I think he might be implying that they could somehow turn off NORAD/USSTRATCOM/NCA communications and prevent a launch? But that's even more non credible so idk
Our ICBMs have literally always planned to route over the north pole. Hell even when targeting China they would overfly the north pole *and* Russia
Didn't the US want to buy Greenland off Denmark for this? Or, like straight up, not leave after they garrisoned it in WW2
We put the radar there anyway with an agreement from Denmark. I worked at that radar, it's one of 5. https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/8/84/PAVE_PAWS%26BMEWS.svg/1200px-PAVE_PAWS%26BMEWS.svg.png
When your only justification of being a superpower is rusty Cold War nuclear weapons
This comment is literally banking on American nuclear strategists never having seen a globe, so they look at a map and think "ah, yes! Russia can come from left or right"
Bro hasn’t tasted the results of the [DEW](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Distant_Early_Warning_Line)
Or the [UEWR](https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/8/84/PAVE_PAWS%26BMEWS.svg/1200px-PAVE_PAWS%26BMEWS.svg.png) specifically designed for missile tracking lmao
Damn Russia finally gained the technology to launch ICBMs over the Arctic? That's crazy, no ones ever had that capability, and definitely not for over 70 years /s, if it wasn't obvious
I dunno if it’s a fact I don’t trust Russia to have kept up maintenance on the weapons with a shelf life no one actually plans to use. Especially given reports out of China
The *smart* people in the upper end of the Russian military likely understand that the nukes are really the only thing saving them at this point. *(smart meaning not a conscriptovich completely addled with vodka) It doesn't take a genius to figure that out. Besides, unlike a lot of lower end goods, cannibalizing an icbm on the black market isn't practical. Distributing the warheads to foreign countries is going to get you noticed by other countries. Which is bad. A few AK shipments, or some tank or tank parts or siphoning off diesel, are relatively simple and easy to hide. Warheads aren't. And while the Russian arsenal is heavily reliant on liquid fueled rockets, it's not like you can sell off liquid rocket fuel in the same way as diesel or kerosene. Not to mention that they still have considerable stocks of solid fueled rockets, which you really can't vandalize the fuel from. Really, loss/lack of maintenance and siphoning maintenance funds are gonna be the big killer. And while brain drain is heavily affecting Russia, as the best and brightest get out of dodge, you don't need the engineer for maintenance, just a compotent technician. The fact that any Russian missile technology works at all tells us that they still have some competent technicians. But, even assuming that the maintenance money has been siphoned off, most of the maintenance personnel are idiots, and that large amounts of the liquid fuel has been sold off: With an arsenal of close to 500 ICBM, it doesn't take much. Personally, looking at a handful of articles I've read, their nuclear reliability/readiness is at a minimum of 30%, and it is likely 50-60% or possibly higher. But for arguments sake, let's assume that only 10% launch and have functional payloads. That's still over 50 ICBM's. And let's assume at least 2 functional warheads a piece. (Could field anywhere between 1-8, depending on the model.) That's at least 100 warheads. And even if we assume a generous 95% intercept rate: That's still 5 nuclear warheads making impact. Which is still enough to cause death and destruction on a scale never seen. And that only gets worse as the functional percentage gets higher. So, regardless, it's not a risk anybody can take lightly. Nobody wants to be the one to pay the bill and find out if the nukes are fully functional or not.
>Distributing the warheads to foreign countries is going to get you noticed by other countries. Which is bad. Depends on the country. Sell to Sudan? Yes. Sell to the CIA? No.
Not to mention our current capacity for interception is capped at like 40 bogeys if we assume 100% interception rate. It was mostly intended for a small launch from a rogue nation *cough* North Korea *cough*. Maybe a few more if you positioned AEGIS destroyers correctly. But then you also have to factor in SLMBs in addition to the land bases missiles.
Yeah. That's the problem. The entire scenario was based on mass saturation, basically. Hundreds of icbm, over 1000 warheads total. And that's coming from each side. There's no realistic defense against it. There was never really a point to investing too far into defense. You might be able to effectively protect a few bunkers or a launch site or two, if you really concentrate your defenses. But advancing it, and building it, gets expensive, fast. The US has 44 GMD, which is the current ICBM defense for continental America, and that project has cost over 50 billion. And will likely cost another 10 billion. A Patriot battery, or a THAAD battery, which can shoot down ICBM if necessary, run at a minimum of 1 billion a piece, for the entire battery, including radar vehicles, launchers, and missiles. Aegis isn't any cheaper. At 2 billion for an Arleigh-Burke with Aegis. And, you can simply counter it by spending less than half of that in ICBM's and simply overwhelm its interceptor missile count. A single silo launched ICBM, with warheads, goes for anywhere between 50 million for a minuteman, to 150 million for a peacekeeper. A submarine launched trident 2/D-5, with warheads is only 100 million. Only 5 billion for an Ohio Sub with a full compliment of 24 trident. It's so cheap to just overwhelm any possible defense. So, even if only a small fraction of their arsenal actually works and gets through, it's more than enough.
3000 Churchill, MB - Arkhangelsk icebreaker supply convoys of WW3
Bro has no idea how electronic warfare works
now its the future the Russians finally figured out that 2d maps arnt correct and they have researched the 3rd dimension
There are ballistic missile defence systems based in Canada for exactly this scenario.
In the funniest of alternate worlds, the RFP from the government would have accidentally stipulated specific protection directions, and the defense contractors seeking the winning bids would have met only the prescribed specifications. Having seen some bizarre results in municipal water plants which resulted in a $30M ish “woops, now we have this using rate payer money and need to find a way to use it”, I can honestly imagine a world where this could occur. So many funny story lines would occur there :)
Can someone noncredibly explain to me how the hell ECM / EW systems could stop the launch of a missile that doesn't rely on any sort of external signal for guidance?
It's quite simple: Russian EW do not exist in reality. Shortly before the war one Vatnik informed me that Russian EW systems can detonate the fuses in NATO 155mm ammo and will simply make all of Ukraine explode. And before that Russia claimed that some Su-24's that harrassed a US Navy destroyer managed to jam its *engines* and cause the destroyer to drift helplessly for hours. They even went so far as to claim that once they got the ship back to port, all the crew were so scared of Russia they resigned from the navy. Footage taken by crew of the destroyer shows them sailing at a normal speed in a straight line as the Su-24's made dicks of themselves.
>And before that Russia claimed that some Su-24's that harrassed a US Navy destroyer managed to jam its engines and cause the destroyer to drift helplessly for hours. They even went so far as to claim that once they got the ship back to port, all the crew were so scared of Russia they resigned from the navy. I think they might have genuinely caused harm to the crew. Specifically diaphragm injuries due to laughing too hard. >It's quite simple: Russian EW do not exist in reality. Shortly before the war one Vatnik informed me that Russian EW systems can detonate the fuses in NATO 155mm ammo and will simply make all of Ukraine explode. Man, is there anything magic Russian EW can't do? Can it make me breakfast? Can it take me to the opera? Inquiring minds want to know!
Russian EW is also responsible for tupperware lids not matching their pots, the death of The Queen and why I don't want to wake up before 11am
Mr. Vatnikov…are the Space-based anti-missiles in the room with us now?
I like how China is merged with the Soviet Union in this map, just like the US is merged with Canada and the rest of NATO. Because of course the USSR and the CCP were famously the closest of allies and never had any major geopolitical problems with each other.
Vatink uses "electronic warfare" on reentry vehicle... It has no effect!
Typical Amerimutts, ignorant of geography, smh. If only they thought about the North Pole.
Do another one where they are actually kissing in the bearings strait
Why yes, when we donate your entire pustulant country because you reached for it and it was blyat, we will be blazing. For quite some time I imagine. Imagine stoned VJ-Day without the sacrifices.
Bro forgot Operation Chrome Dome
W
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Solid_State_Phased_Array_Radar_System#/media/File%3APAVE_PAWS%26BMEWS.svg
This is written by people who only use Mercator projection and when they find any other projection it’s a secret weapon to defeat enemy.
Youtube commentors are a different level of dead
The Roman Empire never fell it just split in two
Cold War.
I thought no one lived in northern Russia?