|
|
От
|
Александр Антонов
|
|
|
К
|
Василий Фофанов
|
|
|
Дата
|
01.08.2008 00:04:56
|
|
|
Рубрики
|
Современность; Танки;
|
|
Re: Можно сказать...
Здравствуйте
>Два момента. Во-первых: что из перечисленного принято на снабжение?
Видимо всё. Потому что перечислены разработки явно советских времен, когда генеральское "Хотим такой же" было руководством к действию для промышленности, будь то космический корабль многоразового использования, или нейтронный спецбоеприпас. Ничего такого нет в нейтронных боеприпасах чего советская наука не могла бы "асилить" еще до того как горбачевское "новое мЫшленье" набрало обороты с тяжкими последствиями для гособоронзаказа. Да, напомню высказывание из советской противоракетной программы: "Нейтроны - лучшие осколки" Сказано было в начале 60-х, когда программа А-35 только набирала обороты.
>По ссылке речь идет о разработках а не о серийных выстрелах.
Ну Вы же не потребуете от меня статистику серийного выпуска нейтронных боеприпасов в СССР? :-) На Западе кстати в то время исходили из посыла - если кровожадные Советы могут разработать какое нибудь оружие, то они обязательно запустят его в серию.
>Во-вторых, и в главных, собственно даже неважно что в СССР реально было на снабжении, важнее в данном случае что на западе считалось что у СССР боеприпасов с увеличенным выходом излучения нет.
"...Many years ago, we tested that (neutron) bomb. We tested, but we never started production of that weapon,’ said Leonid Brezhnev in November 1978.
RUSSIAN PURE-FUSION EXPLOSIVE DEVICE: Soviet nuclear physicist L.A. Artsimovich, a key developer of Russian hydrogen bomb, reported during 1957, on the nuclear devices directed for peaceful applications. Soviets have periodically used pure-fusion explosive devices for non-military application, since 1952. Russians have an enormous lead in pure-fusion neutron bomb technology, since the technology of the US warheads during 1983 required fission trigger. The activity highly relevant to neutron bomb development started a very long time ago in the USSR. In September 1961, the Soviet military journal Red Star, Colonel M.Pavlov wrote on ‘On Plans for the Neutron Bomb.’
Neutron Anti Tank Weapons
NEUTRON BOMBS IN ANTITANK WARFARE: General Biryukov and Colonel Melnikov, wrote a book, Antitank Warfare, and discussed the advantage of nuclear radiation as a tank killer. Neutrons are really the cat’s pajamas for knocking out enemy armored forces. In performing the mission of destroying armored troops on the field of battle, it is expedient to use neutron bombs, to destroy such a basic element as the tank crew in and outside the tanks. This makes it possible to deprive the enemy armored troops of their combat power with greater economy of ammunition, in shorter periods, and with a high destructive probability. It is more efficient to knock out tank crews with enhanced radiation, than to knock out tanks with blast.
Neutron bomb also makes good sense in indirect sense to Red Army, Russian armored forces could quickly move in to mop up in the areas attacked by neutron bombs. Because the destructive effect of the neutron bomb is relatively low, tank crews will be able to accomplish combat missions in the zone of application of neutron bombs continuously. The tank crews will also accomplish the mission’s limit of advance, said Soviet Marshal Pavel Rotmistrov in 1978. It is nothing but an attempt to make black look white when American declares that neutron bomb is a defensive weapon against advancing Soviet tanks.
Depopulation of Western Europe
RUSSIAN OCCUPATION OF WESTERN EUROPE: Neutron bombs allow Russia to occupy the Western Europe, with its key-industrial facilities intact after the neutron bomb attack. Then Russia could either ship the key industrial facilities to Russia or turn Western Europe into a slave labor camp and force European industrial production to continue at gunpoint for the benefit of Russia. Soviet strategy in case of a nuclear war with NATO is to constrain as much as possible the extent of the economic damage. The Soviet objective is not to turn the large economic and industrial regions into a heap of ruins, but to deliver strikes that will destroy strategic combat means, paralyze enemy military production. Neutron bomb provides the solution. After having acquired the neutron bomb capability, all that would be required would be to get the word off to the workers in NATO countries that if they work on military production they may be neutron-bombed at their factories. If they stay home, there will be no bombing. In both cases, the production would paralyze without destroying the facilities. Military strategy makes use of such weapons as defeat the enemy’s armed forces without doing essential injury to the economy or populace. It is in the interest of the political strategy, that military strategy of neutron bomb destroys the totalitarian rulers and their armies, without destroying their economic infrastructure. Neutron bomb is not an instrument of infrastructure wars. Neutron weapon war will not cause economic meltdowns."
Как видим Леонид Брежнев в 1978-м или лукавил или недоговаривал. В СССР была не только испытаны ядерные взрывные устройства с повышенным выходом радиации, но и по требованию военных (а как иначе?) были созданы вполне конкретные нейтронные спецбоеприпасы для вполне конкретных систем оружия.
А если на Западе по какой то причине тогда этого не заметили, что ж, значит НАТОвские разведки невнимательно читали генерала Бирюкова и полковников Павлова и Мельникова. :-)
С уважением, Александр