How much warning would we have on an incoming ICBM on the East Coast from russia?

[NightWatcher]

The longest flight time of an ICBM attacking the US would be about 30 minutes, and the flight time from an offshore submarine to Washington could be as little as 10 minutes. Subtracting the times required to determine the targets of the incoming missiles and to implement any response leaves at most 10 minutes for a presidential decision.

https://thebulletin.org/2021/06/biden-should-end-the-launch-on-warning-option/

30 minutes! We all might be gone in 30 minutes if this crazy man feels threatened or is crazy enough to contemplate "tactical" nukes.

Imagine if some hacker is able to knock Moscow's power offline for a second and putin feels attacked, we're gone folks.

[qazplm135]

1. I would guess

that we would see if they were moving into a launch status, there are tell tale signs.

I'd also guess we'd be able to see the launches themselves.

The moment a missile is launched, that's the end of Russia, so they aren't doing that yet.

[Claustrum]

7. Personally, I rather not know.

I don't want to panic for 30 mins and think about how/if I can escape. I rather die peacefully while I live normally for that last 30 mins.

[lagomorph777]

8. Correct - Putin knows he's dead a few minutes after pushing the button.

I personally think he's too selfish to be suicidal.

We don't really have a choice though - have to stop him or we're dead anyway.

[Jedi Guy]

24. Putin would almost certainly survive if he chose to launch.

Russia has sites that are basically equivalent to Cheyenne Mountain: Kosvinsky Kamen and Mount Yamantau, both located in the Urals, as well as another under the Altai Mountains in Siberia. That last one is reputed to be a high-tech "luxury" bunker, and there have been rumors that Putin has sent his family members there already. But all three are explicitly designed to survive a direct nuclear detonation.

All he'd need to do is slip away from Moscow, reach the bunkers under any of those, and then communicate the launch signal. While the world dies in nuclear fire, he sits in his bunker with his nearest and dearest, sipping on some Stolichnaya.

[Irish_Dem]

33. Putin would be located in a secure secret bunker.

Deep underground or in a flying doomsday machine like the US has.
He would make sure he survives.

[lagomorph777]

36. How long could he survive, and to what purpose?

Woohoo! The planet is a cinder, but I'm alive! I'm the king of the ashes!

[Irish_Dem]

48. A toxic narcissist/sociopath wouldn't care that everyone else is dead.

Or the world is blown up.

He would be happy because he is so "special" that he alone survived.
And thrilled he got revenge on his enemies, no matter the cost.
He would feel all powerful, in control of the world.

I assume Putin with his vast wealth has underground survival areas, fully equipped for a long survival period. As long as he has a few servants he would be happy.

And knowing Putin if there are a few areas of the world still intact he would invade them.

[Ex Lurker]

71. The Navy was beating the watters about 100 miles SW of Tampa over the weekend.

They regularly play with the Russians out there.

[ret5hd]

2. So I will have as little as 10 and as much as 30...

minutes to get as close as possible to the target…because I don’t think I would want to be a survivor.

[LuckyCharms]

5. I'll go with you. n/t

[lagomorph777]

10. Not a problem - I'm already close enough.

[SoonerPride]

25. I would drive towards the local air force base.

I figure it is on a target list an would hopefully be vaporized instantly

I don't want to try navigate a post nuclear hellscape.

[I_UndergroundPanther]

3. Yeah we would

Hopefully it would be instantantly.

[MarineCombatEngineer]

4. Depends on whether it's a land based ICBM,

or a sub launched SLBM.
A land based ICBM: appox. 30 min.
A sub based SLBM: appox. 5 min.

[Jedi Guy]

31. Yep... depressed-trajectory shot from a boomer skulking off the East Coast.

In other sources I've read that the warning prior to detonation could be as little as three minutes. Hopefully the Navy has attack subs beating the grass to find the snakes in the Atlantic, though as a practical matter all it does is let the Pentagon know where Ivan's boomers are. The SSNs can't shoot first... unless orders have changed, and they have permission to shoot if they have reason to believe a boomer is about to launch.

[Irish_Dem]

47. I think this is how Putin would do it.

Russian ballistic missile subs ( "boomers" ) off the eastern coast of the US.

Probably there on standby right now.

Putin did put his forces on high nuclear alert. Wonder what that means for the Russian subs? I think you said in another post that the Black Sea next to Ukraine is too shallow for a big sub. So they didn't go there.

My guess is he sent them to the North Sea (Europe) and off US east coast?

[Jedi Guy]

51. I doubt he'd station a boomer in the Black Sea, yes. No real point even if it were possible.

His land-based missiles in Russia will hit anything in that sphere quickly enough that it won't matter much. Or he could simply send a nuclear-capable bomber like a Tu-95, or a newer model aircraft.

If I were him, I'd sneak a boomer as close to the US East Coast as possible to set up a depressed-trajectory shot on Washington that'd offer minimal warning for Biden to respond. I'd also park one in the English Channel so it could hit western European capitals, another in the North Sea for the rest. Get them on station and have them go silent, with SSNs posted around them to warn of any approaching enemy SSNs. Then all they have to do is wait for the green light.

I'm not sure how it is for Russian subs nowadays, but on the old Soviet subs, the captain and the political officer had to concur on a launch, along with a flotilla commander, if applicable. With their nukes on high alert, the missiles may very well be armed in the tubes. All the decision-making personnel would need to do is turn their keys, and off they go.

[EX500rider]

59. Both the North Sea & English Channel are too shallow for boomers...

...they rely on staying deep to stay hidden.
The North Sea is relatively shallow, with an average depth of 90m, the channel is also relatively shallow, with an average depth of about 120 m at its widest part, reducing to about 45 m between Dover and Calais.

[Jedi Guy]

62. That's a relief. Taking a depressed-trajectory shot from that close off the table is good news.

With sufficiently good mapping of the seafloor, though, wouldn't it possible to navigate their way to a good spot and park there? Maybe have an SSGN run interference and grab everyone's attention while the boomer slips into its spot?

[EX500rider]

75. Possible

But I don't think most modern subs have the ability to sit on the bottom so they'd have a hard time keeping in one spot for a long time, tides & currents.

[Irish_Dem]

60. Yes not necessary for a boomer to be in the Black Sea.

With nuclear capable Russian aircraft.

But if he could put one in the Black Sea I think he would do it.
He must be frustrated that the Black Sea is too shallow.

Putin loves dramatic threats, and loves to terrorize and scare people. He would love to have the sub surface and run on the water just to frighten people. I am talking psychology here, not military tactics.

We know by now that Putin is not long on military strategy or even logistics.

Yes that is what I would do too. Put the boomer close to the US east coast.

Right next to DC. How close do you think the boomer could get? What could the US subs do about it?

I would put some boomers in the North Sea for sure like I said. Would Putin dare put them in the English Channel, Good God. I guess he could. Who would stop him right now?

Jeeze I didn't realize the SSNs could be posted around the boomers. Good Lord. Right, the boomers just sit there like little snakes poised to strike. With their little pals protecting them.

Maybe this is exactly what Putin did when he called high alert. And that is exactly why the NATO countries won't go into Ukraine. That makes sense now.

Yes I would guess that high alert from Putin does mean they don't need double concurrence on a launch. That permission was given by the supreme Russian commander Putin with the high alert. Missiles in tubes ready to launch, turn the effing key. Game over.

Jebus H. Christ. This certainly explains why NATO countries are so afraid.

[sarisataka]

61. The SSBNs typically don't venture

Out of arctic waters. Russia knows they are too vulnerable so they are kept close where they can be protected by attack subs, surface ships and land based air.

The SSGNs are the close in threat. They have three older Oscar class boats that are still effective. Each has 24 missile tubes that could be loaded with nuke tipped Kalibr cruise missiles.

They also have three of the new Yasen class which are uncomfortably close to our Seawolf class. Each Yasen can carry 40 Kalibrs

Even if we take out half before they can launch, that could mean 75 missiles each carrying 100kt arriving with short notice.

[Jedi Guy]

64. Seems odd that that's their strategy with their SSBNs, though.

The whole point of a boomer is to vanish so the enemy doesn't know where they are at the very least, or creep up as close to the target as possible to give minimal warning before detonation. Keeping them in the Arctic really negates both of those advantages, doesn't it?

And yeah, I recall reading that the Yasen-class is very, very good.

Hopefully smarter people than me are setting up contingencies based on what Putin might do, because from where I'm standing, humanity seems poised on the brink of destroying itself. Interesting times, I guess.

[sarisataka]

69. The logic, as I have been told,

Is that we know approximately where they are but not exactly. Their SSBNs are a survivable supplement to land based missiles.

Also they are not as quiet as our Ohios. When a Russian boomer ventures out for some reason, it will nearly immediately pick up an LA class shadow. It is believed Russia rarely even gets a wiff of our boomers. An Ohio is just a hole in the water and can wander wherever it wants.

[Jedi Guy]

70. Ahhhhh, I see.

From their point of view, even if we could somehow disable their land-based nukes, it wouldn't matter since their SSBNs are still able to strike back. Makes sense, I guess.

That's what I've heard, as well. The 688s latch onto their boomers as soon as they leave port.

I seem to recall reading somewhere that Russia is believed to have detected an Ohio-class boomer exactly twice, but only held the contact for a few minutes and couldn't localize or track on either occasion.

[DetroitLegalBeagle]

83. Ballistic missile subs have always been considered the more survivable of the triad

For us as well. Russia does have an advantage as far as land based assets. Their mobile ICBM launchers. They have road going trucks that carry a single ICBM. Range is 6800 miles and the newest ones are MIRV'd. They have some offroad capability, can hide in the cities or countryside and can be set up and ready to launch in minutes.

[MarineCombatEngineer]

76. itls my understanding that there are certain

maneuvers an enemy SSBN will take that strongly indicates a launch, and these are what Hunter/Killer subs look for, especially in times of heightened tensions, such as what we have as we speak.

You can bet that the US Navy has Hunter/Killer subs shadowing each Russian boomer ready to sink it if war breaks out.

And there's also NATO member subs who are doing the same thing.

[DetroitLegalBeagle]

6. Would be less

Closer to 5-10 minutes from launch to detonation for a SLBM. If Russia decides to do a first strike, his subs will hit first.

[WhiteTara]

9. long enough to jam all the phone lines

with people telling their loved ones good bye.

They aren't phone "lines" anymore.

[smirkymonkey]

11. Is this really where we are right now?

If so, I kind of hope it happens while I'm asleep. I don't want to know about it.

[Claustrum]

17. This has come through my mind since the first day of the attack.

The city where I live is prime target for nukes and terrorist attacks. So, if it happens, the likelihood I am fairly close by is very high. It's basically 9/11 all over again for me, except I will probably die this time.

Like you, I rather not know about the nuke incoming and just live that last 30 mins normally.

[smirkymonkey]

32. I see you are in NYC. I lived there during 9/11 and until that point I never imagined such

a thing was even remotely possible. That is the thing with this.

I never imagined that I would really have to worry about being blown apart by a nuclear bomb, but now that I see how possible it is, it scares the f**k out of me. No time to say goodbye or even any point if all your loved ones are going to be blown to bits as well. Except I guess to go with a clear conscience, I suppose. And to hear their voices one last time.

I am still in a large northeastern city (Boston) and while we aren't a primary target, we are still a target. I hope for you that NYC stays safe. I just wrote a long email to a co-worker who is moving to NY telling them all of the great things to do and see in NY and how much I missed it. I like where I live now for this stage in my life, but I hope both our cities remain safe and standing through all this.

[Claustrum]

40. Lets hope we all stay safe and cooler heads prevail.

I've been all over the country as well but I always end up being back in NYC. I've been to DC, San Diego, AZ. This is where my family and closest friends are. There is just something about the city that always brings me back. But I don't know. A new job could take me elsewhere anytime and I am always ready for that adventure. I am the only one in my family and friend circle to move around so much.

As far as 9/11 goes, I could never unseen it as I was watching across the river in my college campus. It's one thing to watch in disbelief on TV and it's another to see it with your own eyes.

[2naSalit]

20. +1

[ret5hd]

27. Kinda like grandpa...die in your sleep...

rather than screaming like all the others in the car.

[smirkymonkey]

38. *snort*

I guess, when all is lost, humor is the best last resort!

[Irish_Dem]

50. Yes. When Putin threatens nukes or chemical/biological warfare, it gives one pause.

[bottrott]

12. Zilch if Status-6 is operational

This would be the undersea drone nuke the twit announced in 2018.

[WarGamer]

13. There'd be little to no warning.

By the time a sub launch was detected, the message would go to the WH and Pentagon, they'd immediately deploy to bunkers under DC and I'm not sure a public alert would ever go out. 5 minutes from launch to impact.

[LakeArenal]

14. He's not going to nuke anyone. Nor will North Korea.

Big egos don’t have a death wish. They want to control people not vast stretches of wasteland.

[boston bean]

15. Oh goodness. If I vaporize hope I only feel it for a minute. I refuse to live in this fear.

[dumbcat]

28. Not enough of it

Unfortunately. And not deployed everywhere needed.

[sarisataka]

30. Can't stop them all

And only a fraction of the total have to get through

[BannonsLiver]

43. We do and we don't.

Our system was built to take down limited strikes from rogue actors like Kim, with one or two missiles. It’s not designed to deal with hundreds of incoming missiles in a single strike that would come from a country like Russia.

There’s always the chance the system is more robust than what is known publicly. I can’t imagine anything more classified than that would be. But it’s unlikely.

[NickB79]

53. A handful, possibly. A thousand? Nope

And Russia has the ability to launch that many at once. They do have MIRV systems, where one ICBM carries 10 warheads at once. 100 ICBM's, 1000 warheads entering atmosphere.

[USALiberal]

66. Where are these And place and ready to go at any time??

[Hoyt]

18. 10 to 30 minutes is long enough to pour a good drink and/or toke.

[ificandream]

19. Did this really need to be asked?

[AntiFascist]

21. Tactical nukes are considered "non-strategic" nuclear weapons...

as opposed to strategic nuclear weapons which are targeted.

[Wingus Dingus]

22. Some people will have some warning, and get on planes to

escape, in Russia, Europe and US. Maybe watch FlightAware or other sites for sudden increases in private or government jet movement? You just know wealthy connected people around the world aren't going to sit and be vaporized if they can get a heads-up.

[sarisataka]

23. We, as in DU folks,

Would have much less time. NORAD would detect the launch, run through confirmation procedures then call the President.

The President would likely consult with any available NSC members to decide which pre-planned response should be activated.

The President then would initiate and authorize that plan through the "football" or other means.

After all of the happens then the process to activate the EBS will be started...

We will be lucky to have ten minutes notice. Some places could be hit before our missiles even start launching.

[JustAnotherGen]

26. I work in the last train stop town

Into Manhattan from NJ. It's an office park/open air mall/hotel plaza, etc. etc.

I'd go over Houlihans, grab the best bottle of whiskey, sit down and have a drink.

I think I can do that in 15 minutes time.

[boston bean]

39. If I could get there I'd join ya.

[Hekate]

29. Lordy. Don't look up.

[Calista241]

34. I don't think we'd know, and then Hawaii had that attack warning snafu a few years ago.

We'd have 30 minutes before we're all dead. And there wouldn't be any indication like 'moving to launch positions' or anything like that. It's press a button, and then it's go time.

[hardluck]

35. Just curious, how old are you?

For those born in the 1970s or earlier this was just normal life living under the threat of nuclear war.

[NightWatcher]

45. Gen X (mid 40's). I missed all this fun last time.

Did y'all ever think it was inevitable that nukes would fly?

[Wingus Dingus]

79. I'm Gen X and I grew up with this threat--

the USSR didn't fall until I was 20. I was afraid of nuclear war from the time I was old enough to understand what it was, as a kid. How did you miss it?

[marie999]

81. I was 2 years 1 month and 29 days old when the US dropped the bomb on Hiroshima.

4 years and 23 days later the Russians tested their first atomic bomb. So I have lived 72 years with both countries having the bomb. I have learned to live with it. I was in the army during the Cuban Missile Crisis.

[11 Bravo]

37. Long enough to call my boys and tell them how much I love them, hug my darling wife ...

and then walk with her and our sweet yellow lab out onto our deck (about 10 miles west of the US Capitol building), and watch the fireworks for a second or two.

However, I don't foresee that eventuality, and you seem remarkably. fatalistic.

Putin is a coward, a bully, and a malignant narcissist - just like Trump. But can you imagine Trump ever doing anything that would almost certainly result in harm to himself?

I think they're cut from the same cloth.

[smirkymonkey]

46. I can't, unless they thought that harm to themselves, or death, was inevitable.

In which case, I could see them going out by causing the most death and destruction to the rest of the world as possible. The way they see things, a world without them in it doesn't deserve to exist.

[Midnight Writer]

41. Thank God we spent trillions on our Star Wars Missile Defense System.

We don't have to worry about things like this.

Our military-industrial complex has the American people all fitted up.

[Captain Zero]

42. Not enough

To spend your time worrying about. Spend your time living your life.

[Javaman]

44. if you live in big city...

just get out the lawn chair, crack open a cold one and watch the very last show of your life.

no point in trying to run, you'd never make it.

[smirkymonkey]

55. What big cities are most likely to be nuked?

I read a while ago that DC, NYC and LA would be at the top of the list, but do you know what other cities would be in the top 10?

[DetroitLegalBeagle]

65. Chicago, Miami, Seattle.

**Caveat to the following, this is all cold war era strategy that I've read and have been told about by Cold War era vets who were in positions to know some of this stuff fairly well. Things could have very well changed since then.**

Technically, cities aren't primary targets for nukes. Some would get hit in the first wave, yes, but that's due to targets in the city, not the city itself.

Primary targets are our silos, radar/command/communication infrastructure, sub bases, and air bases. Highest priority is to eliminate as much of our retaliatory strike capability as possible.

After that would be army bases, naval bases, weapon depots, large airports, and harbors/sea ports. This would be to wipe out our ability to counter attack conventionally and destroy our sea and air lift capabilities.

Then it would be infrastructure. This is where a lot of cities would get hit. Chicago, for example, would get hit due to the rail network there. Its the largest rail hub in the US. Major rail hubs, areas with lot of factories, power generation, highway interchanges, etc, would be targeted. Since a lot of that stuff is in major cities, they would get hit as well. Another thing, if I remember correctly, the Soviets/Russians didn't do 1 bomb per city, it was something like 1 bomb per target, if there are multiple targets in a city, then that city is getting hit multiple times as a result. For hardened targets or very important ones, they would have multiple warheads targeting them to guarantee their destruction. Russian ICBMs were never as accurate(or reliable most likely) as ours, so they compensated by targeting things multiple times. And using bigger warheads.

[smirkymonkey]

77. Thanks for the info!

Very interesting. I appreciate the detailed explanation.

I am sorry that it has taken all of this for me to suddenly gain interest in the matter, but it's good to know for everyone who needs to be prepared.

[BruceWane]

72. Houston is likely top 5......

If not #1. Houston has 42% of US petrochemical refining capacity. 4th largest US population center, too.

[smirkymonkey]

78. Didn't realize that they would be so high up on the list.

Thanks for the info!

[DetroitLegalBeagle]

82. Yep

Also a large port. Nearby Beaumont would likely be a higher up target as well. Deep water port and a whole ton of military cargo runs through it.

[Kaleva]

49. Gamma radiation from the fallout would the biggest threat

My wife and I plus the dog would be hunkered down in the basement for a number of days.

Fortunately, the home is located on a hillside and there are thick woods to the east and west. To the north and south are the neighbors with large houses and many trees in their yards. All of this will provide some protection against gamma rays penetrating the basement .

[NickB79]

57. I disagree. Nuclear winter would be the biggest threat

Because the Northern Hemisphere would lose the ability to grow crops for several years as sunlight is cut by soot and global temps plummet. Snowstorms in June, massive crop failures for the survivors who try to rebuild. No transport systems left to move stored food to survivors, or for survivors to move south.

Starvation would claim far more lives than radiation. We'd basically replicate how the dinosaurs went extinct.

[dweller]

52. Just long enough to get your head between your knees

and kiss your ass goodbye … and for some of us this contortion could take the full 30 minutes. 🤨


✌🏻

[Chainfire]

54. If it came from a sub, it could be quicker than that.

[maxsolomon]

56. Who cares?

It won't make any difference.

Putin is not going to use Nukes. He is not crazy.

[Spider Jerusalem]

58. Possibly enough time to know you're going to die, but not enough to do anything about it (n/t)

[NightWatcher]

63. Best Answer!

[Iggo]

67. I'm 60 years old, and I pondered that question most of my childhood, and the answer is...

…Not Enough.

[Retrograde]

68. Too much and not enough

Too much time in that there will be 10-30 minutes for worry and dread. Not enough because for most people there's not much you'll be able to do to save yourself in that short a time.

We used to joke at a place I worked that we'd never know what hit us, since the Blue Cube (which tracked satellite activity IIRC) was less than 5 miles away.

[roamer65]

73. 20-30 minutes by ICBM, 5-10 minutes by submarine launch.

[JustABozoOnThisBus]

74. No warning at all. Info on incoming ICBMs would be classified.

But, this same question was considered during the Cuban missile crisis. The answer: we'll have enough time to bend over and kiss our asses goodbye.

Our military will have enough warning to launch retalitory nukes at Russia.

[BGBD]

80. You're chances of surviving

Are a lot better than most folks on here realize.