American and Russian Nuclear policy / reactions in 1979

[Orry]

This will be for an ASB story line but the questions here are about American and Russian Nuclear reactions before anybody knows anything ASB has happened. What can happen in the first couple of hours at most.

9th of November 1979 is supposed to be about the closest we got to an American lauch against Russia. However they realised it was a simulation and stopped short of an actual launch.

What if whilst trying to sort out what is happening NORAD and SAC lose contact with anything they have in or over Alaska and Canada and the North Pole.

There are no reports of Nuclear or other explosions but at that point of maximum alert - contact is cut of mid sentence as it were. We will not even have the typical ISOT bright flash in the sky.

They can still communicate with the rest of their missile bases, airbases etc so they know their end of the communications is working. But not word one from Alaska or Canada.

What orders would NORAD and SAC give? How long would they wait to give them?

Orders to US based ICBM sites? Fire or not.
US based Bomber groups? Launch to failsafe?
Nuclear Subs? Launch or remain covert and hope no sneeky Russian is on your tail?
Overseas forces?
Nuclear forces in the Pacific?
Nuclear forces in Europe?

Launching the Bombers is a 'safe' option - get them away from their bases which might be under attack so they can lauch a second strike if needed but can be recalled as well. Likewise the Subs are probably safe to use as a second strike as well,

BUT what about the ICBMs. If they launch they can not be recalled but is a major Russian strike is inbound you risk losing them.

What orders would be given to Nuclear forces based in Europe - how much co-ordination with other NATO countries could happen in the time scales envisaged. Do American forces fire their weapons believing that Soviet missiles may already be on the way? Do they crash deploy outside their bases (possibly killing protestors in the process) or do they wait and see?

Mean while American forces in Alaska have lost all contact with NORAD and SAC whilest and attack warning was in progress.

What do they do? How long do they wait if they think that NORAD and SAC HQ have possibly been destroyed in an attack?

We know Russia is NOT in the middle of a Nuclear first strike.

Depending on American reactions what do the Russians see and how do they react. They have also lost contact with any Satellites over Canada and the North Pole though not over the USA itself. I think almost all Soviet attacks on America whould have to go over the Polar route - is that correct?

Can people reccomend any good works on American and Soviet policy / plans in this era?

I have heard of the idea of launch on warning which seems to be what the Americans almost did on the real 9th November. Would the lose of communications push them over the edge?

 

[marathag]

Mean while American forces in Alaska have lost all contact with NORAD and SAC whilest and attack warning was in progress.

What do they do? How long do they wait if they think that NORAD and SAC HQ have possibly been destroyed in an attack?

Going from stuff that has been unclassified, most USSTRATCOM installations have an 'I'm happy' handshake signal.
Supposedly when enough of those go dark, a type of EAM, Emergency Action Message is relayed out, 'Skyking' and or 'Skybird' that updates SIOP- theory or rumor, really, it puts assets into 'local', with PAL unlocked

 

[Orry]

If nobody has any ideas I guess what ever I have them do will be fine......

I think the Americans will launch the ICBMs and scramble their bombers.

The Soviets will detect the launch using satelites over the USA and return fire without waiting to detect the missiles on Radar.

All Missiles taking the Polar route.

What I am not sure about is what happens in Europe.

What I would like for my story is both side to deploy to firing positions and wait to be used in either a tactical manner or as a second strike alongside the Bombers who will be refueling and the Subs

Possible??

 

[Orry]

OK I assume from the lack or response that nobody has any clear view and what ever works best for the story will be OK........

O great @CalBear do you have any thoughts

Places two whole fresh Salmon and a jar of Honey out as an offering

 

[CalBear]

If nobody has any ideas I guess what ever I have them do will be fine......

I think the Americans will launch the ICBMs and scramble their bombers.

The Soviets will detect the launch using satelites over the USA and return fire without waiting to detect the missiles on Radar.

All Missiles taking the Polar route.

What I am not sure about is what happens in Europe.

What I would like for my story is both side to deploy to firing positions and wait to be used in either a tactical manner or as a second strike alongside the Bombers who will be refueling and the Subs

Possible??

How can I refuse that very generous offering?

The First Use by U.S. is possible but unlikey, it simply wasn't how decades of U.S. doctrine had been crafted. Since SAC/NORAD still has contact with military bases they will know that there have been no Nudet, even at Bremerton, WA or Holy Loch in Scotland or Thule, Greenland. All of those are presumed 1st Strike targets and Thule was a primary Early detection and launch warning facility. Also, critical to this scenario, is that contact has NOT been lost with the National Command Authority (NCA) i.e. President Carter or VP Mondale. This mean it would be up to the NCA to initiate the launch. Don't see Carter pulling the trigger based on the scenario, although he would be at Andrews in two shakes and in the air shortly afterward on Looking Glass or Air Force One.

The manned bombers would absolutely be scrambled to their "Fail Safe" positions.

You just described what is believed to have been the U.S. SIOP regarding SSBN in the late 70s. The Poseidon C-3 SLBM was not believed to be accurate enough for use in a "counter-force" role (i.e. against Soviet missile silos). It was a counter-value system (i.e. a second strike soft military target and "city killer", a role for which it was frightening well designed with up to 14 MIRV per launch vehicle).

 

[Orry]

How can I refuse that very generous offering?

The First Use by U.S. is possible but unlikey, it simply wasn't how decades of U.S. doctrine had been crafted. Since SAC/NORAD still has contact with military bases they will know that there have been no Nudet, even at Bremerton, WA or Holy Loch in Scotland or Thule, Greenland. All of those are presumed 1st Strike targets and Thule was a primary Early detection and launch warning facility. Also, critical to this scenario, is that contact has NOT been lost with the National Command Authority (NCA) i.e. President Carter or VP Mondale. This mean it would be up to the NCA to initiate the launch. Don't see Carter pulling the trigger based on the scenario, although he would be at Andrews in two shakes and in the air shortly afterward on Looking Glass or Air Force One.

The manned bombers would absolutely be scrambled to their "Fail Safe" positions.

You just described what is believed to have been the U.S. SIOP regarding SSBN in the late 70s. The Poseidon C-3 SLBM was not believed to be accurate enough for use in a "counter-force" role (i.e. against Soviet missile silos). It was a counter-value system (i.e. a second strike soft military target and "city killer", a role for which it was frightening well designed with up to 14 MIRV per launch vehicle).

The Submarine cable to Thule in greenland will be no operative but the Cable to Scotland should be fine from the maps I have seen.

What is it happened on 9th of November 1965 when there was another incident where power outages apparantly lead to a belief they may be under attack?? I think they relied a lot more heavily on Canada based assets for early warning in 1965 than in 1979

Lyndon B. Johnson is president he is a democrate like Carter but maybe a little more gung ho.

I am not sure that the Russians would be able to detect an American launch before they clear the pole at this time.

The issue here is that Wiki says

Titan II missiles were designed to be launched from underground missile silos that were hardened against nuclear attack. This was intended to allow for the United States to ride out a nuclear first strike by an enemy and be able to retaliate with a second strike response.

The early Minuteman ICBMs are in service and were hoped to be more accurate and thus a counterforce rather than just counter value system but it still looks like they would be mainly a counter strike force.

What if I try the other way around

26th September 1983

Just after apparantly detecting the launch of American missiles the Russian lose contact with their satellites

Would Stanislav Petrov, be so confident that it is not an American attack if they lose contact after seeing the first launch but before it is clear that it is not the first of many. Nothing is being dectected in Europe so maybe Reagan has gone mad.....

Soviet policy was launch on warning with everything they had as part of MAD

A massive Soviet 'counterstrike' would be detected by the Americans do the Americans fire their ICBMs back whilst scrambling everything else?

PS

As this would happen in am ASB TL as long as everything gets fired over the pole/Canada region nobody will get killed

 

[CalBear]

The Submarine cable to Thule in greenland will be no operative but the Cable to Scotland should be fine from the maps I have seen.

What is it happened on 9th of November 1965 when there was another incident where power outages apparantly lead to a belief they may be under attack?? I think they relied a lot more heavily on Canada based assets for early warning in 1965 than in 1979

Lyndon B. Johnson is president he is a democrate like Carter but maybe a little more gung ho.

I am not sure that the Russians would be able to detect an American launch before they clear the pole at this time.

The issue here is that Wiki says



The early Minuteman ICBMs are in service and were hoped to be more accurate and thus a counterforce rather than just counter value system but it still looks like they would be mainly a counter strike force.

What if I try the other way around

26th September 1983

Just after apparantly detecting the launch of American missiles the Russian lose contact with their satellites

Would Stanislav Petrov, be so confident that it is not an American attack if they lose contact after seeing the first launch but before it is clear that it is not the first of many. Nothing is being dectected in Europe so maybe Reagan has gone mad.....

Soviet policy was launch on warning with everything they had as part of MAD

A massive Soviet 'counterstrike' would be detected by the Americans do the Americans fire their ICBMs back whilst scrambling everything else?

The earlier, 1965 date is more possible, as is 1983.

While there are differing positions (and opinions are all that are available, the U.S., UK, and especially the Soviet/Russian strategic policies are still "I can tell you and then that guy over there will kill both of us" secret), most open source articles/papers I've seen indicate that it rapidly becomes an "all-in" event. The deployed force in Europe will try to launch, but most of the missiles and dual-capable aircraft based there were not "cocked and locked" so launch on warning isn't in the cards. Odds are they get smeared on the ground. Of course as soon as the British see inbounds they are going to launch as well, the French probably launch their IRBM as well, there wouldn't really be time to play games, the French only have about 10 minutes, if that from detection to impact.

 

[Blue cat]

If nobody has any ideas I guess what ever I have them do will be fine......

I think the Americans will launch the ICBMs and scramble their bombers.

The Soviets will detect the launch using satelites over the USA and return fire without waiting to detect the missiles on Radar.

All Missiles taking the Polar route.

What I am not sure about is what happens in Europe.

What I would like for my story is both side to deploy to firing positions and wait to be used in either a tactical manner or as a second strike alongside the Bombers who will be refueling and the Subs

Possible??

As a side note the U.S. had an advanced missile detection Radar in the Northern US in this time frame , possibly in North Dakota ? (It was originally part of the subsequently de commissioned Safe Guard ABM system.)

I doubt the U.S. would launch its own ICBMs in this fictional scenario so long as they could still communicate with that radar station, and that radar station hadn't detected any inbound missiles.

 

[Orry]

The earlier, 1965 date is more possible, as is 1983.

While there are differing positions (and opinions are all that are available, the U.S., UK, and especially the Soviet/Russian strategic policies are still "I can tell you and then that guy over there will kill both of us" secret), most open source articles/papers I've seen indicate that it rapidly becomes an "all-in" event. The deployed force in Europe will try to launch, but most of the missiles and dual-capable aircraft based there were not "cocked and locked" so launch on warning isn't in the cards. Odds are they get smeared on the ground. Of course as soon as the British see inbounds they are going to launch as well, the French probably launch their IRBM as well, there wouldn't really be time to play games, the French only have about 10 minutes, if that from detection to impact.

So if not cocked and loaded they can be cancelled before they launch if it becomes clear that nobody has been hit. Say its the 1965 the Americans have fired and the Russians have noticed nothing or in 1983 they have both fired over the polar region and nobody got hit.

You end up with both sides in Europe ramped up to 11 - twitchy fingers but all sides going WTF just happened.... then they realise the ASB part of the TL

I want a major - the world nearly ended moment at the start.

As a side note the U.S. had an advanced missile detection Radar in the Northern US in this time frame , possibly in North Dakota ? (It was originally part of the subsequently de commissioned Safe Guard ABM system.)

I doubt the U.S. would launch its own ICBMs in this fictional scenario so long as they could still communicate with that radar station, and that radar station hadn't detected any inbound missiles.

So even if in the 1983 version they have Satellite confirmation of launch from the Soviet Union they would wait until the inbounds were detected on Radar before firing? Or did you mean in the 1979 case?

 

[Blue cat]

So if not cocked and loaded they can be cancelled before they launch if it becomes clear that nobody has been hit. Say its the 1965 the Americans have fired and the Russians have noticed nothing or in 1983 they have both fired over the polar region and nobody got hit.

You end up with both sides in Europe ramped up to 11 - twitchy fingers but all sides going WTF just happened.... then they realise the ASB part of the TL

I want a major - the world nearly ended moment at the start.



So even if in the 1983 version they have Satellite confirmation of launch from the Soviet Union they would wait until the inbounds were detected on Radar before firing? Or did you mean in the 1979 case?

In the type of fictional scenario you have presented I suspect they would wait a modest amount of time to fire ICBM's in both 79 and 83 but who knows what might have happened for real. A prompt launch in 83 might be more likely ?

That being said I suspect Russian ICBM's were deemed to be the main threat to U.S. ICBM's in those days and the old safe guard radar was well positioned to detect inbound ICBM's fired at U.S. Missile silos...

In these types of Ficional scenarios, for a variety of reasons I suspect the U.S. would not fire ICBM's until the Old ABM radar (PARCS ?) had confirmed that Soviet ICBM's were inbound, or there were actual nuclear detaonations on or over US territory.


That being said, I can see bombers taking off, air borne command posts that were not already air borne taking off, etc..

There might also be a desire to hold some ICBM's back until they know where the Inbound ICBM warheads were likely to land. Reportedly the ABM radars could provide accurate impact projections.

 

[CalBear]

So if not cocked and loaded they can be cancelled before they launch if it becomes clear that nobody has been hit. Say its the 1965 the Americans have fired and the Russians have noticed nothing or in 1983 they have both fired over the polar region and nobody got hit.

You end up with both sides in Europe ramped up to 11 - twitchy fingers but all sides going WTF just happened.... then they realise the ASB part of the TL

I want a major - the world nearly ended moment at the start.



So even if in the 1983 version they have Satellite confirmation of launch from the Soviet Union they would wait until the inbounds were detected on Radar before firing? Or did you mean in the 1979 case?

In 1979 and 1983 he Pershing Ia & II missiles and dual capable aircraft (mostly F-111B) would only be cancelled insofar as they would be bits of radioactive aluminum scattered over parts of the UK and Germany after Soviet warheads did their work. In 1965 it would mostly be F-105D that were in the dual capable role.

Is this meant to be an ASB thread? It is posted in post-1900.

 

[Orry]

In 1979 and 1983 he Pershing Ia & II missiles and dual capable aircraft (mostly F-111B) would only be cancelled insofar as they would be bits of radioactive aluminum scattered over parts of the UK and Germany after Soviet warheads did their work. In 1965 it would mostly be F-105D that were in the dual capable role.

Is this meant to be an ASB thread? It is posted in post-1900.

I am asking what OTL commanders would do in what to them is a real life situation . Given the understanding of the Sun then assume the blackout is caused by a solar flare or some thing.

On the Pershings - according to WIKI it seems that at RAF Greenham Common these did not arrive until November 1983 so are not in place during the incident. RAF Molesworth did not recieve missiles until 1986.

Not sure when they were deployed in the rest of Europe

SS-20's - If the only evidence of an attack is coming from America would the Soviets fire at the rest of NATO who do not appear to be on a hightened state of alert? How long would it take them to launch from a cold start? Would they be on the same level of alert as the missiles in Silo's? Are we talking 5 minutes to ready and launch? 15 minutes? and hour?

I believe the SS-20 is not a cruise missile so it goes out of the Atmospher as part of its Ballistic path - is that right? How hardebed would it be against something like a Solar Flare frying its electronics and turning a nuclear airburst into a crash that throws nuclear waste around the crash site?

 

[Blue cat]

I am asking what OTL commanders would do in what to them is a real life situation . Given the understanding of the Sun then assume the blackout is caused by a solar flare or some thing.

On the Pershings - according to WIKI it seems that at RAF Greenham Common these did not arrive until November 1983 so are not in place during the incident. RAF Molesworth did not recieve missiles until 1986.

Not sure when they were deployed in the rest of Europe

SS-20's - If the only evidence of an attack is coming from America would the Soviets fire at the rest of NATO who do not appear to be on a hightened state of alert? How long would it take them to launch from a cold start? Would they be on the same level of alert as the missiles in Silo's? Are we talking 5 minutes to ready and launch? 15 minutes? and hour?

I believe the SS-20 is not a cruise missile so it goes out of the Atmospher as part of its Ballistic path - is that right? How hardebed would it be against something like a Solar Flare frying its electronics and turning a nuclear airburst into a crash that throws nuclear waste around the crash site?

Sorry it is not entirely clear to me what you envision the Soviets doing in the 1983 scenario ?

Compared to likely US actions vis a vis there CONUS based forces and SLBM force, I haven't come across much about likely NATO / US actions for European based nuclear forces in the event of a bolt out of the blue event.

Most of the research seems to have been focused on the CONUS based forces and the SLBM force.

 

[Orry]

Sorry it is not entirely clear to me what you envision the Soviets doing in the 1983 scenario ?

Compared to likely US actions vis a vis there CONUS based forces and SLBM force, I haven't come across much about likely NATO / US actions for European based nuclear forces in the event of a bolt out of the blue event.

Most of the research seems to have been focused on the CONUS based forces and the SLBM force.

My understanding is that the Soviet policy was to fire on warning.

in 1983 they went against that policy because the officer in charge thought that far to few launches had been detected.

So here they lose contact with their sattelites after detecting the first false launch. Pesky Solar Flare

So they belive - the Americans under that nutter Reagan started to fire missiles at us and then we lost our Satelites so we can no longer see what they are doing. By the time our radar picks up the American missiles it will be to late

So they fire everything available against America whilst preparing everything not available as a second strike.

Now missiles in Silo's are normally on a higher alert than mobile systems - it will take a little while to get the mobile systems to launch points and preped to fire so there might be some delay in firing off the SS-20's

 

[CalBear]

I am asking what OTL commanders would do in what to them is a real life situation . Given the understanding of the Sun then assume the blackout is caused by a solar flare or some thing.

On the Pershings - according to WIKI it seems that at RAF Greenham Common these did not arrive until November 1983 so are not in place during the incident. RAF Molesworth did not recieve missiles until 1986.

Not sure when they were deployed in the rest of Europe

SS-20's - If the only evidence of an attack is coming from America would the Soviets fire at the rest of NATO who do not appear to be on a hightened state of alert? How long would it take them to launch from a cold start? Would they be on the same level of alert as the missiles in Silo's? Are we talking 5 minutes to ready and launch? 15 minutes? and hour?

I believe the SS-20 is not a cruise missile so it goes out of the Atmospher as part of its Ballistic path - is that right? How hardebed would it be against something like a Solar Flare frying its electronics and turning a nuclear airburst into a crash that throws nuclear waste around the crash site?

The Pershing II was a 1983 deployment. Pershing I and Ia was fully deployed into Europe (including two wings of Luftwaffe launch vehicles designated to be mated to special weapons under U.S. control) starting in the mid 1960s when they started to replace the Mace cruise missile. In the mid 70s the Pershing U.S. battalions and Luftwaffe wings increased in strength to 36 launch vehicles from the previous 8 birds. When the units expands around 1/3 of the launch vehicles were designated as a "quick reaction force" or QFR that were in launch ready modes. Those launchers would be in a 15-30 minute ready status.

SS-20 warhead specs are, as might be imagined, very closely held by Moscow but a sufficient potent flare would be able to fry anything, up to and including the Earth's surface (very low, but non-zero, probability of that delightful prospect). Soviet SIOP equivalent practices are remarkably opaque, but given the general degree of paranoia the Soviets held regarding NATO and first strike it is reasonable to assume that at least some of the SS-20 were in a 15 minute alert status.

 

[Blue cat]

My understanding is that the Soviet policy was to fire on warning.

in 1983 they went against that policy because the officer in charge thought that far to few launches had been detected.

So here they lose contact with their sattelites after detecting the first false launch. Pesky Solar Flare

So they belive - the Americans under that nutter Reagan started to fire missiles at us and then we lost our Satelites so we can no longer see what they are doing. By the time our radar picks up the American missiles it will be to late

So they fire everything available against America whilst preparing everything not available as a second strike.

Now missiles in Silo's are normally on a higher alert than mobile systems - it will take a little while to get the mobile systems to launch points and preped to fire so there might be some delay in firing off the SS-20's

I think you answered your own question... If the Soviets think the U.S. has launched a surprise attack and the Soviets decide to "fire every thing" in response then presumably soviet forces begin the process of readying their weapons upon receipt of their orders..

Some units will undoubtedly launch weapons before others... I don't know enough re about the soviet equivalent of the SIOP plans to specualte about the role for their theatre nuclear forces in this type of scenario. That being said... Perhaps they would want to keep them for future use by theatre commanders in broken back war or maybe they simply fire everything that can reach a U.S. / NATO target ?

I think the likely US response for the CONUS and SlBM forces has been covered. The response of NATO / US nuclear forces in Europe is hard to predict in my view. Other than some QRA aircraft (and portions of the French / UK deterrent forces) I doubt much could be fired / launched quickly in 79 or 83 and I am unclear about the impact of any "dual key" arrangements in a scenario such as this. In any event I doubt the U.S. / NATO QRA aircraft will make much difference once the U.S. Launches their CONUS / SLBM forces.

Edit to add:
I suspect a "fire everything against America" response by the Soviets would also involve firing against many US bases in Europe in 79 or 83. Nuking the conus and leaving US forces in Europe untouched would seem rather foolish. I suspect if given time to launch all their aircraft (not just the QRA forces) the various U.S. Forces in Europe could do a considerable ammount of damage.


In the highly unlikely Event of a Deveatated CONUS and untouched forces in Europe I expect the U.S. would be more than able to retaliate reasonably well. I think an all out strike with F4's and other air craft clearing the way for F111's would do a lot of damage. I can't imagine the soviets allowing that to happen.

Edit to add:
With tanker support and a likely willingness to fly more or less one way missions, I don't think it is out of the question for a few US megaton class weapons to make it to Moscow via European based F111's. I just don't see the Soviets accepting that risk.