Range of Soviet missiles
Did the Soviets have any missiles that could reach Los Angeles in 1962?
Mrs Voorhees is watching you!
Yes.
Watta ya lookn here for?
MovieChat Forums > Blast from the Past (1999) Discussion > Range of Soviet missiles
Wasn't that the whole point of the Cuban Missile Crisis?
shareI know what the Cuban Missile Crisis was but I am asking if their missiles could reach as far as Los Angeles. I know they could reach New York City or Washington DC.
Mrs Voorhees is watching you!
[deleted]
I meant in 1962. During the Cuban Missile Crisis could Soviet missiles reach Los Angeles?
Mrs Voorhees is watching you!
[deleted]
I meant in 1962. During the Cuban Missile Crisis could Soviet missiles reach Los Angeles?
In 1962 the Soviet Union had been putting 8000 pound Vostok manned spacecraft in orbit for several years. Hitting Los Angeles with the same booster was not a problem, and that booster was based on one of their ICBMs.
Note that it was a superb design that in somewhat updated form is used to carry astronauts to the ISS today.
share
I do remember reading somewhere that the missiles couldn't reach Seattle, so if the Soviets could reach space, why not Seattle?
Mrs Voorhees is watching you!
I do remember reading somewhere that the missiles couldn't reach Seattle, so if the Soviets could reach space, why not Seattle?
The Soviet Union did not publish their capabilities and their spies, not to put too fine a point on it, were better than our spies. It doesn't matter what they really had, what matters is what people believed that they had.
They had shown that they could put large payloads in orbit, which implied that they could put equally large bombs anywhere on Earth. They didn't advertise how few of the launchers they actually had in their inventory (around 20) or how limited their capabilities were (preparation time measured in days, so inaccurate that they couldn't even get close enough to count with hydrogen bombs, etc). For planning purposes in the absence of any better information it was assumed that the Soviet Union was as capable as the US, which means that they could put large nuclear weapons anywhere they wanted to pretty much.
Now, that gets to the Cuban Missile Crisis. There, the Soviet Union put R-12 missiles, which were not their long-ranged intercontinental missile (those at the time were R-7A and R-16) but what's called an "Intermediate Range Ballistic Missile" with a range of about 1200 miles. From Cuba, those missiles could reach as far west as central Texas and as far north as DC.
So it's true that the missiles they put in Cuba could not reach Seattle, but it is also true that the missiles they had at home could. share
I'm not a rocket science but there is a difference between blasting straight up to escape the gravitational pull, and circling the globe to touch back down on a specific target.
shareSoviet missiles would have come in over the Arctic.
As mentioned, the point of the Cuban missiles was that they would get there quicker(and thus less time to react). We were putting missiles in Turkey for the same reason and removing them was part of the de-escalation.
No. The point of the putting missiles in Cuba was so that they could reach Washington in about five minutes as opposed to 30 minutes or so. Even then it was almost a mute point, as the USSR had already started to deploy sub based missiles, which could have launched a close range sneak attack from anywhere.
shareYes. But even if they didn't, they had submarines, ships, and aircraft that were perfectly capable of getting close enough to L.A. to either fire a missile or drop a bomb.
shareThank God we had the Navy, Tactical Air Command, and batteries of Nike Hercules anti-aircraft missiles.
Knowing what we know now, I don't think any Soviet Aircraft could have penetrated American air space during that era. Our interceptors were far superior than any of the bombers the Soviets fielded.
Conquer your fear, and I promise you, you will conquer death.
Perhaps, but if that's true, then we haven't progressed a lot since then.
Considering that in 2007, a Chinese diesel-electric sub was able to surface in the middle of a US Navy Fleet Exercise in the Pacific, undetected and within viable range of launching torpedoes and missiles at the USS Kitty Hawk.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-492804/The-uninvited-guest-Chinese-sub-pops-middle-U-S-Navy-exercise-leaving-military-chiefs-red-faced.html
I remember reading about this. Thanks for reminding me.
Remember though that during '62 we had many more ships and aircraft. Plus, we had radar stations all along the Arctic Circle with Canada's participation. Our readiness to respond to a Soviet military threat was much more proactive than today. Tactical Air Command could respond within seconds of an identified Soviet bomber threat. With the attention paid to fighting against minor regional threats, we are disregarding a much larger threat by the Chinese (which are building a blue seas navy at a rapid rate, and building military installations on new islands created in the South China Seas).
I do believe that if China wanted to, they probably could destroy several of our fleet carriers in a similar fashion as the Japanese sneak attack on Pearl Harbor just because of our lack of preparation against a truly global threat such as China's.
Conquer your fear, and I promise you, you will conquer death.
My point was that all it would've taken was 1 Soviet Sub out of Vladivostok to cross the Pacific, largely undetected, and it could've surfaced within sight of the West Coast to launch it's missiles.
Then again, our Subs are capable of launching while still submerged, so why shouldn't theirs have had the same capability.