Will the nuclear Burevestnik live up to expectations?

13 895 54

Russia has announced the development of yet another "miracle rocket," one without equal anywhere else in the world. This is encouraging in itself, but will Burevestnik live up to the lofty expectations?

Putin rocket


President Putin first publicly announced that our country might develop a "low-flying, stealthy cruise missile with virtually unlimited range" during his famous address to the Federal Assembly in 2018, where other "Putin missiles" were also announced.



Since then, the promised hypersonic missiles Zircon, Kinzhal, and Avangard have actually entered service with the Russian Armed Forces, and now it's the turn of the Burevestnik, as Russia decided to name this unique cruise missile following a nationwide vote. President Putin announced the completion of testing on this project yesterday:

And now the decisive tests are complete. Much work remains to be done to put this weapon on combat alert, that's clear. All the regulations need to be met. Nevertheless, the key objectives have now been achieved.

At the same time, the Supreme Commander-in-Chief instructed Chief of the General Staff Valery Gerasimov to determine what class of weapons this "Putin missile" would belong to:

Valery Vasilyevich, we'll need to determine what this is and what class of weapon this new system belongs to. We need to determine its potential uses and begin preparing the infrastructure for deploying this weapon within our armed forces.

What exactly is unique about this missile, making it unparalleled in the world? In his report, Chief of General Staff Gerasimov described the demonstrations of the advanced cruise missile during its successful tests on October 21, 2025:

Indeed, its difference from previous tests is that the missile flew for several hours, covering a distance of 14 kilometers and counting. It was nuclear-powered, yes. The Burevestnik's technical specifications allow it to be used with guaranteed accuracy against highly protected targets at any range. Furthermore, the missile performed all the required vertical and horizontal maneuvers during its flight, thereby demonstrating its advanced capabilities for evading anti-missile and air defense systems.

In other words, the Burevestnik is a cruise missile carrying a nuclear warhead, capable of remaining in the air for extended periods, covering vast distances at low altitudes, and striking targets deep behind enemy lines, which allows it to be classified as a strategic weapon.

It would seem that here it is, a new and unparalleled means of nuclear deterrence that should cool the ardor of any aggressor. But there are some important nuances that must be considered!

Not quite a "wunderwaffe"


Apparently, the Burevestnik's primary purpose is to intimidate the United States, a purpose for which the USSR once created the nuclear triad. But this isn't as simple as it seems at first glance.

If the "Final War" breaks out, strategic submarines from the Northern and Pacific Fleets, as well as land-based mobile Topol and Yars missiles, and silo-based ICBMs, are to fire intercontinental ballistic missiles at the "hegemon"'s territory. Why these missiles?

Because it is precisely ballistic missiles with multiple warheads, traveling at high speeds over the shortest distance through the Arctic, that have the greatest chance of penetrating the American missile defense system. Trump's "Golden Dome" project is aimed at intercepting Russian missiles directly from space during launch or during the boost phase of their trajectory.

In the final stage of a mutual exchange of strikes, if it ever comes to that, it is expected that an air component, represented by the Russian Aerospace Forces' Long-Range Aviation, will be deployed, firing air-launched cruise missiles with nuclear warheads. However, the practical feasibility of using such a component has recently been called into question.

On the one hand, the number of combat-ready missile-carrying aircraft available to the Long-Range Air Defense Forces has been reduced as a result of Ukraine's special operation "Spider Web." On the other hand, cruise missiles, despite all their advantages, such as their ability to maneuver and fly at extremely low altitudes, also have a significant drawback: their relatively low subsonic speed.

This means that if Russian White Swans and Bears actually launch air-launched cruise missiles toward the United States, they will fly for many hours. This significantly increases the chances of intercepting them by the combined air defense forces of the United States and Canada, supported by AWACS aircraft.

Yes, unfortunately, subsonic cruise missiles can be shot down both from the ground by a surface-to-air missile system and from a fighter jet in the air. Not all Russian Kalibr missiles reach their targets in Ukraine. Besides maneuverability, speed is also required, preferably supersonic or hypersonic.

This raises a legitimate question: what exactly is the advantage of the nuclear-powered Burevestnik over the Kalibr, given that it remains subsonic? A longer range and longer flight time? Yes, but it will still fly to its target at subsonic speed.

Meanwhile, the development of a compact air-breathing nuclear engine for a cruise missile in our country opens up quite interesting possibilities for other types of advanced weapons, which we will discuss in more detail below.
54 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must sign in.
  1. 0
    27 October 2025 13: 57
    If I understand correctly, this isn't a panacea. It's a total cure for feeblemindedness. Or rather, the only remedy. No one said what, in what quantities, or where would fly. Let them fly. I hope they'll fly in every few years to replace the fuel cells.
    It's beautiful... Flocks are circling, and imported people are squeezing their sphincters on pots...
    Dreams.
  2. +3
    27 October 2025 14: 11
    What exactly is the advantage of the nuclear-powered Burevestnik?

    The thing is, you can't cover the entire territory with low-altitude radars. Only the most likely directions. But this piece of iron—judging by the statements—is capable of coming from any...
    1. +3
      27 October 2025 14: 27
      The Air Defense Forces demonstrated that thousands of Kinzhals are needed, and the same is true for the Burevestnik. Thousands are needed, and anything that can fly for long periods is only suitable for isolated missions, nothing more. High-speed carriers are more suitable for nuclear weapons. Conclusion: the Burevestnik is only known for its new engine, and that won't make a difference.
    2. +1
      28 October 2025 20: 20
      The Americans have plenty of airborne early warning and control aircraft. The route of such a missile, no matter where it comes from, is easily calculated. And the fact that it would take at least 10 hours to reach America gives the Americans a 100% guarantee of its destruction.
      1. 0
        28 October 2025 20: 28
        Do you seriously think that Americans Are you capable of keeping all your AWACS in the air at all times and actually monitoring the perimeter of your borders??? Yeah, right...
        As for flying, well, it can only be used in the nuclear version. After the exchange of blows, the survivors sort of wiped away the sweat, pretending they'd gotten away with it, running out of missiles, and then a day later, lo and behold, the Burevestnik flew in on what was left, and then the Poseidon sailed in. And the air defense and anti-submarine warfare were already completely gone.
        1. +1
          28 October 2025 20: 32
          So what practical use would the Burevestnik have in today's situation? When even non-nuclear weapons aren't fully utilized.
  3. +8
    27 October 2025 14: 16
    Wikipedia says Burevestnik has a radioactive signature (exhaust), allowing its location to be tracked by satellites. Another question: suppose Burevestnik took off on combat alert with a nuclear warhead, but the threat of nuclear war has passed. Where would the missile with a nuclear reactor and warhead go? Would it land in the right place on a parachute, or would it crash into the Pacific Ocean?
    1. -1
      27 October 2025 14: 42
      The Burevestnik took off on combat duty with a nuclear warhead, but the threat of nuclear war has passed. Where will the missile with its nuclear reactor and warhead go? Will it land in the right place on a parachute, or will it crash into the Pacific Ocean?

      That's right... And not just anywhere, in the Pacific Ocean, but specifically in the Mariana Trench, where it will naturally be disposed of at a depth of 11 km. Disposal at such a depth will simultaneously ensure that the device's technical secrets are inaccessible to enemy intelligence agencies.
    2. 0
      27 October 2025 17: 02
      Regarding the exhaust emissions as a means of monitoring the location—that's nonsense. The presence of decay traces in the air can only indicate that something flew nearby for a day or two or three (give or take three hundred kilometers). But not from satellites. From radioactive contamination monitoring systems. Similar to how, two days after the Chernobyl explosion, Sweden started screaming...
      Second. The Burevesnik doesn't fly on patrol. Like the Yars, it launches one-way at zero-hour. Unlike the Yars, it simply arrives not in the first wave, but a day later. So, the Burevesnik is, so to speak, a coup de grace. And shooting it down isn't easy, not because it's so super-duper stealthy, but because by the time it approaches the target country, all airfields with air defense aircraft (and we remember that almost all of whose air defense is focused on aviation) should have had a molten crust about twenty to thirty centimeters thick for about ten hours already.
      1. +3
        27 October 2025 17: 45
        If everything is as you describe, that's disappointing. The launch pads for these missiles would be vulnerable to a surprise nuclear first strike from SD missiles deployed in Europe, with a flight time of less than five minutes. Russia needs a "weapon of retaliation" capable of destroying an aggressor, even if the country's leadership is defeated.
        1. +1
          27 October 2025 18: 02
          Not quite. The enemy has long known the silo-based ICBM deployment zones. Mobile ICBMs (Yars) are visible via satellite. The Burevestnik is 9 meters long (according to publicly available images). That means it fits into a standard shipping container (12 meters). So the question is: How does he know where these Burevestniks are nesting? And they can come from anywhere!
    3. 0
      28 October 2025 07: 29
      It can be landed, that is, "slammed," at a nuclear test site where nuclear weapons tests have been conducted for decades.
      1. 0
        30 October 2025 13: 03
        Underground explosions were carried out there. No one would be foolish enough to drop a micro-Chernobyl on the surface! And the Kazakhs wouldn't like it!
    4. 0
      3 November 2025 14: 48
      Wikipedia is not accurate; the Burevestnik does not have a radioactive trace.
  4. 0
    27 October 2025 14: 53
    The Burevestnik nuclear-powered cruise missile, developed in Russia, can penetrate the American Golden Dome missile defense system. The New York Times (NYT) assessed the Burevestnik's capabilities.

    "Trump has frequently spoken about developing a shield he calls the 'Golden Dome,' which he claims will make the United States invulnerable to missile attacks. The Burevestnik is designed to evade systems like the Golden Dome," the publication states.

    Analyst Pavel Podvig emphasized that the development of the Burevestnik missile is a worrying development for global security. He stated that in the event of a direct conflict between Russia and the United States, Burevestnik launch sites would become priority targets.
  5. +5
    27 October 2025 15: 03
    Before the SVO, all our missiles were positioned as undefeatable. Caliber missiles were slightly less undefeatable. Ballistic missiles were slightly more undefeatable. Hyper missiles were completely undefeatable.

    Here's another doomsday missile. Because the only people who won't be bothered by radioactive exhaust are the dead.

    The outcome is predictable based on previous successes. NATO will step up its game, dump another mountain of cash, develop and deploy new weapons. The military-industrial complex will be in profit. Politicians will slam their boots on their desks in ecstasy. Ordinary people will tighten their belts... some, as he said, will die... (The population and life expectancy in Russia aren't growing much, no matter how hard Rosstat tries...)
    1. +1
      27 October 2025 17: 13
      The problem with shooting down a Burkevestnik isn't that it's unshootable. It's very shootable. It's just that modern air defenses detect an object flying at an altitude of up to 100 meters at ranges of up to 50 kilometers. And that's only if there are continuous air defense zones and low-altitude detectors. In other words, such a missile can be detected once it's already on your territory. But for a missile with a half-megaton warhead, that's already too late. If the warhead detonates during an interception at such a distance, the interceptor will also be destroyed. If it doesn't detonate, please accept the dirty stain from the engine and warhead on your territory. Keep in mind that the US doesn't have continuous radar fields on its own territory. There are high-altitude (anti-ICBM) interception systems from the Arctic Ocean and Alaska. On the other side, there's a solid gap in the form of air defenses made up of fighter jets designed to intercept drug dealers in Cessnas...
      1. +2
        27 October 2025 20: 13
        You're right. This has been explained 500 times over the years.
        Devil in detail.
        Low-flying cruise missiles have been known for 50 years, and methods for combating them have been developed for the same 50 years.
        Without going into the known ground methods, we can recall a hint from a real case: Americans And the Japanese spotted a meteor from space in 2018 that later exploded into the sea off the coast of the Far East on Hiroshima 6 (allegedly). They published photos and videos in 2019. And yet, both technology and AI have advanced significantly in the past seven years...
        Well, as for air defense from fighters, they wrote about it on military-related websites, before the mass hooray-PR, it's a completely different story...
        1. 0
          28 October 2025 17: 58
          This is really for peacetime and for the first wave. Burevesnik is scheduled to fly a few hours after the ballistics test. Remember back in the 60s, when the Americans studied the effects of an explosion in near space. The entire Earth's ionosphere went nuts. HF and VHF were completely ruined. Reconnaissance in video and near-field bands (IR/UV) would also be ruined by combustion products rising kilometers. And somewhere below, beneath those clouds, something is flying. Basically, the satellites can be written off... Especially since the data reception points for these very same satellites are probably on the first wave's target list.
          1. 0
            28 October 2025 21: 12
            You are right. IMHO,
            1) If a complete disaster occurs, then everything that's been covered in mud will simply not allow us to shoot down even a regular ballistic missile. Unless the missile itself falls because of this disaster.

            2) If the situation isn't completely over, countries likely have backup communication channels and plans. These could include prepared sites for mobile radars (photos surface from time to time), communication centers, etc.

            3) I've read interviews with our naval officers twice, roughly saying that the American AUG can detect a missile launch from 1000 km away. It's probably less for a cruise missile, but it's also subsonic... So, they'll try to block the sea.

            In general, we are not experts, we can only guess what and how, but neither we nor they put their eggs in one basket...
      2. +2
        28 October 2025 10: 14
        Modern air defense systems can simply detect an object flying at an altitude of up to one hundred meters at distances of up to fifty kilometers.

        You're lucky. You don't know about the AWACS, the American AWACS, which can spot a cruise missile from 500 kilometers away, even if it's crawling on the ground. And their fighters are designed to counter cruise missiles and can spot a cruise missile from 100 kilometers away. And they have so many AWACS and fighters!!! They're even ready to intercept 500 of our Kh-102s. And they can somehow intercept a dozen Burevestniks, no matter where they're coming from. Besides, nuclear war is characterized by its speed; everyone is trying to use nuclear weapons before the enemy destroys them. And you can't "glass" US aircraft at their airfields; they'll leave their bases when our ballistic missiles launch.
        1. -1
          28 October 2025 17: 47
          There are just over 60 AVAKS missile systems, of which about half are combat-ready. They can't cover the entire perimeter from drug trafficking even in peacetime. Only threatening areas. That's assuming ideal weather and no interference. After a dozen explosions in the air or space, the detection range will decrease dramatically (learn physics). For those who survive. And don't talk nonsense about them scattering like crows in five minutes. It's good if only a dozen remain operational.
          Second. Show me a single AWACS aircraft or fighter jet capable of staying airborne for more than 10 hours without refueling. Now imagine a situation where you're being hit by small missiles from submarines, silos, and mobile missile launchers... let's say only 5-10% of the total number (i.e., roughly 200-300, counting warheads) actually hit.
          And 10-15 hours after the first Armageddon, those very nuclear missiles arrive. At an altitude of 100 meters. Moreover, the combustion products from the warheads of those that broke through earlier have risen a kilometer in this time... What proportion of the aircraft that left their bases will remain in the air? And what proportion of those that managed to stay in the air under such conditions will be able to cover the entire border perimeter? How will they organize air patrols if the HF band is completely blocked by jamming (read the physics of the consequences of a nuclear explosion), VHF communication is a maximum of 300-400 km, not to mention the fact that there will be no coordination between them (in theory) (certainly, several should arrive to the known command posts and headquarters, not just one, but several – with reserves). Even if they were able to determine the target, who will they guide? The fighter must refuel every hour. Where? How?
          In any case, the Storm Petrel is good because of its new paradigm, which their defense is not yet designed for.
          I may be happy, but it still wouldn't hurt for you to think a little.
          1. 0
            28 October 2025 21: 19
            You are right. That's why Americans They made quite a lot of tankers in the air, as I read.
            Fighters aren't supposed to fly and wait. They target and intercept.
            AWACS... Well, some will be blocked. Some by ground-based radars. Some by marine radars. Some by satellites - where they can. Some by some systems - like our "sound-recognizing smartphones."

            No wonder Americans We diligently developed communications between troops and units. Maybe something will remain operational.

            That's if the final demise doesn't occur. In the final demise... any piece of junk from the storage bins, if it's functional, will make it... Some Soyuz from a museum, stuffed with warheads...
    2. The comment was deleted.
  6. +3
    27 October 2025 15: 22
    Even Oreshnik wasn't used once. We're still fighting with fighters. Burevestnik = good. But we need a victory on the outskirts.
  7. GN
    +10
    27 October 2025 15: 40
    The war on earth should have been won long ago, not just wasted effort and showing off "toys" that won't be used anyway. The fascists long ago stopped fearing the Paper Tiger. And yet, with the stubbornness of a ram, he wants to prove something to them! No one in the West has even discussed his latest demarche in the media! Four years, four regions—what's that? Everyone sees weakness and a complete lack of will to win, so they sent another "Cossack" to the US to pull off another deal (Kirill Dmitriev). All his super-duper weapons are for domestic consumption, unfortunately, and for embezzlement of budget funds.
  8. +1
    27 October 2025 17: 19
    I'd like to point out, referring to Trump's "golden dome," that under President Reagan, there was a mythical plan (to deceive the USSR) to intercept ballistic missiles from space. I'm very curious: how and by what means will ballistic missiles be intercepted in their boost trajectory, if the ballistic trajectory is flat? What means will be used to intercept the Avangard hypersonic warheads or the Bulova missiles, which maneuver in yaw and pitch? And what if Voevoda missiles are launched from all directions?
  9. 0
    27 October 2025 17: 50
    The world has gone mad - the developers and, especially, the customers of this crap should be sent to a mental hospital for life - why the hell do they need a YaSU cruise missile to circle the earth for years? wassat
  10. +7
    27 October 2025 18: 02
    Another lengthy discussion on the topic of the "ultimate weapon." There's nothing more empty than discussing a weapon's effectiveness without any data on its performance characteristics or tactics. One thing is certain: if the Burevestnik's primary purpose is simply to intimidate our enemies, it's doomed to failure, just as with the Oreshnik and other systems. Because true fear isn't caused by the presence of a weapon, but by the certainty of its inevitability. Remember the words of US President John F. Carter's National Security Advisor, Z. Brzezinski:

    Russia may have any number of nuclear suitcases and nuclear buttons, but since 400 of billions of dollars of the Russian elite are in our banks, you still figure it out: is it your elite or already ours?
  11. 0
    27 October 2025 19: 33
    If someone doesn't understand how one can utilize the unlimited range of a cruise missile, this doesn't mean that the people who invented such a missile are likely smarter and capable of fully realizing the weapon's capabilities.
  12. +7
    27 October 2025 19: 40
    The most valuable and important thing is that they were able to create a nuclear rocket engine. Everything else is complete nonsense, including the demands to put the Burevestniks on combat alert. There are many Oreshniks on combat alert, and what are they for anyway? Did they help the Air Defense Forces? There are plenty of such examples.
    That's why our "esteemed colleagues" aren't afraid of us. They haven't "lost their fear." They understand our "chess players."
    All hope lies in the AK, T-90, various SUs, TUs, and so on. Hope lies in our soldiers.
    1. 0
      28 October 2025 10: 28
      All hope lies in the AK, T-90, various SUs, TUs, and so on. Hope lies in our soldiers.

      I wonder how we will protect our oil refineries and power plants from tomahawks using AK and T-90, as well as various SU and TU.
      1. +1
        28 October 2025 12: 41
        Unfortunately, that's exactly what it always is. Or are you thinking of Oreshnik, Poseidon (by the way, does this product exist or is it just a PR mockup?), Burevestnik, Armata, etc.?
  13. +2
    27 October 2025 19: 59
    During the Cold War, US military strategy assigned bombers approximately 20% of strategic targets. And they were supposed to launch after ICBMs had been fired. I believe the role of subsonic cruise missiles in the overall concept of nuclear weapons use is roughly the same. Let's hope it never comes to that, as there will definitely be no winners in a nuclear war. Only those who hole up in underground bunkers somewhere under a rock will survive...
  14. -3
    27 October 2025 20: 03
    Will the nuclear Burevestnik live up to expectations?

    As a doomsday weapon, it will serve its purpose.
    The Burevestnik will arrive when the strategic and tactical missiles are exhausted. It will arrive to finish off whatever might still remain intact after a nuclear exchange.
    There is also Poseidon, who will also finish off.
    The point of this weapon is that even if Russia is completely destroyed, this weapon will completely destroy the enemy. There will be no victory. There will be no NATO countries.
    With Russia's current regime, there will be no political influence on NATO. Russia is not China or even the Houthis.
  15. 0
    27 October 2025 21: 43
    I wonder what could be done with the freed-up space and weight of conventional rocket fuel, and how much weight it could carry? If Kalibr can carry a 450 kg warhead and a total weight of up to 2000 kg, then the fuel weight is around a ton. This means Burevestnik's payload could be at least a ton.
    1. +1
      28 October 2025 06: 31
      Burevestnik must have sufficient radiation shielding to allow specialists to service it without harm. All these protective shells will weigh at least a hundred or so kilograms.
      1. 0
        28 October 2025 10: 39
        All these protective shells will weigh another hundred kilograms,

        I must vindicate the Burevestnik's designers. Its inoperative reactor poses no danger—the nuclear fuel is only slightly radioactive. It requires no protective shell. But it's also impossible to test such an engine in operation, to verify its functionality, as it would become highly radioactive. That's the downside of the idea.
        1. 0
          28 October 2025 11: 06
          If Burevestnik were simply a tube with an engine, perhaps it wouldn't need radiation shielding. But it's presumably packed with electronics, which definitely require a protective shield; otherwise, nothing would work. Regarding the fuel loaded into such a reactor: Yes, it emits relatively little radiation initially, but as it burns, the uranium pellets become deadly to humans. Therefore, such reactors are absolutely required to be enclosed in a shielded capsule, as the rocket could easily fall to the ground or sea during testing, with obvious consequences.
          1. 0
            28 October 2025 14: 28
            electronics that definitely need a protective screen

            Electronics, chips are very compact.

            ...become deadly to humans. Therefore, such reactors are necessarily enclosed in a protective capsule.

            This rocket, after engine ignition, flies one way. No one will waste its very limited weight potential on unnecessary protection. And how they plan to test it is a question for the concept's authors.
  16. 0
    27 October 2025 23: 03
    Quote: Sergey Latyshev
    Before the SVO, all our missiles were positioned as undefeatable. Caliber missiles were slightly less undefeatable. Ballistic missiles were slightly more undefeatable. Hyper missiles were completely undefeatable.

    Here's another doomsday missile. Because the only people who won't be bothered by radioactive exhaust are the dead.

    The outcome is predictable based on previous successes. NATO will step up its game, dump another mountain of cash, develop and deploy new weapons. The military-industrial complex will be in profit. Politicians will slam their boots on their desks in ecstasy. Ordinary people will tighten their belts... some, as he said, will die... (The population and life expectancy in Russia aren't growing much, no matter how hard Rosstat tries...)

    Kalibrs have actually learned to shoot down missiles quickly. Subsonic speed is a problem when a country's air and missile defenses are destroyed, but the crests had no problem with that until 2025.
  17. 0
    28 October 2025 00: 00
    And once again, the guarantor is hoping for a miracle weapon. Where are the munitions based on other physical principles? Apparently, the West is so backward that it doesn't understand how to fear it, so here we go—an old, inexpensive, and merciless munition with a nuclear warhead. Like Gritza—after us, the deluge.
    1. +1
      28 October 2025 10: 49
      There was another leader of the country telling the people about a miracle weapon.
      1. -2
        29 October 2025 10: 10
        And there were still those who laughed in 2018 and called all this cartoons)) Are you, by any chance, one of them?)))
    2. -2
      29 October 2025 10: 08
      Where did you see hope in the Supreme Commander's words? A new type of weapon has simply emerged, and the situation has changed dramatically—the US is now vulnerable to our cruise missiles, too. And any target on its territory. Remember how much laughter there was in 18 about how all this was just cartoons? ))) And the novelty of this munition is that its carrier has a virtually unlimited range, and for the first time, a nuclear engine has been combined with a cruise missile.
  18. 0
    28 October 2025 01: 02
    If this story is as told, and with such a range (14,000 km), wouldn't it be better for this missile to be a bomber, launching a bomb or missile itself and then returning to base? If the engine is nuclear, I suppose it's expensive and polluting.
    I'm not a military expert... what I just wrote may be nonsense.
  19. 0
    28 October 2025 08: 21
    Judging by the comments, the spaghetti about the petrel and Poseidon stops working even for the most stubborn. The world is ruled by desires and expectations, not sober logic. Populism rules.
    Obvious absurdity is pushed into people's minds, but minds begin to resist.
  20. 0
    28 October 2025 13: 40
    As a deterrent, Poseidon is more interesting than Burevestnik.
  21. +1
    28 October 2025 20: 29
    The only interesting thing about the Burevestnik is its engine. If it were possible to install such an engine on the Tu-160 or the prospective PAK DA, we would have a strategic aircraft capable of patrolling the airspace around America for extended periods and capable of launching missile strikes from any direction at any time. And making such an aircraft supersonic would mean a revolution in strategic deterrence.
  22. +2
    29 October 2025 09: 10
    Will it justify?

    There is an additional parallel information approach here.

    Like Oreshnik, Peresvet, and others, he has already "justified"
    Provided endless work for "experts," authors, trolls, and commentators. Nothing much is known, even the pictures are all different, but it's impossible to write and rewrite...
    Well, life is more interesting. They used to write about UFOs, psychics, reptilians... Now it's about the Petrels.
  23. -2
    29 October 2025 09: 58
    It seems to me that the Burevestnik has fundamentally changed the situation. Previously, the United States was still out of reach for our cruise missiles, unless you consider the possibility that a multipurpose submarine could fire at the US coast at a distance of less than 1000 km, or strategic aircraft from the Far East. Even then, not all targets would have been within reach. Now, it can be said that the new weapon has corrected this shortcoming. Secondly, the US air defense and missile defense systems are deployed along both the west and east coasts. Nothing prevents the Burevestnik from approaching from Alaska or, indeed, Mexico. And the same applies to Europe. All European air and missile defense systems are aimed at the western border, while the new cruise missile is capable of crossing the Arctic Circle into the Atlantic and striking from the direction of our best European allies.
  24. +1
    29 October 2025 10: 01
    I have absolutely no hope for the Burevestnik, absolutely none! Because of the spinelessness and cowardice of the decision makers... Because it must be used en masse in a preemptive strike against the enemy's (US) nuclear facilities to prevent a retaliatory or counter-attack nuclear strike against Russia. We'll cover Europe with other means, like hypersonic weapons. And I just can't understand why they're creating weapons and then shouting from the rooftops that they'll never use them? What nonsense!
  25. +1
    30 October 2025 07: 35
    Relying on a wonder weapon is a sign of the guarantor's diminishing potential. The same thing happened under Party Comrade Hitler, when the German military's potential was exhausted and depleted, and neither the V-8s, nor the Tigers, nor the jets were of any help. Because the potential was destroyed, the Janko-Saxo-Anglo-Germans, on the contrary, had increased, thanks to the B-17, B-29, and other bombers, which were destroying the Germans' military and economic might.
    What can this missile do without strong-willed targeting? If our army had a truly strong-willed commander-in-chief, rather than a populist and "geostrategist," this could have been completed long before 22, and there would have been no need for ammunition based on different physical principles and "Stormy Petrels."
  26. +2
    31 October 2025 13: 34
    To counter and destroy the Russian Federation, the Americans adopted the concept of Limited Military Actions (LMAs) back in the last century. This concept involves organizing armed conflicts on the Russian border and drawing Russia into them. LMAO is one of the most striking examples of this aggressor's policy. This is US government policy, not your idle speculation. It's incomprehensible why some idiots have been seeking friends there for over 30 years and trying to establish trade and financial cooperation. Nabiullina and everyone who cooperates with US funds and banks are traitors, fools, and foreign agents... Throw out all this crap. They gave away 300 billion, completely destroyed civil aviation, are destroying the oil and gas industry, and... are they trying to be friends with Trump?!
    The Warsaw Pact forces rule out the use of nuclear weapons. Burevestnik is not designed for air defense....
  27. +2
    3 November 2025 00: 23
    Yeah, let's say there's already a war going on. A nuclear one. Everything is in place for surveillance and destruction. And suddenly, something long, metallic, and noisy flies right overhead, circling, and no one pays any attention, and it calmly flies its 14000 km for days, and no one sees it or tries to destroy it? Isn't that naive?