77
Russia's Invulnerable Weapon: Why the Golden Dome Won't Do the Job (aerospaceamerica.aiaa.org)
submitted 1 day ago by stln@lemmy.ml to c/world@lemmy.world
27 comments fedilink hide all child comments

Greg Mello, director of the Los Alamos Study Group, which studies the US nuclear arsenal, stated that none of the current US or other countries' missile defense systems are capable of countering Russian non-ballistic nuclear weapons.

According to him, the US initiative to create the Golden Dome system is technically unfeasible. Mello noted that Russia possesses weapons such as the Poseidon underwater drone, hypersonic missiles, and cruise missiles, which are specifically designed to overcome missile defense systems.

He emphasized that instead of fanciful projects like Golden Dome, real arms control measures are needed to ensure mutual security.

top 27 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[-] prole 10 points 23 hours ago

I swear to fucking god if they do this, actually name it "Golden Dome," so I have to think about this fascist piece of orange shit every time it is mentioned, for years to come, I'm going to lose it.

I just want nothing more than to never have to read about this piece of human detritus ever again.

[-] plyth@feddit.org 1 points 19 hours ago

Then make it fun and remember what is supposed to be taped.

[-] SwingingTheLamp@midwest.social 1 points 16 hours ago

Hey, wasn't this supposed to be an actual dome? The demented, old dingbat described it as a literal dome.

[-] SoloCritical@lemmy.world 2 points 19 hours ago

Could someone explain to me why this matters? If they have this amazing weaponry, why aren’t they deploying it against Ukraine? If it’s so great that war would have been over in 3 days as originally promised. Sounds to me like some stupid Boogeyman talk.

[-] mojofrododojo@lemmy.world 1 points 14 hours ago

If they have this amazing weaponry, why aren’t they deploying it against Ukraine?

because they can beat the shit out of ukr civilians every night for cheap. hypersonic weapons are expensive.

the underwater drones: well ukraine basically sunk their navy in the black sea, so probably not there...

they did use some cruise missiles early in the conflict, but again, expensive compared to shaheeds and other shitty terror drone weapon platforms. when you're bombing apartments you don't need pinpoint accuracy.

I'd also wager they don't have very many of the fancy weapons ready at any given time, and reserve them for conflict against other nuclear powers.

remember, russia has always underestimated ukraine in this fight, at the very beginning the invaders brought their dress uniforms because they were told they'd be marching in victory parades in just a few days.

https://www.thedailybeast.com/russians-planned-a-victory-parade-in-kyivbut-dumped-their-formal-attire-as-they-fled/

in short, I don't think these weapons would be all that useful against ukraine but poland and denmark might see some action if things continue to escalate. or if Ukraine starts landing significant hits against moscow itself.

[-] CanadaPlus@lemmy.sdf.org 3 points 21 hours ago

Greg Mello, director of the Los Alamos Study Group, which studies the US nuclear arsenal, stated that none of the current US or other countries’ missile defense systems are capable of countering Russian non-ballistic nuclear weapons.

Interesting. Can we have a link to this? It's not in the article.

[-] MunkyNutts@lemmy.world 2 points 19 hours ago

Maybe this is what you're looking for,

https://lasg.org/press/2025/press_release_22Sep2025.html

[-] CanadaPlus@lemmy.sdf.org 1 points 17 hours ago* (last edited 17 hours ago)

Hmm, so that's a civilian think tank. The name had me thinking it might be somewhat official.

Historically, interception has been a pipe dream, but in the 21st century complexity is cheap. I do worry a little that it's not as far fetched as it sounds, and MAD might break down.

[-] decipher_jeanne 4 points 23 hours ago* (last edited 23 hours ago)

Revive the Nike-X you cowards. I want to die from the sonic boom of a missile accelerating to mach 10 in 5s

[-] FuglyDuck@lemmy.world 40 points 1 day ago

the Iron Dome, which is what trump wants to install (and calls the Golden Dome) was never meant to stop ICCBM missiles. It's a system designed to catch the relatively short ranged rockets being used by Hamas and other missiles.

Trump is a moron.

To put the system into perspective, Israel has about 8,500 square miles of landmass. the US? 3.2 million.

[-] icelimit@lemmy.ml 4 points 23 hours ago

Who's lobbing short range missiles at USA?

[-] jellygoose@lemmy.ca 4 points 20 hours ago

Those damn Canadians!

[-] Doomsider@lemmy.world 1 points 11 hours ago

Looks like we just found our new head of the CIA boys! Tell us more about these Canadians.

[-] blicky_blank@lemmy.today 1 points 18 hours ago

The Mexicans obviously

[-] FuglyDuck@lemmy.world 1 points 19 hours ago

Who is lobbing nukes?

It’s the same people. (No one.)

[-] CanadaPlus@lemmy.sdf.org 1 points 22 hours ago

New cartel smuggling idea? /s

[-] Voroxpete@sh.itjust.works 18 points 1 day ago

It's actually so much worse than that, as the article explains.

Iron Dome was the inspiration, but with Golden Dome what they're planning is space based interception. It's Reagan's Star Wars project back from the dead.

The problem with this is two fold; no known system in the world can reliably intercept ICBMs, and doing so from space is ludicrously expensive. It costs, in effect, about ten times as much to shoot down one ICBM as it does to build an launch one, meaning that a peer adversary can just build more missiles and flood the system. To stop even a Hundred ICBMs would cost hundreds of billions of dollars. China has six hundred.

Basically, like so much of what Trump spends money on, it will amount to a very expensive but completely useless toy.

[-] rainwall@piefed.social 5 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago)

600 known nuclear ICBMs. They can probably mass produce just the missiles to flood the system and let the actual nukes through.

[-] FuglyDuck@lemmy.world 4 points 1 day ago

They probably* don’t even have launch vehicles for the warheads they do have. That particular branch of their military isnextremely corrupt, with people selling everything they could off on the black market. Including, apparently, launch fuel.

I would find it surprising if they could mass produce them in any meaningful quantity.

(*not something I’m willing to bet on, to be clear. This is one of those plan for the worst case. The worst case is probably they sold off a portion of warheads to the highest bidder a la Sum of All Fears but the rest are all operational.)

[-] desmosthenes@lemmy.world 18 points 1 day ago

no shit - it’s all a scam to funnel more money to defense contractors

[-] frezik 7 points 1 day ago

Hypersonics, at least, are likely overrated. They reduce the window between detection and countermeasure deployment. They also can't maneuver very well without losing their hypersonic speed or generating too much heat, and therefore travel on a predictable course.

Drones have been the champion technology of the Ukraine war, and that's probably the future. Of course, those are also a reason why a Golden Dome plan wouldn't work.

[-] SkybreakerEngineer@lemmy.world 5 points 1 day ago

Fear mongering about Russian wonder waffles? So far they do more damage to Russia than anyone else

[-] Buffalox@lemmy.world 4 points 1 day ago

The best hope if Russia decides to deploy nuclear weapons, is probably that those are expensive to maintain, and Russian corruption is likely to have made a portion of them unworkable.

[-] dogslayeggs@lemmy.world 3 points 1 day ago

Two things can both be true:

  1. There are classified programs that Greg Mello may or may not know about that are capable of countering all three of those weapons listed. There might also be classified Russian programs that are capable of countering those counters. And you can be sure we know at least something about those countering counters. Kill Chain analysis has been a huge focus area for the last few years, so the US military has developed ways to counter threats.

  2. Golden Dome is still a wildly expensive, fanciful, and technically infeasible program. Even if we know exactly how to detect and counter these threats, the US is a gigantic fucking country with TONS of border to enclose. It's one thing to have a way to detect, track, target, and shoot down one of those three things. It's another to do that for 40 at the same time in wildly different areas of the world (made up number since I have no idea how many weapons Russia is able to unleash). It's a lot easier to protect an area the size of New Jersey than it is to protect the entire US.

[-] Voroxpete@sh.itjust.works 4 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago)

40 at the same time

You're lowballing it just a little there. Current estimates put the number of Russian nukes at about 5,500.

[-] dogslayeggs@lemmy.world 1 points 22 hours ago

It's almost like I immediately said that was a completely made up number that had no basis in reality.

[-] Voroxpete@sh.itjust.works 2 points 21 hours ago

No, I get that, wasn't trying to slap you down. I'm just adding emphasis to your (very good) argument by demonstrating just how far you were lowballing your estimate (ie, just how generous you were being).

this post was submitted on 01 Oct 2025
77 points (100.0% liked)

World News

50126 readers
2532 users here now

A community for discussing events around the World

Rules:

Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.

Lemmy World Partners

News !news@lemmy.world

Politics !politics@lemmy.world

World Politics !globalpolitics@lemmy.world

Recommendations

For Firefox users, there is media bias / propaganda / fact check plugin.

https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/media-bias-fact-check/

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
NewsAutoMod@lemmy.world
jordanlund@lemmy.world
Tenthrow@lemmy.world
little_cow@lemmy.world
lemmyAtom@lemmy.world