By the author of The Faithful Prepper and Zombie Choices
Throughout human history, mankind has recognized the importance of waterways. It is for this reason that cities and towns throughout the world are commonly found clustered along rivers, lakes, or by the shore. Water makes the transportation of large amounts of goods both efficient and economical.
Water also makes moving large amounts of soldiers, munitions, weaponry, food, or other wartime logistical goods both efficient and economical.
It’s because of this recognition that throughout history, nations have built as powerful of navies as they could manage. Not only did this help to protect their nation’s borders (enemies would have a more difficult time with logistics for an amphibious invasion), but it helped to protect a nation’s mercantile ships and gave nations the means to strike back at an overseas invader.
Pain as a deterrence works.
One doesn’t have to look far to see the military importance here. The birth of the US Marines as they fought the pirates of Tripoli would be a prime example. An American navy not only made it possible for us to rescue enslaved Americans in Africa, but it made it so that Tripoli was afraid to enslave Americans again in the future.
In World War II, the reason the Japanese attacked Pearl Harbor was that they knew it was the site of the bulk of America’s Pacific fleet. With the US Navy on its knees, Japan would have fuller control over the Pacific Theater, able to invade nations as it pleased them.
World War II also caused the world to realize the importance of the aircraft carrier. Here was an invention that perfectly melded both air and sea capability. Without air superiority in modern conventional warfare, one stands a slim chance of victory. Aircraft carriers help to provide that air superiority.
What’s the point?
The point is this: what if there were a way to take out an entire fleet at the push of a button? If so, could it not render an opponent completely incapable of a military response in a geographic region? All troops on the ground would be left without any form of resupply other than that which was available via land or by air. Planes would have to utilize accommodating air strips. Bombardment by sea would no longer be a possibility.
How long would it take for resupply to take place? What would the cost be? How long would it take for an opponent’s remaining naval forces to rebuild and come back to the area?
The destruction of an entire fleet is to file down the firing pin of one’s military dominance, and should such an event take place, the aggressor would be at a mighty advantage.
But is there a weapon capable of this type of action?
Introducing, nuclear torpedoes.
Russia’s navy has been working on nuclear torpedoes for years now, and finally operational with the creation of The Poseidon torpedo.
This weapon is both nuclear-armed and nuclear-powered, the size of a bus and 7’ in diameter. It’s largely theorized that these subs are primarily designed to target coastal ports, but what about enemy fleets? If there’s a large congregation of naval forces in one geographic region, the Poseidon could easily be used to obliterate the entire fleet. This would accomplish all of what we’ve just listed and more.
(For more information on emergency evacuations, make sure you check out our free QUICKSTART Guide.)
And how would nuclear torpedoes find their way to the target?
Via the new and massive Russian fleet of submarines that are being built. At the moment, the Russians have the Sarov, specifically built-in 2007, for use with this new devastating weapon. The Khabarovsk was another submarine capable of holding Poseidon torpedoes and was scheduled to be completed and released in the fall of 2021. It is likely operational at the time of this writing.
Each Poseidon-capable submarine is capable of holding six of these Poseidon missiles, and as of August 2021, it was believed that Russia was going to build a total of four of these Poseidon-capable submarines.
One of the chinks in the armor here, though, is that Russian submarines of this size are typically “loud” underwater and thus, easily found. But Russia has been working on a go-around for this problem with the creation of missiles being staged on the ocean floor in specialized containers that will hold the missile until they are programmed to be released.
If you’ll remember, The Organic Prepper recently wrote about strange Russian undersea activity off the coast of Ireland where the undersea cables connecting Europe and America were located. While some sort of tampering is most likely taking place there, is it not possible that Poseidon torpedoes could be being staged here as well?
If that is indeed the case, nuclear torpedoes could give Russia quite the edge over Western Europe.
Bristol is one of the main ports in England, located in what is likely considered to be within range of where the Russian naval exercise took place. These torpedoes can travel at roughly 80mph and are believed to be capable of a trans-ocean range, making this is not outside the realm of possibility. The nuclear payload is believed to be two megatons as well. Early reports with this torpedo stated it was a 100-megaton payload, but this theory has since been revised.
For comparison, Hiroshima took a 15-kiloton payload.
So, if we use the fantastic nuclear war simulator Nuke Map, we can see how this might play out. If there was the detonation of a two-megaton warhead within the port of Bristol, England
Surprisingly, it doesn’t appear as if the blast proper would kill more than 1000 people. What I find even more concerning here, though, is you can see this would layer a huge cloud of radioactive fallout right through the center of England if this were to occur. One thousand rads/hour would cut through where the dark red oval is. 1000 rads is the equivalent of 1140 roentgen. A total of 450 roentgen kills 50% of those it hits.
France has a number of major ports that would be a straight shot, with Brest likely being the closest potential target. If we use Nuke Map to simulate a two-megaton explosion in the harbor of Brest, we again find that while relatively not that many people would apparently die in the blast, the nuclear fallout would reach as far as London.
Not only would Brest be taken out, but if one considers that you can receive six roentgen/day for two months without becoming ill, it would mean that Londoners would have to limit their time outside/day to six hours. This would severely hamper anyone involved with any form of outside activity (e.g., shipbuilders).
Whether it’s a coastal town or a naval fleet, nuclear torpedoes are not a weapon to be ignored.
Part of prepping is understanding the threats that are out there. If you know what the potential problems are, you can begin to better formulate a plan of action. Check out this article for more information. You can also have some idea of what to expect. As we continue to give you updates on the status of the current war, this may be a particular threat to keep in mind. We put together a quick anthology of all our nuclear preparedness and information articles that you can get here and name your own price. If times are tough, pay as little as you like, and if you want to support the site more, pay as much as you like. This is information available on the website in an easily printable format so you can get a hard copy immediately.
What are your thoughts? Do you think nuclear torpedoes are a likely threat to the US? Let us know in the comments below.
Aden Tate is a regular contributor to TheOrganicPrepper.com and TheFrugalite.com. Aden runs a micro-farm where he raises dairy goats, a pig, honeybees, meat chickens, laying chickens, tomatoes, mushrooms, and greens. Aden has two published books, The Faithful Prepper and Zombie Choices. You can find his podcast The Last American on Preppers’ Broadcasting Network.
Nuclear options aren’t limited to ICBMs. There are a lot of packages including artillery, hand carried and VBIED so a torpedo makes sense too.
I question wether or not your far enough from the concussion zone upon deployment. That’s gonna ring some gourds in that underwater coffin.
If they are as well maintained as the equipment being used in Ukraine right now it’s liable to pop in the tube.
This is far down on my list of worries with fuel and food being closer to the top
Go to RealBibleBelievers Dr Gene Kim on youtube and watch Prophecy on Russia and Ukraine
I live in San Diego which is a large Naval Port with Aircraft Carriers. If one of those torpedoes entered the bay our city would be incinerated, because everything is clustered around the bay. I live about 6 miles or so from city center and we would still be inundated with radiation, likely killing us.
An Air burst is another matter altogether because its range of damage is much greater than one at ground level which the Poseidon is only capable. San Diego is a very hilly city, with valleys that a ground bust could not reach, unlike cities which are flat as a pancake as in Los Angles.
Hell Aden, if it goes nuclear does it really matter? Talking about giving an advantage when it comes to nukes is pretty much superfluous. Between ICBM’s, air launched, sub launched, artillery, and even man-packs, does a torpedo really make a huge amount of difference in the race to insanity?
I come back to the fact that the EMP commission continued to find that an EMP event would result in the death of 9 out of 10 Americans in the first year. That’s ONE nuke detonated approximately 300 miles above the continental U.S. If we get into a situation where nukes are used you can’t for a minute believe that there will be enough left to really make a difference. Between the blasts, the radiation, the fallout, the EMP created by each weapon, and the resulting collapse of infrastructure worldwide survivability drops to a negligible level. And in this case those who die outright may in fact be the lucky ones.
What we need to know about nukes? Once unleashed,
you’ll either be under ground or breathing nuke plumes.
Seek the LORD while HE can be found. The servant of
Matt 24:46 is on the earth, revealing the hidden book of
truth promised to us in these last days at daniel11truth.
Dont worry, pete. Its not the radiation or the blast that is the biggest problem of the nukes. That is perfectly survivable. But, the destruction of the infrastructure and our instant production/delivery supply chain will cause unbearable hazard.
We are losing the point here, if nuclear weapons are used it is totally irrelevant what conventional forces are destroyed in port. Mankind gets sent back to the stone age afterwards.
Maybe the Rusky’s have already tested this device on that volcano in Tonga?
This is nothing new. Nuclear torpedoes have been around since the 1960s. They were “carrier killers” and “deep diving sub killers” were fired from a standard 21″ US Navy torpedo tube.
The concept was abandoned when the USN realized they’d destroy the sub, too, because the range of the Mark 45 was about 8 miles.
The Russkies had the Type 65, optionally armed with a 20 kiloton warhead some fifty years ago.
A 7 foot diameter bus is not really that big.
GREAT ARTICLE ON NULEAR TORPEDOS. I thought the principle was to produce an underwater detonation. I have little to back this comment up, but I suspect the fallout is less of a problem than the tidal waves created by the displacement of the water. Imagine if it were detonated in the North Sea, the ports it would cause havoc for… or for that matter off the US west coast, in international waters. Nukemap is not a good demonstration of its impact.
should we consider the possibility of submarine based nuclear tipped cruise missiles launched off shore ??
We used to have them. The Tomahawk cruise missile had a nuclear variant (TLAM/N) with a 200 kiloton warheard. While we’re technically “retired” the warheads, I’m sure it would be possible to re-enable them and reconfigure the warhead of a standard TLAM.
Nuke torpedoes are nothing new. They have reported been around for 50+ years and used as anti-submarine weapons by anti-submarine patrol aircraft like the P-3C Orion. What has changed is the yield of the weapon, from small sized to city killer size. Also changed are the delivery systems, from traditional torpedoes to very fast ones, to very stealthy, slow, hide and seek ones. Such type might be used to infiltrate a shipping harbor, and “sleep” until activated. Do not expect to hear air raid sirens beforehand if they are used.
If it get hot with America and Russia watch La Palma light up,this time for real,no more showing off from Putin about what he can do,it will be “SURFS UP” for the East Coast.
“One of the chinks in the armor here, though, is that Russian submarines of this size are typically “loud” underwater and thus, easily found.”
How is this a problem? The USA and Russia know exactly where each other subs are all the time. It’s not 1944 anymore.
a few years back …before Regan…we developed a ‘neutron bomb’ …it was so devastating, we decided to mouth ball the whole project…what did it do???
it did NOT destroy infrastructure… but it did KILL!!! all protoplasm life…cockroaches to elephants.
with this nuke you could kill the enemy …wait a few weeks for decomposition ..then move in, sweep out the bones, and take up use of all roadways, structures, water systems, electric grids…etc etc…
with the minimal or non-existent radiation we debated and determined…that it should not be developed (as we all know ..sometimes ….somethings are done ‘on the QT’) —never say never—-
if we could make this nuke bomb years ago…, who will say that ‘they’ did not/can not make one now ?
No way would they make such illegal and morally reprehensible weapons. That would be like setting up a ring of biowarfare labs to produce killer germs that wipe out a whole ethn… oops. Never mind.