When Experts are not Experts
Ritter gets a lot of press with his pronouncements .
But let us keep in mind that while he has a military background,, he is not a military strategist or weapons specialist per se—his service is as a weapons inspector.
His job was simply looking for sites where the Iraqis might be hiding banned weapons. Nuclear bombs, chemical weapons, or large dogs that bite. You don’t actually need US Marine Corps training to do that.
In other words, this most recent article for Sputnik in which he conjures up the spectre of nuclear war is a little beyond his paygrade.
It’s the Dark Eagle that is perhaps the most destabilizing,” former weapons inspector and US Marine Corps intelligence officer Scott Ritter told Sputnik. “While it is not a nuclear-capable missile, it is a system that has the ability to strike deep inside Russia with precision hypersonic warheads that are virtually impossible to intercept,” Ritter explained.
And:
We’ve gone back in time. It’s back to the 1980s, back to a situation where the United States and NATO and Russia once again face off with weapons that are inherently destabilizing. One mistake, one miscalculation, one misjudgment could lead to a situation where these missiles are fired in anger, and this would lead to the potential of a general nuclear exchange between the United States and Russia.
Ritter likes to say dramatic things. “Ask the Inspector”, right? In this case—nuclear war on a global scale, New York burning, as opposed to the use of small yield weapons in Europe.
But….here’s the thing. This isn’t 1980.
Dark Eagle or Dead Eagle?
The Dark Eagle program is a year or two behind schedule, and is notable for its large number of test failures. The first battery should be available sometime in 2025, . Maybe—only maybe. The US is still trying to get the bugs out of the F35, which first flew is 2006 and is only 50% operable, constantly grounded for one problem or another. Definitely on a wing and a prayer.
The US MIC always over-engineers its stuff, “added value” boosting the price, of course. The F35 may use ten year old tech – but it’s still mostly good for shooting down budgets.
American attempts to upgrade it are time-consuming and expensive--.partly because of the declining workforce in high tech sectors.
The semiconductor industry sits at the intersection of national security and economic competitiveness. Recognising this, policymakers have sought to bolster domestic chip production through measures like tariffs, immigration restrictions, and subsidies. However, our analysis reveals that these efforts have had unintended consequences on the industry’s most vital resource: its talent pool.
Building on earlier work examining the broader economic impacts of trade frictions (Fajgelbaum et al. 2020, Amiti et al. 2019), we focus specifically on how protectionist policies have shaped the semiconductor workforce. Our findings paint a concerning picture of declining domestic hiring, especially for entry-level positions, and a shift in career choices away from the chip industry.
The chip industry is just one sector—there are many others in this hi-tech world of ours. The result is cost over-runs, deadlines not met, and equipment that fails to do what it is supposed to do.
That’s one reason why Dead -er—Dark Eagle has been delayed and why it is not likely to reach full deployment until 2026 or 2027, much less 2025, although the military may get a few units to park someplace just for show. It’s not like they will have to use them, right?
Hypersonic or just hype?
The missile is "hypersonic"-- but then all ballistic missiles are "hypersonic", meaning they travel faster than Mach 5.
When media writers these days use the word “hypersonic”, however-- they are talking about missiles with maneuverable warheads-- which are difficult --if not impossible-- to intercept with conventional air defense systems such as the Patriot system-but are hard to get working properly since they require expertise in design—and a level of technological and industrial capability the US increasingly lacks.
Russia has been the leader in this area, if only because it has people with skills and knowhow in the field and heavily encourages and subsidizes education and training in the necessary industries and technologies.
Proof?
3M22 Zircon Scramjet-powered, nuclear-capable hypersonic cruise missile for the Russian navy, including submarines. A land-based version in the works. Mach 9. Range: 1000-2000 km.
Avangard (hypersonic glide vehicle) RS-28 Sarmat MIRV (3 carried) . nuclear and conventional Re-entry speeds over Mach 25.
Kh-47M2 Kinzhal A air-launched ballistic missile. Range of 460–480 km (290–300 mi)[ Speed: Mach 10. Conventional or nuclear warheads[ Launched by Tu-22M3 MiG-31K I Su-34 fighter-bombers.
Kh-95 long-range hypersonic cruise missile. 10 Mach or 15 Mach. Nuclear: 500 kilotons -1 megaton. Range 7000 kilometers. Launched by Tu-22M3M ,Tu-160M2 bombers , future PAK DA strategic bomber
Vympel R-37M Very long range. Designed to shoot down tankers, AWACS and other C4ISTAR aircraft out of range of any fighters that might be protecting the target. Compatible with Sukhoi Su-57, Sukhoi Su-30, Sukhoi Su-35, Mikoyan MiG-31BM and Mikoyan MiG-35
Zmeevik anti-ship missile[ Maneuverable warhead hypersonic carrier-killer missile for coastal defense. Yup, can be fired from subs.
8.Gremlin Hypersonic Guided Rocket (air-launched) Similar to Kinzhal – but smaller and fits in the SU57 internally.
Military Show & Tell
Ritter talks about Dark Eagle as though it were invulnerable. It isn’t.
Russian experience with a variety of hypersonic weapons helps them design in anti-hypersonic capabilities in their newest air defense systems – notably the S500-- which designed for long-range interception of hypersonic vehicles like Dark Eagle even when still in the ballistic phase.
Using the SMO as a testing ground, Russian air defense systems are constantly being updated which have allowed them to counter HIMARS, Storm Shadow missiles, and ATACMs.
The White House announced plans to deploy three types of strategic missiles in Germany last week, with the new capabilities set to include:
Ground-launched Tomahawk cruise missiles, which became available to the Pentagon after the US unilaterally scrapped the Intermediate-Range Nuclear Forces (INF) Treaty with Russia in 2019. The Raytheon-manufactured missiles have a range anywhere from 460-2,500 km, and can be armed with conventional or low-to-intermediate yield nuclear warheads.
The SM-6 – a long-range surface-to-air-missile system which can be launched from the US Army’s new Typhon Mid-Range Capability (MRC) missile system, or the Aegis Ashore air and missile defense systems the US has deployed in Romania and Poland. Manufactured by Raytheon. Firing range of 240-460 km.
Unnamed ‘hypersonic’ capabilities widely speculated to be the Army’s Dark Eagle Long-Range Hypersonic Weapon (LRHW) – the only one of the half-a-dozen plus US hypersonics programs anywhere near operational status. Developed by Lockheed Martin. Reported range up to 3,000 km. Payload unknown.
Ritter seems to have taken US military hype at face value.
But….
In 2018, the US launched 103 Tomahawk missiles at Syria. The Syrians intercepted 71 using S-125, S-200, 2K12 Kub and Buk to repel the attacks – second hand Russian kit. How many would have gotten through with first line AD equipment?
That’s one thing but there is another bigger problem for the US.
No weapons for war?
It simply doesn't have the industrial base to support a real war.
You can partly thank the Houthis.
American air defense systems are markedly inferior to the new Russian systems in almost all areas, keeping in mind that Russian systems are integrated, networked multilayer systems. In any case, American air defense systems would be just as miserable failures in Romania and Poland as they were in Ukraine.
While the Navy does have a large existing stockpile of Tomahawks to sustain its land-attack capability, it has recently been firing the missiles faster than it can replace them. According to the Navy, opening day strikes alone expended more than 80 Tomahawks to hit 30 targets within Yemen.
Last year’s entire Tomahawk purchase of 55 missiles accounted for 68 percent of the precision munitions fired at the Houthis in one day. This is an unsustainable rate of expenditure. However, this represents adherence to, rather than deviation from, the norm.
Prior strikes in Syria expended fifty-nine Tomahawks in 2017 and an additional sixty-six in 2018. The Navy bought just 100 Tomahawks in 2018 and then zero Tomahawks in 2019—failing to offset the expenditure rate of the Syria strikes.
Firing off more weapons than America buys causes stockpiles to decline quickly. The same weapons reserve the nation would need should Beijing seek to use force to take Taiwan while the United States is supporting wars in two other regions.
Russia is rearming and building up its military forces—while US military power is in the process of effective decline….
It simply cannot compete. So I don't really think we need to worry about the Americans starting a nuclear war in Europe. The Americans always think win-lose, incapable it seems of thinking win-win. Themselves losing is unthinkable — there's nothing worse for an American than to be a loser.
Sorry Scott. I love ya’. But a little self-inspection for Inspectors can help.
Ichi’s sister
Ichi (# One) had two sisters — identical twins — Ni (#Two) and San (#Three).
This is Ni (I think). Ni and San were a little Siamesey— long tails, slender, gracile bodies. They bonded and ignored Ichi.
Here, Ni is with Uncle Mick, who was nice to everybody.
Special article. … I added something extra from Brian Berletic’s article in NEO about Media misconceptions of “air supremacy”— and war in general — which I have written about before. Suffice to say, Ukraine is not Iraq. That part of the article was nothing new. But the ending was superb. (Recommended!) Berletic is always great.
No matter. A little editing. And I updated the mailing list. I will send later tonight.
New title:
The American Borg
Resistance is not futile
Support me and my furry friends by buying us coffee! Here. Or above on Ni-chan’s photo with Uncle Mick.
Scott Ritter is indeed very American, and proud of things like Operation Desert Storm on a technical basis rather than a moral one. His audience seems to eat up his constant talk of possible huge escalation.
On the point about the US not starting nuclear war in Europe because their hypersonic missiles can't compete with the Russians' - I think on the contrary the biggest worry is that they might do that BECAUSE they can't compete with Russia! If the way they've used Ukraine (and every other American proxy ever) shows anything, it's that their friends are only their friends until they outlive their usefulness. An empire in decline is a dangerous thing, and this is the first time in history that such an empire has had nuclear weapons
Ritter is absolutely correct. He thinks about minutes of response time, which nukes in Eastern Europe reduces to a minute or two. This was why the INF treaty was so important in the 80's. Sustained industrial capacity is irrelevant for a nuclear war. That's the crux of his analysis, and that's why nukes in Eastern Europe are so dangerous. The time and margin of error for a counterstrike is reduced to close to zero. We've been on the edge of nuclear war several times. It didn't happen because there was time for a human being to think about it. That's being erased.