Soviet Nuclear Targets - New Zealand

Status
Not open for further replies.
The Golf class, if deployed at all, would probably be deployed for Europe or Northeast Asia. The range and the short SLBM range would be of less hindrance there.

Why deploy obsolete assets to dangerous waters when one re-targeted modern SLBM from a Delta or Typhoon safely deployed in the Barnets "Bastion" can do the same task?

That's why you're probably going to use Yankees and keep the top line in the bastions. With only 3000km range missles, they are useless in the bastions since they have to get fairly close to their targets. It's a severe risk to send them off the coast of North America due to the ASW coverage. So sending a few south to the Indian and South Pacific Oceans gives you target coverage for those out of the way spots without wasting more important ICBMs and SLBMs; a surprise direction of attack and quite a bit less worries for ASW coverage. Add in that most of the targets are "need to be hit soon" and not "need to be hit now" they could take their time to be cautious to get in position and then volley.
 
Shelly Bay was actually RNZAF, despite the location. It started off as Navy, but was handed over in 1946 and used for accomodation and admin, and was decommissioned in 1995 (total aside, my parents met there and I remember going to Christmas parties in the mess there in the early 80's :)).

Besides that there is/was the Freyberg Building on Aitken St, and Defence House ("Disneyland" to many who worked there), again neither of which are still occupied by Defence. Post war as far as I can recall there haven't been been any Navy facilities in Wellington besides HMNZS Olphert on the corner of Buckle and Taranaki streets, and that was naval reserve. HMNZS Wakakura (also volunteer reserve) was based in Wellington from 1985.


Shelly Bay was an RNZAF flying boat base (sunderland's, etc) then evolved into a mainly training establishment/air force presence in the capital.

Also, didn't the Soviets issue a press release stating that, because of our enlightened nuclear policy and the American reaction to it, we were no longer targeted by Soviet missiles? Paraphrasing and allowing for time-\ fogged memories, of course.
 
"Also, didn't the Soviets issue a press release stating that, because of our enlightened nuclear policy and the American reaction to it, we were no longer targeted by Soviet missiles?"

That's what we loved about the USSR, they always told the truth! They ran an oppressive militaristic machine and the world's largest spy network but golly they were as honest as Boy Scouts. For 40 years they were the great threat to the democratic world but at least we could trust their press releases.

In all seriousness, I don't think nuclear powers are in the habit of notifying the rest of the world who they do and don't have on their target lists. Even if they for some reason did, a target list can be quickly changed.
 
In all seriousness, I don't think nuclear powers are in the habit of notifying the rest of the world who they do and don't have on their target lists. Even if they for some reason did, a target list can be quickly changed.

Well, there would be one sure way to find out...
 
That's why you're probably going to use Yankees and keep the top line in the bastions. With only 3000km range missles, they are useless in the bastions since they have to get fairly close to their targets. It's a severe risk to send them off the coast of North America due to the ASW coverage. So sending a few south to the Indian and South Pacific Oceans gives you target coverage for those out of the way spots without wasting more important ICBMs and SLBMs; a surprise direction of attack and quite a bit less worries for ASW coverage. Add in that most of the targets are "need to be hit soon" and not "need to be hit now" they could take their time to be cautious to get in position and then volley.

The Soviets also had an icbm based fractional orbital bombardment system (aka FOBS) that could strike targets any where in the world that I believe was not phased out due to the salt treaty until 1983 or so. In this time line they might have been avaliable.

My understanding was that the accuracy of the system was not very great and once the us deployed early warning satellites that could detect it being launched it wasn't of much use in a nuclear exchange. Using them to target out of the way capitalist bastions such as New Zealand might have been part of it's role prior to phase out ?

IMHO the Soviets would have targeted a first world capitalist nation (such as New Zealand) with strong ties to the US, UK, Canada and Australia during a nuclear exchange.
 
Shelly Bay was an RNZAF flying boat base (sunderland's, etc) then evolved into a mainly training establishment/air force presence in the capital.

Also, didn't the Soviets issue a press release stating that, because of our enlightened nuclear policy and the American reaction to it, we were no longer targeted by Soviet missiles? Paraphrasing and allowing for time-\ fogged memories, of course.


Sunderlands might have dropped in from time to time, but were never based there, and it's not really set up for that when you compare it to somewhere like Hobsonville. Postwar RNZAF Sunderlands were either based at Hobsonville or Lacaula Bay in Fiji, and would moor in Evans Bay when operating a civil service from Wellington to the Chatham Islands.

Kim Philby apparently came up with the statement that we were no longer targeted, but he likely wouldn't be in a position to know.
 
Last edited:
The Soviets also had an icbm based fractional orbital bombardment system (aka FOBS) that could strike targets any where in the world that I believe was not phased out due to the salt treaty until 1983 or so. In this time line they might have been avaliable.

My understanding was that the accuracy of the system was not very great and once the us deployed early warning satellites that could detect it being launched it wasn't of much use in a nuclear exchange. Using them to target out of the way capitalist bastions such as New Zealand might have been part of it's role prior to phase out ?

IMHO the Soviets would have targeted a first world capitalist nation (such as New Zealand) with strong ties to the US, UK, Canada and Australia during a nuclear exchange.

Well, again, this is one of those 'yes they could, but would they?' questions.

I don't know much (anything?) about FOBS other than what is here and here. Neither of those sources say much about how many warheads were carried nor how many FOBS systems were available. IMHO this sounds pretty 'cutting edge'. The Wiki site seems to indicate that it was designed to counter the US early warning systems by attacking from the south pole, and yes, that puts NZ in it's flight path (well, everywhere on the planet was on its flight path) but the point being that if it was used, it was designed to be a sneaky way of attacking the USA. If you've got that kind of asset you're not going to use it to attack a country which (let's face it) is zero threat to the USSR what-so-ever.

Now, I want to be clear here. I have the utmost respect for the NZ military. I've served with some who were in their army and they are good soldiers (and I'm sure the other services are just as good too) but they are just totally unthreatening to the USSR.

Consider this - the USSR and the USA destroy each other with MAD. We end up in some kind of post-nuclear war world where NZ it totally untouched except for fallout (oh joy) and the potential (seems to be less believed these days) of nuclear winter (oh, even more joy). In this TL is NZ really going to use their military to invade the USSR? Is there a higher risk that the nukes used to eliminate this 'threat' are better used on higher threats in Europe, North America, and Asia?

So, I'm pretty sure that they aren't going to use them as a primary strike against a hostile military... and this would be mostly true of the Australian military as well (which, btw is 6.5 times the size of the NZ Military). What other reason have the USSR to attack NZ as opposed to deploying assets to take out a similar threat as Norfolk Island or Madagascar?

Well, they do have a few ELINT facilities that are a part of AUSCANNZUKUS. This could be hit, true, but most likely it would be more efficient to take it out of action through an EMP weapon, and I'm pretty sure there would be plenty of EMP going on. So really (and this is of course only my opinion) the only threat to the USSR war effort would be that facility which may be a target.

My reasons for thinking it may not be is that it's a part of an overall network. That network would be hit very hard, but not all sites need to be totally obliterated to stop the network from working (although they might for redundancy reasons).

IF FOBS had any left over warheads (and as I said I have no information) then yes it's a possibility. Bombers are another possibility. ICBM's a remote possibility and I'd say SLBM's remote to nil.
 
Well, again, this is one of those 'yes they could, but would they?' questions.

I don't know much (anything?) about FOBS other than what is here and here. Neither of those sources say much about how many warheads were carried nor how many FOBS systems were available. IMHO this sounds pretty 'cutting edge'. The Wiki site seems to indicate that it was designed to counter the US early warning systems by attacking from the south pole, and yes, that puts NZ in it's flight path (well, everywhere on the planet was on its flight path) but the point being that if it was used, it was designed to be a sneaky way of attacking the USA. If you've got that kind of asset you're not going to use it to attack a country which (let's face it) is zero threat to the USSR what-so-ever.

Now, I want to be clear here. I have the utmost respect for the NZ military. I've served with some who were in their army and they are good soldiers (and I'm sure the other services are just as good too) but they are just totally unthreatening to the USSR.

Consider this - the USSR and the USA destroy each other with MAD. We end up in some kind of post-nuclear war world where NZ it totally untouched except for fallout (oh joy) and the potential (seems to be less believed these days) of nuclear winter (oh, even more joy). In this TL is NZ really going to use their military to invade the USSR? Is there a higher risk that the nukes used to eliminate this 'threat' are better used on higher threats in Europe, North America, and Asia?

So, I'm pretty sure that they aren't going to use them as a primary strike against a hostile military... and this would be mostly true of the Australian military as well (which, btw is 6.5 times the size of the NZ Military). What other reason have the USSR to attack NZ as opposed to deploying assets to take out a similar threat as Norfolk Island or Madagascar?

Well, they do have a few ELINT facilities that are a part of AUSCANNZUKUS. This could be hit, true, but most likely it would be more efficient to take it out of action through an EMP weapon, and I'm pretty sure there would be plenty of EMP going on. So really (and this is of course only my opinion) the only threat to the USSR war effort would be that facility which may be a target.

My reasons for thinking it may not be is that it's a part of an overall network. That network would be hit very hard, but not all sites need to be totally obliterated to stop the network from working (although they might for redundancy reasons).

IF FOBS had any left over warheads (and as I said I have no information) then yes it's a possibility. Bombers are another possibility. ICBM's a remote possibility and I'd say SLBM's remote to nil.

Yep good points but IMHO I can't see the Soviets leaving an intact western aligned (or even western leaning) first world nation that could conceviably assist other western powers with their recoveries. New Zealand is to imbedded in the western capitalist system to be left alone IMHO.

By the 1980's the Soviet FOBS systems were well past their prime and using a few of them of them to target New Zealand might have made some sense to the soviet planners. All of this is just speculation on my part.
 
Yep good points but IMHO I can't see the Soviets leaving an intact western aligned (or even western leaning) first world nation that could conceviably assist other western powers with their recoveries. New Zealand is to imbedded in the western capitalist system to be left alone IMHO.

By the 1980's the Soviet FOBS systems were well past their prime and using a few of them of them to target New Zealand might have made some sense to the soviet planners. All of this is just speculation on my part.

Good points, and as I said in an earlier post, only one way to be sure :)

Fortunately we'll never find out.
 
I have Read most of the discussion on this subject of New Zealand being a target of Russan Nuclair Atack, the threat was to warn the world that Russan was deadly serious over the Cuban crises and wanted to prove to the Americans don't mess with us, this report was reported in Otago Daily Times New Zealand, the threat was from the late 50s to 1970, New Zealand did not matter to the Russians because we were at the bottom of the World, This was only found out when USSR was breaking up and Records were opening up to the world and there was a lot of interest in what they held in their Archives. Ps they only needed a Submarine to do the job. Nairb .
 
Someone needs to find out what was the maximum range of Soviet SLBM's in February 1984. I'm not sure if Soviet subs operating primarily in the Sea of Okhotsk have the missiles that could reach Christchurch, New Zealand at the time.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top