WI: Solar Flare starts WWIII

[Kaiser Tito]

What would've happened if the 1967 solar flare caused the Soviets to panic and lob their nukes at the US forcing NATO to retaliate? Was the world arsenal at the time large enough to cause total human extinction or is it more like the Cuban crisis arsenal where we'd still be able to rebuild? Would it be possible for countries to the south to survive like Australia and Mexico? Would the Soviets be able to target every major city in the US or are there any regions that wouldn't be prioritized and survive the ensuing onslaught?

 

[Resurgam]

Two issues after a quick Google-Fu:

| EarthSky

earthsky.org

1) It was the Americans that had problems because of the flare,
2) They figured it out fairly quickly and easily.

The Soviets would likely be able to (and did) the same.

 

[Gillan1220]

What would've happened if the 1967 solar flare caused the Soviets to panic and lob their nukes at us setting of MAD? Was the world arsenal at the time large enough to cause total human extinction or is it more like the Cuban crisis arsenal where we'd still be able to rebuild? Would it be possible for countries to the south to survive like Australia and Mexico? Would the Soviets be able to target every major city in the US or are there any regions that wouldn't be prioritized and survive the ensuing onslaught?

Nuclear arsenal in 1967 according to this paper:

USA	USSR	UK	France	China	Israel
31,225	8,339	380	36	20	unknown

There's a chance to rebuild since ICBMs at this period where at its infancy. The U.S. would be hurt but it could come out in a slightly better shape than the USSR.

The survival of Australia and Mexico is ambigious. The Soviets would have definitely targeted Australia by virtue of being an American ally and while Mexico is not a threat to the Soviets, sparing it would mean the U.S. could utilize its airports and ports to rearm and refuel for its military vehicles. In a nuclear war, there are no neutrals even if a country declares neutrality because it can still offer some use for both sides to retaliate.

MAD was not considered until the 1970s-1980s.

 

[Kaiser Tito]

Two issues after a quick Google-Fu:

| EarthSky

earthsky.org

1) It was the Americans that had problems because of the flare,
2) They figured it out fairly quickly and easily.

The Soviets would likely be able to (and did) the same.

I read a source saying it was the Soviets (an American bias there is a possibility however) though I suppose that who started would be the least of their worries when the nukes start flying.

MAD was not considered until the 1970s-1980s.

I thought we had mad since 1949, my mistake.

 

[Resurgam]

I read a source saying it was the Soviets (an American bias there is a possibility however) though I suppose that who started would be the least of their worries when the nukes start flying.

...but they won't be, that's my point.

 

[marathag]

I thought we had mad since 1949, my mistake.

It was only 'Mutual' after 1968 or so. Before that, it's just the USSR that was assured Destruction once the US fielded large numbers of H-Bombs in 1956

 

[Mad Bad Rabbit]

There was an intense flare in August 1972, that caused Vela satellites to falsely report nuclear flashes, and caused several dozen magnetically-triggered mines to detonate in Haiphong Harbor. Fortunately, USAF and Navy personell correctly interpreted these as effects from the solar storm and not a Soviet attack; and the mines did not blow up any U.S. or Soviet ships.

August 1972 solar storms - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

 

[Gillan1220]

I thought we had mad since 1949, my mistake.

While the first Soviet nuclear test of August 1949 did baffle the West (they thought the USSR was 10 years away from building and/or testing their first nuclear weapon), the U.S. as that period estimated the USSR to only have handful: 1 in 1949, 5 in 1950, 25 in 1951, 50 in 1952, and 120 in 1953. The years between 1949 to 1951 had nuclear war erupted on both sides would mean the U.S. would survive because 25 bombs would mean 25 cities would be gone (assuming the bombs hit target). Bombs too at this period weren't powerful as they would be after the H-Bomb and the introduction of the ICBM with MIRVs. Plus, a 1950s nuclear war would require bombers of both sides (B-29s, B-36s, B-47s for the U.S. and Tu-4s for the USSR) to pass by hostile airspace and risk getting shot down or intercepted.

It was only 'Mutual' after 1968 or so. Before that, it's just the USSR that was assured Destruction once the US fielded large numbers of H-Bombs in 1956

Then came in 1962 with the Cuban Missile Crisis. However, MIRVs weren't deployed or created yet so one missile would correspond to one city.

 

[marathag]

Then came in 1962 with the Cuban Missile Crisis. However, MIRVs weren't deployed or created yet so one missile would correspond to one city.

Even so, a handful of SS-6 on open air pads with a long fueling process, SS-7 similar, with work ongoing to make silos for them.
There's a reason they tried to sneak IRBMs into Cuba.
Even so, say all the Soviets missiles work (unlikely, all early ICBMs were twitchy) and on target(poor guidance) RVs survive reentry, and then the warhead works
Even Early US efforts had trouble with all the above.
But is still maybe a dozen, even two dozen US cities are hit and destroyed, that not the whole country.
Now the Warsaw Pact, USSR and Red China, that would be one huge Charnel House from end to end.

 

[Gillan1220]

Even so, a handful of SS-6 on open air pads with a long fueling process, SS-7 similar, with work ongoing to make silos for them.
There's a reason they tried to sneak IRBMs into Cuba.
Even so, say all the Soviets missiles work (unlikely, all early ICBMs were twitchy) and on target(poor guidance) RVs survive reentry, and then the warhead works
Even Early US efforts had trouble with all the above.
But is still maybe a dozen, even two dozen US cities are hit and destroyed, that not the whole country.
Now the Warsaw Pact, USSR and Red China, that would be one huge Charnel House from end to end.

The situation in 1962 is kindly optimistic in a nuclear war between the U.S. and the USSR. The U.S. is hurt but can recover.

Here's a map I found on the Cuban Missile Crisis:

Every major U.S. city except Portland, Oregon and Seattle, Washington is in range of these Soviet missiles.

Then here is the 1970s nuclear map fall out from an old FEMA map.

The CONUS would be engulfed in fall out except strangely for Colorado, Utah, New Mexico, Arizona, Nevada, and Oregon. But I doubt those states would be spared. CO hosts NORAD and NV has Area 51. Those are prime targets for any Soviet nuclear missile.

 

[marathag]

The situation in 1962 is kindly optimistic in a nuclear war between the U.S. and the USSR. The U.S. is hurt but can recover.

Here's a map I found on the Cuban Missile Crisis:

Every major U.S. city except Portland, Oregon and Seattle, Washington is in range of these Soviet missiles.

Then here is the 1970s nuclear map fall out from an old FEMA map.

The CONUS would be engulfed in fall out except strangely for Colorado, Utah, New Mexico, Arizona, Nevada, and Oregon. But I doubt those states would be spared. CO hosts NORAD and NV has Area 51. Those are prime targets for any Soviet nuclear missile.

A lot of that depends on whom you believe on the USSR priority of Counterforce and Countervalue.
In the '80s, they had enough throw weight to do both,as the US did in the 1950s.
In the '60-70s, the Soviets did not.
Would they try to take out hardened missile silos in a first strike that still may have been empty, or just paste US cities, that will always be there, without BMD. Far easier to destroy Countervalue.
So in the 1970s, unlikely to waste nukes in the Titan fields in Kansas, and Minuteman in North Dakota and west.

 

[Gillan1220]

A lot of that depends on whom you believe on the USSR priority of Counterforce and Countervalue.
In the '80s, they had enough throw weight to do both,as the US did in the 1950s.
In the '60-70s, the Soviets did not.
Would they try to take out hardened missile silos in a first strike that still may have been empty, or just paste US cities, that will always be there, without BMD. Far easier to destroy Countervalue.
So in the 1970s, unlikely to waste nukes in the Titan fields in Kansas, and Minuteman in North Dakota and west.

The movie Damnation Alley (1977) depicted how the USSR would attack the continental United States and probably Canada as well.

Notice how the American BMDs only took out 40% of the Soviet nuclear missiles headed towards the CONUS. That still leaves 60% to rake the CONUS with nuclear fall out.

 

[marathag]

Notice how the American BMDs only took out 40% of the Soviet nuclear missiles headed towards the CONUS. That still leaves 60% to rake the CONUS with nuclear fall out.

For a very short time before the House Democrats killed it, the US did have working BMD

Spoiler

But it was to protect a missile field, not a City, like the Soviets did(and Russians still do) to protect the Moscow Metro Area per the Treaty in place