WW3 in the 70s?
- Thread starter Joseph Weaver
- Start date
Is Australia part of the Commonwealth?
Does it have major port cities that could be used to move men and material?
Are their resources of strategic worth in Australia that should be denied anyone?
All its going to take is one of the Pacific fleets Delta's or Yankee's getting close enough and lobbing some missiles. Australia would be hit. Not as bad as say Western Europe but you'd get some buckets of sunshine dropped on you, like 2 or 3 at a guess (Canberra, Sydney being targets at a guess.)
As for being wasted, its not wasted if it denies it to an enemy. Thats why in a full, use it or lose it exchange, the Middle East would get flattened too. And probably China as well as India/Pakistan, Hong Kong, Singapore, Korea (North and South) etc etc etc, basically, if an enemy has something that could aid them in a big strategic way, its probably got an SSBN dialed in on it with a few missiles. And sure they're old missiles, inaccurate etc.Accuracy's not really an issue when you're talking in the megaton.
You may think you're too far away, not to an SSBN you're not. the Soviets usually had Yankee class subs off the East and Western Seaboard (along with a US Sub following them in most cases) and they have enough to also put them off the coast of Australia or close enough at least to hit Australia.
Last edited:
Australia and New Zealand are assuming they are untouched, going to have rising opprtunities to lead what is left of the democratic world.
Tell that to the Israelis in '73. Everyone, especially NATO took notice of the effectiveness of low level Soviet style defenses after that. If NATO had had persisted with their planned mission profiles the losses would have been horrendous.
Don't have to go nuclear. Chemical weapons and conventional warheads will do a lot of damage. Airbases are big fat fixed targets. We were not prepared for chemical weapons in that era. I know. I was there, responding to chemical attacks was part of my assigned duties from 77-82. We were not prepared to fight in a chemical environment.
Australia was the home of the British nuclear test site. There were dockyards that would have been 'ports of refuge' for any surviving allied naval forces. These by themselves would have been enough to put them on someone's target list. Then there are the EMP effects to be considered.
What?
The 1970s is well after the Sino-Soviet split exploded into the open and made everyone aware of it. The two had just been shooting at each other in 1969, after all. If China isn't a neutral in the war, it's far more likely to be in the west's corner at this point in the world than the Soviet one.
Though if it does wind-up a neutral and the balloon goes up, it's in the lead to emerge in the post-war world as the leading power assuming the chips fall the right way and we don't get any outlier scenarios.
Do you think soviet low level defenses Would still would’ve caused a problem for NATO later in the decade ?
I can’t see the Chinese joining forces with the US. Especially if Mao is in charge - at most they remain neutral, which, the more I think about it, looks more and more likely no matter what part of the 70s we’re talking here.
I do think a war would force China’s hand in some way, especially if there’s conflict on the Korean Peninsula. As such, if the Soviets and Chinese are on the same side…well, it’s an alliance of convenience and necessity moreso than genuine fondness for one another. Of course, stranger alliances have formed, case in point the Soviets themselves aligning with the Wallies to stop the Nazis.
Mao would likely stay as neutral as possible, but Deng will do what he has to. I think “what he has to” will depend a lot on external forces.
In a full use it or lose it because EVERYTHING is flying scenario, China's going to get hit. Either by the USSR or US or both. China will be hit. You can't re-dial nukes easily, especially back then. If a missiles aimed at Nanjing, then its going to go to Nanjing as you're not going to re-program it to hit somewhere else quickly.
Last edited:
I have studied Nuclear Strategy at a post-grad level. In one seminar, we had Professor Des Ball give us a talk on the subject. He had been just sucked into the Pentagon war fighting programme. He stated one the information at his disposal, that it was unlikely for Australia to be considered much of a target for the Soviets for the reasons I gave. The Pacific Fleet would be too busy in a general exchange to bother striking Australia, our cities were too distant from each other and our natural resources too diffuse to represent much of a target. The Soviets would be striking at targets far more valuable to them in a exchange - the US and Europe. Their systems were such that approximately a third or more were unreliable and prone to failure.
Australia was, in the 1970s, quite self-reliant in most things, except electronics. We used to manufacture our own cars, trucks, etc. We grew our own food and were quite able to feed ourselves and a large slice of the world.
Australia had one naval dockyard in the 1970s - Cockatoo dockyard, in Sydney. Melbourne, Brisbane, Perth had large commercial ports. All are over a thousand kilometres apart. Do you really think the Soviets could afford the number of nuclear warheads to eliminate Australia?
Of course, as you know, it wasn't the warheads, it was the delivery systems. Not enough of those with the range to hit Australia to spare on targets in this country. They'd be needed for the powers that actually concerned the Soviets.
ferdi254
Banned
Rickshaw you were assembling all those things. Very important parts came from imports.
Also the machinery to produce all those things plus the equipment in power plants was produced outside. Neither did Australia have the engineers for heavy maintenance (they were regularly flown in) nor the ability to manufacture spares.
Up until today actually very few countries are independent when it comes to manufacturing and Australia is not on this short list.
Machines to make machines to produce tools and parts to make machines that actually produce goods/chemicals/electricity are not produced in Australia so it will be living on borrowed time.
Plus the real low population density and the large distances between the big cities will hurt big time.
Also the machinery to produce all those things plus the equipment in power plants was produced outside. Neither did Australia have the engineers for heavy maintenance (they were regularly flown in) nor the ability to manufacture spares.
Up until today actually very few countries are independent when it comes to manufacturing and Australia is not on this short list.
Machines to make machines to produce tools and parts to make machines that actually produce goods/chemicals/electricity are not produced in Australia so it will be living on borrowed time.
Plus the real low population density and the large distances between the big cities will hurt big time.
It is obvious you know very little about Australia in the 1970s. We had a vigorous manufacturing industry in the country. We built most things, ourselves. We had three car manufacturing companies. We had numerous truck manufacturing and other heavy industries. We made most things ourselves, protected by high tariff barriers which made it that we made most things, except electronics in Australia. The Government did not dismantle the tariff barriers until the mid-1980s. We were primary a primary production country concentrating on agriculture and mining - we grew most things ourselves and mined many minerals ourselves. We did not "Fly-in" many technicians. Today, our economy is much worse off but in the 1970s we made most of our own stuff.
ferdi254
Banned
Rickshaw there are until today 4 companies worldwide that produce assembly lines for cars and trucks.
There are today worldwide 7 companies that can produce electricity plants (in the 70s it was 4)
The list goes on. Alone Germany has today 20 companies that hardly have any competition in tool machines or other equipment.
Australia was good at the endlevel of production but the basics were and are sitting in Europe, the USA, Japan and nowadays partly in China.
There are today worldwide 7 companies that can produce electricity plants (in the 70s it was 4)
The list goes on. Alone Germany has today 20 companies that hardly have any competition in tool machines or other equipment.
Australia was good at the endlevel of production but the basics were and are sitting in Europe, the USA, Japan and nowadays partly in China.
In 1973 (to pick a date) the US and NATO had two Lance battalions, around a thousand Honest John rockets, Corporal SRBMs, Polaris dedicated to the theatre nuclear role, several hundred nuclear artillery shells, Mace cruise missiles, Sergeant IRBMs and more.