Documents / FOIA release

Warsaw Pact Forces opposite NATO, NIE 11-14-79, Volume II, the Estimate, CIA/NFAC, 31 January 1979

Central Intelligence Agency · 201 pages · text from the file's own layer

This is Volume II of National Intelligence Estimate 11-14-79, Warsaw Pact Forces Opposite NATO, issued by the Director of Central Intelligence and dated January 1979. The National Foreign Intelligence Board concurred with it. It was the first comprehensive estimate of Pact forces facing NATO since 1971. It covers Pact doctrine, the ground, air, naval, nuclear and chemical forces, command and control, and campaign plans for war in Europe. It judges that Central Europe would be the decisive arena, and it lists Pact weaknesses in pilot training and antisubmarine warfare. The document contains no UFO material.

  • p. 25 …and subsidiary systems such as command and control, radioelectronic combat (REC), and reconnais- sance data link…
  • p. 31 …Some of these submarines might alternatively have missions of minelaying near NATO naval bases or patrolling…
  • p. 33 …The Soviet Union views control of its East Euro- preparerd for any mission, froni defending against…
  • p. 42 …The USSR attributes a littoral of Europe have significant capabilities in either broad range of missions…
  • p. 51 …Improved models of the radio-controlled The SA-9 and ZSU-23-4 are probably with…
  • p. 55 …All Pact countries have well-organized mobili- direct control of the VGK to tactical-level missions…
  • p. 58 …These have pervasive control over the soldier's activities and commanders are expected to be closely…
  • p. 59 …Frontal Aviation missions include counterair, ground attack, Warsaw Pact Fixed-Wing Tactical Aircraft reconnaissance, electronic warfare…
  • p. 62 …Pilot Training and Proficienc. 3Y US stand- facilities, hardening command and control facilities, and establishing pipeline…
  • p. 66 …control system which is designed to provide the coordination necessary to conduct close-in missions when…
  • p. 68 major ground formations is used by tactical controllers conventional weapons or to have an operational weap…
  • p. 71 …countries, are tailored primarily for control of guished by missions: antiship strike, reconnaissance those two seas…
  • p. 75 …missions of the Warsaw Pact's general purpose naval forces are to exercise sea control 110…
  • p. 84 …this mission. The combat radii of Soviet ASM-equipped naval Capabilities for Exercising Sea Control in…
  • p. 85 …signed missions; submarines would not neces-" The holders of the second view are the Director, Defense…
  • p. 87 …the Soviets, Poles, and East Germans other missions. Most bombers would be required for have the…
  • p. 118 …would be detached from national control. Re- - The Western TVD. This theater would include, sidual forces…
  • p. 122 …and control functions is central to Soviet control and integration of Pact military operations. Such groups…
  • p. 134 …against HEAT ammunition, the Soviets have incorpo- control and combat support communication links. rated composite or…
  • p. 135 …The Air Operation have been ascertained from classified missions assigned to the NSWP forces are intended…
  • p. 141 …Pact air forces to perform their primary missions in poor flying weather. ould be the preferred…
  • p. 143 …Others believe that no judgment with flying combat missions at low altitudes or over long any…
  • p. 158 …The establishment of control of the Norwegian drastically the likelihood of a major, preemptive at- and…
  • p. 163 …aircraft carrier probably would be unable secondary mission of antiship attack. The Kiev prob- to cope…
  • p. 175 …be building a mand and control and electronic warfare missions. force capable of siniultaneously lifting much…
  • p. 176 …The Pact's early warning network is scheduled current roles of sea control in limited areas…
  • p. 178 …We do not know how the Soviets assess the achieving sea control and in providing support…
  • p. 182 …subma- to control Pact forces once they are released from rines with peripheral missions declines, some…
  • p. 186 …Soviet sea control capabilities gravity to require an early Soviet counteraction. The against US carrier and…
Table VI-1
Projected Soviet Peripheral Strike Forces Opposite NATO a
1979, 1983, and 1988
1979 1983 1988
MRBMs and BIBMs
SS-4 Launchers 384 140 0
Silo ....... . ....... 64 56 0
Aboveground 320 84 0
SS-5 Launchers 61 51 0
Silo ...... ..... 27 27 0
Aboveground 34 24 0
SS-20 ........ .... 45-63 171 27
SS-20 Mod 13 . 0 9 171
Bombers of Long Range Aviation
TU-16 Badgers ..... 325 300 250
TU-22 Blinders 155 140 100
Backfires . ... 45 115 160
Ballistic Missile Submarines/Launchers b
SS-N-4 (G-1) 1.......... 1/3 0 0
SS-N -5 (G-Il) ... ........................ 6/18 3/9 0
SS-N -5 (H -I1) ... .... ................... 4/12 0 0
aFor a more detailed treatment of the peripheral strike forces, the implications and possible constraints
of a SALT agreement, and alternative projections of future peripheral strike forces, see NIE 11-6-78, Soviet
Strategic Forces for Peripheral Attack.
b Some of the modern Y-class submarines probably have contingency missions for peripheral strike. As
the number of older ballistic missile submarines with peripheral missions declines, some of their target
coverage may be assumed by modern ballistic missile submarines.
limitation on the rate of Backfire production. If this target coverage may be assumed by modern ballistic.
enters into effect, LRA could have almost 200 Back- missile submarines. The range of the missiles carried
fires in 1988, of which about 160 would be deployed by these modern SSBNs gives them greater targeting
opposite NA'TO. In the near term, we expect Backfires flexibility than the G- or H-classes.
to be deployed primarily with LRA units in the
European USSR, enabling some Badgers, especially Support Systems and Forces
those capable of delivering both bombs and air-to- 101. Command, Control, and Communications.
surface missiles, to be transferred to the Soviet Far We estimate that, currently, about one week would be
East. required before the Pact's wartime communications
99. The number of older ballistic missile subma- links could be established to theater-level headquarters
rincs for peripheral strike probably will decline during and to supporting strategic commands. Communica-
the period of our projections. The Soviets probably tions, between Moscow and the fronts and within the
will continue to convert their G-I submarines to attack fronts, to control combat operations by divisions and
or special-purpose submarines or retire them. We armies could be effectively established within a few
estimate that some of the G-II submarines, which are days. However, the Pact has two programs under
targeted against the peripheral areas, will be in the way-the creation of a centralized command structure
force until the mid-1980s, but the last G-II probably and the establishment of a unified communications
will b~e deactivated before 1988. The future of the system-which, during the period of this Estimate,
H-Il submarine as a ballistic missile system is in doubt could shorten the time required by the Pact to get its
because of the limitations of a prospective SALT command and control system prepared for war. The
agreement. two programs are intended to establish in peacetime
the theater-level (High Command) resources needed
100. As the number of older ballistic missile subma- to control Pact forces once they are released from
rines with peripheral missions declines, some of their national control. We estimate that the centralized
VI-13
Top 5uet1

Not linked to a story yet.

About this file

FOIA release, from the cia-readingroom collection. The PDF is mirrored here; the original link is above. 201 pages are in the text index: search them above, or from the library's search.