Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

RuAF News and development Thread part 15

Collapse
X
Collapse
Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 3 (0 members and 3 guests)
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts
  • TR1
    TR1
    http://tiny.cc/tp8kd
    • Oct 2010
    • 9826

    TR1-

    Stop moving the goal posts. You obviously are trying to miscount by ignoring the ships using S-300 missiles. Like I acknowledged, the ground radars are different and the navy uses fewer overall systems to search, track, and direct them. But it doesn't mean the missiles didn't get used across the fleet. And you've cherry-picked which missiles to include. This isn't the only forum that has covered this topic. Please don't create an unnecessary argument over semantics.
    No, I pointed out to the ship, the vessels that carry S-300 in the VMF. You can prove I am miscounting anything if you are so inclined.

    I also was very careful in regards to the missiles the use, as it is the key point of the discussion- they have not made attempts to field a naval SAM that can reach nearly as high as SM3 or SM6 can.

    30km altitude vs 100km+ is not "semantics".

    I see no way that the US side, which has responded to a whole host of threats that do not originate from Russia
    You could argue that by responding to these primary threats, the US has created a serious threat from Russia to both its Europe assets (via INF heading towards death, which is related to ABM treaty pullout) as well as its overall security picture (through destabilizing weaponry like Status-6). DoD will be forced to reply to these security conditions, and although Russia hardly has the funds to match the investment in offensive weaponry, it also can get by by spending on far less than the adequate defenses needed.

    and who knows, prehaps Russia has objections to this broader inclusion as well.
    Part of Russia's contention with INF is the Chinese arsenal on its border, so I doubt that.
    sigpic

    Comment

    • TR1
      TR1
      http://tiny.cc/tp8kd
      • Oct 2010
      • 9826

      On the subject of nukes, first carriers of Avangard HGV will be the ~30 or so UR-100N UTTH rockets that have been stored since being handed over by Ukraine in the 2000s for debt.

      http://tass.ru/armiya-i-opk/5047200
      sigpic

      Comment

      • JSR
        JSR
        Rank 5 Registered User
        • Aug 2011
        • 4982

        I would say Russian military spending is stretched to the brink right now. Only China can afford an arms race with the US.
        let see China can repeat what Russia did with 40,000 sorties in Middleast and that was mostly done with technology and equipment manufactured in 1970-80s. now the modern equipment is entering Russia. it will have big impact. I don't think China has test fired that many long range cruise missiles.
        neither China or US can afford arms race. both are polluting environment so much that all the money will go to expensive health care. US need external human resources and components due dysfunctional education that is creating trade deficits/inflation. China need to steal or import high end stuff.. I don't see how they can compete with Russia. Russia nuclear arsenal is modern than both. it has titanium valley and factories located in low cost regions.

        Comment

        • stealthflanker
          Rank 5 Registered User
          • Sep 2015
          • 1027

          There is a good book on Russian SAM titled "SAM's of the PVO's" By Boris Bunkin, that details many things, perhaps people interested in Russian SAM's can dig there for service record and their respective test results.

          Comment

          • St. John
            Rank 4 Registered User
            • Jan 2018
            • 568

            let see China can repeat what Russia did with 40,000 sorties in Middleast and that was mostly done with technology and equipment manufactured in 1970-80s. now the modern equipment is entering Russia. it will have big impact. I don't think China has test fired that many long range cruise missiles.
            neither China or US can afford arms race. both are polluting environment so much that all the money will go to expensive health care. US need external human resources and components due dysfunctional education that is creating trade deficits/inflation. China need to steal or import high end stuff.. I don't see how they can compete with Russia. Russia nuclear arsenal is modern than both. it has titanium valley and factories located in low cost regions.
            You are right that China copies a lot, I said they were the only ones who could afford it. Right now the US GDP is outgrowing debt, and only a small increase in defence spending of 0.5% GDP would amount to $100bn, which is spent on SDI, would go a long way.

            Comment

            • sepheronx
              Senior Member
              • Jun 2015
              • 320

              No it isn't. uS debt is now 21T over GDP of 19T (yeah right). That's also not including liabilities.

              Comment

              • FBW
                FBW
                Rank 5 Registered User
                • Dec 2011
                • 3294

                No it isn't. uS debt is now 21T over GDP of 19T (yeah right). That's also not including liabilities.
                Why are we on this topic? Does anyone have enough sense to avoid being dragged into this JSR level discourse (I'll give St. John the benefit of the doubt he's relatively new, perhaps didn't know). Can we keep it relatively aviation related?

                And while I realize that US debt is a popular topic in Russian media and forums, it is obvious most of the discourse borders on fanciful daydreams of a coming calamity based on simplistic understanding.

                No offense meant directly toward you sepheronx, I know you didn't start this digression,
                Last edited by FBW; 21st March 2018, 16:05.

                Comment

                • Marcellogo
                  Rank 5 Registered User
                  • Jun 2014
                  • 1840

                  Yes, also because of the six new systems presented by Putin the first of march just one, the Khinzal, is aviation related.
                  Other two are pertinence of strategic rocket forces, one is navy, one is a land/sea launched cruise missile and the last is an AD laser.
                  Last edited by Marcellogo; 21st March 2018, 20:24.

                  Comment

                  • St. John
                    Rank 4 Registered User
                    • Jan 2018
                    • 568

                    No it isn't. uS debt is now 21T over GDP of 19T (yeah right). That's also not including liabilities.
                    Yes but the GDP is growing faster than the debt, i.e. the debt as % of GDP is reducing.

                    Comment

                    • TR1
                      TR1
                      http://tiny.cc/tp8kd
                      • Oct 2010
                      • 9826

                      Look just do everyone a favor and don't respond to JSR's insanity.
                      sigpic

                      Comment

                      • haavarla
                        Rank 5 Registered User
                        • Dec 2008
                        • 6715

                        Found a good readup in this link about ABM, INF and all the fuzz debated here;

                        https://youtu.be/kqD8lIdIMRo
                        Thanks

                        Comment

                        • panzerfeist1
                          Rank 6 Registered User
                          • Feb 2018
                          • 415

                          http://www.businessinsider.com/us-ch...weapons-2018-3 US General Hyten says no defense against it. " When asked by Republican Senator Jim Inhofe, the committee chairman, what kind of defenses the US had against such weapons, the general responded, "our defense is our deterrent capability."
                          "We don't have any defense that could deny the employment of such a weapon against us," Hyten said."

                          So the size and switching trajectory tech on these missiles really make that much of a difference?

                          There is one more thing that is confusing me here and its people calling the Kinzhal an Iskander-M. Google images show me they look different or am I just looking at the wrong pictures. Also the altitude of the iskander-M is 6-50kms while the altitude for Kinzhal if air launched flies at a very high altitude. So for those calling the Kinzhal an Iskander missile what Iskander variant are you trying to compare this missile to? I believe there were people in this forum and other websites making these comparisons. I just want to know what iskander variant do they mean this missile is comparable to?
                          I thought the fall of western civilization was a tragedy, now I realize it's a comedy.

                          Comment

                          • MadRat
                            Rank 5 Registered User
                            • Aug 2006
                            • 5032

                            TR1-

                            The moving the goal posts comment went right over your head. We talked about Russian navy ships deploying S-300 and eventually fitting S-400 somehow to shooting down or at least reaching targets at an altitude of 100 km. The sad thing is you redefined the question before the answer. S-300F was actively used on no less than seven Soviet-built missile cruisers. Never mind initial testing on a third class proved it would work... I'm not sure why you engaged me in this way, but it wasn't necessary to carry on. I mean, seriously, I'm the first guy to point out the ineffectiveness of using ABM technology as policy.
                            Go Huskers!

                            Comment

                            • St. John
                              Rank 4 Registered User
                              • Jan 2018
                              • 568

                              The Kinzhal can only be a ballistic missile to attain that range. The Kh-32 has a range of only 1,000km flying at high altitude and that is huge relative to Kinzhal.

                              Comment

                              • JSR
                                JSR
                                Rank 5 Registered User
                                • Aug 2011
                                • 4982

                                You are right that China copies a lot, I said they were the only ones who could afford it. Right now the US GDP is outgrowing debt, and only a small increase in defence spending of 0.5% GDP would amount to $100bn, which is spent on SDI, would go a long way.
                                increasing GDP which itself debt based cannot solve problem in quality / organization of scientist and skilled labor. the deficiency in it is increasing costs and imports.
                                it is high quality of science that is so ahead of time and is attracting free money to built factories without hyping it like Gigafactory. You will see the difference once the arms progress. They wont call S350/BUKM3/PantsirSM/TORM2 widely name but functionality it is the same to protect against projectiles.
                                http://en.misis.ru/university/news/s.../2017-04/4621/
                                In Russia, the production of lithium and its compounds has been started based on a developed and cheap technology.
                                http://www.liotech.ru/newsen_1206_350
                                Dec 8 2011
                                The worlds largest plant producing high capacity lithium-ion batteries has been launched in Novosibirsk region

                                Comment

                                • TR1
                                  TR1
                                  http://tiny.cc/tp8kd
                                  • Oct 2010
                                  • 9826

                                  We talked about Russian navy ships deploying S-300 and eventually fitting S-400 somehow to shooting down or at least reaching targets at an altitude of 100 km.
                                  The discussion (with other members included) was about Aegis and its overall ABM capabilities, and how Russia's naval ABM force stacks up. Well, it doesn't. Not in missile capability, not in AD systems deployed. Also, no S-400 deployed or planned .

                                  I'm not sure why you engaged me in this way, but it wasn't necessary to carry on
                                  Forums are for discussing things, and I saw incorrect assertions re. Russian navy AD. Not persona.

                                  I mean, seriously, I'm the first guy to point out the ineffectiveness of using ABM technology as policy.
                                  That I can agree on.
                                  sigpic

                                  Comment

                                  • MadRat
                                    Rank 5 Registered User
                                    • Aug 2006
                                    • 5032

                                    That's just the point in my prior post, you called me out for being wrong when specifically everything I posted was factual. I don't need to rehash all the points. It would have been much easier just to acknowledge your error and move on. I get the impression you're not up to the task. But that's cool.
                                    Go Huskers!

                                    Comment

                                    • TR1
                                      TR1
                                      http://tiny.cc/tp8kd
                                      • Oct 2010
                                      • 9826

                                      You claimed s-400 was deployed navally. That is, 100% factually wrong. S-300f and fm are not the S-400. You are welcome for the correction.
                                      sigpic

                                      Comment

                                      • MadRat
                                        Rank 5 Registered User
                                        • Aug 2006
                                        • 5032

                                        But that's not technically factual now is it. S-400 missiles have been integrated. There is no naval S-300 system. There is no naval S-400 system. But missiles from both systems have made it to navy projects. Real life operational projects. 9M96E and 96M100 are used from the lower end of the S-400 system, which you want to claim are strictly tied to the S-350 system. The navy doesn't use the 48N6 nor the nonexistent 40N6. They have also tested and likely deploy 9M96E2. Yes, these are all common to both S-350 and S-400. The fact is the S-350 came afterwards as an interim export option for countries not considered for the 48N6 and the associated radar technology. But news spoiler, the Russian navy doesn't use any of the radars from S-300, S-350, or S-400 systems. They do however, use missiles from said systems so everything I stated was factual. But that's cool, man. Arguing with someone that moves the goal posts is unpleasant. So, peace out.
                                        Last edited by MadRat; 23rd March 2018, 00:13.
                                        Go Huskers!

                                        Comment

                                        • TR1
                                          TR1
                                          http://tiny.cc/tp8kd
                                          • Oct 2010
                                          • 9826

                                          Facepalm.

                                          S-400 missiles have been integrated.
                                          No, they have not. At best S-300PMU2 missiles have been integrated, and only on the S-300FM of the Peter the Great. 48N6 is NOT an S-400 missile. It was introduced in ~1990!

                                          There is no naval S-300 system.
                                          The S-300F and S-300FM (Rif and Rif-M) don't exist?

                                          But missiles from both systems have made it to navy projects.
                                          No, the 48N6 from the S-300PMU made it to the S-300F, and later variants of the missile have made it to the S-300FM.

                                          9M96E and 96M100 are used from the lower end of the S-400 system
                                          No. 9M96 has been shown in arms expos tied to S-300 tubes, but has never been bought or deployed as such. 9m96 in naval service is PURELY for the Redut-Poliment system, as on the 20380 corvettes and 22350 frigates.
                                          It is NOT used on the ships that have S-300F/FM systems. In fact their tubes are incomparable to date.

                                          which you want to claim are strictly tied to the S-350 system.
                                          I made no claims about the S-350, but to date, for land use, yes it seems like 9M96 is only to be used on the S-350. However the S-350 is still not in service, nor is the 9M96 seen on ANY Russian land-based SAM batteries, so live and see I guess.

                                          The navy doesn't use the 48N6 nor the nonexistent 40N6.
                                          Derp. Navy VERY MUCH uses 48N6- on the Peter the Great, and the Nakhimov will get the 48N6DMK, internal documents have explicitly stated so!

                                          They have also tested and likely deploy 9M96E2
                                          First of all- why would the Russian Navy use the EXPORT 9M96E2? And second, neither the 1164 nor the 1144 cruisers use the missile, and that is a fact.
                                          sigpic

                                          Comment

                                          Unconfigured Ad Widget

                                          Collapse

                                           

                                          Working...
                                          X