Udaloy and Sovremennyy destroyers

kvs wrote:The theme that comes out of all these navy threads is that Russia "can't build ships".    This is superficial analysis at best, and BS
at worst.   If it was such a high priority to crank out ships like there is no tomorrow, then it would happen.   There are enough
qualified people and money to both build the ships and the ship yards.   That there is no indication of any such drive over the last 20 years
says everything that needs to be known.   Ship building ain't a priority and any manpower shortage could have been addressed in 20 years.  
There is a reason for this and that is because we live in the ICBM era and not 1930.    Aside from policing operations like Syria, Russia has
no immediate need for dozens of new ships and fleets sailing every sea 24/7.

"ICMB era"? That era started in the 1950s and and the soviet was building large amount of ships all the way up to the late 80s. The only reason they stoped was becouse of the huge economical problem that followed the collapse of the Soviet union.

walle83 wrote:

kvs wrote:The theme that comes out of all these navy threads is that Russia "can't build ships".    This is superficial analysis at best, and BS
at worst.   If it was such a high priority to crank out ships like there is no tomorrow, then it would happen.   There are enough
qualified people and money to both build the ships and the ship yards.   That there is no indication of any such drive over the last 20 years
says everything that needs to be known.   Ship building ain't a priority and any manpower shortage could have been addressed in 20 years.  
There is a reason for this and that is because we live in the ICBM era and not 1930.    Aside from policing operations like Syria, Russia has
no immediate need for dozens of new ships and fleets sailing every sea 24/7.

"ICMB era"? That era started in the 1950s and and the soviet was building large amount of ships all the way up to the late 80s. The only reason they stoped was becouse of the huge economical problem that followed the collapse of the Soviet union.

BS. The ICBM era started after 1957 and the R7 which launched Sputnik. The US got its ICBMs by 1960. And your "proof" is basically all
correlation. The people making the decisions to build a big navy were engaged in fossil thinking since they grew up and developed their careers
before the ICBM era. That the USSR engaged in such a program does not prove your point. You are also engaged in the usual context free
troll-type posting where you ignore the fact that the Soviet navy was not built up over 14 years but over 30 years. There was no urgent need
in 2000 for Russia to build up its navy. And there is no such need today.

People need to start proving their wild claims about some great utility of ships in any WWIII confrontation and the urgency for Russia to waste
money on them instead of submarines. I see a similar pattern to all the 5th column liberasts pushing all sorts of BS that Russia "must" implement
and thereby f*ck itself over. Thank God nobody in charge is paying attention to this malicious drivel.

kvs wrote:

People need to start proving their wild claims about some great utility of ships in any WWIII confrontation and the urgency for Russia to waste
money on them instead of submarines.

You need a strong surface fleet to protect your submarines and hunt the enemies after a nuclear war.

The-thing-next-door wrote:

kvs wrote:

People need to start proving their wild claims about some great utility of ships in any WWIII confrontation and the urgency for Russia to waste
money on them instead of submarines.

You need a strong surface fleet to protect your submarines and hunt the enemies after a nuclear war.

No you don't

After nuclear war crap like that won't matter

Kvs is right, submarines first, ships with what's left

GarryB wrote:
Since when did pointing out your system of procurement and military production is corrupt to the core become me being a quitter.

I am happy about the situation and think you should continue to ignore the problem... leaches survive best by not killing the host outright... but the chemicals they pump into your blood so you don't feel it seem rather sophisticated... instead of an anti coagulant that keeps the money flowing and an anaesthetic so you don't notice the pain, it seems they have added some oxycotton or LSD or something... you are hooked...

Not sure why you think the system will collapse... the people in the Pentagon don't want it to collapse because that is their future retirement programme... they get to be super rich... and the companies encourage this state of affairs... they get government money thrown at them and the accountability requirements are pathetic... you really can't even call them requirements... more guidelines...

You are equating sometimes possible incompetence and sometime bad design judgements as corruption in what sounded like an absolute tone. Ford is a new class and no one else in the world is building anything close to that size other than commercial vessels but they are much simpler in design. So problems would be inevitable and will be resolved, it does not mean it is total corruption. I am not sure what your day job is but such experiences are very typical in any field when building new and complex systems....same with Zumwalt, may be they thought they had enough next gen tech ready for these kind of lightly armed destroyers compared to established designs but then they realized it is not worth it....I do not know if it is intentional or not or to skim off money but products are delivered and will be used in specialized roles. It is corruption if they went ahead and mass produced many more knowing that this class is not a very efficient one....either way I am sure they experimented lot of new technologies and they will find their place.

It is not upto the pentagon....even a giant will collapse from an unchecked infection. Remember USSR?

Anyway, when you make an example of something....some objectivity helps.

SeigSoloyvov wrote:

Then why did you reply to me....I was clearly talking about those ships. Before insulting someone have the mind to atleast talk about the same topi they are referring to.

Also that ship isn't getting UKSK but you can pretend it is if you want?.

That ship is getting Uran Launchers with KH-35's but hey call someone an idiot when you don't even know what they are putting on the hull, if you need to call someone an idiot look in the mirror.

And yes genius they are gutting the hull to do this, you see those things called holes in the ship?. Geez I wonder why they are there

Not getting UKSK? Who knows, maybe they pulled the #2 turret for no reason...

I see a few hull sections removed so they can replace internal heavy equipment. Its a standard technique and isn't "gutting the hull".

Do you ever get embarrassed when acting like a twat in a public place? Maybe you're de-sensitized to it by now...

PapaDragon wrote:

The-thing-next-door wrote:

kvs wrote:

People need to start proving their wild claims about some great utility of ships in any WWIII confrontation and the urgency for Russia to waste
money on them instead of submarines.

You need a strong surface fleet to protect your submarines and hunt the enemies after a nuclear war.

No you don't

After nuclear war crap like that won't matter

Kvs is right, submarines first, ships with what's left

Threat profiles are not yet analyzed or studied with new gen weapons coming online or on the horizon. Russia is kind of in a "right time right place" before laying down capital ships. I am interested in seeing what our Navy does with such huge fleet, I hope they have decent and cost effective upgrades to address new threats.

Did you hit your head today? because you made a stupid remark just now.

Do you get hit in the head a lot?

Putting UKSK on an old Udaloy is a waste of time and they aren't doing, The Uran launchers are going on the outside, but they still had to dig into the deck some for support reasons.

Where did I say they were putting UKSK launchers in Udaloys?

Talk about putting words in peoples mouths and making shit up... perhaps look in a mirror... or do death dealers like you cast no reflection...

are you suggesting the remark I made to him goes against what I said prior?

I am suggesting that he is talking about something you clearly thought was directed at you, and rather than getting your panties in a bunch over what he or I said, perhaps you need to take his advice and work on your reading comprehension and read what is there instead of what you think is there.

[qote]You are by far one of the worst keyboard warriors, I have seen when it comes to taking someone ones words out of context and attempting to us eit to justify one of your amusingly dumb arguments.[/quote]

But you are suggesting they don't waste time and money upgrading old ships at all and just make new ones... so why are they ignoring your advice?

Maybe they are as stupid as BigGazza and little Garry?

It is a waste to upgrade old ships with UKSK and they aren't doing that, they are however putting some Uran launchers on the ship which requires them to put holes into the vessel to do because they need to go and redo the internals some.

Why is it a waste to upgrade old ships with the new standard weapon systems being fitted to all new ships of the fleet?

That would be far worse if it was UKSK.

It would require rather more extensive changes, but would result in a much more capable vessel... the Udaloy is an anti sub vessel, whose primary weapons... SS-N-14s are fully dual role anti ship and anti sub weapons, but its primary role is anti sub for which its sensors and weapons and even propulsion are optimised for the anti sub role.

Replacing the SS-N-14 with Kh-35s greatly improves its anti ship capability but largely eliminates its anti sub capability and limits it to land attack and anti ship subsonic missiles.

Putting even just one UKSK launch system means it can have any combination of supersonic and subsonic long range land attack, anti ship or anti sub weapons of more than half a dozen types in pretty much any combination they want.

But the real question is... if they are only replacing the SS-N-14 with Kh-35, then why are they taking out the rear 100mm gun turret at the front?

So no Garry nothing I said is out of place or contradicts my statments, I did not bring up The Udaloy, they did I merely responded.

Yet official statements regarding the UKSK-M launch system suggest it can be fitted to new and upgraded vessels from light missile ships up to cruisers...

if you have nothing productive to say but try and add veiled insults and being a manipulative asshat then do not talk to me, kapeesh?.

Might come as a shock, but I prefer not to talk to you, your macho bullshit doesn't impress me. A 10 year old in a third year physics lecture at any university would say he heard nothing useful or productive, does that mean it has no value? Was the lecturer a fool for not realising one member of his audience was not up to speed?

I can give an opinion as I wish, just the same as you can... you are not forced to read my posts, except when I am giving directions as a mod which will generally be in red.

"ICMB era"? That era started in the 1950s and and the soviet was building large amount of ships all the way up to the late 80s. The only reason they stoped was becouse of the huge economical problem that followed the collapse of the Soviet union.

Russia didn't need anything like the force size of the Soviet Union, so she ended up with an enormous armed force and a fraction of the money to fund it, so much of it went to waste, much of it is still being used but is being replaced with newer more useful items. They can't replace it all at once, and wouldn't need to if they could. The Russian navy is not an enormous priority just yet. As their trade ties increase to rather more distant places then its important will increase, but until then it is what it is.

You are equating sometimes possible incompetence and sometime bad design judgements as corruption in what sounded like an absolute tone.

The process has become corrupt, get over it... you can't win a contract if you are honest, so you make shit up.

The F-35 is a case in point the competition aircraft was never a serious competitor and was used to work on stealth features for their other products instead of honest competition...
How can you compete for contracts with someone who outright lies about performance to get the contract... you make even bigger lies yourself and then talk about tranches or block upgrades to fix the shit that doesn't work to begin with... the Microsoft method... by service pack 3 they should have most of the major bugs and problems sorted out right?

Ford is a new class and no one else in the world is building anything close to that size other than commercial vessels but they are much simpler in design. So problems would be inevitable and will be resolved, it does not mean it is total corruption. I am not sure what your day job is but such experiences are very typical in any field when building new and complex systems....same with Zumwalt, may be they thought they had enough next gen tech ready for these kind of lightly armed destroyers compared to established designs but then they realized it is not worth it....I do not know if it is intentional or not or to skim off money but products are delivered and will be used in specialized roles. It is corruption if they went ahead and mass produced many more knowing that this class is not a very efficient one....either way I am sure they experimented lot of new technologies and they will find their place.

If the makers had their way both would be in serial production, yet with huge fundamental flaws in the design... it is up to the pentagon to pull them up on things not working and half the time they are not. I am not denying these are very complex new systems, but is a corvette with the Russian equivalent of AEGIS less complicated for Russia?

The fact that the Pentagon just keeps throwing money at the problems suggests corruption is the real issue... if you want to find corruption... follow the money.

It is not upto the pentagon....even a giant will collapse from an unchecked infection. Remember USSR?

The Pentagon is throwing money at these companies with no accountability, and very few penalties or criticism...

The USSR was killed by an external source... from outside pressure... supporting foreign communist regimes, a war in Afghanistan, and an IADS that could stop western cruise missile attacks and air attacks... something similar to what will happen to the EU now that the INF treaty is gone.

Anyway, when you make an example of something....some objectivity helps.

Well considering there is no will to fix any of this the only way change can happen is when the whole system breaks and needs to be rebuilt... you might even get democracy if you are lucky...

I am interested in seeing what our Navy does with such huge fleet, I hope they have decent and cost effective upgrades to address new threats.

You expect them to change the habits of a lifetime and try to be cost effective?

But then to be fair they did go with the Cobra instead of the Apache as their attack helo, but that was rather more to do with air force vs navy vs army... if the army picks apache then we pick the cobra...

SeigSoloyvov wrote:@GarryB

Did you hit your head today? because you made a stupid remark just now.

Putting UKSK on an old Udaloy is a waste of time and they aren't doing, The Uran launchers are going on the outside, but they still had to dig into the deck some for support reasons.

Also what the flying F are you talking about? are you suggesting the remark I made to him goes against what I said prior?. Are you trying to manipulate my words that bad? grow up.

You are by far one of the worst keyboard warriors, I have seen when it comes to taking someone ones words out of context and attempting to us eit to justify one of your amusingly dumb arguments.

It is a waste to upgrade old ships with UKSK and they aren't doing that, they are however putting some Uran launchers on the ship which requires them to put holes into the vessel to do because they need to go and redo the internals some.

That would be far worse if it was UKSK.

So no Garry nothing I said is out of place or contradicts my statments, I did not bring up The Udaloy, they did I merely responded.

if you have nothing productive to say but try and add veiled insults and being a manipulative asshat then do not talk to me, kapeesh?.

You are pulling stuff out of your  . You have given no logical reason why the udaloy won't have UKSKs beyond "lol udaloy old" and simply for the sake of pessimism and Russia bashing.  Also how is equipping AN ASW SHIP without as many ASW MISSILE  capable cells as possible a waste of time?

UKSK>>>>>Uran in performance and multifunctionality. Every single hull that has them adds far more combat capability than urans. You'll probably say that russia can't afford UKSKs, but you have no funding statistics and installation cost charts for the udaloy modernization project, so Im gonna take your claims with several tonnes of salt.  The Udaloy has enough room for UKSK. UKSK is mature technology. And for the last   time, there is irrefutable proof that UKSKs have been fired from an angled position, and within the laws of physics and guidance software engineering, its missiles can e configured to fired from an angle.

GarryB wrote:
The process has become corrupt, get over it... you can't win a contract if you are honest, so you make shit up.

Ya and you are the judge, jury and executioner....an infection and you are ready to chop of the arm or worse take the head off. Not an interesting way to argue about anything....

The F-35 is a case in point the competition aircraft was never a serious competitor and was used to work on stealth features for their other products instead of honest competition...
How can you compete for contracts with someone who outright lies about performance to get the contract... you make even bigger lies yourself and then talk about tranches or block upgrades to fix the shit that doesn't work to begin with... the Microsoft method... by service pack 3 they should have most of the major bugs and problems sorted out right?

You sound like one of those that always dwell in the past and not realizing the value of the current and not seeing the hope in the future because it is too fucking hard to get through problems....who thinks competition and the best qualities drive everything in the world? Get real man, I already said real world is much more complex than your over simplified idealistic world. I clearly said, if they can not fix problems then they will go the way of the infected giant.

Your view of "no corruption" world does not exist...sorry to break it to you. It is an individual quality, collectively it does not generally abide by that quality. Every project in Russia is generally delayed, so they should all be fired because obviously it is corruption....except sane people does not think like you even if there is corruption.

If the makers had their way both would be in serial production, yet with huge fundamental flaws in the design... it is up to the pentagon to pull them up on things not working and half the time they are not. I am not denying these are very complex new systems, but is a corvette with the Russian equivalent of AEGIS less complicated for Russia?

Somebody did pull the plug on it...you and your over simplification. First problem and then axe it, is that how you work? I hope you do not manage any real people...ford is not a white elephant like you think....you have no evidence. Russia did not get through their problems in one day or one year...What does Russian corvette has to do with it? Completely different scale, different complexity and different system. One is private industry working towards profit and the other is mostly state owned, even then corruption exists there...but then so what?

The fact that the Pentagon just keeps throwing money at the problems suggests corruption is the real issue... if you want to find corruption... follow the money.

Sometimes you do not have a choice, it is just too far along and too much invested. You probably never tried your hand at business either...

The Pentagon is throwing money at these companies with no accountability, and very few penalties or criticism...

I have seen too many common folks that use these words, it is nothing but emotional reaction...these folks generally shy away from accepting real responsibility when offered....when you fight profit wars ofcourse standards become too low and all sorts of unpleasant things start to occur. My comment is specifically towards taht.....if they do not fix these things then the results will be obvious.

The USSR was killed by an external source... from outside pressure... supporting foreign communist regimes, a war in Afghanistan, and an IADS that could stop western cruise missile attacks and air attacks... something similar to what will happen to the EU now that the INF treaty is gone.

It does not matter....it is an idiotic ideology that existed for long that it is surprizing. Misery shared by all only works in desperate times....fundamental human nature is to maim, murder, kill, rape (resources), plunder, loot, grow, prosper, innovate, pursue happiness and so on. That system never had a chance to stand the test of the times...

Well considering there is no will to fix any of this the only way change can happen is when the whole system breaks and needs to be rebuilt... you might even get democracy if you are lucky...

As I said if the wound gets infected then it has a potential to kill anyone and anything. Why is it so difficult for you to understand and the answer lies in future, so I will wait but you seem to have already seen it. It is like arguing with a stuck up old man...

You expect them to change the habits of a lifetime and try to be cost effective?

But then to be fair they did go with the Cobra instead of the Apache as their attack helo, but that was rather more to do with air force vs navy vs army... if the army picks apache then we pick the cobra...

Cost is one parameter, the other being keeping the innovation....just like Mig vs Sukhoi and state vs private (totally different motivation). Use some critical thinking....F-16's were upgraded to this day and so are F-18's and other ships, subs e.t.c. What is your point dude? Anything built in USA will feel like inflated when compared with other foreign arms manufacturers because USD is our currency and it is also reserve. I can explain it in detail but I am sure you can understand it by yourself.

Ya and you are the judge, jury and executioner....an infection and you are ready to chop of the arm or worse take the head off. Not an interesting way to argue about anything....

An infection is a boo boo on someones hand that needs ointment and a band aide.

The current US MIC is a zombie apocolypse, except instead of demanding brains to eat they want money to feed their insatiable hunger.

And bubba is mommas baby so momma gives bubba what he asks for... a three ton baby asking a two stone momma for food because he is hungry... and like a good momma... she feeds her bubba... she feeds him good.

You sound like one of those that always dwell in the past and not realizing the value of the current and not seeing the hope in the future because it is too fucking hard to get through problems....who thinks competition and the best qualities drive everything in the world?

I am probably more often criticised for being too optimistic, but what are the signs of reform and change in the US government and MIC and pentagon that makes you think there is even the slightest interest in change.

Nobody has even mentioned the real problems, they are just whining that the F-35 is not what it was supposed to be, no body has mentioned that it is exactly what it was supposed to be... an unkillable cancer and now is part of the system that can't be removed without killing the patient...

The obvious solution is to completely scale back the programme and get something into service that can do the job at least as well as 4th gen fighters already could... for goodness sake an F-15 is a fraction of the cost of an F-35 to buy and to operate and maintain and it can sit in Israeli air space and launch way more weapons in to Syria than the F-35 can for a fraction of the price... the F-35 has no real advantage, and lots of serious disadvantages including top speed, real payload capacity, airframe life... put some of the electronics that work from the F-35 in an F-15 or F-16 and you have an aircraft almost as good in many areas and superior in quite a few including top speed, operational ceiling, flight range, capacity to carry a lot of weapons at one time.

But the only discussion taking place is... there are things wrong and it will take a lot of money and a lot of time to sort them out... so give me more money and time to do that...

They don't want to change... as I said before... the pentagon spends money... that is what they do, and contractors and the US MIC find reasons to ask for more money...

Get real man, I already said real world is much more complex than your over simplified idealistic world. I clearly said, if they can not fix problems then they will go the way of the infected giant.

Nothing lasts forever...

Your view of "no corruption" world does not exist...sorry to break it to you. It is an individual quality, collectively it does not generally abide by that quality. Every project in Russia is generally delayed, so they should all be fired because obviously it is corruption....except sane people does not think like you even if there is corruption.

There are an enormous number of reasons why a project might be delayed... corruption is usually easy to spot... when Sukhoi sells Su-34 strike bombers to the Russian military for $40 million dollars each... that is a bargain, when they export Su-35s for $60-80 billion each including spares and weapons that is profit margin.

When the US sells C-17 transports for $400 million to their closest allies... that is just taking the piss...

Somebody did pull the plug on it...you and your over simplification. First problem and then axe it, is that how you work?

Hahahaha... if you actually read my posts on the Russian naval threads on this forum you would not need to ask such a question.

I hope you do not manage any real people...ford is not a white elephant like you think....you have no evidence.

The Ford is an instrument of US imperialism... it will be used to destroy democracy around the world for the next half century... it will never be used against the US or China, but if it is it will be the last time it is used.

Russia did not get through their problems in one day or one year...What does Russian corvette has to do with it? Completely different scale, different complexity and different system.

The Russian corvettes are fully multirole new design high tech vessels being produced in an MIC that has been starved of cash for the better part of 20 years... those companies, including all the subcontractors have been surviving on small export contracts they got very occasionally... most other industries would have collapsed and folded, yet here they are making corvettes with supersonic anti ship missiles and long range land attack missiles that will soon carry hypersonic missiles too.

Of course it is not fair to compare that with the US MIC which has hundreds of billions of dollars spent on it every year... a huge budget, with subcontractors lining up to sell new technology with no issues of sanctions or restricted budgets... the Ford is nothing revolutionary... it is just a Nimitz class with a few bits upgraded and changed and those bits are not working properly.... yeah private enterprise...

One is private industry working towards profit and the other is mostly state owned, even then corruption exists there...but then so what?

That is exactly it... private industry is working for profit, that alone encourages greed and corruption...

Sometimes you do not have a choice, it is just too far along and too much invested. You probably never tried your hand at business either...

Hahahaha.... I know when I realise my accountant is stealing my money I don't keep paying the bastard and sending him a christmas card every year.
Your logic is to keep giving him money because you have already invested a lot of money in him and perhaps he has a limit as to how much he wants to steal from me and then he will stop and just do his job...

I have seen too many common folks that use these words, it is nothing but emotional reaction...these folks generally shy away from accepting real responsibility when offered....when you fight profit wars ofcourse standards become too low and all sorts of unpleasant things start to occur. My comment is specifically towards taht.....if they do not fix these things then the results will be obvious.

What evidence is that that anything at all is changing?

Who actually has an interest in fixing anything?

Who is going to upset their own gravy train?

I see the budget went from 716 billion to 750 billion this year... they must be clamping down hard... right?

It does not matter....it is an idiotic ideology that existed for long that it is surprizing. Misery shared by all only works in desperate times....fundamental human nature is to maim, murder, kill, rape (resources), plunder, loot, grow, prosper, innovate, pursue happiness and so on. That system never had a chance to stand the test of the times...

Socialism is alive and well in the Scandinavian countries specifically and europe in general... why do you think all those economic migrants from Africa and the middle east want to end up there?

As I said if the wound gets infected then it has a potential to kill anyone and anything. Why is it so difficult for you to understand and the answer lies in future, so I will wait but you seem to have already seen it. It is like arguing with a stuck up old man...

Yeah, we are clearly from a different generation... we both see the wound, but you think it is a scratch, and I think it is a symptom that something is seriously wrong with this person... as we both observe there is no attempt to deal with the problem that can only get worse, and can you agree that nothing is being done fundamentally to change anything... just a blind belief that democracy and market capitalist forces will solve the problem they created in the first place.

Just leave it and keep watching... things don't fix themselves, you need to work to maintain and fix things when they show damage or the damage just gets worse and in the worst case scenario it breaks and stops working... the damage that can cause might not be repairable... but for your generation it is just game over and press the start button to start again right?

Cost is one parameter, the other being keeping the innovation..

What innovation... the YF-23 was the innovative design... the F-22 is just an F-15 designed to stealth rules... most militaries are at their heart conservative, it is only occasionally they do something unusual... like hypersonic manouvering missiles, supersonic anti ship missiles, vehicle families for armoured forces.

American innovation revolve around its ability to spy and its ability to murder... the Russians are working hard to make you realise that they can kill you just as easily as you can kill them in an effort to achieve self defence by prevention of fighting.

America was built on fighting and needs fights to justify its defence budget and global military expansion/occupation... probably why you relate so well with Israel.

BTW I see Trump has nominated two idiots to the Federal Reserve... how long will the US dollar last...

The-thing-next-door wrote:

kvs wrote:

People need to start proving their wild claims about some great utility of ships in any WWIII confrontation and the urgency for Russia to waste
money on them instead of submarines.

You need a strong surface fleet to protect your submarines and hunt the enemies after a nuclear war.

Not in a 30 minute long nuclear war. You are still thinking like the planners during WWII. How did all those great battleships fare?

Bismarck? Yamato?

You make strategic submarines sound like the obsolete aircraft carriers needing some sort of escort. Really, do you actually
believe this?

southpark wrote:

GarryB wrote:
The process has become corrupt, get over it... you can't win a contract if you are honest, so you make shit up.

Ya and you are the judge, jury and executioner....an infection and you are ready to chop of the arm or worse take the head off. Not an interesting way to argue about anything....

The F-35 is a case in point the competition aircraft was never a serious competitor and was used to work on stealth features for their other products instead of honest competition...
How can you compete for contracts with someone who outright lies about performance to get the contract... you make even bigger lies yourself and then talk about tranches or block upgrades to fix the shit that doesn't work to begin with... the Microsoft method... by service pack 3 they should have most of the major bugs and problems sorted out right?

You sound like one of those that always dwell in the past and not realizing the value of the current and not seeing the hope in the future because it is too fucking hard to get through problems....who thinks competition and the best qualities drive everything in the world? Get real man, I already said real world is much more complex than your over simplified idealistic world. I clearly said, if they can not fix problems then they will go the way of the infected giant.

Your view of "no corruption" world does not exist...sorry to break it to you. It is an individual quality, collectively it does not generally abide by that quality. Every project in Russia is generally delayed, so they should all be fired because obviously it is corruption....except sane people does not think like you even if there is corruption.  

If the makers had their way both would be in serial production, yet with huge fundamental flaws in the design... it is up to the pentagon to pull them up on things not working and half the time they are not. I am not denying these are very complex new systems, but is a corvette with the Russian equivalent of AEGIS less complicated for Russia?

Somebody did pull the plug on it...you and your over simplification. First problem and then axe it, is that how you work? I hope you do not manage any real people...ford is not a white elephant like you think....you have no evidence. Russia did not get through their problems in one day or one year...What does Russian corvette has to do with it? Completely different scale, different complexity and different system. One is private industry working towards profit and the other is mostly state owned, even then corruption exists there...but then so what?

The fact that the Pentagon just keeps throwing money at the problems suggests corruption is the real issue... if you want to find corruption... follow the money.

Sometimes you do not have a choice, it is just too far along and too much invested. You probably never tried your hand at business either...

The Pentagon is throwing money at these companies with no accountability, and very few penalties or criticism...

I have seen too many common folks that use these words, it is nothing but emotional reaction...these folks generally shy away from accepting real responsibility when offered....when you fight profit wars ofcourse standards become too low and all sorts of unpleasant things start to occur. My comment is specifically towards taht.....if they do not fix these things then the results will be obvious.

The USSR was killed by an external source... from outside pressure... supporting foreign communist regimes, a war in Afghanistan, and an IADS that could stop western cruise missile attacks and air attacks... something similar to what will happen to the EU now that the INF treaty is gone.

It does not matter....it is an idiotic ideology that existed for long that it is surprizing. Misery shared by all only works in desperate times....fundamental human nature is to maim, murder, kill, rape (resources), plunder, loot, grow, prosper, innovate, pursue happiness and so on. That system never had a chance to stand the test of the times...

Well considering there is no will to fix any of this the only way change can happen is when the whole system breaks and needs to be rebuilt... you might even get democracy if you are lucky...

As I said if the wound gets infected then it has a potential to kill anyone and anything. Why is it so difficult for you to understand and the answer lies in future, so I will wait but you seem to have already seen it. It is like arguing with a stuck up old man...

You expect them to change the habits of a lifetime and try to be cost effective?

But then to be fair they did go with the Cobra instead of the Apache as their attack helo, but that was rather more to do with air force vs navy vs army... if the army picks apache then we pick the cobra...

Cost is one parameter, the other being keeping the innovation....just like Mig vs Sukhoi and state vs private (totally different motivation). Use some critical thinking....F-16's were upgraded to this day and so are F-18's and other ships, subs e.t.c. What is your point dude? Anything built in USA will feel like inflated when compared with other foreign arms manufacturers because USD is our currency and it is also reserve. I can explain it in detail but I am sure you can understand it by yourself.

Ok..as you say

US 7th Fleet still hasn't learned collision regs
https://www.rt.com/news/461332-video-us-russian-warships-pacific/


Vinogradov is clearly in right-of-way position, yet the US ship only took urgent evasive step just before collision.
Even then Vinogradov has clearly made the bigger course change.
Of course, they blame the Russians...

People need to start proving their wild claims about some great utility of ships in any WWIII confrontation and the urgency for Russia to waste
money on them instead of submarines. I see a similar pattern to all the 5th column liberasts pushing all sorts of BS that Russia "must" implement
and thereby f*ck itself over. Thank God nobody in charge is paying attention to this malicious drivel.

A modern Navy would be worthless in a WWIII scenario... you don't need ships or subs to protect SSBNs because within 5 minutes of receiving an order they can launch all their missiles... rendering them a non target... it wont matter if all are then sunk they have done their job.

The purpose of a strong and capable but relatively small navy is that it gives you options around the world. It is no guarantee of dominance... lack of a serious navy meant Russia could only give verbal support to Serbia during the late 1990s and early 2000s, but equally even with 13 super carriers and carrier groups the all powerful US Navy could do fuck all to help their ally Georgia invade South Ossetia and Abkhazia because they could not access the Black Sea or the Caspian Sea.

A powerful navy is no guarantee of anything... but without it Russia will have no say in regions away from its land and sea borders... a 20K ton modern destroy designed and built these days could have ten times the fire power of the Cold War Era Kirov class cruisers... in fact their 7K ton upgraded Frigates have vastly more fire power than their Kirovs in terms of missile performance (even the small Redut SAMs have 50km and 150km range which is better than the Rif and Rif-Ms on the Kirovs, and Onyx is actually a more powerful missile than Granit in terms of speed and range and is much smaller so it can be carried in much greater numbers... even the SS-N-14 compared with the 91ER1, the older missile is subsonic but passive homing, but the newer missile is supersonic ballistic weapon with a much more capable payload...)
Sensors on the new ships will be orders of magnitude more capable with modern thermals and AESA radar arrays, and the processing power would be exponentially more effective... Corvettes fitted with the equivalent of AEGIS systems with subs, ships, aircraft, sea bed sonar arrays, and satellites all linked in to an information sharing network.

The point is that in the future why would any country in central or south america or africa or asia trade with Russia or China if the US is just going to go in and destabilise the country and overthrow the legal government in a coup like they are trying with Venezuela? If the Russians or Chinese could send some ships to support the local legal government, which could also provide other assistance like helicopter carriers to deliver aide if needed or just exercise with local forces to give them support things will be sorted out much faster and there will be much less, perhaps even no bloodshed to bully countries into not trading with Russia or China.

That is what Venezuela is about... the US and the west trying to limit the growth of Russia and China... and also an opportunity to seize a large potential oil rich region for future exploitation. You can bet your ass if they win the locals will get bugger all and the US companies will make a fortune because that is how the west got rich... and it is how it plans to stay rich... and it does not like competition or rivals.

A future with Russia without a serious navy with perhaps 2 CVNs and 6-8 20K ton nuke destroyers and perhaps 20-24 Destroyers that are improved Gorshkov Frigates (perhaps 4-6 of the small ones and 18-20 7K ton versions) plus Corvettes of various types would be all they really need... perhaps with 6-8 Ivan Gren variant landing ships and perhaps 2-4 Helicopter carriers like Mistral but icebreaking nuclear powered slightly larger and better armed models...

So US claims their ship was in a state of impeded maneuvering due to landing its chopper -> Vinogradov is give-way.
Also that Vinogradov was far enough to rear that it counts as Overtaking -> give-way.

In the first case there should be some visual evidence that the US ship was flying appropriate flags/shapes & had sent appropriate warning message over radio.
There should also be a chopper nearby which seems absent so-far & logically there is a good chance the aerial shots are from its chopper, in which case its manifestly nowhere near landing.

In the second case we need video of the aerial angle &/or a AIS/radar track to show relative angles & speeds.


As has been pointed out in various places regardless of who is actually in the give-way position both crews are in the wrong for letting it get anywhere near as close as that.

Shaposhnikov upgrade work billboard:

https://www.janes.com/article/89346/russian-udaloy-destroyer-modernised-for-land-attack-mission

Tsavo Lion wrote:https://www.janes.com/article/89346/russian-udaloy-destroyer-modernised-for-land-attack-mission

Russian Udaloy destroyer modernised for land-attack mission

The Russian Navy will take delivery of its first modernised Project 1155 Udaloy-class destroyer before the end of 2019, the Izvestia newspaper reported on 29 May.

Upgrades to anti-submarine warfare (ASW) destroyer Marshal Shaposhnikov will convert the ship into a robust land-attack and anti-surface platform. Four more Udaloy ships will receive the same upgrade, the RIA Novosti news agency reported in January 2017.

A Navy Main Command source told Izvestia that Marshal Shaposhnikov had been modified to carry the Kalibr-NK land-attack and Kh-35U Uran anti-ship cruise missile (ASCM). The former has a range of 2,500 km against targets ashore and the latter 260 km against surface targets.

Expected as much

Kalibrs will be going instead of that main gun, question is how many, 8 or 16?

As for Kh-35 they would probably be replacing those two large boxes under the bridge, loads of space there, I wonder if they will use it all?

Still no info on AA missiles and CIWS?

Interesting indeed.

New pic of the Shaposhnikov refit. They are now building up the superstructure box for the fwd UKSK bin.

Are they also upgrading the tor VLS in a better one with the more obthe newer and smaller missiles ?

There is lot of unused space in this awfull launcher btw the two sets. New missiles takes 2 times less space and with a 16 cells vls like on land version they could multiply by 3 the number of cells.

Isos wrote:Are they also upgrading the tor VLS in a better one with the more obthe newer and smaller missiles ?

There is lot of unused space in this awfull launcher btw the two sets. New missiles takes 2 times less space and with a 16 cells vls like on land version they could multiply by 3 the number of cells.

My experience is that there is no wasted space on any ship - every bit of internal volume is used with something. Beneath the rotary launcher bins will be reloads, missile handlers and associated equipment.

The rotary bins do however seem to have been removed, but I think this will most likely be a general refurbishment not replacement, so they have likely gone to a machine shop for refurb work.