Home
Latest images
Register
Log in
SeigSoloyvovAlso George you mean AM's not A's the plan was to upgrade 4-6 of the Oscars into the AM's.
+57
RTN
Krepost
Mir
ALAMO
LMFS
lancelot
Dorfmeister
kvs
AMCXXL
lyle6
Arrow
flamming_python
walle83
The-thing-next-door
mnztr
owais.usmani
Luq man
JohninMK
ult
dino00
Hole
Labrador
verkhoturye51
Tsavo Lion
KiloGolf
Peŕrier
TheArmenian
hoom
Singular_Transform
Big_Gazza
Benya
PapaDragon
GunshipDemocracy
Isos
George1
A1RMAN
gaurav
Flanky
SeigSoloyvov
franco
Backinblack
runaway
sepheronx
max steel
chicken
Mike E
Morpheus Eberhardt
magnumcromagnon
zg18
CaptainPakistan
TR1
Cyberspec
Stealthflanker
GarryB
Viktor
Mindstorm
Austin
61 posters
Project 949A: Oscar-II
SeigSoloyvov- Posts : 3903
Points : 3881
Join date : 2016-04-08
Isos- Posts : 11602
Points : 11570
Join date : 2015-11-06
SeigSoloyvov wrote:Isos wrote:Peŕrier wrote:That's really strange.
They forgot to transfer four modernized 949A belonging to the Northern Fleet, despite the fact they have no chance to operate in the Atlantic.
They even went so far as assigning even the first 885, Severodvinsk, to the Northern Fleet instead of choosing the only viable option, it being the Pacific Fleet.
Or maybe they believe to be able to operate in the Atlantic as well?
There are reports that the Kursk was following US carrier in mediteranean during kosovo war and even was in position to lunch its missiles.
It is logic that they send the first Yasen in the north. It can target nato bases in UK.
No the sub would not have been positioning it's self to launch that can be seen as an act of aggression an would justify an attack on the submarine.
"We had a Russian sub built to attack AC's getting in launch position for it's missiles"
Yeah no, that's not how ROE work.
They always do that with airforce by simultating missile attack on carriers ...
The kursk wasn't even detected when it went through gibraltar by nato forces. Only when it put itself into position they detected it and send p-3 to track it. Another proof of how bad US navy actually is. They have hundreds of ships, thousands of sonars for SOSUS ... and yet they can't see the bigest submarine near their carrier.
You can find the story by yourself if you want to read it online.
GunshipDemocracy- Posts : 6168
Points : 6188
Join date : 2015-05-17
Location : fishin on Stalin´s Strait between Mexico and Canada
SeigSoloyvov wrote:
No the sub would not have been positioning it's self to launch that can be seen as an act of aggression an would justify an attack on the submarine.
"We had a Russian sub built to attack AC's getting in launch position for it's missiles"
Yeah no, that's not how ROE work.
By positioning itself do you understand letting enemy know you are ready to fire?
As for Antey's Pacifistic Fleet makes more sense - this ability to send a barrage of kalibr's against CBGs.
Peŕrier- Posts : 275
Points : 273
Join date : 2017-10-15
Usually aircrafts do not perform any attack run with targeting radar locked on others ships: it would make the ships lock on the incoming aircrafts and fire at the slightest possibility of a missile launch from those aircrafts.
Either they perform litle attack run without locking on the ships, signaling very clearly they are not able in those seconds to launch anything at a target, or they lock against the ships avoiding any attack run, in order to show a threat without actually implementing it.
Any other course of action would be looking for serious troubles.
And nobody, neither on the ships's side nor in the aircrafts' side, will look for troubles until it is forced by the other side.
The same applies between ships and between ships and subs: nor the subs nor the ships would ever show an actual readiness to fire on the other side until the others do the same.
Either they perform litle attack run without locking on the ships, signaling very clearly they are not able in those seconds to launch anything at a target, or they lock against the ships avoiding any attack run, in order to show a threat without actually implementing it.
Any other course of action would be looking for serious troubles.
And nobody, neither on the ships's side nor in the aircrafts' side, will look for troubles until it is forced by the other side.
The same applies between ships and between ships and subs: nor the subs nor the ships would ever show an actual readiness to fire on the other side until the others do the same.
SeigSoloyvov- Posts : 3903
Points : 3881
Join date : 2016-04-08
GunshipDemocracy wrote:SeigSoloyvov wrote:
No the sub would not have been positioning it's self to launch that can be seen as an act of aggression an would justify an attack on the submarine.
"We had a Russian sub built to attack AC's getting in launch position for it's missiles"
Yeah no, that's not how ROE work.
By positioning itself do you understand letting enemy know you are ready to fire?
As for Antey's Pacifistic Fleet makes more sense - this ability to send a barrage of kalibr's against CBGs.
Whenever you come across another countries ships etc let alone one you are currently at let us say odds with.
You are told not to take such threating positions, Wars can easily start this way. They also have, what he said would be like a surface ship training it's canon on someone and when you see "escorts" you always see the guns are facing forward not towards.
Even when those Russian planes buzzed the Burkes they had no weapons, had they done that with bombs on the wings the DD would have shot the planes down.
In this case an Oscar getting into firing position (submarines like that have certain ways they go about setting themselves up to fire, would make an Admiral consider sinking or trying to sink the submarine before his ships can come under attack.
A Russian submarine Captian would not be so stupid and if he was under orders "Get into position to attack" to be in detection range. Also to even get in position to fire like that he would require permission from the Kremlin and if such an order was issued it would never be known to the public.
to launch their missiles submarines like Oscer dive to certain depths, they go dark and they slow down alot. They don't just follow them and be able to open their missile bays like that it's not how it works.
so yeah that statement was a load of crap.
SeigSoloyvov- Posts : 3903
Points : 3881
Join date : 2016-04-08
Isos wrote:SeigSoloyvov wrote:Isos wrote:Peŕrier wrote:That's really strange.
They forgot to transfer four modernized 949A belonging to the Northern Fleet, despite the fact they have no chance to operate in the Atlantic.
They even went so far as assigning even the first 885, Severodvinsk, to the Northern Fleet instead of choosing the only viable option, it being the Pacific Fleet.
Or maybe they believe to be able to operate in the Atlantic as well?
There are reports that the Kursk was following US carrier in mediteranean during kosovo war and even was in position to lunch its missiles.
It is logic that they send the first Yasen in the north. It can target nato bases in UK.
No the sub would not have been positioning it's self to launch that can be seen as an act of aggression an would justify an attack on the submarine.
"We had a Russian sub built to attack AC's getting in launch position for it's missiles"
Yeah no, that's not how ROE work.
They always do that with airforce by simultating missile attack on carriers ...
The kursk wasn't even detected when it went through gibraltar by nato forces. Only when it put itself into position they detected it and send p-3 to track it. Another proof of how bad US navy actually is. They have hundreds of ships, thousands of sonars for SOSUS ... and yet they can't see the bigest submarine near their carrier.
You can find the story by yourself if you want to read it online.
What do you mean by the airforce? you mean when Russian planes buzz DD's? You know those planes aren't armed when they do this right? if they tried that with missiles or bombs on their wings they would be shot down.
The Kursk you mean the submarine that went down in 2000?.
I know what story you mean, first off the Russians where so incompetent back then, no one cared about them so little attention was paid to the kursk. They knew the submarine was there that part is a lie. That story was proven and shown to have many holes in it, this is why I take what news outlets say with a grain of salt.
no official from either the US or Russian ever stated the Kursk entered firing depth.
However, while that submarine was watching the six fleet it was never at any time told to get into firing depth and be on standby to attack the sixth fleet if it did that, the sixth fleet would have sunk it. The sixth fleet was in combat operations at that time and would have taken such a threat searious and reacted accordingly. since a submarine-like Oscar again will only get into firing position if it's going to fire.
Isos- Posts : 11602
Points : 11570
Join date : 2015-11-06
What do you mean by the airforce? you mean when Russian planes buzz DD's? You know those planes aren't armed when they do this right? if they tried that with missiles or bombs on their wings they would be shot down.
The Kursk you mean the submarine that went down in 2000?.
I know what story you mean, first off the Russians where so incompetent back then, no one cared about them so little attention was paid to the kursk. They knew the submarine was there that part is a lie. That story was proven and shown to have many holes in it, this is why I take what news outlets say with a grain of salt.
no official from either the US or Russian ever stated the Kursk entered firing depth.
However, while that submarine was watching the six fleet it was never at any time told to get into firing depth and be on standby to attack the sixth fleet if it did that, the sixth fleet would have sunk it. The sixth fleet was in combat operations at that time and would have taken such a threat searious and reacted accordingly. since a submarine-like Oscar again will only get into firing position if it's going to fire.
No I mean real simulation of missiles attacks. This thing was just a show of force. Even during soviet times they lunched some Tupolev practice Attack against carriers.
They can fly with what they want under their fighters they won't be shot down just as they can put the oscar at firing depth and they won't do anything.
Another story to prove that US won't do anything is about Chinese ship that cut the towed sonar of a US destroy and took it to China. They did that agressively by manoeuvring behind the destroyer.
Peŕrier- Posts : 275
Points : 273
Join date : 2017-10-15
Manouvering aggressively do not equals to lock on others military assets, being them airborne, surface based or under the sea.
Unless the chinese ship wasn't armed with a ram as ancient greek ones, of course.
Unless the chinese ship wasn't armed with a ram as ancient greek ones, of course.
SeigSoloyvov- Posts : 3903
Points : 3881
Join date : 2016-04-08
Isos wrote:What do you mean by the airforce? you mean when Russian planes buzz DD's? You know those planes aren't armed when they do this right? if they tried that with missiles or bombs on their wings they would be shot down.
The Kursk you mean the submarine that went down in 2000?.
I know what story you mean, first off the Russians where so incompetent back then, no one cared about them so little attention was paid to the kursk. They knew the submarine was there that part is a lie. That story was proven and shown to have many holes in it, this is why I take what news outlets say with a grain of salt.
no official from either the US or Russian ever stated the Kursk entered firing depth.
However, while that submarine was watching the six fleet it was never at any time told to get into firing depth and be on standby to attack the sixth fleet if it did that, the sixth fleet would have sunk it. The sixth fleet was in combat operations at that time and would have taken such a threat searious and reacted accordingly. since a submarine-like Oscar again will only get into firing position if it's going to fire.
No I mean real simulation of missiles attacks. This thing was just a show of force. Even during soviet times they lunched some Tupolev practice Attack against carriers.
They can fly with what they want under their fighters they won't be shot down just as they can put the oscar at firing depth and they won't do anything.
Another story to prove that US won't do anything is about Chinese ship that cut the towed sonar of a US destroy and took it to China. They did that agressively by manoeuvring behind the destroyer.
What are you talking about Chinese cut DD's sonar array while right behind it?. There was a Chinese sub that ran into one on accident. Provide a link because that sounds like made up BS.
Oh that's why whenever they do it the fighters aren't armed!
Oh really did they? and where did you get that information because that ain't true at all.
You should really be careful what you read on the web
Isos- Posts : 11602
Points : 11570
Join date : 2015-11-06
What are you talking about Chinese cut DD's sonar array while right behind it?. There was a Chinese sub that ran into one on accident. Provide a link because that sounds like made up BS.
Oh that's why whenever they do it the fighters aren't armed!
Oh really did they? and where did you get that information because that ain't true at all.
You should really be careful what you read on the web
About the chinese story I just remember it. Maybe it was bulshit but I think it was a serious article. They also took one US submarine drone in front of the US ship.
You don't need missiles to practice missile attack. It is the detection, approch and communication with other fighter that matters. During the buzzing they did that : low lvl approch at high speed.
You have plenty of of videos showing su-27 heavily armed in the international space.
Tupolev keep missiles in weapons bay they can simulate lunch any time they want. US carriers were always apeoched by soviet bombers. You also have video of that.
SeigSoloyvov- Posts : 3903
Points : 3881
Join date : 2016-04-08
Isos wrote:What are you talking about Chinese cut DD's sonar array while right behind it?. There was a Chinese sub that ran into one on accident. Provide a link because that sounds like made up BS.
Oh that's why whenever they do it the fighters aren't armed!
Oh really did they? and where did you get that information because that ain't true at all.
You should really be careful what you read on the web
About the chinese story I just remember it. Maybe it was bulshit but I think it was a serious article. They also took one US submarine drone in front of the US ship.
You don't need missiles to practice missile attack. It is the detection, approch and communication with other fighter that matters. During the buzzing they did that : low lvl approch at high speed.
You have plenty of of videos showing su-27 heavily armed in the international space.
Tupolev keep missiles in weapons bay they can simulate lunch any time they want. US carriers were always apeoched by soviet bombers. You also have video of that.
True you don't need a missile to practice an attack BUT the Kursk was armed with missiles at the time, submarines do not leave port without weapons.
There is a difference between international space and flying over an American DD like they do at times with weapons.
Then I know what buzzing you mean and there was no American CV group during those times or Us ships, soviets were very careful not to risk things with us back then.
Tsavo Lion- Posts : 5960
Points : 5912
Join date : 2016-08-15
Location : AZ, USA
The Kursk SSGN was in position & ready to attack in case the US CVN started airstrikes on the Russians in the Balkans. After it was located, it was a Mexican standoff, with "guns pointed on each others' heads". Who knows, maybe this actually prevented the US airstrikes on the Russians from being conducted!
Isos- Posts : 11602
Points : 11570
Join date : 2015-11-06
True you don't need a missile to practice an attack BUT the Kursk was armed with missiles at the time, submarines do not leave port without weapons.
There is a difference between international space and flying over an American DD like they do at times with weapons.
Then I know what buzzing you mean and there was no American CV group during those times or Us ships, soviets were very careful not to risk things with us back then.
Soviet SSN were always tracking and practicing against carriers when in operation. They go at whatever depth they want. From ouside the sub or bomber you don't know what they are doing. For US sailors they are just moving around. But for soviet or russian sailorq inside the sub they are practicing how to arm missile and torpedos and it all goes until the fire when the commander says stop.
What do you think they do when they sail ? Look for Nemo ?
There is no difference between international air space and abovr US ships. Soviet tupolev used to fly 100 m above the carriers. Lot of pictures of that too. You did nothing because it is not a poor defenceless country. That will always be like that. You know how to shot Lybian lonely mig 23 but when it comes to soviet or russian or chinese army you shut up like always.
There is also another good story about your fleet trying to impress India during the war against pakistan but they were stoped by Soviet cruiser and your ships left the area. Google that you will find it easily.
SeigSoloyvov- Posts : 3903
Points : 3881
Join date : 2016-04-08
Isos wrote:True you don't need a missile to practice an attack BUT the Kursk was armed with missiles at the time, submarines do not leave port without weapons.
There is a difference between international space and flying over an American DD like they do at times with weapons.
Then I know what buzzing you mean and there was no American CV group during those times or Us ships, soviets were very careful not to risk things with us back then.
Soviet SSN were always tracking and practicing against carriers when in operation. They go at whatever depth they want. From ouside the sub or bomber you don't know what they are doing. For US sailors they are just moving around. But for soviet or russian sailorq inside the sub they are practicing how to arm missile and torpedos and it all goes until the fire when the commander says stop.
What do you think they do when they sail ? Look for Nemo ?
There is no difference between international air space and abovr US ships. Soviet tupolev used to fly 100 m above the carriers. Lot of pictures of that too. You did nothing because it is not a poor defenceless country. That will always be like that. You know how to shot Lybian lonely mig 23 but when it comes to soviet or russian or chinese army you shut up like always.
There is also another good story about your fleet trying to impress India during the war against pakistan but they were stoped by Soviet cruiser and your ships left the area. Google that you will find it easily.
Sure they track carriers never said they don't but they track they do not actively ready weapons to fire there is a massive difference, I don't think you know what submarines generally do when they leave port.
Tell you what go get enlisted get on a submarine then come and talk to me.
Wasn't 100 meters where do you get your information they would fly a mile above.
This is also not like 20ft like I was talking about apples and oranges buddy, we generally do "nothing" because they have nukes it's the same reason they do nothing. That however doesn't change the status of the russians back then.
Oh really....we have destroyed more aircraft than the Ruskies ever have, you think shooting down russian planes would be hard? lol hardly. Just like it wouldn't be hard for them to shoot ours down in this situations it comes down to who has more planes and who can build them faster guess who wins in those areas.
Why don't you link said incident to me and I'll tell you what I think because you have been spouting BS since this started
Isos- Posts : 11602
Points : 11570
Join date : 2015-11-06
https://www.google.fr/amp/s/swarajyamag.com/amp/story/world%252Fdecember-1971-when-the-us-sent-its-naval-ships-into-bay-of-bengal-and-ussr-responded
https://www.google.fr/amp/s/mobile.nytimes.com/2016/12/16/us/politics/us-underwater-drone-china.amp.html
You can find by yourself the pictures of russian bombers near your carrier. Also during the buzzing of the arleigh burke su 24 were less than 100m ...
Yes you have destroyed more aircraft because you have attacked more poor countries than they did.
Yes they SSN use to train against US carriers. They activate torpedo at least they follow the procedure so that crews know what they have to do. They just don't lunch the torpedo. It is the same with ssbn. They always train to lunch their missiles by following the rules until the last minute when they have to push the red button.
https://www.google.fr/amp/s/mobile.nytimes.com/2016/12/16/us/politics/us-underwater-drone-china.amp.html
You can find by yourself the pictures of russian bombers near your carrier. Also during the buzzing of the arleigh burke su 24 were less than 100m ...
Yes you have destroyed more aircraft because you have attacked more poor countries than they did.
Yes they SSN use to train against US carriers. They activate torpedo at least they follow the procedure so that crews know what they have to do. They just don't lunch the torpedo. It is the same with ssbn. They always train to lunch their missiles by following the rules until the last minute when they have to push the red button.
SeigSoloyvov- Posts : 3903
Points : 3881
Join date : 2016-04-08
Isos wrote:https://www.google.fr/amp/s/swarajyamag.com/amp/story/world%252Fdecember-1971-when-the-us-sent-its-naval-ships-into-bay-of-bengal-and-ussr-responded
https://www.google.fr/amp/s/mobile.nytimes.com/2016/12/16/us/politics/us-underwater-drone-china.amp.html
You can find by yourself the pictures of russian bombers near your carrier. Also during the buzzing of the arleigh burke su 24 were less than 100m ...
Yes you have destroyed more aircraft because you have attacked more poor countries than they did.
Yes they SSN use to train against US carriers. They activate torpedo at least they follow the procedure so that crews know what they have to do. They just don't lunch the torpedo. It is the same with ssbn. They always train to lunch their missiles by following the rules until the last minute when they have to push the red button.
Ah yes the drone that was not near the ship, I know what happened here this is far from the story you claimed.
ah this incident, the task force was told should the carrier group try and pass to open fire. They had legitimate orders to attack if a borderline was crossed.
this is far from the facts you claim "it's normal for subs to open their tubes and ready weapons for practice on other countries ships".
In this case we backed down because nuclear war wasn't worth it, Nixon isn't a beloved president here also.
Yes and those Su's had no weapons, keep trying to sell this shit dude. I ain't buying it at all, you are wrong in like 95 percent of shit you have said.
"they activate the torpedo" are you mad? they do not activate the torps, they cannot turn the dam things off if they go live. Dude just stop talking now, now I know you don't know what you are talking about.
Tsavo Lion- Posts : 5960
Points : 5912
Join date : 2016-08-15
Location : AZ, USA
A Russian naval task force from the Pacific Fleet based in Vladivostok, consisting of a cruiser, a destroyer and two attack submarines under the command of Admiral Vladimir Kruglyakov intercepted Task Force 74.Sebastien Roblin writes in War is Boring that Kruglyakov revealed in a Russian TV interview about “encircling” the task force, surfacing his submarines in front of the Enterprise, opening the missile tubes and “blocking” the American ships.
https://swarajyamag.com/world/december-1971-when-the-us-sent-its-naval-ships-into-bay-of-bengal-and-ussr-responded
A U.S. carrier group only came face-to-face with a Russian carrier task force during the Cold War once. During the tensions surrounding the Yom Kippur war, the presence of a “locally superior Russian force” resulted in the American ships having to reposition further west in the Mediterranean.
Soviet Adm. Sergei Gorchkov reportedly held the view that the U.S. had made a strategic miscalculation by relying on large and increasingly vulnerable aircraft carriers. The influential U.S. Adm. Hyman Rickover shared this view. In a 1982 congressional hearing, legislators asked him how long American carriers would survive in an actual war. Rickover’s response? “Forty-eight hours,” he said.
..In 2002, the U.S. Navy held a large simulated war game, the Millennium Challenge, to test scenarios of attacks on the fleet by a hypothetical Gulf state — Iraq or possibly Iran.
The leader of the red team employed brilliant asymmetric tactics resulting in 16 U.S. ships, including two supercarriers, going to the bottom in a very short span of time. The Navy stopped the war game, prohibited the red team from using these tactics and then reran the exercise declaring victory on the second day. ..
Ballistic missiles are just the most recent challenge to carrier vulnerability. “I would argue that you can put a ship out of action faster by putting a hole in the bottom [with a torpedo] than by putting a hole in the top [with a weapon like the DF-21],” former U.S. Naval Operations chief Gary Roughhead said.
This extends to diesel submarines. Although the number of simulated “sinkings” by ships of the Navy is officially unacknowledged, there are reports of around a dozen U.S. aircraft carriers being “sunk” in exercises with friendly countries including Canada, Denmark and Chile.
In 2005, the USS Ronald Reagan was “sunk” by the Gotland, an electric diesel sub that the U.S. Navy borrowed from Sweden between 2005 and 2007 and which was never detected in exercises by U.S. carrier groups during all that time.
Although it’s true that the Soviets and the Americans never faced off in an actual naval battle, there is every reason to believe that they would have had some success against the “invulnerable” carriers. As far back as 1968, a fast nuclear powered Russian submarine matched the Enterprise at top speed in the Pacific.
In 1995, Israeli Adm. Yedidia Ya’ri wrote in the 2005 Naval War College Review that the Russian SS-N-22 “Moskit” anti-ship missile “can probably penetrate any existing defense system, hard or soft-kill, especially when launched in salvos.”
In 2012, test of a slower and higher-flying surrogate of the Moskit missile demonstrated that “the Aegis system could not be relied on for effective defense of itself or the aircraft carriers it was escorting,” Winslow Wheeler of the Straus Military Reform Project noted.
One carrier, the USS Kitty Hawk, used up three of its nine lives having been run into by an undetected Soviet sub in 1984, overflown by two undetected Russian planes — an Su-24 and an Su-27 — in 2000, and surprised by a Chinese Song-class attack submarine that surfaced undetected inside its perimeter and within torpedo range in 2006.
In March of this year, the French Navy reported that it had sunk the USS Theodore Roosevelt and half of its escorts in a war game, but hurriedly removed that information from its website.
The world, of course, is not standing still. Missile ranges and speeds will increase. Missiles will become more elusive and accurate — and could be nuclear-tipped. Sensors will see further and more accurately, significantly reducing the fog of war. Surface ships, no matter where located, will be increasingly vulnerable.
Supercavitating torpedoes — such as the Russian Shkval — already travel at 200 knots and can track ships for more than 1,000 kilometers. Above the surface, supersonic anti-ship missiles that currently travel at Mach 2 will be replaced by hypersonic missiles that will travel at Mach 5, and Mach 10 and Mach 25.
https://medium.com/war-is-boring/the-u-s-navy-s-big-mistake-building-tons-of-supercarriers-79cb42029b8
The Il-38s would always have torpedoes in their bomb bays!
http://www.usscoralseacvb-cva-cv-43.us/index_files/Page2307.htm
https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Soviet_Il-38_May_passing_low_over_USS_Midway_(CV-41).jpg
http://www.seaforces.org/usnships/cv/CV-64-USS-Constellation.htm
"U-boats open the way to the shores of the US": in Europe they realized that NATO is losing an "unsinkable aircraft carrier" in the Atlantic
Increased tension between Russia and the West attracts additional attention of Iceland to NATO leadership, since this country is an "unsinkable aircraft carrier" of the US and its military bloc in the northern part of the Atlantic Ocean, providing control over adjacent waters. ..today the Russian Federation "more than ever" can imperceptibly bring submarines to the coast of the United States. Calmness does not add to the alliance and the qualitative modernization of Russia's submarine fleet, which is inferior to the Soviet in size, but significantly ahead of its capabilities. NATO understands that additional forces and means are needed to track Russian submarines, but they are afraid of provoking Iceland's discontent once again. For this reason, the alliance's observer aircraft have to fly to the north of the Atlantic from Sicily.
In addition to the vulnerability of the US coasts, NATO is concerned about the fate of transatlantic cables that provide America's connection with Europe, transferring 99% of all data, stresses NZZ. The alliance fears that Russian submarines can cut off these communications and deprive NATO members of communications, some of which pass directly through Iceland.
Let's note, the president of Russia Vladimir Putin considers NATO strategy "offensive and aggressive", especially concerning creation of a rocket infrastructure in Europe. The very fact of the existence of an alliance that was created to counteract the socialist bloc, after its disintegration, causes Moscow many questions.
https://rueconomics.ru/vse-novosti#from_copy
IMO, the Oscars & Yasens will have a mix of LACMs & AShMs- their proportion will vary depending on their mission. CVNs & SSNs at Norfolk & NPN shipyard can be attacked by LACMs. They can also be resupplied at sea or in Cuba/Venezuela, protected by S-300/400/500.
Cyberspec- Posts : 2904
Points : 3057
Join date : 2011-08-08
Location : Terra Australis
autumn 2016 in the Mediterranean Sea....Oscars sneaking up to the USN
Most likely related to this report..
Russian Submarines “Scared” NATO Navy in Mediterranean
https://southfront.org/russian-submarines-scared-nato-squadron-in-mediterranean/
.
Most likely related to this report..
Russian Submarines “Scared” NATO Navy in Mediterranean
https://southfront.org/russian-submarines-scared-nato-squadron-in-mediterranean/
.
KiloGolf- Posts : 2481
Points : 2461
Join date : 2015-09-01
Location : Macedonia, Hellas
- Post n°244
Oscar II is the best, active class of SSGNs in the world.
KiloGolf Tue Jun 12, 2018 10:25 pm
Isos wrote:Oscars are already pretty old and almost outdated..
Oscar II is the best, active class of SSGNs in the world.
Isos- Posts : 11602
Points : 11570
Join date : 2015-11-06
KiloGolf wrote:Isos wrote:Oscars are already pretty old and almost outdated..
Oscar II is the best, active class of SSGNs in the world.
Doesn't change the fact that they are old and a modernization can't give them a new life, only add some years of service compare to the 40 or 50 years that a new sub has.
Their missiles are also outdated for attacking carriers.
Tsavo Lion- Posts : 5960
Points : 5912
Join date : 2016-08-15
Location : AZ, USA
Well, they have more than a few years left, since from 1991 till present most didn't go on long patrols. Their Granits r as deadly as they were 20 years ago, what make u think they r outdated? After Zircons & other AShMs r inducted, they can still be used as LACMs.
KiloGolf- Posts : 2481
Points : 2461
Join date : 2015-09-01
Location : Macedonia, Hellas
Isos wrote:KiloGolf wrote:Isos wrote:Oscars are already pretty old and almost outdated..
Oscar II is the best, active class of SSGNs in the world.
Doesn't change the fact that they are old and a modernization can't give them a new life, only add some years of service compare to the 40 or 50 years that a new sub has.
Their missiles are also outdated for attacking carriers.
They can level a small country and deal with most navies in Europe, Middle East and Far East. If they need upgrading, so be it, go for it. To replace them early (i.e. in 5 or 10 years) is a waste of resources and already paid for platforms.
Isos- Posts : 11602
Points : 11570
Join date : 2015-11-06
Well, they have more than a few years left, since from 1991 till present most didn't go on long patrols. Their Granits r as deadly as they were 20 years ago, what make u think they r outdated? After Zircons & other AShMs r inducted, they can still be used as LACMs.
They were in the water all those 30 years. Doesn't matter they didn't go on patrol. Technology is from 30 years ago too as the structure.
Granits are big, slow compare to newer russian missiles and with 30 years old technology. They were meant to be used in big salvos against US defences from the 70s. Against modern aegis or Aster missiles they need much more of them but russia is upgrading its kirovs to uksk and the kuznetsov probably will get also uksk. So the only ship with granits are the 8 or 9 oscars separeted in two fleets. The salco will be very small and easy to destroy for modern defences.
They can level a small country and deal with most navies in Europe, Middle East and Far East. If they need upgrading, so be it, go for it. To replace them early (i.e. in 5 or 10 years) is a waste of resources and already paid for platforms.
That's not their role. Against a small country buyan M proved to be very good.
That's the thing. If you upgrade them you will spend money on upgrade and on buyong new subs in ten years.
It's better to buy new subs now so that you save money from upgrading old ships and you have ten or 15 new ships with state of art technology and modular architecture by sharing design of husky class. So the price falls and you can even build husky SSN sooner and for cheaper because Husky SSGN would have resolved issues of the design.
GunshipDemocracy- Posts : 6168
Points : 6188
Join date : 2015-05-17
Location : fishin on Stalin´s Strait between Mexico and Canada
Isos wrote:
That's not their role. Against a small country buyan M proved to be very good.
this was not literally but showing firepower.
That's the thing. If you upgrade them you will spend money on upgrade and on buyong new subs in ten years.
It's better to buy new subs now so that you save money from upgrading old ships and you have ten or 15 new ships with state of art technology and modular architecture by sharing design of husky class. So the price falls and you can even build husky SSN sooner and for cheaper because Husky SSGN would have resolved issues of the design.
Strangely enough risk management says otherwise. It is lesser risk to upgrade proven platform than put all bets on something that design dont even exist. And if program is delayed by 3-4 years , then what? no Russian nuclear subs on sea patrols?
PapaDragon- Posts : 13472
Points : 13512
Join date : 2015-04-26
Location : Fort Evil, Serbia
Isos wrote:.......
That's the thing. If you upgrade them you will spend money on upgrade and on buyong new subs in ten years.
It's better to buy new subs now so that you save money from upgrading old ships and you have ten or 15 new ships with state of art technology and modular architecture by sharing design of husky class. So the price falls and you can even build husky SSN sooner and for cheaper because Husky SSGN would have resolved issues of the design.
I am all for buying new subs but throwing away perfectly good subs that you have now and that work is pretty stupid.
And there is also problem of build capacity and speed. Severodvinsk can't build any more than they are building already no matter how many new subs are ordered from them.
On the other hand Oscars can and are being overhauled and upgraded in other shipyards (Zvezda is working on one Oscar as we speak). If they need new missiles then have them installed.
Upgrading Oscars is pretty cheap compared to what you get in return.