Home
Latest images
Register
Log in
For surgical strikes, their AF strategic bombers refueled range is enough to reach most of the globe from bases in Russia.
But why?
The enemy could see it coming and rivals like NATO or EU nations could put up barriers and deny passage through airspace they might control...
For the delivery of a precision cruise missile strike it would make more sense to send a submarine or a warship... by the middle of the 2020s they should have at least one Kirov class vessel with 80 launch tubes of the UKSK system...
In 2010, the Tu-95 "staked out" behind a unique record, being in the air for 43 hours, breaking 30 thousand km and leaving behind five oceans, simultaneously completing five most difficult refueling stations.
Approaching hostile territory with a useful weapon load is something else... a strategic aircraft can be refuelled in flight but not rearmed... a nuclear sub can pretty much go anywhere, but can also be reloaded at sea by a support vessel, so it can have much better combat persistence.
The F-14s and Phoenix missiles intended to deal with Backfires to protect CV/Ns engaged in ASW & surface ships. The Soviet VMF would use bombers & subs against reinforcements in the Atlantic just like the Germans did with their Condors & U-boats.
Tomcats would hold off Backfires while Intruders tried to deliver nuclear bombs into Soviet territory...
They could just stop pumping gas in winter & let them freeze or go bankrupt with more expensive American LNG, then people will fire their elected leaders. No need to interfere in elections!
Love that accusation... Russia interfering in foreign elections... recently it has been proven that the UK has been funding an organisation hilariously with the word Integrity in its title, that has been actively changing public opinion to actively work against any politician that shows any positive feelings or statements towards Russia... if that isn't fucking interfering in elections I don't know what is.
In comparison in the US they are bringing up individuals they claim who are working for the Russians (no evidence of course) and they said some things that were anti Clinton, there is no evidence they had any effect on the vote or even changed one single vote but that does not matter because any interference is not acceptable. Meanwhile big powerful international companies buy and sell senators and congressmen/women and politicians daily but that is all OK it seems... it is actually rather sad that they think that is even democracy where they get the choice of two people put forward by two organisations that would shame any communist party anywhere in the world.
Still, they all come from the state budget before being allocated to VMF, FSB, & Atomflot.
Money being spent on healthcare can't be spent on the VMF either, but I suspect they are OK with that.
The reality is that their navy is not very high up the food chain in terms of priority for the moment... once the army and airforce are in a better situation they might transfer some of the funding away from them to help the navy... they likely wont reduce funding from the aerospace defence forces however...
3. Economics doesn't really make you a superpower, this is your personal view I mean How many smaller nations have a much higher GDP than Russia and are in no means a superpower? lots again highly narrow-minded.
Superpower means violence... Japan has been an economic super power for a while, China is an economic super power even with all its problems... in fact I would rate them as being more like Saudi Arabia than eclipsing Russia... they have shiny weapons that appear to be the best, but whether it is Saudi Arabia in Yemen or China in Vietnam, they are not really a fighting nation.
The Chinese were as bad as the French in WWII, and in Korea they relied on large waves of unfed masses against the UN force there rather than skill or tactics.
I would want to see China actually do something like Russia has done in Syria before I think there has been any real changes because shiny flash weapons simply are not the key to military power.
4. For the love of whatever god you believe in. I NEVER SAID THEY NEED 10 CARRIERS How MANY times must I tell you that, So you need to keep quiet with that I am TIREd of you putting words in my mouth.
You are claiming the Russian navy is not strong enough, so of course to test your logic I suggest a very very powerful state the Russian Navy might find themselves in and see if that makes any improvement... and your logic fails... right now a more powerful Russian Navy would make no real difference in any thing that might be considered important to them so delays and development issues are not the end of the world...
I understand Americans have problems understanding logic or reasoning... it is reflected in your leadership... past, present and future...
6. I wasn't even talking to you with the three statement, yet you had to chime in lol are you that sensitive that someone says something you need to ride in?. Considering the current geopolitical landscape they do need a decently sized navy.
Yeah, really weird of me on a discussion board... actually discussing stuff... even responding to comments not directed at me... what a self centred bastard....
7. NEVER said they should build cruisers or DD first you realize they will only build one class of ship not both, however, they got to frigates before they noose died and crashed into the ground in a flaming fireball of death and that's a big issue for many reasons.
You are such a genius... the modular design of their new ships means small ships and big ships... the only real difference will be the size of the main sensors and the number of weapon modules fitted. That means when they can sort out the integration of all the systems together, it is just a question of scaling and new scaled up sensors.
But keep on crying, I am sure deep down you want them to succeed... after all you claim to be fighting on a battlefield against their proxy forces... and no matter how much you love your terrorist head chopping allies are you really worried the Russian Navy might not have enough ships to load Kalibrs to blow up your current temporary mates?
8. That is problems they need to fix, they need to find and train crews they need to actually get their shipyards producing ships are a reasonable pace etc.
How can they produce ships at a reasonable pace when their designs are not right yet Mr Battlefield Hero?
Did you go to the Microsoft school of management? Get the product out and then let the first users beta test it and find all the problems and we will rush out patches and service updates as soon as we can be bothered...
Indeed it is hard for them, but you either need to rise above that or sink. They have had much time to move past some of these issues but haven't, yes it is perosnal opinion in some cases but I don't make excuses for them when they do fail which is a lot.
So what you are saying is that they should take the route of China and make Cold War era ships and subs with modern weapons on board so they look like up to date things even though all the weapon systems and sensors are copies of foreign models they previously bought... yeah setting the bar low is a way to go... as I have said... the Russian navy wont be important for a decade yet, so it wont matter for a while.
We can discuss whether they managed to achieve this or that in the planed schedule, but in the end it changes nothing in the big scheme of things. Developing the navy is not a whim, is a clear need for the national development and they will try for as long as it is needed until goals are fulfilled
Some people don't understand management and think any plan is set in stone and any change to a plan is a failure.
How can any of those 7 redundant projects be a bonus?! Those extra ships only increase the total # w/o any value added while the $ & time wasted r gone forever, unless they r sold with profit &/ converted to CG duties.
They can all serve a purpose... the Ivan Gren might not be the Amphibious Ship they were thinking of, but it is rather better equipped in terms of sensors and communications and capacity to perform its role than existing types like the ancient Alligator (4,500 tons full load) class or the Ropucha (4,000tons full load) class and has the capacity of just over 6,000 tons full load.
The point is that they didn't know it didn't meet their needs until they tested it... and besides they thought they would have up to four Mistral class ships by now.
this requires rebuilding the whole economic-legal and industrial base. You criticize, all we have righ tto do that. I just wonder what would you do on their place?
Obvious isn't it?
Fire Putin.
And replace entire Russian MIC with a replication of the US system... obviously with the Chinese running it all....
