A good number of US surface ships date back 10-20 years. The Enterprise entered service in 1961, and the USS Iowa (still in reserve, its museum service may not alter the ship in any way that would prevent re-activation. Same case with the USS Wisconsin) was launched in 1943. Granted these are extreme examples, but there are lots of ships in the US Navy that are quite old
The US also has the most advanced chemical laser technology (THEL) (Boeing Airborne laser) that will be stationed on ground bases and naval ships in the near future to augment existing anti-ballistic defenses. The torpedo was not a US torpedo, rather it was a rusted Shkval torpedo that had a propellant leak. Both the Shkval and the US Mark 50 torpedo have roughly equivalent cruising speeds, but the Shkval has some reliability issues with its propellant as it rusts.
I hope that Poland will be stronger and stronger, because it deserves,Poland experienced difficult moments through history.And now is the time to live in peace... good luck to,and tanks for support. Dziękujemy za polskich braci, Greetings from Serbia!
HMSAstute don't let these people get to you...we in Russia already know that there are some problems as you have mentioned but now we have the funds to fix them and use them now. There's talk of new carrier and already a new sub has been built and commissioned. Granted we have yet work to do but greatly appreciate your unbiased comment.
Turkish-Greek bilateral economic relations expanded significantly in the last decade and reached an unprecedented level in history. Given the increasing importance of business groups as a result of the intensifying economic relations, some scholars go on to argue that interdependence theory, which underlines the importance of non-state actors in the decision making process, became relevant within the context of Turkish-Greek relations.
It seemed to be operating ok when they entered Georgia last year. Its obviously very operational, but as you would know they had some economical problems in the 90's and early 2000's, so of course their military is not in top working condition as it was, however over the last few years things have taken a turn with increased military spending. New carriers, the Pak-Fa, increased activity and modernisation of their fighters and Navy.
The MiG-35 has already been exported to Syria and India. Due to its modifications it is a totally new aircraft, and comparing it with MiG-29 will something like comparing F-15 and F-22. Thus it is a newer aircraft. Plus that do not expect to find an extremely large number yet, but it is a more effective replacement program in comparison to the US, where only putting new stuff under an old shell is all that has been done so far and a very small number of new vehicles can be seen.
Adolf Tolkachev (1927, Aktyubinsk, Kazakhstan 1986) was a Soviet Union electronics engineer who provided key documents to the CIA over the years between 1979 and 1985. Working at the Soviet radar design house Phazotron as one of the chief designers, Tolkachev gave the CIA complete information about such projects as the R-23, R-24, R-33, R-27, and R-60, S-300; fighter-interceptor aircraft radars used on the MiG-29, MiG-31, and Su-27; and other avionics.
nope it wasn`t borrowed the shuttle looked dimilar but it was bigger and fully automatic also the rocket energia was a independent complex it was not used shuttle`s engines to lift it to orbit
What is US Navy? It is aircraft carriers (Nimitz class in commission 1975), missile cruisers (Ticonderoga class in commission 1983), destroyers (Arleigh Burke class in commission 1991), frigates (Oliver H. Perry class in commission 1977).
The T-80 is basically the same tank as the T-72, it just has an gas turbine engine, some improvment on the suspension and some other small tech stuff. The T-90 is also based on the T-72 but is is also depoloyed is very few numbers and wouldnt make much differens in a full scale war. However the number of tanks is not that importent in todays war. Iraq had the fourth biggest army in the world in 1990/1991 but it still didnt have a chance in hell when it was confronted by modern western hardw.
According to my knowledge on this topic, the current priorities of the Russian ministry of defense are the air force and ground forces. In all sectors the Russian government is coming up with newer and better innovations and yet the navy is left behind. Usually ships take a lot of funds, time and resources to build, but 20 years seem to be not enough. I agree, new inventions are needed.
Large numbers means a good percent of active counter parts. The BTR-90s are also in a good number within the Russian military, saw service in Chechnya and Georgia being active within three armies in the Russian military. A total of 30 has been already built and another shipment of 67 is expected by the end of this year with 44 currently under construction and 9 being tested. The MiG-35 is the improved version of the MiG-29, I agree, but it is far more superior in design.
Actually you are wrong. The T-90 is based on the T-72 design but it is far superior and currently represents an overall of 15% of the active tanks in Russia, which is a lot if measured. The S-400 has already been put to service within 7 different PVO units on the most critical areas, testing was complete 3 years ago and is already being mass produced. The Ka-52 has been split into two regiments and is currently operational and more deliveries are expected soon.
I agree, but still when you have this enormous warship underwater armed with 50 nuclear missiles, I think that this really has the attention of everybody else and they will think twice before messing up with the Russians. These subs are not for fighting enemy subs, but to be off land missile platforms and Kursk and Typhoon class subs, truly are menace when it comes to that.
Your right, Afghanistan was a lot MORE than Vietnam, 1/3 of the pre-war population in Afghanistan were displaced or killed by your war there. Both Vietnam and Afghan wars were devastating, its pointless to argue between the two.
To the thing about the submarine surfacing beside the US carrier, the HMCS Corner Brook surfaced less than a 1km away from HMS Illustrious undetected during a wargame. And Canada's subs were made in Britain! This happend again during RIMPAC where HMCS Victoria surfaced inside the USS Enterprise battlegroup, undetected, which means if we were hostile, there would be another American carrier sitting on the bottom of the Pacific Ocean Another thing, Russia has nearly invulnerable missiles
UAVs are specifically designed to pass by undetected. And to breach a Kirov class defense takes ONE well placed Harpoon with ONE fighter with stealth capability (JSF, Spirit). Unless you plan on wasting ammo all day hoping to take down something you can't see, that I'm not wasting my breath. Also, electronic warfare from some prototype hardware the Navy's packin has the potential to make all conventional missiles obsolete. (chemical lasers, high grade ESM, EMP)
Smaller ships don't need great defensive capabilities for themselves but when escorting a larger vessel, then they must be able to destroy deflect some of the incoming hazards. When I start to think in what condition was the Russian military 10 years ago I am surprised that they even have navy. Currently it is somewhere between 30-40% of its potential to match rival navies, but given enough time this will change drastically. After all, they must do it.
Yeah, i agree 100% about Russian cruise missiles. They are very advanced and some fly ballistic trajectories (flying all over the damn place, not in a straight line) The Shipwreck missile from the 70's is one hell of a high tech weapon system from Russia. Read up on it. The system was designed to launch a salvo of missiles, they are data linked together, one would pop up, scan for targets, prioritize them, strike, remaining missiles would repriortize, and restrike remaining vessels, very scary
Although a harsh statement, I think you are right. I am a pretty big fan of Russian military hardware and its downsize is that it is pretty expensive. Simple fleets like combining destroyers, frigates and carriers are not the way of the Russians. But still, the warships that are 20 years old are still useful and have a long time of service ahead of them. Usually 50 years take for a ship design to become outdated. A little modernization and the Russian Navy will retake its former glory.
The Kuznetsov is built for an entirely differnet purpose. It carriers supersonic SSM's, more SAM's then many nations' entire inventory, 4 or 6 dual CIWS 30mm gattlings, guns, CIWS missiles. The aircraft are just there for air superiority and can be fitted for surface attack. A Kuznetsov would be coupled with a Kirov, a few Slava's, Sovremeny's and Udaloys as escort, all carry overkill numbers of SAM's & gattlings. There is no fleet on earth who can surpass Russia in defensive weaponary.
as far as i know there is a reserve but it isnt a proper aircraft carrier its a commamndo carrier mainly for helicopters but can support harriers if they have support
Armament Anti-ship weapons of «Admiral Chabanenko»: SS-N-22 Sunburn (a quotation from wiki: this weapon has a top speed of Mach 3, and is considered one of the most lethal anti-ship missiles in the world) It can deliver a warhead of 320 kg. It can also deliver a 200 kiloton nuclear warhead
The P-500 and P-700s have some pretty limited ranges to my understanding, I don't think that a Russian ship OR a sub for that matter could get that close to a Carrier battle group without attracting attention from Aegis and Arleigh-Burke destroyer sensors. By that time, JSFs and anti-missile defenses would be set up and stand a good chance to taking out those ASMs from long range. Also, you're forgetting that the P-500s only make their supersonic runs when they get in close to the ships.
Gotta love that Russian music in the background -_- no Supercarriers? C'mon I know you guys deal in Subs more but seriously, you have some catching up to do in Naval tech to the west. I mean admit it, your navy is huge in Subs but the Brits and Americans have some top notch sonar and anti-sub weapons. Not to mention SOTA Destroyers and Aegis cruisers...
Think before you write, the F-22 is in service in the US airforce today. The F-35 (JSF) is the plane that is still in development. And no the S-400 cant shoot down any F-22 or F-35 becouse is has nothing to lock on to. They are freaking stealth! The only thing that might work are heatseeking missiles and classic AA guns. And I dont think Su-35 will be the main fighter by 2012, it means that they have to build like 400 fighters in 5 years.
Oh yeah...and the Akula s actually only quieter than the old Los Angeles class subs back in the 1980s and 90s not the quietest. Right now, the Virginia class subs are considered on par with some other German non-nuclear sub as the stealthiest.
Well, the US are buying from Russia Mi-26 Halo primarily for the civilian sector, so just because something has NATO written on it, doesn't mean that it is the best. I think is that because the Russians want to decrease expenses, thought that buying foreign equipment is cheaper than designing and building your own.
The modernization part is out of place on a second thought. When I come to think of it, the Kirov class Cruisers are very symbolic ships, but they require a lot of materials and time to build, almost as an aircraft carrier. On the other hand, I don't think that the Russian government will ever try to copy the US when assembling a fleet, consisting of aegis cruisers, destroyers, frigates and a carrier as a flagship, perceived as a standard today.
Just to end things, I do HAVE some favorites of Russian technology (AK rifles, T-90 tanks, Spetznaz which I think can go neck a neck with US Special forces, MIRVs, Typhoon-class subs). C'mon you gotta have at least some favorites outside Russian tech.
You know, i can't think of a single instance in history when having a navy did Russia any good. It's been nothing but defeat, disaster, rust, and waste. Now the Army is a different story of course.
The US do not need anti-ship missiles as severely as the Russians do. No other country needs a navy as sophisticated as the US Navy. Most countries and navies do not need to go around the world and do dangerous things.
However, even in its current state the Russian NAVY is not to be underestimated. Most of their ships have excellent AA defenses making them more effective against carriers, which is why ships like the Peter the Great can exist today. I think that soon the Russian Navy will be back on track. It has a pretty big potential in it, by the end of the year, the Russian navy should acquire one additional Kirov class and a carrier, as well as two subs. The finances are its worst enemy, not the US navy ;)
Вот вот - вот ты и попалсяю 1) Форма солдат весьма подходящая - или ты не знаешь что междуречье это не только пустыня но и плодороднейшие земли? Здесь на ЮТ много видео с солдатами в этой форме
P-500 has range of 550 km P-700 has 650 km 500 is 6t 700 is 7t both have 500-750kg warheads and huge kinetic energy Harpoon is mostly air-to-surface missile and it`s weight is up to 630kg and range is not exceeds 300km even if it launched airborne And as for CBG - Iranian UAV closed unnoticed with ease - also real war is not in open sea - it ALREADY will be within range - and for empl to breach Kirov class defences you need ALL jets that will be in CBG SIMULTANEOUSLY
The F-22 was the first to match it my friend, and the F-35 will follow. Prior US jets aren't equal in dog fighting skill, the F-22 was given thrust vectoring to match Russian military aircraft.
Ничего подобного. Единственное время когда солдаты США носили зеленую форму, это было в начале войны, и это были костюмы химзащиты. Никаких значков на форме, указывающих на подразделение, к которому они прикреплены.
A version of the MiG-35 is designed for non-export - MiG-29M NATO reporting name. Also the AK-101 is being used by Russian armed forces as well. Don't know from where you got this info. Interestingly the Russian Defense Ministry has much lower budget for now compared to its American counterpart and yet they manage to pull the Russian military in one piece. Plus that you asked how many new vehicles Russia has mass produced since the Cold War and I told you.
True, yet as you see I am a little optimistic. I am a very huge fan of Russian/Soviet military and I feel bad when I turn against them. The government is always the ones to blame. The Kursk which unfortunately saw no future was one of the most promising designs of modern submarines and we all thought that the Russian navy is getting out of its dark age. But the disaster itself turned out to be a hard hit on the navy's funding.
they are diff designs of carriers.. russia has large cruisers with decks on top.. and usa has aircraft carriers... a squadron of f18s in the air is more than enough air/ ship defence... with that hawkeye in the air.. no one is getting close... and the aegis system can handle any anti ship missiles.
Dude, I don't hate the Russians, in fact I like a lot of the stuff they've made over the years. (AK the most) I'm simply saying that although the Russians are modernizing, they still have some catching up to do with the West. I mean, some of these ships look good but in point speaking, I don't think they can take on a modern battle fleet like for example, the British, Japanese, or US.
anti-submarine weapons of «Admiral Chabanenko»: «Udav» (120 anti-submarine rockets, range 3000km, can use nuclear warhead) «Vodopad» (24 anti-ship and anti-submarine rocket-torpedoes, range 60 km (last modifications of this weapons has range 100km and has warhead-torpedo with speed 360 km/h under water) can use also nuclear charge) 2 helicopters
The United States considered the most advanced airborne radar among the systems Tolkachev compromised was the passive phased array radar used by the MiG-31 Foxhound fighter. He was executed as a spy in 1986.
And PAC-3 is supposed to be NOT antiair - it is antibalistic adaptation - which has limited airborne targets engagement capability - so lets compare S-300 to PAC?
ak30001 i agree with you, nobady knows Russian gear, not like American video it almost everything. (Quiet doesnt mean weak.) and Russian always show something old and video it, sometimes make me wonder what they have acctualy. Even they have trouble in money they still can make best weapon AA for example its very impressive.
U did not read carefully what i wrote mate ,I asked what Russia implemented i VAST NUMBERS.BTR-90 around 350 in service,T-90 is only development of T-72BM with involvment of components from t-80 next Su-35 is prototype due in service 2011 , Mig-35 is development of Mig29(new engine) and only for export,Ka-52 there is 10 in service,Ka-60 there is 7 in service,S-400 just has finished tests and is ready for production but we will see how many going to enter regular service.
Do not forget - 70% of Afganians suported USSR one way or another - we build there dams, power plants, universities, factories, airports, roads, houses, hospitals, schools - right in a middle of what you call "a lot MORE than Vietnam" How many of those stuff USA built in Vietnam during carpet bombings?
I didn`t said that no civilian population suffered by Soviet weaponry - but - we NEVER did it intentively like you did in Jp, Dresden or Nam. And here is list of Soviet long-range strategic aviation of WW2 TB-3, TB-4, TB-6, DB-2, ANT-42, DB-3, DB-4, DVB-102, DB-LK, Er-2, Zveno, Pe-8,Pe-8M-82,Tu-2D Enough?
Ну хорошо. 1) Форма солдатов США имеет другой цвет. 2) Оружие, которое в кадре, никогда не состояло на вооружении в армии США. И 3) Кудрявые волосы у девушки? Она же мулатка. К Ираку она вообще не имеет отношения.
Russian Navy has many different anti-ship supersonic rockets. But US Navy does not have anti-ship supersonic rockets, even now! Even US experts agree that Russian anti-ship rockets, SAMs and missile/cannon complexes are currently the best in the world.
"CV" is recognized as shorthand for ANY carrier, and we could easily remove the reactors from a Nimitz and still kick ass as effectively. NGNNS produces all our CV(N)s, the same basic design going back to CV-63. Russia's MILITARY is in shambles. Here's an example: the VVS doesn't give half their pilots enough time to stay proficient on the jets they're assigned. There were reports of one regiment not even getting paychecks for three months. The USAF has never had something like that happen.
Actually the have 6, but 4 are decommissioned and one was sold to India. 2 aircraft carriers will be back to military service in the next few years. And 2 more Kirov class cruisers will enter service as well. About the US military, I think that you will agree when I say that there hasn't been nothing impressive invented since the end of the Cold war except the F-22 and F-35. The Russian have a plenty of newer equipment.
Thats right. Thats how it have been since.. I donno partly ww1, and seriusly ww2. "Detected means destroyed". Its not only about naval combat. Its about everything these days.
Russia has 1 carrier about 5 or 7 cruisers something like 14 destroyers some frigates, corvettes and a sizeable number of submarines. They are the navy that they had in the 80's but they are planning to become a blue water navy once again.
Heres the answer to D-day: we originally were to push through Italy to Germany itself but the Soviets (namely Stalin) in the Yalta or Tehran Conference asked the Allies for a "Third Front". So no we didn't plan D-day to beat the Russians to Berlin, we did D-Day because Stalin needed it. Oh yeah and what does the term "largest planned invasion in history" mean? God, we took off so much pressure from the Eastern Front it actually made Stalin happy.
Russia's navy sits rusting at the piers, and the Air force just bought their first new-production fighters in 20 years: a small token batch of Flankers. A slideshow of decades old ships like this means little.
Haven't heard nothing about it. ;) I think there're too little S-400 to substitute S-300. And I haven't heard about S-400V and S-400F version. So S-400 seems to be an assimetrical answer to american BMD. :))
Nice video once again.
A good number of US surface ships date back 10-20 years. The Enterprise entered service in 1961, and the USS Iowa (still in reserve, its museum service may not alter the ship in any way that would prevent re-activation. Same case with the USS Wisconsin) was launched in 1943. Granted these are extreme examples, but there are lots of ships in the US Navy that are quite old
The US also has the most advanced chemical laser technology (THEL) (Boeing Airborne laser) that will be stationed on ground bases and naval ships in the near future to augment existing anti-ballistic defenses. The torpedo was not a US torpedo, rather it was a rusted Shkval torpedo that had a propellant leak. Both the Shkval and the US Mark 50 torpedo have roughly equivalent cruising speeds, but the Shkval has some reliability issues with its propellant as it rusts.
coooool, they look so sleek and deadly.
Also thanks for the quick reply comrade.
I hope that Poland will be stronger and stronger, because it deserves,Poland experienced difficult moments through history.And now is the time to live in peace... good luck to,and tanks for support.
Dziękujemy za polskich braci, Greetings from Serbia!
nice video!
And what a nice Navy Russia has.
HMSAstute don't let these people get to you...we in Russia already know that there are some problems as you have mentioned but now we have the funds to fix them and use them now. There's talk of new carrier and already a new sub has been built and commissioned. Granted we have yet work to do but greatly appreciate your unbiased comment.
They still have the Kuznetsov, the ship they are selling to india is the old Admiral Gorshkov. From the Kiev class.
@riverman83 Hi, could you elaborate on "projecting power on a world wide scale" please. thank you.
Тоже заметил!!!! :)
Turkish-Greek bilateral economic relations expanded significantly in the last decade and reached an unprecedented level in history. Given the increasing importance of business groups as a result of the intensifying economic relations, some scholars go on to argue that interdependence theory, which underlines the importance of non-state actors in the decision making process, became relevant within the context of Turkish-Greek relations.
It seemed to be operating ok when they entered Georgia last year. Its obviously very operational, but as you would know they had some economical problems in the 90's and early 2000's, so of course their military is not in top working condition as it was, however over the last few years things have taken a turn with increased military spending. New carriers, the Pak-Fa, increased activity and modernisation of their fighters and Navy.
The MiG-35 has already been exported to Syria and India. Due to its modifications it is a totally new aircraft, and comparing it with MiG-29 will something like comparing F-15 and F-22. Thus it is a newer aircraft. Plus that do not expect to find an extremely large number yet, but it is a more effective replacement program in comparison to the US, where only putting new stuff under an old shell is all that has been done so far and a very small number of new vehicles can be seen.
Adolf Tolkachev (1927, Aktyubinsk, Kazakhstan 1986) was a Soviet Union electronics engineer who provided key documents to the CIA over the years between 1979 and 1985. Working at the Soviet radar design house Phazotron as one of the chief designers, Tolkachev gave the CIA complete information about such projects as the R-23, R-24, R-33, R-27, and R-60, S-300; fighter-interceptor aircraft radars used on the MiG-29, MiG-31, and Su-27; and other avionics.
nope it wasn`t borrowed
the shuttle looked dimilar but it was bigger and fully automatic
also the rocket energia was a independent complex it was not used shuttle`s engines to lift it to orbit
subprime2006, There was a US submarine accident back in 2005, I think it crashed into rocks underwater, 1 crew member died.
Вспомнил детство
Most of Russian ships are not old and equiped with modern weapons.
Many ships in American fleet are older actually.
What is US Navy? It is aircraft carriers (Nimitz class in commission 1975), missile cruisers (Ticonderoga class in commission 1983), destroyers (Arleigh Burke class in commission 1991), frigates (Oliver H. Perry class in commission 1977).
Where's Steregushchiy? Cool clip anyway I like the pics.
Nice!!
The T-80 is basically the same tank as the T-72, it just has an gas turbine engine, some improvment on the suspension and some other small tech stuff. The T-90 is also based on the T-72 but is is also depoloyed is very few numbers and wouldnt make much differens in a full scale war.
However the number of tanks is not that importent in todays war. Iraq had the fourth biggest army in the world in 1990/1991 but it still didnt have a chance in hell when it was confronted by modern western hardw.
The Russian national anthem is one of the best anthems in the world. Majestic, solemn and powerful. Never getting tired of listening to it.
Yeah it really hurts me when I see the Ruble getting de-valued on the news on monthly basis
Russia needs a navy like they did in the 80's. Carriers, cruisers, destroyers, Frigates, Corvettes and submarines were available in large numbers.
According to my knowledge on this topic, the current priorities of the Russian ministry of defense are the air force and ground forces. In all sectors the Russian government is coming up with newer and better innovations and yet the navy is left behind. Usually ships take a lot of funds, time and resources to build, but 20 years seem to be not enough. I agree, new inventions are needed.
Large numbers means a good percent of active counter parts. The BTR-90s are also in a good number within the Russian military, saw service in Chechnya and Georgia being active within three armies in the Russian military. A total of 30 has been already built and another shipment of 67 is expected by the end of this year with 44 currently under construction and 9 being tested. The MiG-35 is the improved version of the MiG-29, I agree, but it is far more superior in design.
Actually you are wrong. The T-90 is based on the T-72 design but it is far superior and currently represents an overall of 15% of the active tanks in Russia, which is a lot if measured. The S-400 has already been put to service within 7 different PVO units on the most critical areas, testing was complete 3 years ago and is already being mass produced. The Ka-52 has been split into two regiments and is currently operational and more deliveries are expected soon.
I agree, but still when you have this enormous warship underwater armed with 50 nuclear missiles, I think that this really has the attention of everybody else and they will think twice before messing up with the Russians. These subs are not for fighting enemy subs, but to be off land missile platforms and Kursk and Typhoon class subs, truly are menace when it comes to that.
Your right, Afghanistan was a lot MORE than Vietnam, 1/3 of the pre-war population in Afghanistan were displaced or killed by your war there. Both Vietnam and Afghan wars were devastating, its pointless to argue between the two.
To the thing about the submarine surfacing beside the US carrier, the HMCS Corner Brook surfaced less than a 1km away from HMS Illustrious undetected during a wargame. And Canada's subs were made in Britain!
This happend again during RIMPAC where HMCS Victoria surfaced inside the USS Enterprise battlegroup, undetected, which means if we were hostile, there would be another American carrier sitting on the bottom of the Pacific Ocean
Another thing, Russia has nearly invulnerable missiles
UAVs are specifically designed to pass by undetected. And to breach a Kirov class defense takes ONE well placed Harpoon with ONE fighter with stealth capability (JSF, Spirit). Unless you plan on wasting ammo all day hoping to take down something you can't see, that I'm not wasting my breath. Also, electronic warfare from some prototype hardware the Navy's packin has the potential to make all conventional missiles obsolete. (chemical lasers, high grade ESM, EMP)
Smaller ships don't need great defensive capabilities for themselves but when escorting a larger vessel, then they must be able to destroy deflect some of the incoming hazards. When I start to think in what condition was the Russian military 10 years ago I am surprised that they even have navy. Currently it is somewhere between 30-40% of its potential to match rival navies, but given enough time this will change drastically. After all, they must do it.
Yeah, i agree 100% about Russian cruise missiles. They are very advanced and some fly ballistic trajectories (flying all over the damn place, not in a straight line)
The Shipwreck missile from the 70's is one hell of a high tech weapon system from Russia. Read up on it. The system was designed to launch a salvo of missiles, they are data linked together, one would pop up, scan for targets, prioritize them, strike, remaining missiles would repriortize, and restrike remaining vessels, very scary
Although a harsh statement, I think you are right. I am a pretty big fan of Russian military hardware and its downsize is that it is pretty expensive. Simple fleets like combining destroyers, frigates and carriers are not the way of the Russians. But still, the warships that are 20 years old are still useful and have a long time of service ahead of them. Usually 50 years take for a ship design to become outdated. A little modernization and the Russian Navy will retake its former glory.
The Kuznetsov is built for an entirely differnet purpose. It carriers supersonic SSM's, more SAM's then many nations' entire inventory, 4 or 6 dual CIWS 30mm gattlings, guns, CIWS missiles. The aircraft are just there for air superiority and can be fitted for surface attack.
A Kuznetsov would be coupled with a Kirov, a few Slava's, Sovremeny's and Udaloys as escort, all carry overkill numbers of SAM's & gattlings.
There is no fleet on earth who can surpass Russia in defensive weaponary.
as far as i know there is a reserve but it isnt a proper aircraft carrier its a commamndo carrier mainly for helicopters but can support harriers if they have support
range on aerial targets - 200km; PAC-3 15km PAC-2 160km
Range ballistic targets - 150km; PAC-3 45km PAC-2 20km
Max attitude aerial targets - 30km; PAC-3 15km PAC-2 24,4 km
Max attitude ballistic targets - 30km; PAC-3 15km PAC-2 12km
MAx target`s speed 10000km/h; PAC-3 5000km/h PAC-2 2200km/h
Mass of warhead - 150kg; PAC-2 74kg PAC-2 91kg
Fire delay - 2 sec; PAC-3 4 seconds PAC-2 4 seconds
Deploymen/Mobilizing - 5 min/5 min; PAC-3 15/30 min PAC-2 15/30 min
Armament
Anti-ship weapons of «Admiral Chabanenko»:
SS-N-22 Sunburn (a quotation from wiki: this weapon has a top speed of Mach 3, and is considered one of the most lethal anti-ship missiles in the world) It can deliver a warhead of 320 kg. It can also deliver a 200 kiloton nuclear warhead
The P-500 and P-700s have some pretty limited ranges to my understanding, I don't think that a Russian ship OR a sub for that matter could get that close to a Carrier battle group without attracting attention from Aegis and Arleigh-Burke destroyer sensors. By that time, JSFs and anti-missile defenses would be set up and stand a good chance to taking out those ASMs from long range. Also, you're forgetting that the P-500s only make their supersonic runs when they get in close to the ships.
Gotta love that Russian music in the background -_- no Supercarriers? C'mon I know you guys deal in Subs more but seriously, you have some catching up to do in Naval tech to the west. I mean admit it, your navy is huge in Subs but the Brits and Americans have some top notch sonar and anti-sub weapons. Not to mention SOTA Destroyers and Aegis cruisers...
i do thing its inpressive but it is a bit behind like 5-10 years. but i did see a famous sailing vessel named Sedov and that was pretty inpressive.
Кстати, а ничего так брови у девушки выщипаны, что за визажист там в Ираке? Не подскажешь?
Think before you write, the F-22 is in service in the US airforce today. The F-35 (JSF) is the plane that is still in development. And no the S-400 cant shoot down any F-22 or F-35 becouse is has nothing to lock on to. They are freaking stealth! The only thing that might work are heatseeking missiles and classic AA guns.
And I dont think Su-35 will be the main fighter by 2012, it means that they have to build like 400 fighters in 5 years.
(Information from wiki)
United States Navy has:
11 aircraft carriers
22 missile cruisers
56 destroyers
30 frigates
71 submarines
14 minesweepers
33 landing ships and supporting ships
Bulava is reliable design. It has problems with quality production control.
Oh yeah...and the Akula s actually only quieter than the old Los Angeles class subs back in the 1980s and 90s not the quietest. Right now, the Virginia class subs are considered on par with some other German non-nuclear sub as the stealthiest.
Ever heard about SUPERSONIC ASM and SUPERCAVITATIONAL torpedoes?
Well, the US are buying from Russia Mi-26 Halo primarily for the civilian sector, so just because something has NATO written on it, doesn't mean that it is the best. I think is that because the Russians want to decrease expenses, thought that buying foreign equipment is cheaper than designing and building your own.
whats the name of this song?
The modernization part is out of place on a second thought. When I come to think of it, the Kirov class Cruisers are very symbolic ships, but they require a lot of materials and time to build, almost as an aircraft carrier. On the other hand, I don't think that the Russian government will ever try to copy the US when assembling a fleet, consisting of aegis cruisers, destroyers, frigates and a carrier as a flagship, perceived as a standard today.
Just to end things, I do HAVE some favorites of Russian technology (AK rifles, T-90 tanks, Spetznaz which I think can go neck a neck with US Special forces, MIRVs, Typhoon-class subs). C'mon you gotta have at least some favorites outside Russian tech.
anyone know wats the progress wit the planned carriers?
А я гдето говорил что я Спецназ? Я просто уважаю их героизм. В честь них я сделал этот ник.
You know, i can't think of a single instance in history when having a navy did Russia any good. It's been nothing but defeat, disaster, rust, and waste. Now the Army is a different story of course.
Russia ,Greece,France ...Europe
Благородно!
The US do not need anti-ship missiles as severely as the Russians do.
No other country needs a navy as sophisticated as the US Navy. Most countries and navies do not need to go around the world and do dangerous things.
However, even in its current state the Russian NAVY is not to be underestimated. Most of their ships have excellent AA defenses making them more effective against carriers, which is why ships like the Peter the Great can exist today. I think that soon the Russian Navy will be back on track. It has a pretty big potential in it, by the end of the year, the Russian navy should acquire one additional Kirov class and a carrier, as well as two subs. The finances are its worst enemy, not the US navy ;)
Вот вот - вот ты и попалсяю 1) Форма солдат весьма подходящая - или ты не знаешь что междуречье это не только пустыня но и плодороднейшие земли? Здесь на ЮТ много видео с солдатами в этой форме
2 divisions u say, how many systems contain 1 division? 3? 4?
P-500 has range of 550 km P-700 has 650 km
500 is 6t 700 is 7t both have 500-750kg warheads and huge kinetic energy
Harpoon is mostly air-to-surface missile and it`s weight is up to 630kg and range is not exceeds 300km even if it launched airborne
And as for CBG - Iranian UAV closed unnoticed with ease - also real war is not in open sea - it ALREADY will be within range - and for empl to breach Kirov class defences you need ALL jets that will be in CBG SIMULTANEOUSLY
As for you how about vietnam korea combojia somali gaiti cuba grenada iraq afganistan
who`s next?
You forget about what price these planes have.
i heard that they are planning on building 6 carrier groups in 2012
It was NOT Russo-Afgan war - it was Afganian CIVIL WAR where we assisted LEGITIME GOVERMENT
The F-22 was the first to match it my friend, and the F-35 will follow. Prior US jets aren't equal in dog fighting skill, the F-22 was given thrust vectoring to match Russian military aircraft.
Ничего подобного. Единственное время когда солдаты США носили зеленую форму, это было в начале войны, и это были костюмы химзащиты. Никаких значков на форме, указывающих на подразделение, к которому они прикреплены.
@SuperKriegsmarine Its Russian Navy flag.Sometimes the color is white instead of red
A version of the MiG-35 is designed for non-export - MiG-29M NATO reporting name. Also the AK-101 is being used by Russian armed forces as well. Don't know from where you got this info. Interestingly the Russian Defense Ministry has much lower budget for now compared to its American counterpart and yet they manage to pull the Russian military in one piece. Plus that you asked how many new vehicles Russia has mass produced since the Cold War and I told you.
True, yet as you see I am a little optimistic. I am a very huge fan of Russian/Soviet military and I feel bad when I turn against them. The government is always the ones to blame. The Kursk which unfortunately saw no future was one of the most promising designs of modern submarines and we all thought that the Russian navy is getting out of its dark age. But the disaster itself turned out to be a hard hit on the navy's funding.
A 4to Super?
they are diff designs of carriers.. russia has large cruisers with decks on top.. and usa has aircraft carriers... a squadron of f18s in the air is more than enough air/ ship defence... with that hawkeye in the air.. no one is getting close... and the aegis system can handle any anti ship missiles.
Dude, I don't hate the Russians, in fact I like a lot of the stuff they've made over the years. (AK the most) I'm simply saying that although the Russians are modernizing, they still have some catching up to do with the West. I mean, some of these ships look good but in point speaking, I don't think they can take on a modern battle fleet like for example, the British, Japanese, or US.
@Magnedudewon2
When you are using steam catapult,air frame on the plane has short duration, and must be changed often
anti-submarine weapons of «Admiral Chabanenko»:
«Udav» (120 anti-submarine rockets, range 3000km, can use nuclear warhead)
«Vodopad» (24 anti-ship and anti-submarine rocket-torpedoes, range 60 km (last modifications of this weapons has range 100km and has warhead-torpedo with speed 360 km/h under water) can use also nuclear charge)
2 helicopters
if you go by number of boats, Disney has the third largest navy on the planet.
The United States considered the most advanced airborne radar among the systems Tolkachev compromised was the passive phased array radar used by the MiG-31 Foxhound fighter. He was executed as a spy in 1986.
Ну ты уж выбери, пара мы или одно лицо:-) Доктор Джекил и мистер Хайд? Забавно:-)
And PAC-3 is supposed to be NOT antiair - it is antibalistic adaptation - which has limited airborne targets engagement capability - so lets compare S-300 to PAC?
ak30001 i agree with you, nobady knows Russian gear, not like American video it almost everything. (Quiet doesnt mean weak.) and Russian always show something old and video it, sometimes make me wonder what they have acctualy. Even they have trouble in money they still can make best weapon AA for example its very impressive.
U did not read carefully what i wrote mate ,I asked what Russia implemented i VAST NUMBERS.BTR-90 around 350 in service,T-90 is only development of T-72BM with involvment of components from t-80 next Su-35 is prototype due in service 2011 , Mig-35 is development of Mig29(new engine) and only for export,Ka-52 there is 10 in service,Ka-60 there is 7 in service,S-400 just has finished tests and is ready for production but we will see how many going to enter regular service.
Do not forget - 70% of Afganians suported USSR one way or another - we build there dams, power plants, universities, factories, airports, roads, houses, hospitals, schools - right in a middle of what you call "a lot MORE than Vietnam"
How many of those stuff USA built in Vietnam during carpet bombings?
I didn`t said that no civilian population suffered by Soviet weaponry - but - we NEVER did it intentively like you did in Jp, Dresden or Nam.
And here is list of Soviet long-range strategic aviation of WW2
TB-3, TB-4, TB-6, DB-2, ANT-42, DB-3, DB-4, DVB-102, DB-LK, Er-2, Zveno, Pe-8,Pe-8M-82,Tu-2D
Enough?
2) по поводу оружия - с чего ты взял что оно обязательно должно стоять на вооружении США? Да и к томуже они используют много трофейного
Ну хорошо. 1) Форма солдатов США имеет другой цвет. 2) Оружие, которое в кадре, никогда не состояло на вооружении в армии США. И 3) Кудрявые волосы у девушки? Она же мулатка. К Ираку она вообще не имеет отношения.
Russian Navy has many different anti-ship supersonic rockets. But US Navy does not have anti-ship supersonic rockets, even now! Even US experts agree that Russian anti-ship rockets, SAMs and missile/cannon complexes are currently the best in the world.
Welcome,This is "WW3",my little friend =)
@MokomaSusi
And so? What is bad about it? Actualy all NATO stuff used today is also upgrade of cold war era equipment
"CV" is recognized as shorthand for ANY carrier, and we could easily remove the reactors from a Nimitz and still kick ass as effectively. NGNNS produces all our CV(N)s, the same basic design going back to CV-63.
Russia's MILITARY is in shambles. Here's an example: the VVS doesn't give half their pilots enough time to stay proficient on the jets they're assigned. There were reports of one regiment not even getting paychecks for three months. The USAF has never had something like that happen.
Actually the have 6, but 4 are decommissioned and one was sold to India. 2 aircraft carriers will be back to military service in the next few years. And 2 more Kirov class cruisers will enter service as well. About the US military, I think that you will agree when I say that there hasn't been nothing impressive invented since the end of the Cold war except the F-22 and F-35. The Russian have a plenty of newer equipment.
Thats right. Thats how it have been since.. I donno partly ww1, and seriusly ww2. "Detected means destroyed". Its not only about naval combat. Its about everything these days.
Russia has 1 carrier about 5 or 7 cruisers something like 14 destroyers some frigates, corvettes and a sizeable number of submarines. They are the navy that they had in the 80's but they are planning to become a blue water navy once again.
Нет - это не мой праздник - это горькая дата для всех жителей бывшего СССР и многих стран мира кто пострадал от последствий развала Великой Страны
F22 is in development aswell dude
Heres the answer to D-day: we originally were to push through Italy to Germany itself but the Soviets (namely Stalin) in the Yalta or Tehran Conference asked the Allies for a "Third Front". So no we didn't plan D-day to beat the Russians to Berlin, we did D-Day because Stalin needed it. Oh yeah and what does the term "largest planned invasion in history" mean? God, we took off so much pressure from the Eastern Front it actually made Stalin happy.
For example big anti-submarine ship «Admiral Chabanenko»:
Russia's navy sits rusting at the piers, and the Air force just bought their first new-production fighters in 20 years: a small token batch of Flankers. A slideshow of decades old ships like this means little.
Haven't heard nothing about it. ;) I think there're too little S-400 to substitute S-300. And I haven't heard about S-400V and S-400F version. So S-400 seems to be an assimetrical answer to american BMD. :))