That 3D is interesting… especially the US Army Blackhawk (or maybe USAF) on the port side!

I know it is an Army UH-60 because: 1. You can see the tail wheel at the end of the tail boom, and the USN’s UH-60 Seahawks have the wheel much closer to the main fuselage; 2. the USMC has no UH-60s, and are buying 100 new UH-1Ys to replace their current UH-1N Hueys!

LOL. I would read too much into something like that chances are its just a case of they wanted an S-70 helo pic and thats something they had available to pop into the pic. Otherwise looking at the pics around of the new MH-60S KNIGHTHAWK – MULTI-MISSION NAVAL HELICOPTER variant shows the tail wheel in the same position as the Army models.

Daniel

Within the remaining life of the Oscars Russia is unlikely to need a submarine LACM carrier. (Incidently have all the Yankee Notch (667AT) subs been retired yet?) It will be much easier and cheaper to base LACMs for launch from ground units or by then bomber fleet. You can always load a battery of missiles into a few An-124s for more strategic mobility than you can get from a 30kt submarine. Seriously Russia is unlikely to be operating beyond its own borders unless as part of a cooperative effort so either the US will provide the capability or Russia will be able to employ its other arms from friendly territory. If the Russian Navy really has to have stealthy submarine LACM carriers then utilise a VLS in SSNs as seen in the latest Amur designs or just utilise TT launched missiles, which are already in the Russian inventory. (BTW the Oscars already are designated SSGNs)

Daniel

Russia has 8 Oscar-2 ( One K-141/Kursk was lost ) and one underconstruction , It would serve much better purpose in the RuN , if these Monsters are Converted in to Land Attack Cruise Missile Carrier , Specially the last few of them , They are less than a decade old and can easily serve for more than 2 more decades .

Why? What purpose would such a vessel serve? I have no doubt it could be done but I fail to see how such a platfrom fits into a Russian Navy that is being restructured to provide security for national waters. The Russians and not going to be fighting any expeditionary wars anytime soon and its much cheaper and easier to have your LACMs landbased if they are only being used in protection of your own territory.

Daniel

from JDW 18 Oct 2005

Russia’s PGMs go on show
ROBERT HEWSON Editor, Jane’s Air-Launched Weapons
Moscow
Arare glimpse into Russia’s airborne weapons development was provided in September during an air display to mark the 85th anniversary of the Valery Chkalov State Flight Test Centre.
Otherwise known as the 929 GLITs, the unit is based at the Akhtubinsk airbase in Russia’s North Caucasus Military District. The facility is one of two main flying centres for the NII-VVS – the Russian Federation Air Force’s (RFAF’s) scientific and technical institute – along with Chkalovskiy, situated east of Moscow.
A remote and once highly secret location situated between Volgograd and Astrakhan, Akhtubinsk combines the equivalent aircraft and systems test work undertaken by the US Air Force, for example, at Edwards Air Force Base (AFB) with the weapons and tactics trials conducted at Eglin and Nellis AFBs. The Russian base was established in the 1920s and since 1960 all Russian aircraft and weapon systems, along with those for every export customer, have been tested at Akhtubinsk.
Of the weapons on display at the September event the UPAB-1500 rocket-boosted guided glide bomb attracted much attention. The UPAB-1500 (also known as the Izdeliye K-070) is a new Russian precision weapon designed to attack hardened targets, mountain caves and other such difficult sites. The 1,500 kg (3,300 lb) class bomb has been under development for several years, but its appearance at Akhtubinsk was a surprise. Sources within Russia have suggested that the bomb on display may have been a trials or practice round and not a full-scale 1,500 kg weapon. Its appearance at Akhtubinsk was not accompanied by any data or information and it may even have been shown to the public by mistake.
The fact that the bomb was painted in special markings for drop trials would seem to indicate that some level of testing is ongoing. It is possible that there is renewed impetus behind the UPAB-1500 programme, which has been developed by FSUE Region for both Russian and export needs. Its capabilities fall into the category of precision ‘anti-terrorist’ weapons that have been much recommended lately by President Putin.
Another new export weapon on display was Region’s LGB-250 laser-guided bomb. The LGB-250 is a 250 kg class weapon, which has not been commissioned by the RFAF. In 2003 Region said that the bomb would finish its design development that year, so flight-testing may have been under way for nearly two years and should be nearing completion. India and China have been suggested as potential customers.
Several other Russian precision-guided munitions (PGMs) were in evidence at Akhtubinsk. These included Region’s KAB-500S-E: a global navigation satellite system-guided weapon first revealed in 2003 and now undergoing airborne testing.
Alongside this bomb was SRPE Bazalt’s PBK-500U gliding submunitions dispenser, displayed in a new configuration incorporating the SPBE-D sensor-fused munition. Previously the SPBE-D had been associated with the RBK-500 free-fall cluster munition. The PBK-500U bomb has distinctive long-chord fins and has an inertial navigation system allowing it to glide accurately over a 40 km range. Bazalt has also developed a small jet-engine propulsion system to further boost the range of its dispenser munitions. In 2006 Bazalt said it will complete testing of the improved SPBE-K submunition. The earlier SPBE-D uses an infra-red sensor to detect tank and armoured vehicle engines. The new K variant has a radio frequency (RF) sensor that is effective out to 150 m with a look angle of 30º over the target area beneath it. Fifteen of these bomblets are carried by each dispenser.
In the GLITs aircraft line up an upgraded Su-24M2 was equipped with a Kh-59MK anti-ship missile. The newly produced Kh-59MK is a radar-guided, long-range variant of the basic Kh-59M (AS-18 ‘Kazoo’). It has been developed to arm China’s Su-30MK2 strike fighters, but its display with an Su-24 raises the possibility that it is being offered to other customers such as Algeria or Iran. A similar Su-24/Kh-59MK combination was also shown at the Moscow Air Show in August.
Among the less smart munitions was the latest version of the Bazalt ODAB-500 fuel-air explosive bomb. The ODAB-500PMV is designed for ‘low and slow’ employment by helicopters. Bazalt claims the 500 kg weapon delivers an explosive effect equivalent to a 1,000 kg high-explosive charge. Also in evidence was Bazalt’s RBK-500U anti-runway cluster weapon with its BETAB-M ‘stick grenade’ concrete-piercing submunitions.
Russia may also be working on a new range of guided rocket systems. Alongside an array of standard S-8 80 mm unguided rockets was one device that appeared to be a modification of an S-13 90 mm air-launched rocket. This was fitted with pop-out wings, for increased range, and a di-electric radome in the nose that may house a new RF seeker system. The status of this programme is unknown but large guided rockets are not new to Russian service. The latest development of the S-25 340 mm heavyweight rocket – a laser-guided variant of the penetrating warhead S-25OFM, designated S-25OPM-PU – was also shown at Akhtubinsk.

I have not for a moment accepted that the US would. But while I can’t disprove the presence of ‘ other than russian’ submarines, I can disprove a theory.

Sorry Wan mate, that first part was in support of your statements and the second was directed elsewhere entirely 🙂

Daniel

and so many said its wasn’t possible? :confused:

Who said its not possible? Of course its possible, just not bloody likely. Someones model proves nothing especially when it shows a vessel with the relatively small airgroup of the Kuts class with three different fixed wing type (one interceptor, one strike and one multi-role). IIRC this model was posted more than 12 months ago on CDF.

Daniel

Well, everyone gets sidetracked from time to time? 😮 Really, the point I was trying to make. (before the sharp left turn) Was China would be better off not spending large sums on Aircraft Carriers. Which, would cost in the Billions and take 10-20 years to develope…………….. 😎

But then of course if you want to be able to employ what you can afford to build in 10-20 years time then you need to start developing the capability now.

Daniel

from JDW 31/8/2005

Judge orders ex-Dutch subs in Malaysia to be dismantled
JORIS JANSSEN LOK JDW Special Correspondent
The Hague
* A Dutch court has ordered RDM Technology Holding BV to dismantle two RNLN Zwaardvis-class submarines
* The Dutch want to prevent certain components falling into unauthorised hands
A Dutch court on 17 August ordered RDM Technology Holding BV to begin dismantling two ex-Royal Netherlands Navy (RNLN) Zwaardvis-class submarines before 1 October.
Alternatively, the company must return the boats, which have been laid up in Malaysia since December 2000, to the Netherlands by 1 November.. Penalty for non-compliance has been set at EUR100,000 (USD122,000) per day to a maximum of EUR25 million.
The court order followed a case brought forward by the Netherlands Ministry of Defence (MoD), which had become increasingly concerned about what was going to happen with the submarines, considered to be strategic military goods.
The two submarines, the former HrMs Zwaardvis and HrMs Tijgerhaai, were sold by the Netherlands government to the former RDM Submarines (which went into receivership in 2004) in 1995.
At the time, RDM was campaigning to lease the Zwaardvis-class boats to Malaysia for training purposes in a package deal that would also have included the sale of new Moray-class submarines.
As part of this effort, RDM in 2000 shipped the two submarines to PSC-Naval Dockyard Sdn Bhd in Lumut, Malaysia, to have them positioned close to the customer, thereby increasing its chances of winning the contract.
However, Malaysia selected a competing French offer instead, ordering two Scorpene submarines (currently being built by DCN and Navantia) in 2002.
The Netherlands MoD had specific concerns that the Lumut shipyard could try to recoup some of the money it was owed by the defunct RDM Submarines by selling the submarines to a third party.
“We want to prevent certain components, such as the weapon launching tubes or sensors, falling into unauthorised hands,” the MoD said.
RDM Submarines owes PSC-Naval Dockyard money for maintaining the submarines during the almost five years that they have been in Malaysia.
The two Zwaardvis-class submarines are now more than 30 years old, but at the time of their arrival in Malaysia they were still considered capable.
JDW was on board what was then HrMs Tijgerhaai in 1995, when the boat was simulating a Kilo-class submarine armed with wake-homing torpedoes, during NATO exercises off southern England.
At the time, the submarine escaped detection by anti-submarine warfare helicopters by hiding on top of a wreck site and subsequently successfully attacked the UK auxiliary ships RFA Black Rover and Sir Tristram and their escorting Portuguese and UK surface combatants NRP Corte Real, HMS Southampton and HMS Chatham.
Tijgerhaai’s commanding officer at the time said that “this showed the effect that a relatively cheap diesel-electric submarine can have on a naval force worth over a billion dollars”.
He said that the strong points of the Zwaardvis-class include quality of life on board; long endurance (six-week patrols were routine); full capability to operate in tropical waters; and good maintainability. “From a platform point of view, the boats easily have a 15-year lifetime remaining,” it was said.
It is believed, however, that the technical state of the submarines has deteriorated during their long period of inactivity.