dark light

snake65

Forum Replies Created

Viewing 15 posts - 181 through 195 (of 746 total)
  • Author
    Posts
  • in reply to: Russian submarine Losharik #2024780
    snake65
    Participant

    The project number is considered to be 10831K (or 10832).

    in reply to: Russian Navy News & Discussion, Part III #2024894
    snake65
    Participant

    Nice view of Pr.855 ‘Yassen’, (pic c/o Gradient):

    Apparently the torp tube shields are as secret as the propeller. Usual veird logic of the 1st Section.:diablo:

    in reply to: Russian Navy News & Discussion, Part III #2025827
    snake65
    Participant

    I have a document that claims Vulkan and possible Sandbox (I don’t have the doc handy at the moment) supposedly dove below the waterline just before impact. Any truth to this?

    That was the way how one of the first Russian ASMs KSSch was operating, which dropped warhead into water app. 60 m from the target.

    in reply to: Russian Navy News & Discussion, Part III #2026291
    snake65
    Participant

    And two hits of target ship Gordy in 1988. P-120 Malahit missile.

    in reply to: Russian Navy News & Discussion, Part III #2026295
    snake65
    Participant

    It’s sometimes so hard to prove obvious….

    April 2000, Ukrainian ship “Vereschagino” accidentally hit by Progress (modernized P-35) missile.

    in reply to: Indian Navy News and Discussions #2026338
    snake65
    Participant

    Sea Viper has now passed every trial its been put through including the recent salvo fire testing. Its last hurdle before full acceptance in the RN is the shipboard firing set for the end of this year. Aster/PAAMS/SAAM has been deployed as an operational weapons system for several years. In context of the discussion its a far more viable weapons system, right now, than the alternate system currently planned for installation.

    For the sake of this discussion – yes, certainly it’s more viable than vapourware Barak NG. For the sake of “providing proven capability” – not yet exactly.

    in reply to: Russian Navy News & Discussion, Part III #2026342
    snake65
    Participant

    Me either. I have reason to doubt that one of those impact holes was caused by Vulkan though. The weapon, according to all information I’ve seen regarding the Bazalt airframe is that its either a diver or a low profile flier. Low profile being in the hundreds of ft….not sea skimming. Seeing that Vulkan is developed off the earlier missile it begs the question of how it hit target at the same height as Moskit?.

    Suite yourself. Vulcan is not exactly a sea-skimmer, but it’s terminal phase is definitely lower than anticipated. So, it’s a diver, you’re right. It just doesn’t need to dive from several hundred of feet.

    You’ve ever seen the hole a Ukrainean Progress made in a trawler at approximately the same height? She isn’t a skimmer either…

    in reply to: Russian Navy News & Discussion, Part III #2026394
    snake65
    Participant

    I have no reason to doubt Russian report that Vulcan and Moskit were fired during that exercise.

    in reply to: Indian Navy News and Discussions #2026402
    snake65
    Participant

    Jonesy, do you claim that Sea Viper has started to provide proven capability? The problems have been sorted out?

    in reply to: Russian Navy News & Discussion, Part III #2026432
    snake65
    Participant

    Three missile combo of Vulcans and Moskits

    in reply to: Russian Navy News & Discussion, Part III #2027782
    snake65
    Participant

    Just because the (old) 50km SS-N-14 Silex (URPK-4 Metel) missiles are gone? You don’t suppose 2x Ka27 Helix (530km range, with 1 × AT-1M, VTT-1, UMGT-1 Orlan, or APR-2 Yastreb torpedo or 36 RGB-NM plus RGB-NM-1 sonobouys), 2×4 553 mm Torpedo tubes with both 18-22km Type 53 ASW/ASuW torpedo’s and (newer) 45km SS-N-15 Starfish (RPK-2 Viyuga) ASW missiles and2x RBU-6000 rocket launchers for close-in ASW and anti-torpedo countermeasures account for anything?

    It’s not Vyuga, it has Vodopad in those torp tubes. There’s a video showing the launch.

    in reply to: Russian Navy News & Discussion, Part III #2027974
    snake65
    Participant

    She sank as per predictions of super-defense-professional prediction @ “defensetalk” forum!

    The rest is of course a Russian propaganda cover up! 🙂

    Yeah. She sank. So Russians had to raise her and put in Suhona floating dock.

    in reply to: Russian Navy News & Discussion, Part III #2027985
    snake65
    Participant

    There isn’t much detail on the Duet but you’re probably right.

    On the other hand, the Phalanx’s rate of fire is 3,000-4,500 rds/min (20mm) compared to 10 000 30mm shells

    Puma series of FCS provides closed loop guidance.

    in reply to: Russian Navy News & Discussion, Part III #2031633
    snake65
    Participant

    Isn’t Novella simply the domestic version of Sea Dragon? Why is there a problem if Sea Dragon has already been installed successfully on the Indian IL-38s?

    Also, what is the status of the Su-32FN maritime strike fighter? I have not been able to find any technical details on it. What kind of radar will it use? How will it carry and launch ASW warfare gear like MADs and torpedoes? Above all I’d appreciate some pics of these systems.

    Novella is quite a bit different than Sea dragon. Forget about Su-32FN.

    in reply to: Indian Navy News and Discussions #2031716
    snake65
    Participant

    Came across this on a vietnamese forum: Talwar model with 3×12 cell VLU in place of current 24 round SRL.

    That’s model of 11356-M, proposed for export and Russian Navy.

Viewing 15 posts - 181 through 195 (of 746 total)