You’ve done little to prove carriers can survive a coordinated strike from a combination of Russian Navy and Air Force assets that have been listed, spare the sketchy/confusing armaments that you so desperately fought to take out of the discussion 🙂

Just keep believing carriers are invincible, you’ll be really surprised one day. 😀

By the time the US gets out of the mess in the Middle East, carriers will be becoming more and more obsolete. If anything, your typical ignorance is a joke. :rolleyes:

I have never said that the USN carriers are invincible……………….stop lying.:mad:

The fact is that you have listed a whole bunch of systems that are not in service, so you look completely ignorant.:rolleyes:

A recent report showed how more energy was required to process corn to turn it into fuel than the actual output of fuel it was producing. There was a net loss. And just today there was a study highlighting how biofuels have along way to go to develop in terms of technology to cut costs, save energy and not affect the environment.

Coming to pre 9/11 US energy policy, Bush got the National Energy Policy development group (NEPDG) to examine energy consumption and come to a solution. Good old cheney was in charge of overseeing the report dubbed National energy policy (NEP).

NEP recommended
-the expansion of oil drilling operations in alaska and domestic exploration.
-allocated limited funds for researching new propulsion systems, hydrogen fuel cells.
-relying on nuclear power.
-diversifying oil production from non gulf producers.

But contrary to all that, NEP reports also shows a chart that displays the increase in imported oil forcasted to 25.5 million barrels per day in 2020 as opposed to the 19.5 million barrels level at the time. Report mentions “support initiatives by Saudi Arabia, Kuwait, Algeria, Qatar, the UAE, and other suppliers to open up areas of their energy sectors to foreign investments”- NEP chap8, pg5.

Sounds more like increase in imports than decrease.

Below table also shows gradual increase in petroleum imports by the US http://tonto.eia.doe.gov/dnav/pet/hist/mttimus2a.htm

-production from alaska has gone down not come up.
-No more nuclear power plants have been brought online since- http://www.eia.doe.gov/cneaf/nuclear/page/nuc_reactors/reactsum.html
–
One thing that has happened and that is diversifying imported oil from other countries, but that does not change the fact the US is still increasing its oil consumption.

Of course US oil consumption is growing, so is its population and so is its economy, that does not change the fact that the intention is to reduce dependence on imported oil.

I have to provide some correction, after all. Looks like the ASM-MSS got well beyond the mock-up stage. Here a stillshot showing a live launch of the Kh-41 Moskit (SS-N-22 Sunburn) from the 27K.

I am unable to confirm whether this indicates the missile in active service or just a single test-firing. Enjoy..

P.S. Anyone able to identify the ordnance still carried on the Flanker’s pylons? Missiles or instrumentation pods?

Interesting, certainly looks to big to be a Kh-31. However the report stating that it had not entered production as of 2002 still stands and one launching does make it in service as you say.;)

The sources are not quoting the 33 carrying the 3M80 operationally. I have yet to see a proof of this missile being in active service.

So far the Sunburn was exhibited on two aircraft, the T10K-5 #69 T10K-9 #109. Hardly enough to prove the missile is in Sea Flanker’s inventory.

Eloquently put.

I’ll continue to post just to laugh at your replies, even if I have to make stuff up to get you all steamy. :dev2:

Only issue is that that’s an export site, so that could mean confusion in terms of whether the missiles were built for export or home use, or both, or neither.

Close man, but no cigar. 😉

Wrong sunshine, as of 2002 the missile had not entered production, no confusion at all.:rolleyes:

With your in service Kh-65’s, AShM Kh-101’s, Kh-22 firing Bears and now this classic piece of uninformed nonsense you are this forums laughing-stock.:p

You try and circumvent your ignorance by posting the likes of the above, fact is that you have no sources and no information. You are so uninformed that before now you have actually confused Russian and NATO designation systems.:eek:

Learn to read your own articles, it says that the aircraft needs the adapter but that the missiles are different variants.