Could you please clarify who is making any ‘claims’? Why would i be using words such as ‘assume’ and ‘might’ if i was ‘making any claims’. I am merely talking about speculation/possibilities.

Anyway, forget about this. I raise my hands and admit im totally wrong and cant back up my so called claims. Now lets talk about what you have stated. Please enlighten us with your knowledge about this matter. Why did they jettison their tanks over Turkish lands? I am sure you would back everything (that you state) with irrefutable evidence.

I would eagerly await for your reply.:)

So you have no evidence to back up your claim that ‘the planes were in trouble’, thought not.:rolleyes:

Well its Russia who is supplying Pantsyr systems to Syria. These systems (in theory) are only for defence against Israeli and/or American fighters…i cant think of anyone else attacking Syria in that manner. Also note Russian reactions to the whole saga…when Pantsyr AD was mentioned. Finally you might have noted the way Russians recently supplied nuclear fuel to Iranians when things are gradually heating between Russians and Americans.

While i totally agree that there could be a number of reasons for Israeli fighters jettisoning their tanks, i think its ‘quite reasonable’ to ‘assume’ that those fighters might have been in some sort of trouble if they did so (in Turkey) during an aggressive operation (in Syria). You might be able to give us a few reasons as to why they were forced to do so, an action for which Turkey demanded official explanation.

Of course I have noted Russian reactions, I was the one who bought them up.:rolleyes: That was over false claims about their systems being ineffective, nothing else. Unless you can provide evidence that the tanks were dropped becouse the aircraft ‘were in trouble’ stop making claims that you can not back up. The fact that the tanks were dropped in Turkey, if anything undermines the idea that they were dropped becouse the aircraft were in trouble and may even suggest that it was planned.

Cost prohibitive? What is the ‘official’ defence budget for Russia and PRC???

What you mean is what was the official defence budget for the USSR and what is the official defence budget for the PRC.;)

Sorry rick but you seem to have completely lost the plot. Gorky delayed because India might help US???:D 😀 Are you even serious? I though scooter was the most delusional guy here. If RuN and PLAN ( with 1 barely functional carrier between the 2 of them ) go against USN, with 11 super carriers and 11 LHA’s (40 K tonne) then what help is IN with just gorky and ADS going to be off? More importantly what makes you think India would be helping US? IN would definitely help against China but against russia, very doubtful.

I think this is the first time I have said this but for once I agree with you.

Rick, one of your links states that one of the Kirovs is to be receive Onyx missiles, is this to be in addition to the Granits or in place of them. If it is in place of them then it makes little sense as the Granit alongside the P.1000 Vulkan represents the most effective AShM system yet seen. Onyx, whilst good, just does not compare and is far from being a great LACM. Something like Kh-555 or Kh-101 woulod be more appropriate if replacement is the intention. If it is supplementation then something else will have to give, either the short range surface to air missiles or the ASW missiles mounted forward.

the problem is that janes has few quality personnel working for them, compared to the volume of information they handle. so while they are regarded with keen interest over the stuff they get from airshows, trade expos and industry events which are basically all the released data from corporations, their analysis and local reports are very hit and miss.

so for the west coverage is great, in fact startling. but for asian countries, including india for instance, their coverage is pathetic. their local correpsondent is rahul bedi. who cant recognise a t-72 from a bmp or an agni from a trishul. its somewhat embarassing really. on the one hand theres christopher foss and on the other rahul bedi.

The issue outside of the ‘west’ is a lack of suitable personnell. The UK and the west in general produces a high number of Security/War studies graduates and post graduates every year and of a very high calibre, outside of the ‘west’ that sort of cadre is simply not available. The local reports and analysis on Russia is very very good, the reason is becouse they have been doing it for years, India and Pakistan have only just come to the fore and China is a knightmare to get reliable information on.

Well it’s happening. The UK are procuring 2 new carriers, 65,000 ton class ships I believe, which are being designed around the aircraft that will operate from them – in other words the F-35B (at the moment!). Don’t forget, that for the ultimate “light carrier”, the UK has operated Harriers from CVS ships (Invincible, Illustrious and Ark Royal) since the early 80’s. These are cruiser-sized ships. The new carriers, (dubbed CVF) will replace Ark and Lusty that are still in service, with a greatly expanded capability.

STOVL is a great way for countries like the UK, Spain, Italy to have carrier-borne aircraft and great flexibility at reasonable cost. I’m disapointed that no US Navy diehards picked up the gauntlet for a debate on conventional CV vs STOVL:diablo:

It is misleading to say that the CVF is specifically designed for the F-35B, specifically equipped maybe but not specifically designed.

If they had any ‘credible’ evidence that could link ‘whatever they bombed’ in Syria with nuclear material, US/Israel by now would have moved sky and earth to link it with Iran and how dangerous Iranian nuclear threat is.:)

Several independant groups have come to the Nuclear facility conclusion, Israel has said nothing.

I’m sure most Europeans thought Germany was finished as a military power in 1930…….but as we all know, things change. Dangerous assumptions to make regarding China. And it looks like Russia may be a major player again soon.

Russia is a middling power and that is where it is going to stay. The assumptions of China are not dangerous at all and the Germany comparison is deeply flawed.