sealordlawrenceOf course. Each machine still increases production (defense). As long as its still profitable (which of course doesn’t apply here).
Precisely, but roles shift, with the Gorky being an aging and unique hull for the IN she will easily be the first to be retired and a jaunts as a training vessel or other ignominious non frontline tasks are more likely in the medium to long term, as a result.
sealordlawrenceI suppose selecting the A330 for commonality with RAF tankers would be too simple a solution? :rolleyes:
Heck, if the UK wants to outsource defense and become the 51st state, fine; at least then we get Raptors 😀
With BAe selling its stake in Airbus the A330 is hardly an indigenous solution either.;) BAe’s pretty impressive UCAV development line up rather suggests that reliance upon the US is still not quite a policy objective either.;)
sealordlawrenceTrue but the RC-135 is a big old tough bird and in effect we would be buying into the huge American logistics base for the KC-135/RC-135 fleet. Also we would gain access to AMARG and all the spares from that source.
For me I would like to see the CFM56 fitted to give more comonality with the E3D fleet.
The fact that the American DOD are prepared to shift three airframes over to the RAF is sign to me how highly the RAF R.1 fleet are regarded in the US. I bet the Americans quite like the idea of gaining access to the skilled RAF crews and the Helix upgrade, for the loss of three aircraft that they have had difficulty crewing anyway.
Also a sign of how good an allie the UK is and how much the effort in Afghanistan (including by the R.1) is appreciated.;)
It might be an old airframe but at least they are not falling out of the sky and are reasonably compatable. How long is the E-3D slated to stay in service for? It might be an idea to link the RC.135 and and E.3D together, by which I mean common airframe/powerplant and then put them on the same life cycle, especially if they get Helix. That way when the time comes the RAF gets some kind of airframe commonality and procurement costs for the airframe (although granted its only a small part of the cost) would that be possible or is the RC.135 just too old?
sealordlawrenceYeah, the Indian Navy is just going to let a ship they bought rot. . . grand logic lawrence.
If you get two pieces of machinery, and can use them both to better yourself, you don’t let the other one rot.
At what point did I say it would rot? I simply suggested that with two fully operational, cheaper to operate and maintain and capable of being operational for longer the ex Gorschkov is going to have a reduced status even if it is just fewer sea days, which should be expected anyway given the ships age and dated machinery. If you have three pieces of machinery and two of them work better than the third you will use the other two more.:rolleyes:
sealordlawrenceIt’s the most immediate option at the moment.
The missile isn’t exactly going to overshoot. . .
Most of the big targets are up farther North anyway.
Hardly ICBM ranges are they?:rolleyes:
And frankly given the limited number of mobile Topol units available the redeployment of some to a far more vulnerable location is hardly a great use of resources now is it?:rolleyes:
sealordlawrenceYes, however, the SS-27 packs a much bigger punch, and is much harder to intercept.
The SS-27 is also fairly portable, which means a lot.
SOC has already addressed both thos issues. Topol-M would be a poor solution for deployment to the carribean unless you wanted to swat Hawaii.
sealordlawrenceHere lets get this straight in about 1/4 the text.
Is it easier to make more of what you are producing now (SS-27) or develop and produce something you can’t even use at the moment (SS-X-IRBM-whatever) ?
If you have the production and design capacity for both there is not much in it and a unilateral withdrawal from the INF would hardly be challenging and could take effect instantaneously. Furthermore both the Bulava and RS-24 programs show that Russia is not affraid to embark upon fresh development. I am sure that a ground launched Kh-101/102/555 would not be a difficult exercise for Russian industry.
sealordlawrenceYeah, and 10 Bombers means a hundred more F-22s. Are you thinking about this?
Considering the SS-20 is out of service, the SS-27 makes the most sense. . . Since it’s designed to avoid ABM defenses. . . which is kind of what this whole debacle is about . . .
Unless they want to shoot Florida with the Iskander . . . if it even reaches those last few kilometers. . . You are taking this stupid thread too seriously 😛
If you followed developments in the politics, procurement and strategy of Russian military affairs (which you clearly do not) you would be well aware that there have been several threats to withdraw from the INF treaty and accompanying statements about howeasy it would be for Russia to make new IRBM’s and GLCM’s all of which would be far more appropriate for deployment to Cuba. While I would be amazed if the idea has not been muted in Russian Government and defence circles I would be equally amazed if they were dumb enough to try it. Look what happened last time and the issue is now such an ego fuelling historical precident that there is almost no way that a US president could back down and let it happen. If the Russians really want to be annoying they should just plant some conventional forces in Venezuela or Cuba, a few SAM systems or fighters (we are defending are allie blah blah) but I would be surprised if even that happens. Cuba is potentially to fragile and why let Chavez have stuff for free when he has the oil dollars and ego to pay for it?
sealordlawrenceSealordLawrence, here are the pics of the old Slava model with Tombstone. It’s quite old by now, not sure if it carries any value. On the other hand, they are using the Slavas quite frequently and seemed to be interested in doing upgrades to them (as the, although minor, upgrade of Ustinov and others seem to indicate).
Well the Slavas are major assets for the Russian Navy as after the Kirovs they are the only ones capable of true area air defence so I would imagine that they would get substantial upgrades, the fitting of Osa-AKM, S-300FM and Vulkan would produce potent ships but these are still 20+ year old hulls.
Vulkan did enter service and I suspect that its production followed on from the original Bazalt, hence why the Echos and Varyag got it. It may even be the case that there are some missiles left over from the Echos.
sealordlawrenceWith how important the Persian Gulf is to the world I would think upgrading the Iraqi navy would be a top priority. I know it wwould take some years to get the personel properly trained but I do not think it will take a decade. The new Nakhoda Ragam Class ships would be a great asset in protecting Iraq’s oil and shipping lanes. They could be purchased and based outside the country and cadets could start training on them immediately.
No making the Iraqi state work and preventing it sliding into anarchy is the top priority and given the vast US/Western presence in the Gulf not to mention the amount of fancy sea toys the GCC states have aquired there is no pressing need for an Iraqi Navy that well equipped. I suggest you go to Iraq if you dont get how ****ed up it is.
sealordlawrenceThe Air defense variant of the tornado, plus the buccaneer’s with upgraded avionics. At the time the CVA-01 was canceled the RN had three fleet carriers, Victorious, Eagle and Ark Royal. CVA-01 as replacement for Victorious?, 02 for Ark?, 03 for Eagle? Built over 15 years with the last entering service in the 1980.
My reason for the order is that apparrently Eagle was in better condition then Ark.
Not only that but far more fully modernised and with a total of six Sea Cat launchers. Eagle was a very powerful ship when she was completed. You get these sorts of vessels pop up throughout the post war RN but only ever in small numbers, Bristol is another good example. The moral is that the RN knew what it wanted it just could not afford it.
sealordlawrenceThere is no direct quote unless you dig up exactly what he said on the day this information was given to the press.
There are multiple sources they say this, on different occasions too. Why are you even posting?
“Admiral Vladimir Masorin, commander-in-chief of the Russian Navy, said the Bulava-M (SS-NX-30), a naval derivative of the land-based missile Topol (SS-27), had been approved for mass production.”
Oh no! Something quoted from Jane’s say the same thing.
http://www.missilethreat.com/missilesoftheworld/id.158/missile_detail.asp
It is not a direct qoute, that comment does not support you no matter how much you post it, find a direct qoute or stop posting.:rolleyes: Look at the location of the commers, all that remark says is that Masorin said that the Bulava has been approved for production.
sealordlawrenceWhat will they fly? 🙂
Now that could get interesting, in the original it is all Navy but I doubt that the USAF would want to miss out on an opportunity to get the Raptor yet more screen time. Personally I think the best way forward would be to compromise on the F-35, that way you avoid the absurdity of the Snornet trying to take the place of the F-14 (That would be like Katie Holmes trying to play the Terminator) and the USAF can not winge that a Navy type is getting to much coverage.;):D
sealordlawrenceYour basic reading skills are failing you as always. Go read read the part where they say Masorin said X.
Where X has apparently been made up – and is a puzzle for armchair military analysts to unlock and unravel, to make themselves feel better. . .
No it says that Masorin talked about the headline, there is nothing to attribute the bit about Bulava’s parenthood to him at all and if there was you would have produced a direct qoute by now instead of your usual trick of resorting to blind insults.
sealordlawrenceDont know about that – there was a reasonably sizeable contingent of Iraqi Navy personnel still in Italy with the impounded corvettes that the Italians sat on and they were still there in the early 2000’s if I remember right. I’m not suggesting that full-trained crewmen could be found, but, what I am saying is that Iraq isnt incapable of producing the calibre of personnel required to man such vessels.
Naturally this is not a ‘right now’ solution. I said as much myself. It would take a few years to get their crews ready and to develop secure infrastructure for local basing. There is no possibility of flying in a couple of hundred Iraqi’s, showing them where the throttles and wheel are, and sending them on their merry way! 🙂
The point is that, when Iraq is once again at a point where it is looking to establish a more capable naval presence in the Northern Gulf area, these vessels would actually be a pretty good fit.
Sure, I agree when they are, but we are talking more than just a few years, a decade + I suspect, although I would not be surprised if political ego forced such an issue earlier. However you should see the state of the Iraqi shore infrastructure.;)
Sign In
