Ahhh Dionis,

You do seem to enjoy telling people how they look….but dont seem very keen on supporting your own arguments. More interested in form than function eh?.

I’m interested in truth, not speculation based on a handful of small facts. The real truth, if you can call it that, would have far more evidence than you usually present. Sometimes you hit the ball, I’ve been around here long enough to know, but usually, you beat around the bush. I don’t claim to have classified data, and neither should you (and you do not), so, we are, basically, speculating out of our rear ends. Which is fine by me.

You want pieces of the thing?. How about, after I’ve been good enough to give you the dates above, you come up with a bit of proof that says its still up there. You do that and you might appear a bit less of a joke than you do now.

You have no presented actual evidence of the system being offline, other than SUPPOSED “offline” dates. Yet the Kirovs are slated for repair, and the Oscar II subs are being maintained (and certainly not just to fire those big nasty Type 65 torpedoes!)

Passive/Active seekers have been around more than thirty years….with some absolutely spectacular failings. If the thing didnt need offboard targetting help why did the Soviet Union bother with Legenda in the first place?.

How far would a ship get in 12mins – about 12,000yards. With an inch precise position fix fed to the missile prior to launch that will not be out of seeker FoV. Problem there is that the resolution of the targetting asset isnt going to be to the inch!.

Plus it has to have found identified and tracked the target before the missile is fired in the first place. Remember that, in context of the Kirov class, the ship was designed to contest blue water in the Atlantic covering the activities of the Soviet submarine force. So none of the coastal/shore-based surveillance assets so regularly trotted out in these arguments apply here.

You

1) Dodged my question very nicely. What is the rush for Russia to implement a brand new targeting system?

2) Have presented no evidence whatsoever on any real “Soviet failures” other than your deep rooted hate for the Soviet Union. Sad individual you are. 😀

3) And yeah, ok, 1200 yards is 1.1KM. Essentially, it is enough for just one fix for the Granit equipped force to launch an attack. That’s pretty impressive indeed. This means any MARPAT, AWACS, patrol boat, submarine, fishing trawler on the Russian side can relay a relative fix for the missile to be fired at. The missiles are designed to do the rest themselves. Off-board targeting was an added extra to ensure extra efficiency, unless you can prove otherwise, which you cannot.

At this rate, I can claim that the Harpoon will never sink a single decently defended ships – EVER! :rolleyes:

I would consider the B-1B with 24 SRAMs as one of the weapon systems that marked the peak of nuclear delivery technology. Such an aircraft can basically blow its way to the target. Getting targeted by a HARM is one thing, getting a SRAM on your radar dish is another issue.

The Russians have this option with the Kh-15 on Tu-22M3s or Tu-160s.

Didn’t have to touch a key did I?!. Least the message has penetrated one closed mind….even if the fingers are still in the ears and the eyes are screwed up to blot out an inconvenient truth!.

You have only made yourself look like a know-it-all, when you are not. That just makes you look like an ass. :rolleyes:

Truth is that the last satellite component of the Legenda targetting system, Cosmos 2421, stopped orbital correction Feb 10 2008 and came down on or near Mar 14 of the same year. Legenda is as dead as Lenin!.

You have no real evidence to this. If otherwise, please present it.

Translation: the missile has a guidance section and it can take cues from some other targetting system. What that targetting system actually could be who knows….there will be a veritable list of systems duly catalogued I’m sure…all of which have serious limitations!.

No, the missile system is what it is. Passive radar and active radar guidance, with inertial assistance and satellite correction.

At 600KM, a mach 2.5 missile will reach its target in 12 minutes. How far is a ship going to get within 12 minutes? :rolleyes:

…and have been slated to do so for over a year.

From memory, the one time they tried to launch a Lotos-S, this July just gone, it developed a fault and had to go back to the factory. The information generally available suggests that they might be trying for a launch window mid-November for the repaired Lotos-S. As Dionis acknowledges above the ‘missile targetting systems of the next generation’ are anything but in orbit currently and not available to service a P-700 shot!.

Before we get carried away with ‘missile targeting systems of the next generation’ bit, by the way, it should be noted that Liana is just an ELINT system with much the same limitations as more terrestrially deployed ELINT systems. In that to target it has to find an emitter operating, it has to be a system unique and identifiable to a ship class and it has to be in view for long enough to triangulate. Take away any one of those factors and it is not doing any targetting.

I’ve been on Mars for a few years, sorry. Enlighten me as to what the rush is to implement any kind of satellite targetting system for the Russians?

But we are saying the cost of the upgrade, massive crews, training etc would be better spent getting a new class of more up-to-date ships in service. The fitting out of these ships is all about political tub thumping rather than economic-military sense.

Spending 500 million on a repairing a Kirov is better than spending $1.5 billion on building a new destroyer.

But they don’t. No weapon really does, just like all other pieces of tech, they never quite work as advertised its all sales pitch (even internally to your own govt.)

Weapon specific evidence, or STFU.

Well they see a TU95 and think- scramble now? or cup of tea first? it sure to still be off Norway by the time we’ve polished off the buiscuits :p

But but but wait, the closer they get, the better those crappy Russian cruise missiles get, no? :rolleyes:

By which time the Kirovs will be even more out of date! 😀

Which is why they want to update them TODAY – now you get it finally eh?

You’ve dug yourself into quite the hole kiddo. 🙂

Germany did declare war on the USA to support Japan and not the other way around. 😉
The British led war with Germany, did prevent Germany to use its full power against the SU. The Japanese attack on the USA did relief the SU from the danger of a second front in Asia and free its troops there in a critical time.
From November 1941 the SU got the chance to recover and win the power/time race against Germany for the luck of all.

Britain, France, and the rest of Europe held up about 20% of the Germans.

That’s child’s play compared to what the USSR fought off.

Only the Su-34 does, in the accepted sense. The Su-35 and Su-27SM might be able to use the LRF on their IRSTs to designate ground targets but without imaging capability (?) and with the system located on top of the nose that’s a very limited implementation. If at all possible, they will be restricted to designating missiles only, free-fall bombs are too slow when the launch aircraft needs to be in a dive to keep the target in view.

So it would make sense to integrate them onto the Su-27SM and Su-35, not the Su-34 then?

Well yes of course, I mean an 18th century sailing ship had a combat management system, it was called the captain. Yes the Kirovs have a CMS but AEGIS is an entirely different breed, its what has made US combat ships the finest for the last two-three decades. Other nations are catching up and gaining similar systems, but Kirovs built back in the 1980s will not have such an advanced system, it was brand new back in the 80s so had yet to be copied by anyone. Kirovs are fine ships, but they are getting out of date and the money could be spent better elsewhere.

The 3 older vessels are out of date, sort of, yes, which is why they are getting an upgrade! Ding ding ding! You finally seemed to have figured it out by yourself.

Where do I begin….unless you line your missile with lead (very heavy) or gold (very expensive and not light) its sytems will be effected by high intensity electronic transmissions, even internal only sytems. Signals from GPS/GLONASS etc would be degraded – not just by deliberate jamming but just the sheer volume of electronic transmissions in a war. And i’m afraid the TV terminal guidance may not be unaffected, unless as I said your misile is made of lead…. all this means that stated ranges and abilities tend to degrade in a conflict, very very few weapons perform as advertised when the shooting starts.

Strategic cruise missiles and ICBMs should work as advertised more than just about anything else.

sound of a TU95 crew on a marathon flight?

Probably, it takes those Brit aircrews forever to intercept.

You mean the high up navy guys that need to justify their jobs and careers by imagining that the west is out to get Russia??? We really aren’t you know, honestly… you really do not need to man a quarter of a centry old cruiser to protect the great white north from the norwegians. Even the yanks and canadians are only talking about coast guard vessels up north.

They are smart enough to know that while everything might be nice and peachy today, things can change tomorrow.

The sound of those frigate crews in Murmansk fighting world piracy?

Quite possibly, yes.