dionisIs the Su-27BM/Su-35 supposed to use a rear-facing radar system eventually? The first prototype doesn’t have one fitted.
Yes it is – I could have sworn I read about it recently, but I guess I can’t find the source now that gives some basic specs for it.
dionisSo in 2020 we will see up to 20 new and modernized Tu-160 in total.
I believe there are currently 16?
http://en.rian.ru/russia/20080429/106194482.html Yes.
2008 Now.
12 years to go.
8 more jets till 2020.
24 total Tu-160 in 2020.
dionis
Yes, it’s on the ground, but this is as full-frontal as it gets!
dionisTu-160? That would either mean the Russian Air Force relinquishing some of its very small number, or manufacture being restarted. I don’t believe either would happen.
You must have missed, when it was said years ago, that Tu-160 production would restart and that existing jets would be modernized. A new aircraft is expected every 18 months until 2025 – 2030, till 30 are in service.
dionisPAK-FA may be ready in 2013:
Seems like they are on schedule as it is.
Are the new engines going to be ready by 2013? Seemingly the pre-production models will be powered by the 117-S?
Wonder when in 2009 the beast will be unveiled, if not earlier – with at least some imagery. Looks like this series of threads will still be around for a while 😎
dionisThat’s about when it would be getting hit by GBI. And SBX would be feeding it updates along the way.
Right. About as tricky as hitting a school bus while riding a bullet bike. The problem is the launch vehicle can follow the turns easily and the KV even more so. If you want to avoid the KV you have to move quicker than the KV. Doesn’t have to be much but it does have to be QUICK. Almost explosively. If you had a small Ghz radar that could detect the KV coming in and then a couple very high thrust, low burn time solid motors, that’s all it would take. Wait until the very last moment possible and then *BANG* to move and *BANG* to stop. You’d have to have a small SDACSs to get you back on course but you will have missed the KV. Of course you’ll have to miss the first GBI, the second one, and maybe a THAAD but you get the idea.
No but it does dictate HOW it can and the KV has the same set of laws and the laws favor the KV.
When did I say Russian ones had? Then again when has Russia ever put a MARV into service?
Not saying they’ve ignored them. Just saying the published information says they haven’t DONE anything about them.
True, and for a B-52 to outmanuever an S-300 it only has to manuever as well. Unfortunately it’s ability to manuever is FAR less than required. As appears to be the case with the RV.
Okay, manuever, detonate. . .you still need to know WHEN to do it and an IR sensor won’t tell you that. Something like a small radar will though. So what’s the difference between making it set the nuke off in space and say, oh, a Gazelle setting it’s nuke of in space to kill a target?
The ones in Poland would be child’s play for Russia to avoid in a strike against the US.
You were talking about MARVs not MIRVs. Nice try though.
Yeah, comparing B-52s and the S-300 to barely developed ABM systems and ICBMs and their payloads. Genius. :rolleyes:
Are you suggesting that GBI and KEI are going to using only nuclear payloads to intercept things? The only way in hell that’s going to work also, especially if it’s to make contact with the incoming ICBMs in space, is to position them specifically against a country’s predicted ICBM launch routes. In which case, it’s going to be very clear who the systems are made against.
After this, while whatever ABM system can track an incoming MIRV/MARV continuously, even the slightest latency in information flow will probably result in a miss at those velocities (no, this isn’t the B-52 and S-300), and if the warhead is doing evasive maneuvers, I wish the defensive systems the best of luck tracking and predicting the incoming warhead’s route. Not in our lifetime I’d bet.
http://en.rian.ru/russia/20071225/94113222.html Russia is well aware of what it’s up against – make no mistake.
dionisWho wants to try and surface through 3m of ice???.
I’d assume that the CO would direct his Nav officer to find the nearest known polynia for that time of year, there are tables of these things, and make best speed for it. Surfacing through 3m of ice breaks stuff and, if you are about to ripple off the big fireworks, chances are that all the replacements back at port recently reached 10,000 celsius following a rather bright flash.
Not good news, so I think possibly something that is more academically relevent than operationally so!.
Proof? Source? Anything actually “relevant” as to what can and can not, or would not break aboard the sub?
dionisDionis
What do you mean by ‘never considering anything the Russians do’. I would have thought it plainly obvious, even to you, that I’ve ‘considered’ a lot of what the Russians have done over the past few decades and remain to be impressed by much of it….especially their ships and this particular ship more than most.
Do you actually mean to say that its inevitable and right that the Russians would rip off arguably their most important defence customer?. Perhaps an alarmingly short-termist view that one. Then again though it does seem like Russian industry works that way at present!. Lets see how long it survives the remarkable pressures its labour force seem to be subjecting it to according to what Star says?.
If the shipyard accedes to 1000% wage inflation in the middle of a fixed price contract it deserves to go under. It negotiated prices with its suppliers and came out with a contract value. In 2005, or whenever it was, several of the more experienced posters on here were in hysterics at the contract value. This heap was meant to be on sea trials this year by the original schedule IIRC and I remember offering an open £20 bet against an equivalent in anyones currency that it would be nowhere near. Shame no one took me up on it now!.
Fact is that it was plainly obvious to anyone with any maritime sense whatsoever that the Russians couldnt do the job on budget and on time right from the kickoff. They knew that as well as we all did and that knowlege predated Stars ‘economic factors’. You, like your little pals, are just making excuses….it appears you might be suited for work in a Russian shipyard!. Good wages apparently!
Your argument is only as good as any here. So you, like the rest of the Russo-phobic British and American posters on this forum, are never going to accept the fact that even in 3 years, things can change around completely. Business is business, and the Russians aren’t going to give the Gorshkov away for free – and even at its “newest” price, its still a decent deal. You are Jon James with slightly better grammar, at best.
dionisSo, in summary, we have Star calling a $1.2bn increase in the cost of a fixed price contract ‘peanuts’ before trying to draw parallel between a scratch designed fighter, requiring harmony between 4 partner nations, and a bilateral contract to refit an old ship. Only in Stars world I guess!.:rolleyes:
Then we have the redoubtable RPG blaming everything on the Indians for not knowing that there was no possible way that the contract was deliverable and might as well have been written on toilet paper. The shipyard obviously being innocent bystanders as the whole contract was put together by dodgy Sergei from the milling shop……. presumably the same guy who had off with the ships engineering blueprints!!! 😉
It does give me heart that, once in every while, a group of foreigners prove that truly bolloxing up a very straightforward project isnt something thats limited to us Brits.
Still at least the Indian Navy can sleep soundly in the knowledge that, should they ever find any ice in the Indian Ocean, that their new ex-Russian carrier is strong enough to plough straight on through it!.
Is there any hint of when this bargain of the ages will be available to start working up its Indian delivery crew – let alone approach commission in the IN?.
And we have Jonesy, never considering anything the Russians do – actually plausible or perhaps right, or even inevitable. :rolleyes:
If the Russians are just ripping the Indians off in a trap, good for them, if not, well, then you might want to consider the actual time frame that this whole deal has been under, and how the economies have changed – as star suggested.
dionisPersonally, I doubt Russia has any chance of winning the MMRCA Contest. If, it does India will lose what like respect it has left………in Military Circles.🙁
Yeah clearly the F-18E/F, F-16IN, or even the Eurofighter will win – god forbid Russia sells another jet right?:rolleyes:
dionisYeah, they even had an aviary to relax watching birds while sailing under the ocean.
No hot racking (ie with three shifts of crews with 8 hours on 16 off up to 3 people could be sleeping in one bed or rack. On the Akula I understand even the non officers had their own rooms.
I heard they had a disco in there too! Even a compartment for the women. :dev2:
dionisWanted to know members opinion
The Typhoon class SSBN submarine was created in retaliation to US deploying Ohio class SSBN.
But looking at Typhoon design it seems that the Soviets reached a dead end with their Typhoon design , nothing innovative about it except for its insane huge size.
Because of their underwater displacement of ~ 48000 T , they were also nicknamed Submerged Water Carrier.
A quick back of the envelope calculation of Typhoon versus Ohio will show the following differences.
Typhoon Displacement: 24,500 T surfaced , 48,000 T sumberged
Ohio Displacement : 16,600 T surfaced ,18,750 T submergedTyphoon : Double Reactor , Double Propellor
Ohio : One Reactor , Single PropTyphoon Crew: 165
Ohio Crew : 155Final the thing that matters
Typhoon : 20 R-39 SLBM with 10 MIRV ,20 Kt yeald each
Ohio : 24 Trident II SLBM with 12 MIRV each W88 warhead of 475kTClearly Bang for Buck the Ohio is one of the greatest SSBN designed post world war II.
Typhoon design represents more of a political decision than design achievement.
It will be expensive to operate , maintain , due to its twin propellor it more noisy than Ohio.
The only area it scores is it can be on patrol for very long time ie more than 4 months.
Perhaps due to this reason the Russian see no reason to upgrade the 3 remaining Typhoon and would rather replace with Borei class , although Typhoon are quite new and an upgrade might see it remain operational till atleast 2030.
Opinions Welcome
The Typhoon features a multi-hull design that makes it far more resilient in case attacked, which I would guess it pretty crucial when things were suppose to get “hot.”
The Typhoon is also slightly faster from what I gather.
dionisMy car example is fine.
The west blabs on an on about how multirole their aircraft are, but in reality they are not.
A good example is the F-15 and F-16 fiasco. The purpose of the F-16 was to be a cheaper simpler replacement for the larger heavier more complex fighter (F-15). The late model F-16s are actually just as expensive as the F-15s were. On paper both are fighters and the F-16 is also a light bomber. In practise the F-15 was used as the fighter where it was available and the F-16s were largely used as bomb trucks. In other words the multirole jack of all trades stopped being multirole when a better platform was available (ie F-15).
Going back to the Russian AF model, I think making the Su-35 the JSF equivelent makes little sense. Why spend that much money on a light bomber?
The role of mud mover obviously belongs to the Su-25, but there is a need for faster higher flying strike aircraft that can look after themselves… ie 2 LGBs or TV or satellite guided bombs and some ARMs and AAMs for self defence. A bit of a waste to use Su-34s or Su-35s in that role when they should be looking after deep strike targets and enemy interceptors respectively.
The JSF / Su-35BM comparison was more for the purpose of “what’s being built when.”
Your last paragraph is hella confusing by the way, I’m not sure what you are suggesting. That the Su-34 is a bad bomber as a whole (for the high altitude precision bombing role?)
The Su-35 is going to be used mostly as a “stand off” type aircraft I think, in other words, using long range weapons at its advantage, rather than guided bombs, at least against a well armed adversary.
The Su-34 seems to be more of a “hands on in their face” type aircraft, that’s designed for both stand-off and close range attacks.
Granted, the real mud mower as you suggest is the Su-25.
dionis[QUOTE=1MAN;1266519]Thats why the New SS-27 are “manouvering” so they can aviod being hit, what that SM-3 missile did was shoot a target moving only in one direction, a missile moving in multipal directions at hypersonic speeds will more than be able to avoid the SM-3.
This is a good point!
At the speeds the intercept take place, it takes insane amount of mathematical accuracy to make the objects impact / hit.
I guess if the Russians have programmed their missiles to have several “attack” paths, it would be almost impossible to predict accurately how the warheads would come in.
I’m not entirely sure what it is they did (and I’m quite positive they won’t tell, at least yet), but it does seem to be maneuver related
dionisSo the Chakra is confirmed to the the Nerpa?
Of Improved or “2” level?
Sign In
