dark light

dionis

Forum Replies Created

Viewing 15 posts - 1,171 through 1,185 (of 1,704 total)
  • Author
    Posts
  • in reply to: the PAK-FA saga, continued2…… #2482320
    dionis
    Participant

    your most confused my friend if you think we are worried that it will beat the raptor, firstly because its extremely doubtfull it would anyway but secondly and most importantly it makes no differance what so ever to me if its better then the Raptor or not – it really dosn’t, i’m from the UK so if my loyalties lie anywhere its with the Eurofighter, which is a sweet jet but nothing amazing i feel, so in short no its not that we are scared of it being better, decent competition is good for everyone including us mighty westeners! 🙂 Now back to the Knaapo forum guy, i’d just like to point out that just because others on the site know the person first hand dosn’t mean he’s real, reason being one person could be pretending to be three or four people, its dead easy i could do it right now on this forum, i simply create a new log in, go through a fake ip and voila – my new alt personality could claim that Jon James works for BAE and is overseeing the latest projects, no -one would no any the better, of course except you already know i don’t work for BAE but you get my point i’m sure. So really to be safe we have to eliminate this mystery knaapo source because he simply isn’t legitimate enough.

    According to what evidence and at least logic is the F-22 going to be the best? It was created before the PAK-FA, and knowing the Russians they are going to ensure it is a generally superior jet. Clearly, the fanboys here will make everyone believe the F-22 is invisible, and that it will shoot down the amount of enemy fighters equal to how many missiles are still on board. :rolleyes:

    If the Russian fighter had worse stealth characteristics, but a superior radar in low RCS detection and range, who cares how much stealthier the F-22 is? If any. Just an example.

    in reply to: the PAK-FA saga, continued2…… #2482585
    dionis
    Participant

    Sorry, I don’t see that argument holding much water. Clearly, a simple picture or drawing is no threat to the PAK-FA. Nor did I suggest Russia should provide secret techincal data either………….Regardless, how close Russia keeps the PAK-FA. I very much doubt it will be superior to the F-22 and/or F-35. For all that we know it may be inferior to the Rafale and Typhoon?:eek:

    Yeah, the Su-27 and MiG-29 were garbage when they were made. What do the Russians know anyway? Grand argument fanboy. :rolleyes:

    in reply to: the PAK-FA saga, continued2…… #2482613
    dionis
    Participant

    A Black Project would be a military program that even the vast majority of the Goverment or Military is unaware of………….The PAK-FA does exist as the Russian Goverment like to tout its future capabilities. Yet, it won’t even provide a picture or drawing. Let alone any details to back up one of its many claims…….:( Pretty much like the “Cold War USSR”!:mad:

    It’s not the Russian government’s / UAC’s business to please forum fanboys with images of their latest air defense systems. There are professionals in other militaries who, with much more knowledge than you or anyone here, would be able to more accurately judge the capabilities of the PAK FA if anything substantial if leaked. This jet is potentially going to be exported to some nations, and will also be one of the premier aircraft in the RuAF. This means they need to keep it as quiet as possible to prevent the F-22 or F-35 (for example) being adjusted to potentially beat the PAK FA, since the PAK FA is being created as a direct counter to the other 2 aircraft.

    in reply to: Argentina and Brazil to develop nuclear submarine #2083414
    dionis
    Participant

    That is correct however Russia has a decreasing population, few Russian brands can compete with western ones in terms of cars computers even commercial aviation, Russia also is experimenting an economy based upon selling raw materials.

    Is russia lost? no! it is true Russia will grow and perhaps can catch up and even surpass Brazil for a few years, however Russia is a nation that has lost all its empire, has lost the energy it had it is graying fast it has few children, it has an oligarchy as bad as Mexico or Brazil, criminality as bad as Mexico and Brazil and men are dying younger than in Mexico and Brazil.

    The Future of Russia is bleak to say the least.

    Today` Russia is economically and in development in the league of Mexico and Brazil however a nation without youth is a nation dying. they have more science than us in latin america true but they have less chances of catching up at the long run, and their children also suffer proverty as the ones we have, a nation witn such features can not catch up easily, Russia is in the same condition Spain and Portugal were in the 1900 or England in the 1970s, it is an empire in decadence that needs desperately join Europe to gain part of its lost power

    in fact the state of the russian submarine fleet shows that they have collapsed as a maritime power
    http://cns.miis.edu/pubs/week/images/031203.jpg

    You post garbage as bad as the likes of Jon James and fanboylaurence.

    The demographic situation in Russia can change easily depending on how the governments handles it policies towards this.

    With this being said, I congratulate you on finding images of 50+ year old submarines rusting in port. Clearly, the 3 Boreis (or more) are all fictional, the Yasen/Severodvinsk is actually a myth, and the 50+ billion $$ re-armament plan for the Navy alone till 2015 is a hoax. :rolleyes:

    At this rate, I might as well be like: Oh wow, look, the navy is in amazing shape, just look at these great subs!

    http://static.panoramio.com/photos/original/3497959.jpg

    in reply to: Russian Space & Missile[ News/Discussion] Part-2 #1787774
    dionis
    Participant

    Definitively on hurry

    http://en.rian.ru/russia/20080227/100186909.html

    Yeah the Russians are definitely picking up the pace. . . wonder what the 50bn of re-armament money will do for the Navy and Army, seems like the Air Force and Strategic Rocket Forces have it all set.

    dionis
    Participant

    Prove Global Security isn’t wrong about the Mig.

    At this rate, you might as well be asked to prove they ARE wrong. :diablo:

    dionis
    Participant

    They probably couldn’t afford to upgrade many Migs, must cost a fair few million per plane to upgrade.

    Back in 2000 that’s likely, but right now the MiG-29S –> SM –> SMT upgrade seems redundant with the PAK FA and Su-35 slated for production, along with modernization of the Su-24M and production of the Su-34. This of course leaves the MiG-31 in question.

    Wonder what’s happening to the massive Backfire-C fleet. The M5 upgrade program was something that was created, but the airforce seems focused on the Tu-95MS and especially the Tu-160 fleet.

    in reply to: Russian Space & Missile[ News/Discussion] Part-2 #1787792
    dionis
    Participant

    I think renumbering might have something to do with the START treaty. Something about agreeing not to MIRV non-MIRVed missiles. Making it a “new” design (learnign from Sukhoi, maybe…) might get around that restriction.

    That might make him less than credible on the issue of the RS-24, but what about the rest of it? And his argument is based on analyzing images of both the RS-24 and the Topol-M, and they appear to be nearly identical missiles:

    http://russianforces.org/blog/2007/07/rs24_and_topolm_side_by_side.shtml

    At any rate, nobody is talking about the RS-24, so his speculation is as credible or worthwhile as anyone else’s at this point. Which has been confirmed by Russian sources, by the way:

    http://www.vpk-news.ru/article.asp?pr_sign=archive.2007.200.articles.conception_02

    So, it would appear that the RS-24 is a MIRV’ed Topol-M, and Podvig was right.

    According to that Russian article the RS-24 is a development of the Topol-M, using both new and similar parts, and with a larger number of MIRV warheads, with the specific number not being available now. They are increasing the missile’s “combat capability.”

    MIRV’ed Topol-M is an understatement. That’s like calling the Su-30M an Su-27.

    dionis
    Participant

    If so, please be so kind and let me know, where they are? There is no one MiG-29SMT in Akhtubinsk and Lipetsk test and conversion centres, no one in 14th IAP in Kursk, no one in 19th IAP in Millerovo, no one in 28th IAP in Andreapol, no one in 31st IAP in Zernograd, no one in 120th IAP in Domna, no one in 237th TsPAT in Kubinka. Maybe you know some secret place nobody else knows?

    At the same rate, you could ask, do you have recent inventory sheets and photos of those airbases? :confused:

    While I feel the SM/SMT project was given very low priority and hardly any jets were upgraded if at all, unfortunately, it’s still curious to know what really happened to the project internally.

    dionis
    Participant

    And don’t seem to to have much luck upgrading their weapons in the 21st century either – how many MiG-29SMTs, Su-27SMs or MiG-31BMs are in service at the moment? How many Mi-28s are in service?

    Who cares?

    The conventional build up has only started last year after the re-armament plan was approved.

    The MiG-29 is being replaced, the Su-27SM and Su-34 are in full production, the Tu-160 is back in production, the Su-24 is being modernized, along with a LOT of other stuff. 3 or more Borei SSBNs are being launched, the Yasen/Severodvinsk is being finalized, the PAK FA is going to be tested within a year, 2 new frigate classes have been developed for large scale production.

    In about 7-8 years time, I can assure you even more will be planned.

    in reply to: Russian Space & Missile[ News/Discussion] Part-2 #1788037
    dionis
    Participant

    No, you’re all confused. Yes, the RS-24 has been noted to be a MIRV’ed Topol-M missile. Yes, that may have come at the expense of some of the decoys and penaids. No, that does NOT mean that it is less survivable; the new anti-ABM technology is likely in the form of the MARV warheads recently tested, meaning that reducing the number of decoys and penaids to provide for multiple warheads may actually have resulted in a more survivable delivery platform.

    Why do you consider Podvig to be an unreliable source? Most of his material regarding recent developments comes from the Russian media, in the form of news articles and press releases from the Russian MoD. If his site is unreliable, then you’d have to agree that his source material is unreliable as well.

    Personally, I find Podvig to be a far more accurate source to use regarding Russian strategic developments than anything published by a Western journalist or author. If you read through the endnotes in his book you’ll find that he has reached far and wide to find the most comprehensive list of sources imaginable without breaking into classified Russian files and getting arrested.

    Best way I can explain it that there’s a difference between spewing out facts that are presented by the government in an article (which would be accurate), making up your own facts based on some information (less accurate), and speculation with hardly any information (hardly accurate).

    I think his RS-24 analysis is based on lots of speculation and BS really. :confused: That’s why I think he’s rubbish in this case (or any source FOR NOW, about the RS-24).

    in reply to: Russian Space & Missile[ News/Discussion] Part-2 #1788038
    dionis
    Participant

    We have been through this before, you have to prove that the facts they present are unreliable.

    I never said it was.

    Well that is the general purpose of a ballistic missile.

    This doesn’t work this way. You don’t point me around to find crap for you. So if you want me to believe you, go prove Pavel is the #1 man on everything Russia. Along with Jane’s.

    You never said it was, ok, but someone else did and I disagreed.

    That was not really the general purpose of an ICBM, at least not the anti ABM part, since ABM systems have been and still are pretty primitive to stop any real ICBM threat, which I’m sure you agree.

    The whole point of the RS-24 seems to be better anti-defense capability than the Topol-M, with a clearly larger payload. :confused: Essentially what I stated at first and what Pavel says, except he’s hella confused about it being either a new missile or a Topol-M mod, and it’s really the former not the latter it seems.

    in reply to: INS Vikramaditya delayed until 2011! #2086340
    dionis
    Participant

    You finally seem to be almost getting it. Just becuase the radar was tested on a Mig-29SMT it does not mean that it is available as an option to a customer.

    Congratualations you know what the E stands for in the designation. Stop making excuses everyone knows you were confused becuase you dont know anything about Russian weapons.

    That may be the case but there is absolutely no doubt that I know more than you do and this has been proven on multiple occasions.

    Yeah, confused about the most obvious designation. Good luck finding evidence to sort that one out other than an American keyboard having E and F right next to each other;) Kinda like “Eksportnaya” and “Eksporynaya” misspelling (see the connection?) Bet that one means I can’t speak Russian right? Being a native speaker of the language. :rolleyes:

    And who says it wasn’t available as an option? NIIR tested smaller and larger radars, the latter for Sukhois and the former for MiGs. :confused: What’s so over the top here to say that the smaller radars, in all forms, were not available if there was a demand for them? :confused:

    dionis
    Participant

    Do they have open press in America? Seems like most of the horse sh– is affiliated to some politcal party. Open press my rear end. :rolleyes:

    in reply to: Russian Space & Missile[ News/Discussion] Part-2 #1788049
    dionis
    Participant

    Funny becuase it actually confirms what Austin said and you seemed confused by that.

    Big whoop.

    You mean my obsession with using reliable sources is hilarious? If thats what you think then more fool you, what is worrying is your inability to provide any viable sources. Anyway I thought Pavel’s blog was one of (:D )your(:D ) sources?:rolleyes:

    Prove your sources are reliable, then we will talk.

    How is it a stopgap weapon? The Russians don’t need another SS-18 to annihilate American nuclear silo.

    It’s a larger ICBM that’s being designed as a staple for the future, and primarily with defeating any defenses in mind. :confused:

Viewing 15 posts - 1,171 through 1,185 (of 1,704 total)