You’re right, every time the NK’s announce that they are developing nuclear weapons or demanding our exit from the peninsula, it’s really faked Pentagon propaganda

Not really, what they are telling is that u don have any business in their backyard as much as what u might have said if China had the same amount of presence in Mexico.

For the sake of deterrence, lets give South Korea and Japan nukes too.

Yes sure, why not, that way amrikka can reduce a good load of policing duty and leave these nations to stand up on their own feet to defend themselves. And thats the better option also, as they are gonna fight for them and amrikka is going to save a lot on body & bags.

The problem is that the South Korean government wants the US military in South Korea. This is to keep the North Koreans out of South Korea. Our presence in South Korea should be of no concern to North Korea, provided they are content to remain within their own sovereign borders.

Did the SK Govt do a referrendum??? ….. yes, sure ur presence shud not be a concern to NK, as much NKs presence in the north shud not in anyway have concerned US as well. W/o doubt SK is the more powerful of the two (as per American spec) but if they still need the Amrikkan military might to defend them, it speaks volume abt the quality & capablity of the systems used by SK. If even after buying huge cache of weapons amounting to multi-billions dollars, they lack confidence in defending themselves with these systems, from NK (equipped with with earlier genatheir system) and need to pay the amrikkan military to defend them, it speaks out two things. That is — the system in itself is not worth the amount spend and hype surrounding them and /or America never really want to make the situation calm and just want to make good amount (as usual) by selling systems and having a strategic base in the south.

So we should discount the desires of the South Korean government in order to placate the North Koreans? Is that what you’re saying?

First of all u shud not create any ‘desiree’ in the SK for ur presence in there. Moreover, u r fully capable enough to reject their ‘desireee’ if u think that ur super-duper weapons that have made billion of dollars in exchange are capable enough to defend against NK euipeed with earlier generation weapons.If not stop the sale of ur ‘crappy’ weapons and let them buy the weapons with which they wud regain their confidence in defending their homeland from any agresssion from the North. Its as simple as that …

What is the intrest of the USA to stick its nose into NK? Why feed those people at all? Reducing the strength of the NK forces considerably will ease tension in Korea and will not make NK defenceless by doing so. SK is no longer intrested in an united Korea, when looking into the financial burden for that.
When the USA are clever enough, they will leave that problem to SK and Japan to deal with and get rid of some financial burden by that.

Yes, its no busines of urs to feed those ppl as much as it was not ur responsiblity to accept the half amrikkan Vietnameese born during & after the rapists was kicked out of Vietnam. …. n h do u know that ppl don want to unite??….. the only obstacle in ther is the US, who doesn’t want to loose a huge market and an almost free base.

So we should just ignore others who request our assistance now? This is a UN-brokered cease-fire, is it not? What have they done over the past 50 years to end the conflict?

c’mon…. plz leave the UN alone … its a joke and sounds more so when an amrikkan uses it ….

come on, everybody knows that Korea would have been reunited decades before under the peace loving rule of the North Koreans, if it would not have been for the interference of the US. Korean people want to get rid of the corrupt puppets of the Southern goverment and want to join their borthers in the north, in their eternal struggle for freedom, prosperty and harmony.

WMD are a needed assets if you want to protect your poeple from becoming slaves of the imperial monster, known as the US.

You are soooo damn correct!

How are we overstepping our bounds in this case? What is wrong with maintaining the UN cease-fire? This should be called the “I don’t think the US should have gone into Iraq so they should get out of everything” mentality.

as said earlier, amrikkan’s simply doesn’t deserve to talk abt UN or on their behalf …. h many times have u guys worn the UN dress & contributed to UN under the UN flag ?? …..

Well, I have never seen a French, Brazilian or Italian that would agree with your eagerness to intervene in terms of ‘pre-emptive measures’, even British and Aussies are not so common as one would expect. Well, to stay objective, though, undoubtedly there are some French or other citizens who are fans of your world domination games but I have never encountered any, except for one German that has been working in CT for ages and was probably infected with long-term Fox-News syndrome. In this case a generalized *You Americans* seemed as a best option to me, but you are welcome to suggest anything that might sound better to your sensitive ears.

I fully agree abt that ‘american’ thing … most ppl really do not realise (more so Indians) that Amrikkans are highly patriotic ppl and they wont accept any disgrace to their national pride and they see to it that if at all that happens, a fitting reply is given in due course.

What many simply do not understan is the ‘American’ behaviour or a national character —– I can only describe at best what America is now, like this —– Americans are very Stubborn (first & foremost!) and due to that, they have always got what they want on their terms (u’ll see that in personal life too!), And these two things are what made the Amrikkans & the US arrogant (!) enough …

Martina never really wud have dreamnt that the FREELAND wud ever tell her to leave the country for expressing her FREEDOM of EXPRESSION on the Iraq war. Now thats the real face of worlds oldest DEMO-CRAZY!

After all this is what Americans say in one voice and that old lady in the cartoon says it all!

By operational cereer, I did not mean usage in war. I meant just this operatoipnal carrer. People tend to overlook the difficulties of implementing a new (and totally different from its predecesors) weapon system like the AMRAAM/R 77.

really? ….. i guess it was not what u’ve been following …..

I am not American, so i don’t know the reason they continue missile developpment after AIM 54 introduction.

yes, he is most probably an Indian poster who find it really toooo hard not to $uck his amrikkan ….

The Pirate, AAS 42, OSF that use LW sensors can detect a “cold” target from ~100 km. The ATFLIR , Sniper that use MW sensor can do this at ~ 60-70 km (but the advantage is that a MW sensor is less disturbed by moist, smoke etc.). The figure for KOLS is 50 km for a “hot” target (the target seen from behind); the figure for a cold target is far less.

a source wud just do fine …

You must be kidding. If the pilot is not 100 % sure that the target is an ennemy ,he is not allowed to fire!

not 100% sure even abt IFF ?? so whats the super computer & the worlds biggest – threat – library in the invincible stuff meant for ….

Well that’s good to hear. I suppose you’ll let us add ASALM into the mix then? IT was going to be a dual-role ASM/AAM with a 300 mile range, Mach 5.5 speed, ramjet power, and a 200 kt warhead. Flight tested but cancelled because of lack of $$$.

really?..and when did amrikkans find themselves in a situation like what the Russians found themselves in the 90s … and u might as well tell us abt the flight test …

You’re welcome to reject it but that doesn’t mean they don’t or couldn’t have it. And no there’s not a whole lot of information out there but then if it’s classified you’re not exactly going to be able to go to Amazon and buy a book on the thing. As for ASALM it’s been dead for 25 years, I was merely using it to illustrate that good ideas don’t always get into service. Other than money I’ve still not heard a reasonable explanation for that decision though often times money is enough of one. They even kicked around the idea of using it as a long range SAM launched out of a Mk41 VLS and as a target for antiship missile defense testing.

now u got such a ‘broad-mindedness’ in thinking abt the cancellation, but this is something that is throughly missed when it comes to the wide array of cancelled Russian stuffs.

apparently u can provide evidence to this that the USAF/USN/NASA projects like the MATV,HARV , ACTIVE were not able to produce reliable and usable 3d nozzles!! Also what about the fluid thrust vectoring? ? ? Please give evidence to support that the USAF/NASA has not perfected 3d nozzles to the same degree the russians have (basing it solely on the fact that because the su-30mki exists (do all of them have 3d?) while no US example exists as such does not justify the clame..the f/a-22 is more or less operational my friend (just a few months away) and is allready clocking big hours down at tyndall and edwards..the pwf119 and the nozzles have been working flawlessly since many years now..also the F-100PW-229 powered F15 ACTIVE first flew almost a decade ago and demonstrated 3d thrust vectoring of 20 degrees (p+y) at speeds in excess of mach 1.8..

U need to give a creadible proof as y the USAF who doesn’t leave any new tech to be integrated into their systems did not put in the 3D TVC into the F-15 & other a/c …. where as they have been putting the asea radar into the older a/c whose development started (if am not wrong) after the TVC or was not ‘perfected’ as much as the engine nozzles ….

now that u talked abt the flawness of the nozzle on the F-22, can u put any source for that and any link to the same which is creadible enough so that we can have some data for the F-100 engine & its nozzles …?

Now that was almost a decade ago..i find it really hard to believe that given a decade this technology would not have been perfected to a point where it was usable..however here is an interesting article regarding fluid tvc which talks about adv and disadv of each system..happy reading

And thats what u need to answer, as to Y the USAF who keeps their AF updated did not go for a TVC on F-15 and other a/c, while they went in for the asea and other upgrades, which did not have that ‘decades’ behind them to be ‘perfected’ …

The nozzle on the F-22 is at least a 4th generation TV nozzle. One does not need to deploy an item to consider it “perfected” if the need is not there. The US has tested a LOT of different TV nozzles, just because you don’t know anything about them doesn’t make it any less true. I’ll list just the ones that come to mind here.

Now friend, u need to give a creadible reply as to Y the USAF was not interested in updating their a/c with this ‘perfected technology’ on their fighters, when they were eager to go in for asea and have been more so drooling abt the TVC on their Raptors ….

So the F-22 has got a 4th Gen TV nozzle …. hmmmm …. which means that the a/c is not fully a ‘5th Gen a/c’ ….. more so like —- 4++ plus some more +’s ……

1. At the very beginning of research into the ATF P&W was testing a 2D nozzle with a flat-end nozzle. This was back in the 80s. That proceeded to:

2. A flight worthy version which an F-15 flew with two of. In the 80s

3. The YF-22 flew with a completely new 2D thrust vectoring nozzle. Keep in mind this was not a research aircraft to test thrust vectoring. By that time (1990) thrust vectoring was ALREADY sufficiently advanced that it was being used on prototypes for a production aircraft.

4. During the time between the selection of the YF-22 and the rollout of the F-22A P&W continued to refine the 2D nozzle on the F119. The nozzle lost 600lbs of weight on it’s way to being the nozzle used today.

5. Concurrently with 4 both P&W and GE developed 3D vectoring nozzles that are much lighter and less complex that the swiveling nozzle on the Su-37 and Su-30MKI. You’d have to see them in operation. The petals of the nozzle slide across each other directing the exhaust. It almost looks like the things are alive.

6. Both the F-16 and the F-15 have flown with the nozzles mentioned in 5

7. The X-32 had a 2D vectoring nozzle. Again this was not an aircraft who’s purpose was to test thrust vectoring. Thrust vectoring was ALREADY sufficiently advanced in the US to implement it in a fighter prototype.

And since u posted all these ‘perfection’s u might as well be capable enough to give us a creadible info as to y the USAF did not update their a/c with this technology or for that matter a US industry who are pinoeers in showcasing their products never ever showcased their new achievement in any airshows or for that matter any expos.

India has TEN Su-30MKI

http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/world/india/su-30.htm

The US has over FORTY F-22s in operation.

and what do u know abt the operation of the 40 F-22 in the USAF??…..whats the nozzle life and others … u can post all that in here —-http://forum.keypublishing.co.uk/showthread.php?t=37083

If the price of the Indian built Su-30MKI is really only $22.5 million then why isn’t the world lined up to buy them? Hell that’s cheaper than an F-16. Is it because they suck? Or is it because maybe they really aren’t that cheap? Why isn’t the Su-30MKI in the Singapore competition? Why didn’t it win South Korea? Why did the UAE invest $3 BILLION of their own money to develope and procure the Block 60 F-16 when that same $3 billion would have got them 133 Su-30MKIs? Come to think of it if they’re cheaper than Russian built ones why isn’t Russia buying Su-30MKIs from India instead of upgrading their inferior Su-27s?

Now tell me the list of Nations which need a/c in the class of Flankers ….. I’ll reply to u after that …. as for the Singapore and SK, u’ll as well tell as Y the Rafale did not win in SK . In the case of Singapore, u need to learn a lot more abt geopolitics and arms dealing around a world in much much more detail to even have a grip of the stuffs. The basic step in that direction wud be to stop viewing/reading ur own visual & print media …

Indias pricing is in iR. Not knowing the excact date or exchange-rate at a given date reveals nothing. There is never given a clue, what is incorporated in that price.

u must be really dumb arseOle or u must be the finest twister around.

The official price for the MiG-29K for example is ~32 Mio $, when India paid 700+ Mio $ for 16 of that. So RD-work share is not included.
As long as not all parts from the MKI were produced in India itself and the Indian specialists will not earn more money, this is a fictive price for the Indian taxpayer.

Now the $700 million included training simulators and other supports with the unit price being high coz of a small lot. But the IN has expressed their desire top get more and the last report said like 14 which will add upto 30 a/c, where as the real need will be about 25-30 a/c each (totalling 50-60a/c) for Gorshkov & IAC-I, the construction of which have began. But the IN don have a very big pocket, so they are trying the old trick to get in things bit by bit which i think wont help much in reducing the unit price. I’d rather hope GoI make a deal for the entire lot of a/c (50-60) in one go, thus reducing the unit price.

In the case of MKI, engine is locally built, frame is locally built, avionics comes from Indian and external sources as well as Radar. And u r correct as soon as the products that comes from west is not reduced, the exchange rate will make sure that the cost wont be able to come down.

South Korea operates Russian helicopters and the Flanker was a contender.
The F-15K won, because it offered real functional hardware. The Rafale is still in the race in Singapore, because it will meet the timeline there and the Typhoon may not. First time that the F-15 and Rafale competite under equal conditions. But not really, when we keep in mind the military infrastructure there. I think the whole competion is made to force down the price of the F-15. It is crazy enough, what an AF is kept by a city with a population of ~3 Mio.

If u really thought that a govt under American patronage can ever have other manufactures systems (big bucks & large quantity) in theie inventory, then, u need to get a Life man.

They’re not exactly in a friendly neighborhood. They’re not in the situation Israel is by any stretch but still, an ounce of prevention…

care to explain that ‘prevention’ …..which makes them keep such a large military?

However the no. of f/a-22’s that the pentagon/congress was willing to give to the AF does not entirely depend on its cost. This is evident from the fact that under the current cap the Air-force thinks that it can procure around 225-250 raptors from the money it has saved (and will save per unit flyaway) through various cost cutting/effeciency increasing measures it has taken , but still the congress wont allow it..they have said 189 and thats it!! the QDR might change that but i still think that it aint gonna be over 225..Now the question to wether the USAF needs the 339 raptors is open to debate and lets not go there..Some (ELP and myself) think that around 300 raptors should be enough however the required no. are debate..Now i am not saying that had the raptor been 50 million a peice USAF wouldnt have bought more but still comparing 2 aircraft that have different levels of technology (almost a generation gap in this case) in terms of procurment cost isnt all that justifiable as comparing 2 aircraft if a similar generation..Although a comparison of sorts cannot be deemed as flawed (and no where am i suggesting it). the raptor’s next batch of production (second full batch of 30+ aircraft)should most likely cost under 100 mill a peice and prices will go down from then on…however It is an expensive aircraft none the less..But i guess that is the price u pay for producing something that is levels above the rest.

now y wud USAF need more than 200 a/c considerig that some ‘creadible’ testing has shown that 1 Raptor = 10 Flankers. Now thats means, in most cases even those 189 wud be an overkill …

Helo guys … can anyone pull up the other IMDS 2005 thread, my search did not yield me anything (i’m not talking abt the thread that I started) …….

can anyone help?

An article from FORCE posted in the IN discussion thread says something abt the simulators for Kilo & Amur-1650 for IN in addition to the VLS & AIP, which might as well point out that an Amur-1650 is on its way to join the IN in the next few years, which might as well have an 8-cell PJ-10 VLS & AIP or it might as well only be having these two starting from the second unit. Here is the quote from the article

Meanwhile, the Rubin Central Design Bureau for Marine Engineering (CDBME) has given a detailed proposal to the IN regarding the supply of type-specific full-mission simulators for both the Type 877EKM SSK and the Amur 1650 SSK. These simulators will be located at Vizag.

In addition, BrahMos Aerospace, along with CDBME, has modified the Amur 1650 SSK’s design that now enables the vessel to accommodate both an 8-cell vertical launcher for the BrahMos, as well as an air-independent propulsion system.

In addition to that is this article (posted by Igorr @ br) which mentions abt 12 submarine for exports which might as well be abt the Project-26 for Indian Navy which calls for a second line of submarine inaddition to the Project-25, for which the French & Germans are battling.

ST. PETERSBURG, on 30 June. (ITAR- TASS). FGUP “Admiralty shipyards” relies on delivery of 12 non-nuclear submarines of project “Amur” (export alternative name for design 677 “Lada”) to the foreign customers. Pra1m- TASS with the reference to the Director-General of the enterprise Vladimir Aleksandrov reported on this. According to him, the process of proposal and agreement of sale of the fourth generation submarines must go more rapidly in connection with the fact that the submarine of Russian last design in the near future will be transmitted TO Russia NAVY. V. Aleksandrov explained, that the enterprise obtained the approval of Defense Ministry to the demonstration to the foreign specialists of several sections of submarine “Saint Petersburg” for the demonstration of the layout of equipment, suitability for inhabitation of boat. General director emphasized that on this project “there are many interesting proposals; however, it noted that the delivery of submarines” a question is political, a question of mutual commitments “. According to Aleksandrov, present moment is critical, since some 44- countries, which have non-nuclear submarine fleet, want to replace the submarines of the second and third generation by the more contemporary models. It refined that the cost NAPL is 150-200 million $..

http://arms-tass.su/?page=article&aid=16224&cid=94

I do remember someone commenting abt the Russian subs ‘inferiority’ by showing the consoles during some discussion on the naval thread quite a while back. Now, thats the case with a good majority of the guys everywhere, when they talk abt how modern a submarine is (or for that matter any other product). As for them, the flashy and eye ctachy soft or not-so soft-touch screens, lots of color displays etc etc and other stuffs inside only make up anything modern. If someone employ the old switches, display etc even though the ‘core workers’ inside doing the job maybe entirely different & new, the ‘impression’ doesn’t change for these guys.

So though abt putting this pics too …. which is related to the Amur’s control room and consoles. Two of them are artists impression & a third one from Morphyspribor’s brochure (Igorr’s scan) showing some consoles. One of the artists rep is from Rubin’s site (earlier) & the second one from Itarr-Tass. The third one, which is actually a real console – is either from a submarine (IN’s upgraded Kilos or Lada) or from the simulators – is what I’m guessing as to the kind of stuffs that Sankt Petersburg (Project-677 Lada) is having inside her. Now, these cud as well be whats inside the upgraded Klios of the Indian Navy too.

The germans proved the concept that you could make an effective underwater attack diesel sub simply my improving underwater hydrodynamics and increasing battery capacity. They also proved the concept that hydrophones could be used for long range detection. Other than that, nothing much was copied from the XXI. The Germans probably would have defeated Britain if they started the war with XXIs.

well i think we can go by two way …. my belief is that if they had the surface combatants to give cover to their attack subs running from the ASW assets of the opponents, the things wud definetely have been different. With the newer XXI entering to later-on ….

Maybe you could explain why that is, I dont see the big relation of French and German subs to XXI over Kilos

Its not abt the similarity of the subs mentioned to Type-21, but the general WW-II submarine profile. Well i don know y u guys don see it. As for me it definetely does. Don u guys see any similarity in the gereral profile of Agosta, U-209 class & Foxtrot class to that of the U-boats or for that matter WW-II boats. See the side profile, the fore section with an almost vertical chopped off profile and so does the front profile which looks like this — () —- rather than this — O —- which is what Kilo, Zawaaris (Dutch built, US design) among some others & the newer designs like Scorpene, U-212/214 and ofcourse the best of the lot, Amur looks life. I don know h to say it better than that for now. I hope u guys are getting what i mean.

Western subs dont have flood holes

The flood holes are only opened when the sub need to surface & submerge and these have got cover when the job is done and I see no great deal of drag and noise that gets produced due to the closed ports.

That’s right, the Western designs work on a suck and blow principle un like the Eastern designs which have a dual suck principle.

I did not knew that they had different principles … So Ja, can u put in more abt the same??? … woud love to know more on that. Tks in advance.

well I don know what the new Amurs have, but i think it got the flood holes which i suppose is like ‘free flooding’ the sub. Now, free-flooding a sub (or for that matter a surface ship) is the best way to sink the submarine and the reason Y all subs have that as an option to make sure that enemy don get the ship. And it don take hours for a sub to sink when its freely flooded, but just a matter of minutes unlike ‘forced flooding’ to sink it. Now that might also tell as to the reason y the Russian sub have got ‘free flooding’ (if am not wrong) for their subs to submerge — yup, faster dive, if the ‘surroundings’ have got some ‘disturances’. After all we get to see the western chaps mentioning abt “fast diving” Russian submarine when they talk abt the ASW assets …. I hope u will correct my wrong theories … so that i can stand corrected.

I think that in discussing about the russian success in submarine development we should not only mention the Kilo class, but the Akula too, according to some books I had read, the Akula is as silent or even more than the best submarine from the west.

Well mate, this thread is all abt the diesel-electric submarines and hence the Shuka’s (Akula/Bars) is out from this discussion. But that said, I believe the greatest submarine design have been the Kilos and it shud definetely take the pole, if the new generation susb are not included.

To put a bit on the Shuka’s, I did hear that the British did have some experience & were worried abt the Shukas shadowing the British N-subs, after they resumed the international patrolling. But then things like this don get to be heard too often or hear abt the same more as the west wont reaveal anything of that sort, coz its embrassing for them and all their remarks abt h they used to tail the Russian subs w/o even them knowing it and other claims.

Kilos are very very capable boats, but the blow holes on top make a bugger of a noise when they get stuck open, I have come across this a couple of times (we think it was the same boat each time).

Yup, and that happens when the holes are opened to either blow out or when diving. But then a sub will only do these two in the extreme cases in the presense of the opponent and is not something that will worry a Kapitan.

BTW, … did that Kilos u mentioned happened to be in the Indian Ocean Region (IOR)? ….. got more on that?

India still operates two Foxtrots, but they will be decommissioned soon.

Yo they are now mostly test beds. We did have 8 Foxtrots in all and these were boats that was different from what the Soviets sold to others. Yup, believe it or not, customisation for IN did not start after 90s, but it was the way since it started with the Russians. The Foxtrots that Russians built for the IN was different, maybe in the sensors among other (i’m not in a position to tell what all, but i think so) and it would not be idiotic to think that of the Foxtrots that operated world wide, IN’s subs were a step ahead of all those.

here is – a bit old – article article abt the Russian export submarines.

Russian Export Submarines: Striking Power, Reliablity and Stealthiness

Yuri Kormilitsyn
General Designer of the Rubin Central Marine Design Bureau
Leonid Yashenkin
Head of the Submarine Department of the 1st Naval Central Research Institute of the Russian Federation

Russian submariners shared their unique experience with submarine designers and builders, permitting them to develop boats capable of operating in any climatic conditions.

The world’s submarine market has an almost century-long history. During this period over 500 submarines have been exported worldwide. Various foreign experts maintain that Germany is the largest exporter of submarines. This assertion is erroneous, since Russia ranks first among other nations, having exported over 150 submarines, despite the fact that its first submarine was exported only after World War II. Over the same period, the USA has exported about 90 submarines, Germany – about 80 and Great Britain – about 70.

Export of Russian submarines dates back to post-WWII times, when the first-generation submarines of Projects 613 and 633 (Whiskey and Romeo according to Western classification) were exported. At that time the USA and Great Britain were selling war-time submarines of Projects Balao, S and T. As the Russian export submarines were designed and built after WWII, they boasted the highest performance characteristics at that time, were equipped with snorkeling system, sonar and homing torpedoes. The submerged cruising range of the submarines at an economic speed was 400 km.
Russia also helped submarine importers train their crews and create and develop coastal infrastructure; supplied spare parts, tools, accessories and materials to repair the purchased ships; trained specialists and handed over documentation.

Sometimes, the entire set of design documents was handed over to submarine importers for the construction of submarines at their own shipyards and all possible assistance was rendered to them in assimilating the relevant technologies.

Project 641 (Foxtrot) submarines were derivatives of the Whiskey and Romeo class diesel boats. They featured larger ammunition load, endurance and range. The USSR started to export these submarines (modifications I641 and I641K) in the mid-1960s. By that time the USSR’s Navy had accumulated extensive experience of their operation in different areas of the World Ocean – from the Arctic to the equator.

Russian submariners shared their unique experience with submarine designers and builders, permitting them to develop boats capable of operating in any climatic conditions. If we look at the map of the first-generation Russian submarine export deliveries spreading to Albania, Bulgaria, Egypt, Indonesia, China, North Korea, Poland, Syria, India, Libya, and Cuba, we shall see that the boats were operated in diverse climatic conditions, including the warmest and most saline tropical seas rich in microorganisms. The reliability of Russian-built submarines was proved in practice.

With the beginning of the nuclear shipbuilding age, diesel submarines were built in Russia at a lower pace. But due to the presence of inland seas and extended coastal economic zones, where operation of nuclear submarines is limited, common sense triumphed and the second-generation submarine of Project 641B (Tango) was developed. In comparison with the submarine of Project 641, the hull of its successor was better suited for underwater operation. It was equipped with a new sonar system fitted with a large passive array, a storage battery of a larger capacity, powerful torpedo armament, including quick-loading gear, automatic fire control system and other improvements. But actually, this was no more than an improved version of the diesel submarine of Project 641.

Third-generation submarines of Project 877 (Kilo class) and their export versions 877E and 877EKM were developed under a fundamentally new concept using newly developed equipment and construction techniques. The submarine was equipped with a one-shaft electric propulsion unit, combined with a standby propulsion plant arranged in the boat’s aft end. The submarine’s state-of-the-art electronics made the boat one of the most modern ships. The submarine’s versatility is worth noting. It shows excellent maneuverability in shallow waters, straits and narrow passages, and performs well in any sea state.

Many navies worldwide recognize the Kilo-class diesel submarine as the most successful boat in its class because of its low level of generated noise (contributing to the submarine’s enhanced stealthiness), impressive combat capabilities, reliability, excellent sea-keeping qualities, reasonable automation, easy operation and maintenance and high degree of survivability.

Today, 17 submarines of Project 877EKM are operated by the navies of India, Algeria, Iran, Poland, Romania and China. These submarines considerably enhance the combat efficiency of the navies of the countries that operate them.

A diesel submarine of Project 636 is a further development of the Kilo class boat. By adding only two frame spacings (600mm x 2) to the boat’s hull length, the designers increased the diesel-generator’s power rating 1.5 times, provided better shock-mounts for these generators and, consequently, reduced the generated noise level, reduced the main propulsion motor speed by half, and replaced over 30 items of equipment with the new low-noise specimens. Due to these changes the boat’s underwater speed was increased to 20 knots, her acoustic field was reduced, and other parameters were improved. The submarines of Project 636 entered service with the Russian Navy over seven years ago. The first boats have already been exported.

The upgrade potential of the Kilo- class submarine is far from being exhausted. As soon as the testing of new items of equipment is completed and their production is launched, they can be installed on a submarine being built or repaired, upon customer request. Among such new equipment items are towed transducer arrays, periscopes fitted with a night vision channel and laser range finder, an antiship cruise missile system, an air-independent fuel cell propulsion plant, etc. The submarine designers are prepared to discuss installation of equipment manufactured by other countries. With these upgrades, Kilo-class submarines will last into the first decade of the next millennium and will be competitive.

The designers of the Rubin Central Marine Design Bureau (St. Petersburg), Russia’s oldest submarine design organization, continue to produce new designs. In the late 1980s they started to develop a fourth-generation diesel-electric submarine, the export version of which was designated Amur-1650. Considering the submarine’s stealthiness and sonar equipment, the boat is likely to be superior to her predecessors. This will change her operational tactics, because a multiple increase in the target detection range will change target detection techniques. The submarine will be equipped with an automated integrated control system and armed with the latest cruise missiles, torpedoes and mines.

At the start of the 21st century, the first submarines of the Amur-1650 type will be offered for export. Priority will be given to the «Kilo-class submarine club» members, i.e. these boats will initially be offered to those countries which have already accumulated some experience in operating Russian-built submarines.

Presently, the guarantees of after-sale servicing and repairs of underwater ships have been raised to a higher standard. The Marine Equipment financial and industrial group has been established in Russia to incorporate a design bureau that produces submarine design projects, three large shipyards, one of the largest banks, and the Navy’s Shipbuilding Institute. Such a strong and well-balanced consortium is capable of resolving any issue related to Russia’s contractual obligations for the export and servicing of submarines.

For those countries which contemplate not only to purchase submarines, but build them under a licensing agreement, and later design and build submarines on their own, several versions of the technology transfer program have been devised.

Copyright © Military Parade JSC, 1998.

And here the quantity of subs that each nation built during the period 1901-1996 & the share that they make in the world.

Ken,

expecting good pics…. and for me plz check out for Yak-44, new variant of Ka-28/29 etc … and ofcourse engines from Salyut (if am not wrong) … In addition to that wud be any Tu-204 based MPA, RRJ and other commercial ones …

And who will be there – USAF & US Navy !!! (and the Patrouille de France)

Still – they’ll be surrounded by Russians asking for autographs – which means the aircraft I want to see might be visible !!!

BTW, did the US allow the Russian Tu-95 to enter US??…. wasn’t there a bit of stuffs abt US refusal to allow the same even after the B-52 had been there at MAKS 2003

Hope Rafales win, but then they are gonna definetely loose against Isreal at time of war ….

Tsk Tsk, what a waste of cash! if IAF does not buy dem exhorbitant M2000s at all, they could probly get close to 160 Mig 29 (MKI) for the same $. 🙂

USS.

well not 160 but more close to 250 x MiG-29(MKI) for the same amount for what Mirage-2000-5 wud come

If we take the amount thats been in the media it says $9billion deal and for the MiG-29s its wud most likely cost $4.5-5 billion.

Now that will also give u the perfect insight into what I’ve ben saying abt the media which have been heavily backing the French against the Russians (for obvious reasons). If we take a look at the reports we wud get to see that the final amount is actually what the reports say abt the cost for ‘their a/c. So likewise, the International media (& Indian clones) say its $9billion (i.e their clear backing of Mirage-2000-5) , where as the Russian report (the one I earlier posted) mentions it as $4.5-5 billion, which was considering the fact they were calculating it with the unit cost of their a/c. ie MiG-29M/M2.