dark light

UAZ

Forum Replies Created

Viewing 15 posts - 406 through 420 (of 532 total)
  • Author
    Posts
  • in reply to: Algerian mig 29 SMT quality issues #2529832
    UAZ
    Participant

    Irkutsk Aircraft Plant Delivers First Two Su-30MKA Fighters to Algeria

    ((Two more to be send before yearโ€™s end. Deliveries will continue in 2008. Not further translated.))

    Source: 25.12.07, ARMS-TASS

    Translation by http://www.royfc.com

    in reply to: Iskander-K/R-500? #1790021
    UAZ
    Participant

    I would expect the cruise missile ISKANDER to be stealthy and can easily be improved to have a far longer range than publicized. Otherwise a ground attack version of the Yakhont/Brahmos would make more sense.

    in reply to: Pantsir S-1 : fire on the move video #1790028
    UAZ
    Participant

    Another video

    A promotional video made by KBP (in Russian language), this time showing the PANTSIR on tracked BMP/BMD chassis in the just missiles version (no guns).

    http://rutube.ru/tracks/301379.html?v=38d8363d49fb2513ad7eba55afc3e53a

    in reply to: Russian Space & Missile[ News/Discussion] Part-2 #1790335
    UAZ
    Participant

    Deflating a S-300/400 dummy

    http://img207.imageshack.us/img207/9535/972896qf5.jpg

    http://img207.imageshack.us/img207/7558/972897ik8.jpg

    http://img207.imageshack.us/img207/4600/972898ba5.jpg

    http://img207.imageshack.us/img207/7477/972899zb9.jpg

    in reply to: INS Vikramaditya delayed until 2011! #2041553
    UAZ
    Participant

    Over-simplified to the point of falsity. There are (among others) those who turn the visions of “those who can make things happen” into reality, when they are workable (often they aren’t – see below), e.g. the technicians, such as myself – and my job for the last few years has consisted of putting right what “those who can make things happen” have done, without having thought enough about what they were making happen. Look at what has happened to such once sound firms as Northern Rock & Marconi, when “those who can make things happen” took charge, without restraint. The whole current credit crisis is due to “those who can make things happen”. For large, complex organisations & deals, you have to tightly rein in such people. They’re useful tools, but they must be controlled.

    We are looking at things from completely different angles. We are not even on the same wavelength on this one…anyways this subject is off topic.

    Fair enough, I misunderstood you. But are you sure the original Gorshkov price included all the bribes? Maybe that’s part of the Russian wish to charge more, to recoup their outlay.

    Oh, I don’t know if there were any bribes involved in the original Gorshkov deal. My guess is as good as yours… But, if bribes were included in the original price, then I would imagine they would increase as the price increases :diablo:

    in reply to: INS Vikramaditya delayed until 2011! #2041650
    UAZ
    Participant

    Really? I don’t know what sort of business you’re in, but the major corporations & government bodies I’ve worked with & for would immediately label you as someone not to employ, & to be wary of doing business with, on the strength of “All it takes is a phone conversation or meeting between officials of both sides”. Varying a contract can be done, & often is – but not casually, by a phone conversation. Long hard negotiations over details, with everyone making damn sure they agree on exactly what each clause means.

    Really? Depends on who you are. In every government, corporation and even in medium and small business there are two sorts of people: those who can make things happen and the bureaucrats.

    and are you suggesting that Indian officials refuse bribes from Russians, but take them from W. Europeans? What a strange world you live in.

    Please read my posts more carefully. I never suggested that.
    On the contrary, I am suggesting that the costs and prices quoted earlier in this thread for a new W. European carrier do not include bribes. As for the Gorshkov deal….:p

    in reply to: INS Vikramaditya delayed until 2011! #2041671
    UAZ
    Participant

    A few points to add:

    1) Contracts are not carved in stone. They can be re-negotiated, changed, ammended and even cancelled. All it takes is a phone conversation or meeting between officials of both sides.

    2) Some posters here just wish that the carrier’s problems affect the MRCA tender… India has been signing new military contracts with the Russian side (additional tanks, helicopters ec.) since the cost overruns and delays became public.

    3) If the Indian side wants to get out of the deal, the Russians will probably finish the carrier. Even after returning the $400 million to the Indians, that would still be a great deal for the Russian navy as they are planning to build new carriers after 2015. Here they get one quicker for a lot less money.

    4) The Indian officials know that they are getting a great deal despite the cost increases and delays. A carrier for around $2 bil. including aircraft…and no strings attached. What they signed up for originally was a fantastic deal, now after the cost increases and delays, it is an excellent deal.

    5) In case the Indians had gone with a European mini-carrier…. what price it would have been after adjusting for inflation?….oh, and don’t forget to add all the bribes..

    in reply to: INS Vikramaditya delayed until 2011! #2041989
    UAZ
    Participant

    I fear the Russians aren’t seeing the Big Picture. Billions of dollars worth of deals in the pipeline, yet they’re trying to screw India on one, relatively small, deal. Wouldn’t it make more sense to say “Sorry, we got this a bit wrong. We’ll soak up the loss on this one & compensate you for the delay, to show good faith.”, rather than scaring the Indians with the prospect of similar disasters on those other, some much bigger, deals?

    Get real. India got the carrier for $1.

    Also, forget the mentality of retail business where the customer is king. These are military/political transactions.

    in reply to: INS Vikramaditya delayed until 2011! #2042009
    UAZ
    Participant

    Some of you guys are failing to see the “Big Picture”.

    Billions of $$$$s worth of military deals, dozens of contracts. Huge exports done, happening and being negotiated (SU-30MKI, PAK-FA, MTA, T-90, Smerch, BrahMos, Gorshkov, Talwar frigates, etc.etc.etc.).

    It would have been a miracle if absolutely no delays or hiccups occured. Problems happen daily in all kinds of business deals (civilian or military).

    Too much fuss is being made about the Vikramaditya delays. It is still a good deal for India (despite of the delay and cost increase).

    Nuff said.

    in reply to: Su-27SM vs regional rivals #2538075
    UAZ
    Participant

    Do you have a source for that? I was aware that the Chinese were consdiering the engine for upgrading their Su-27s but this is the first that I have heard of it being used for a domestic Russian program, especially seeing as the FM2/3 must be making considerable progress by now?

    MOSCOW, December 12 (RIA Novosti) – Russia will re-equip a second Air Force regiment in the Far East with modernized Su-27SM Flanker fighters by the fall of 2008, an AF spokesman said Wednesday.

    “The first six modernized Su-27 fighters arrived at the Tsentralnaya Urglovaya airfield outside Vladivostok on Wednesday,” Colonel Alexander Drobyshevsky said.

    “The regiment [based at Tsentralnaya Urglovaya] will be fully re-equipped with 24 Su-27SM aircraft by the fall of 2008,” he said.

    Russia’s 23rd fighter regiment based at Dzemgi, near Komsomolsk-on-Amur, has been already upgraded with 24 Su-27SM fighters.

    Experts say the modernized Su-27SM, equipped with two upgraded AL-31FM1 engines and advanced weaponry, is 60% more effective than the Su-27 and estimate current demand for the upgraded version at 200 aircraft.

    http://en.rian.ru/russia/20071212/92078523.html

    in reply to: Soviet F111 equivalent #2538778
    UAZ
    Participant

    Besides what would you rather be, an F-15 who can punch off 9000lbs of fuel at the push of a button if needed vs a Flanker that takes X number of minutes to do the same so it can actually manuever?

    ROFLMATSOFLAGARATHER:D ๐Ÿ˜€ .
    From now on lets forget about internal fuel. Lets carrry everything externally:dev2:

    in reply to: Russian Navy : News & Discussion Part-2 #2042597
    UAZ
    Participant

    Russian Navy resumes constant presence in world’s oceans

    MOSCOW, December 5 (RIA Novosti) – Russia’s Navy has resumed its continual presence in different regions of the world’s oceans, Defense Minister Anatoly Serdyukov told the president at a meeting in the Kremlin on Wednesday.

    “There are plans to dispatch ships to the northeast Atlantic and the Mediterranean Sea from now to February 3, 2008. The expedition is aimed at ensuring a naval presence and establishing conditions for secure Russian navigation,” Serdyukov told Vladimir Putin.

    The minister said an aircraft-carrying heavy cruiser, two anti-submarine ships and a tanker left for the Mediterranean on Wednesday, where they will be joined by a Black Sea Fleet missile cruiser and a tanker.

    Serdyukov said a total of four warships and seven other vessels of Russia’s Northern, Black Sea and Baltic fleets, as well as 47 planes and 10 helicopters, have been dispatched for the mission. Three exercises, involving the vessels and aircraft, are being planned.

    In mid-August, Putin announced the resumption of strategic patrol flights, saying that although the country halted long-distance strategic flights to remote regions in 1992 with the collapse of the Soviet Union and the ensuing economic and political chaos, other nations had continued the practice, compromising Russian national security.

    Russia’s strategic bombers have since carried out over 70 patrol flights over the Pacific, Atlantic, and Arctic oceans, as well as the Black Sea, a senior Air Force official said on Tuesday, adding that NATO interceptor aircraft had escorted Russian bombers during almost all their patrols.

    http://en.rian.ru/russia/20071205/91056421.html

    in reply to: Soviet F111 equivalent #2543597
    UAZ
    Participant

    The Su-24 Fencer would be the closest to the F-111.

    Be carefull about the “copying” subject, you may also say the Europeans have copied the design to come up with the Tornado.

    Anyways copying is a whole topic on its own. Some of us will deny any copying (just arriving at the same solution). Others will say its a two way street and bring examples like:

    http://img220.imageshack.us/img220/5773/f354gc8.jpg
    F-35

    http://img230.imageshack.us/img230/84/yak141previewcjpgc6cdddnn8.jpg
    Yak-141

    in reply to: Putin cans CFE #2543971
    UAZ
    Participant

    Some of you are so blinded by Gasprom and gas. It is a two way street. EU buys gas from Russia, in return they sell Mercedes cars, Airbus planes etc. etc. just check the increasing amount of EU exports to Russia…

    Those people who talk about lessening EU dependence on Russian gas are exactly those same people who don’t want good political and economic EU-Russia relations.

    Guess who will be marginalized if EU-Russia political and economic relations improve steadily?

    Guess who must (by gifting, bribing,buying regimes or providing hard nipples with lots of milk behind) install and support anti-Russian regimes in Eastern Europe?

    Guess who must create tensions in Europe by installing ABM missiles (and what else at later stages) in some of these East European nations?

    I wish Western people from both sides of the Atlantic one day see past their press and propaganda machine (which just as bad as the old Soviet propaganda, but more effective).

    in reply to: Defense against Anti Radiation Missiles #1791199
    UAZ
    Participant

    My 2 cents on this issue:

    NATO SEAD missions de-briefing:
    – Primary mission: Destroying the Serb air defense network : Failure
    – Secondary mission: Limiting the Serb air defenses to a “hide and snipe” mode : Success

    Serb Air Defenses de-briefing:
    – Primary mission: Destroying large numbers of NATO aircraft and repulsing air attacks: Failure
    – Secondary mission: Limiting NATO aircraft to fly over 20,000ft and forcing to carry ECMs and use SEAD missions: Success

Viewing 15 posts - 406 through 420 (of 532 total)