dark light

soyuz1917

Forum Replies Created

Viewing 15 posts - 526 through 540 (of 585 total)
  • Author
    Posts
  • in reply to: Are the Tu-22M-3s for India definitive? #2508379
    soyuz1917
    Participant

    its for both. They dont have 7 billion in cash so half of it is gas fields. Algeria owed Russia money not Russia owed Algeria. The Russians forgave the old debt in exchange for these contracts.

    in reply to: Russian Navy : News & Discussion #2066397
    soyuz1917
    Participant

    I dont know where you are getting that they have no plans to fix the Udaloy’s. According to Janes the problem is that they dont have a new engine for the Udaloys yet and they dont want to buy Ukrainian so they are PROBABLY waiting for development work on the new engine to be finished in Russia before they fund any repair or upgrade. There are no plans to scrap the ship.

    Both klinok and Shtil are dated systems and arent worth investing more money in really. Shtil could probably be salvaged for another decade if they stop relying on shipborne illuminators and put actually seekers on the missiles. The story is that they are working on just such an improvement, but then you have to ask yourself if you are going to spend so much money why do it on a missile that is heavy and unimpressive by modern standards? The VLS shtil really isnt even selling well with the Indians favoring the Barak. What they really need to do is navalize the S-400 system, but I dont think any work in this direction in even ongoing, at least not publicly. What the Russian navy needs is ships with serious air defense capability since at present the Russian surface fleet is little more then a submarine bastion defense force. All the Klinok equipped ships are basically garbage alone. If there were no RIF-M equipped ships the entire surface fleet would be a joke.

    They continue to improve klinok with a new radar antenna and new computer, the system can now handle targets with a smaller RCS. The Iranians claim the TOR varient they have has had its range extended 8km’s, but even all this doesnt make the system much good in this day and age.

    in reply to: New MiG-35 (in flight) photos #2515667
    soyuz1917
    Participant

    if Im not mistaken the F-22 is only 24% composites by weight and the F-18 is 19% composites by weight. If the MiG is 15% I call that rather impressive for a Russian design and a good sign for any future 5th gen design.

    engineers.ihs.com/NR/rdonlyres/AEF9A38E-56C3-4264-980C-D8D6980A4C84/0/444.pdf

    in reply to: Russian Navy : News & Discussion #2066701
    soyuz1917
    Participant

    the second neustrashimy class boat the Yaroslav Mudry was not abandoned work on it him still continues and they do still plan on finishing the ship. Ship #3 however was cancelled.

    in reply to: Russian Navy : News & Discussion #2066863
    soyuz1917
    Participant

    Ivanov does some very interesting math. I’d bet good money that 8 new SSBN’s means 3-4 Boreis and all the Delta IV’s that are set to recieve overhaul in the same time period! They routinely count old platforms that are upgraded as “new.”

    The sad news yesterday is he said Russia would operate a fleet of 50 Tu-160’s and Tu-95’s. The way he said it you would think this was a major numerical improvement when in fact is means over 30 bombers are going to be scrapped!

    He said they would reequip 40 tank, 97 motorized rifle and 50 assault battalions and that this would compose 1/2 the Russian army. If this is the case than the Russian army is about to be cut by a HUGE HUGE number. 40 tank battalions is 1200 tanks. If this is 1/2 the tank fleet they plan on fielding it means a Russian tank force of only 2400 tanks! Germany has more! But I guess if they are really moving toward serious quality improvements it might be okay. At least the red army will stop being a running joke.

    in reply to: Russian Navy : News & Discussion #2068093
    soyuz1917
    Participant

    http://www.rosprom.gov.ru/news.php?id=3053

    k-317 Pantera a Shuka-B class boat is undergoing sea trials at Sevmash after upgrade and repair. Since they are testing the sonar it means it was probably upgraded or replace outright.

    Sevmash just got a huge cash injection to upgrade its yards too.

    in reply to: MiG-35 and MiG-29 SMT presentation [pics] #2534549
    soyuz1917
    Participant

    so is the radar we see on the plane in that picture an AESA or what? Its not pointed up 20% like its supposed to. If its an AESA it looks like it has only 700 nodes or so right? The current US designs have way more.

    in reply to: Ethiopia Attacks Somalia #2540875
    soyuz1917
    Participant

    ethiopia has always wanted a port in Somalia that coupled with a very simple cost benefit analysis (no real cost thanks to US financial backing) more than anything is why they are in Somalia now. Killing jihadis and in particularly arab jihadis is just an added bonus.

    The real winners will be Russian and Ukrainian defense industries will will get more orders from Eritrea and Ethiopia respectively.

    in reply to: A new RuAF news thread #2540879
    soyuz1917
    Participant

    The Russian air force has taken delivery of 6 upgraded Su-25SM’s. 6 more will be upgraded next years and 8 more the year after (pitifully slow). That means that in 2006 the VVS has upgraded 6 Su-24’s and 6 Su-25’s. Have any MiG-29’s, MiG-31’s or Su-27’s actually been upgraded this year? From what I know not a one, but maybe 1 MiG-31 was upgraded because the BM did pass some sort of state tests according to Interfax-avn.

    http://arms-tass.su/?page=article&aid=34723&cid=24

    They also obviously took delivery of 2 Su-34’s and 10??? attack helos (6 or 7 Mi-28’s and anywhere from 1 to 3 Ka-50’s) this year. Also 1 Tu-160 returned to service after being rebuilt but recieving almost ZERO avionics upgrades.

    In short, another rather pitiful year in terms of procurement but R&D continues and at least a few air frames are being bought for the VVS.

    in reply to: Russian Navy : News & Discussion #2072058
    soyuz1917
    Participant

    wait, Tula isnt alone, didnt Bryansk just come out of upgrade?

    soyuz1917
    Participant

    yes it apparently a full technology transfer but the article is not 100% clear on this. The contract has been signed, it was apparently signed on Decemeber 2 and leaked to Janes first.

    The NII Stali website also has an interesting bit of Russian tank news on it that escaped my all seeing eyes until now. Apparently they have developed a new ERA and actually displayed it at the Nizhny Tagil arms show, they claim its twice as effective as Kontakt-5. If the performance numbers are true it will stop all modern NATO rounds.

    http://www.niistali.ru/index_en.php

    they are calling the upgrade “sling shot”

    in reply to: Russian Navy : News & Discussion #2076497
    soyuz1917
    Participant

    arms-tass is reporting that the Dolgaruki will be launched in the 1st quarter of 2007. The ship is ready, missiles obviously arent.

    http://arms-tass.su/?page=article&aid=33344&cid=25

    in reply to: Analysis: Russia must remain a major nuclear power #2512902
    soyuz1917
    Participant

    what caused the changed in doctrine was the loss of WARPAC and a collapse in resources, nothing more.

    In the 1980’s the USSR inducted a whole series of weapons, the Mi-24, the Su-25 (which would have mashed NATO tanks just as well as the A-10) , AGS-30 grenade launchers etc….The Afghan war also produced a core of experienced infantry officers and soldiers and raised the quality of the spetsnaz. People forget how many 4th gen fighter planes the USSR built in 1989 alone, NATO could NEVER match that.

    The Iraqis did not employ soviet doctrine, their tanks never advanced anywhere, they buried then in the sand and waited for the US to come and attack their fixed positions. Where was the maneuver warfare on their part? It barely happened. Do you think WARPAC would have fought from fixed positions like the Iraqis did? Where in Europe can tanks shoot at each other from 4km’s out? Europe is hilly and wooded. Soviet tanks would have engaged NATO tanks at under 2km’s in europe. Engagements to 4km’s are all but impossible. The Iraqis did not move in combined arms units. Did their tanks move with heli support? No. Did they move with self propelled artillery behind them? No. How did the Iraqis fight like the Soviets? Where were their ATGM’s? Hezbollah fought more like a real army.

    in reply to: Analysis: Russia must remain a major nuclear power #2512910
    soyuz1917
    Participant

    first of all the Iraqis were not following Soviet doctrine, none of the arab armies ever came close to following Soviet doctrine, their units werent formed right, they certainly werent equipped right, they werent trained right and they certainly didnt maneuver right. Combined arms operations is something the arabs never got. In fact, it was the Israelis who came the closest, to maneuvering like the soviets, using a combination of Soviet (pre-1976 doctrine) and German doctrine (oh the irony). The Soviets changed doctrine in the mid-70’s actually and modern Russia has since changed doctrine twice. The modern Russian army doesnt even man its tank batallions like the USSR did, the Russian tank battallion was seriously rethought in the mid 90’s.

    I’d go into more detail but it would take forever.

    Needless to say, even in 1989, NATO conventional forces in Europe would have been little more than a speed bump to the soviet army, the afghan war actually led to improved logistics in europe, they were in better shape in 1989 as a army than they were in 1979, to bad as a country they were screwed.

    in reply to: New Su-35BM already flying? #2528372
    soyuz1917
    Participant

    an R-77 in a VLS style tube was shown at MAKS-2005 pics of it are all over the internet. The SAM varient is called the RVV-AE-ZRK, its is one contender for the Russian MRADS system.

    http://img156.exs.cx/img156/6012/vympelrvvaezrk7ih.jpg

Viewing 15 posts - 526 through 540 (of 585 total)