If they’re smart then they begin with the T-60S design from Sukhoi. Expand it and give it new, more fuel efficient engines to increase range to intercontinental levels, and you’ve got a pretty good platform able to deal with the next 20-30 years or so.
[color=red]This one has gotten a bit bloated, time to start a new one.[/color]
[color=red]This one has gotten a bit bloated, time to start a new one.[/color]
Watching that one on Blu-ray right now. Great movie, and by far the best of the four Clancy adaptations. Gotta say that it was very well cast, too. Don’t necessarily agree with Alec Baldwin’s politics, but the man was perfect for the role of Ryan. Best line: “Be careful what you shoot at. Most things in here don’t react too well to bullets.”
Watching that one on Blu-ray right now. Great movie, and by far the best of the four Clancy adaptations. Gotta say that it was very well cast, too. Don’t necessarily agree with Alec Baldwin’s politics, but the man was perfect for the role of Ryan. Best line: “Be careful what you shoot at. Most things in here don’t react too well to bullets.”
Yeah, but speed is still a critical factor in a dogfight. I think that’s what he was getting at by saying your remark was misinformed. He who bleeds speed off the fastest will probably get obliterated.
Alright, after looking through some declassified Cold War documents, it seems that I am missing three sites in Belarus, one in Lithuania, one in Kaliningrad that I think I have found, and at least three in Russia (Chelyabinsk, Ozersk, and Belogorsk/Svobodnyy). Beyond that every site I have found a reference to in documents from the 60s through the 80s that I can make out an accurate reference to has been located. Part of the problem is bad quality maps that have a lot of the western Russia stuff incomprehensible and hard to make out.
If they’d picked the F-23 though all we’d be hearing from the fanboys is “sux/obsolete cuz it has no 3D TVC and can’t do backflips” 😉
Yeah whatever, all those fancy maneuvers wouldn’t amount for squat against something fast as hell and absurdly hard to locate 😀
I seem to recall hearing about high AOA testing though but can’t remember the details. High AOA maneuvering and all that is great in WVR combat, but it is only a really useful feature if you can manage to do it without bleeding off massive amounts of energy. Then you can point the nose to get a shot off without killing yourself if you miss. The other problem is that a jet with high AOA and excellent maneuver capability is still remarkably easy to kill with an AAM. Current AAMs may be able to be evaded, yes, but all you really need is a WVR AAM with a bigger warhead and longer range proximity fuse, expanding the kill radius of the weapon to compensate for more maneuvering capability.
How many missiles did a typical site have (launchers and reloads)?
Reloads I’d have to investigate, but most sites had either two or three firing positions. Each firing position would have six launch rails and be linked to a SQUARE PAIR radar. Therefore, most sites had a multi-target engagement capacity, while the system itself did not, because of the presence of multiple engagement radars.
SOC,
You might find these sites helpfull:
I’ve seen the PVO site, but the German one is pretty interesting. I think I have all of those sites already but the site does have some good stuff in there regardless.
Russia has offered to work on a joint ABM system before. As for the Arctic and Siberia, not a lot of exploitation has gone on. With American financial and engineering backing, it could potentially be done swifter and cheaper, to the benefit of both sides. Spheres of influence could easily be defined as Asia, Europe, and the Americas for the three “partners”, with the only expectation being that one doesn’t interfere with the others. Instead of idiotic posturing and fantasy dreams of conflict, why not work as one to get what all three want, far better economic conditions at home.
What the hell is that thing?
What the hell is that thing?
2nd rate? Who would be first? Let me guess- Russia? ROFL!!! And Europe certainly has a lot of room to talk. It would serve them right if the US packed up all it’s forces in Western Europe and said “you’re on your own”.
That’s exactly what should happen, following a much-needed disbanding of NATO. If Europe can’t defend itself, maybe it deserves to be under Russian control or influence. The US should concentrate on ignoring the Europeans and focusing on improving relations with Russia. Build a joint ABM monitoring and intercept system in Armavir to go with the new Voronezh-DM radar being installed there to counter the Iranian threat. Develop technology to exploit the Arctic and Siberia for resources. That provides a boost to the economies of both nations and gets rid of the retardation coming from both sides right now on ABMs that pose no threat to Russia and bombers that pose no threat to the United States. An American-Russian alliance could basically control the Western Hemisphere. Bring the Chinese into it and the rest of the world can rot.
Tu-160s or Tu-95s seem a bit pointless. If Russia wanted to make things interesting, box up a few BACKFIREs and send them to Cuba. Then they can purposely capitulate to the US’s demand to remove them from the area by selling them to Chavez!
In some fews days time, Russian TU-160 and TU-95 bombers would land in Cuba for re-fuelling and of course it would be a practise that would continue.
It doesn’t mean these bombers would be stationed there, but that would certainly occur if finally the missile interceptors are placed in Poland and the Radar in Czech respectively.
Russia is free to make whatever basing agreements it wants with its allies. So is the United States.