Soviet carriers got around the Montreaux restrictions by referring to themselves as “aircraft-carrying cruisers”. Armed warships are not banned from travelling the straits outright:
http://www.turkishpilots.org.tr/ingilizcedernek/DOCUMENTS/montro.html
Me. 2005. Megadeth.
:diablo:
Me. 2005. Megadeth.
:diablo:
The unit in question was the Fla-Raketenabteilungsgruppe 4351 of the 43. Fla-Raketenbrigade, HQ’d at Roevershagen near Rostock, actual site of the battery was Retschow.
You read German? If not, I can translate, or ask Schorsch.
http://home.snafu.de/veith/43.htm#4351
I think I figured it out, here’s why:
http://geimint.blogspot.com/2008/08/ddr-air-defense-cold-war-case-study.html
That figures, I just got that in my inbox today :rolleyes: 😀
First A400M Rolls Out In Spain
First A400M military transporter rolled out
In a ceremony presided over by His Majesty Juan Carlos I, King of Spain, Airbus Military has today rolled out the first complete A400M military transport aircraft from the Final Assembly Line facility in Seville, Spain.
The new aircraft, which was presented to the customers and the world’s press, heralds a new era in military airlift capability.
Designed initially to a recognised requirement for a new airlifter for European air forces, the A400M incorporates the state-of-the-art materials and technology that are being continuously perfected in today’s civil aircraft fleets. Features such as electronic flight controls, carbon composite structures and an automated handling system will bring new standards of operability a nd safety to military aircrews.
Launched under a single contract in 2003 with 180 orders for seven European launch customers, the A400M represents the most ambitious military procurement programme ever undertaken in Europe. The launch customer nations, Belgium, France, Luxembourg, Germany, Spain, Turkey and the United Kingdom were subsequently joined by Malaysia and South Africa, whic h recognised the potential of the new airlifter for their own requirements and brought the total number of commitments to 192.
“Today is a great day for our industry,” said Carlos Suarez, CEO of Airbus Military and Head of MTAD: “It is the result of the combined efforts and determination of all those involved in the programme. It has been supported by the national governments – our customers, the industrial partners, the suppliers, and all the employees who have worked to produce the aircraft. I would like to thank and congratulate them all.”
“This event demonstrates our joint determination to show that EADS can design and manufacture a long-range military transport aircraft which will set new standards airlift and open further potential in international markets. It also serves to justify the confidence which our customers placed in us when awarding the initial contract”, said Louis Gallois, CEO of EADS
The initial contract, worth some 20 billion Euros was signed with a si ngle interface between Airbus Military and OCCAR, (Organisation Conjointe de Coordination en matière d’Armament), the contractual body representing all seven European customer nations.
Versatility is the characteristic that best describes the A400M, it being conceived with both tactical and strategic capability. With a payload of up to 37 tonnes over ranges of up to 4700 nm, the A400M is designed to carry all loads and vehicles in the European Staff Requirement (ESR) inventory, serve as an aerial delivery platform and act as an in-flight refueller for both fast jets and helicopters.
The A400M is the first truly new military transport aircraft of its category designed in over 30 years, with twice the capacity and twice the payload of the current aircraft types that it will replace. It is all set to become the new standard in military airlift.
(Came from EADS via an e-mail along with the following three images)
– Russian General Staff admits that the use “of a Tu-22 in Georgia on a recco mission has been a mistake and will be reviewed”. Seems it was not an MR after all, but a “normal” M3 with recce pods.
The M3 has no recon pod carrying capability so far as I know; do you have a link to where they admit it was a mistake? I’d have said it was a mistake because of the primarily overwater recon function of the MR, but since it does have an ELINT package they probably wanted to find Georgian Buk-M1 batteries.
Really? I don’t think I’d seen them before either way.
Noticed that the J-10 in the last two images Hyperwarp posted above are carrying PL-11s. Is this because of a shortage of PL-12s, or are they for whatever reason seriously planning on using it operationally long-term? I’d think that the PL-12s would go to the J-10s first, with the J-8IIs (especially older models that can’t take the PL-12) relying on the PL-11 for the most part. SARH weapons are a limitation in your air combat effectiveness, especially when all of your potential adversaries are relying primarily on ARH weapons themselves.
Ukraine can still build missiles as far as I know. They build SLVs I think.
Not exactly.
The S-400 TELAR vehicles are made bu http://www.BZKT.ru in Russian
The radar vehicles are made by http://www.MZKT.by in Belarus
And the funny part to all of this is that if I’d actually read what I wrote I said as much in my blog :rolleyes: 😀
Beats the hell out of me but apparently they’re offering up their pieces of the former USSR early warning system.
That’s pretty retarded. They’ve got a HEN HOUSE at Sevastopol but part of the reason the Russian’s dropped their lease and built the new BMEW at Armavir was because the Sevastopol radar was apparently in really crappy condition.
S-300Vs are wholly Russian made as far as I can remember. The missiles should be fine in their sealed containers so then its a case of having the right parts and expertise to maintain the radar sets. They should be trained to be able to maintain them but spares could eventually become a problem, same goes for the S-300Ps.
Yeah you’re right, I got the two confused. Vehicle maintenance of such a common piece of equipment (the MAZ-543) shouldn’t be a problem, though. New S-300PMU-2 and S-400 systems do use a Russian-made chassis now though.
http://geimint.blogspot.com/2008/07/s-300p-detailed-analysis.html
Gabriel didnt go air-launch until the IIIA/S variant in 1982 and ASM-1, which I had completely forgotten about admittedly, not until 1980 and, IIRC, was first deployed on the F-1…I’m not sure when the F-4EJ had the weapon integrated.
Now that I think about it I think the ASM-1 was part of the F-4EJ Kai upgrade, so that takes it well out of the 1970s period anyway.
the Mirage F1 played clean up very well against the F-4’s and F-14’s over Iran.
I think Iran only lost 5 F-14s against Iraq, and three of those were due to the idiots manning the HAWK battery on Khark Island.
Is it possible Russia could cut off all support for the Ukraine’s S-300s and leave them in the cold?
Yes and no. The chassis for the mobile variants are made in the Ukraine, so they can handle those. The Russian-made (Fakel) missiles are sealed rounds that do not require maintenance over extended periods, so the only issue there would be if and when they need their 10 year maintenance or need to be refurbished. Ukraine could probably handle that as well. The only issue they could have is a lack of maintenance support for the radar systems themselves. But, proper planning, as in keeping some systems in stored reserve, can alleviate some of that.
Is the Ukraine part of the whole joint CIS air defence organization?