OK…once again then…and even slower this time. The point was raised that the Russian Fleet deployment was a poor one. You leapt in with a point about the alleged efficacy of one of the weapons systems deployed with that fleet. Now you are trying to make out that your point was really unrelated and just a general comment?. So you are either lying to cover up an obvious lame statement or you are just given to making unrelated commentry of minimal value. Thats not twisting your words either its just holding up a mirror so you can see how you are perceived, hopefully, its salutory.

Efficiency of a weapons system – yes.

Power of a 2-ship mission in the Atlantic? No.

A Navy cannot be considered powerful, in any kind of traditional frame of reference, if it has no ability to project power. Is the Russian Navy capable of covering the Russian coastline….yes….more than adequately. Does it need Kirov/Slava cruisers to do that?. No of course not. Where those RK’s built to defend the Russian coastline….equally no – of course not. They were built to carry Russian combat power into the oceans in line with the prevailing naval doctrine. Are those units viable today…no they arent.

I don’t think so. These units were meant to protect vs US aggression with carriers! This is the entire Soviet anti-US naval doctrine. Now also Russian.

And with the Russian submarine fleet still in good shape, and getting better, they can do this just fine.

Do I care whether you want to hear what I write or not?. I’d suggest you put me on your ‘ignore list’. Failing that you might want to stop making stupid comments on forums populated by people who know a lot more about the topics you involve yourself in than you do. The third option is one that I hesitate to mention as its so unlikely – get out there and find out the truth about the systems you idolise so much. I’m telling you what I learned whilst wearing my countries uniform and, since then, by talking intelligently to those who still wear theirs. You wish to be taken seriously by me, and those like me, you do the same.

My point remains the same. Unless you are in the Russian Navy officer core, I don’t want to hear your rambling about “inefficiency” of an entire military doctrine that was made by more smarter people than you.

OK list them. My information has one operational in the Northern fleet, one operational in the Pac Fleet and a pair in the Baltic.

What info? It would be good if you actually backed up your claims and convinced me of something new and useful!

Pacific: Boyevoy, Bystry, Burny, Bezboyazneny
North: Bezuderzhannyy, Rastoropny, Besstrashny, Gremyashchy (dead?)
Baltic: Bespokoyniy, Nastoichiviy

A few may be in repair – or were last year (Boyevoy, Rastropniy?)

Agreed but thats a short-range point defence missile and not AAW capability. I’ll say again there are precisely 5 AAW ships available in the Russian fleet and not all of those are deployable at any one time!.

At any one time – you mean in one battlegroup? If so, then yes. Although I imagine things can move around if you play it smart and think ahead.

And you could put this the American way – “we can’t shoot down your planes, we’ll shoot down your missiles” in terms of the close in defenses of the smaller vessels.

There’s a Kashin Mod and a Krivak listed on strength down there too I believe. Not exactly cutting edge warfighters but should be capable enough against, as you put it, 30 Somalian pirates!. Unless they are undeployable for operational reasons it stands to reason that they would be off the Somalian coast faster than a unit that has to steam from the bloody Baltic!.

Come on man, you turned on the TV in August right? I’d assume they are still busy monitoring NATO in Georgia. That area is still sensitive, and Neustrashimy was ALREADY on the way there (again).

I’m touched that you think I’m special. I’ll reiterate my earlier comment though. I have provided hard facts about Russian satellite launch capability and platforms actually in orbit. You have provided bluster and flashy, inaccurate, twaddle. The ball is in your court to start providing credibility to your own arguments.

You provided nothing except the list for a few satellites. Ball’s STILL in your court – as that link shows a LOT of possible radar sats in orbit!

What’s funnier is that KNAAPO has a PAK-FA link for combat aircraft – and it’s got a pic for it! Of one of the ones seen online 😉

http://www.knaapo.ru/rus/index.wbp#

Click on the fighter pic – and you’ll see what I mean.

Why not just post the damn pic?

Echo,

Ahh denial again….so you weren’t in fact talking about SS-N-19’s hitting aircraft carriers in response to Scooters comment about the Russian Fleet deployment to Venezuela. You just happened to make a random comment about those missiles just after someone commented on a Russian deployment that included an SS-N-19 shooter. Isnt that a wild coincidence.:rolleyes:

Again your logic is as bad as ever – what a surprise.

He made a comment – I responded with one – and a generalization at that. Nothing to do with Venezuala, but rather the fact that a Kirov isn’t something to be taken lightly – especially in its main role of homeland/bastion/SSBN defense or nearby conflicts.

They now have an asset the same as E-2 do they?. The Yak-44 got built and no-one told me…..how remiss I am!. We are talking about the Russian Navy old boy…you’re trying to talk up its might because Scooter stung your pride. You’ve just admitted to everyone its powerful only so long as an A-50 can be overhead. So what you’ve got is in no way a transoceanic force and, in fact, about one-step removed from being a coastal navy. Keep going Echo….I’d not be as critical as you seem to want to be!.

Who cares about the E-2. The A-50 has longer range, longer ranged radar. And again, Russia isn’t invading America or Uruguay – and the A-50 is perfect for defense or nearby conflicts – just like the Kirov.

No I’d more say that their missile technology forced them to expend significant resources developing aircraft, like Backfire, that were deeply flawed in operational concept. No-one else ever needed to build the type of aircraft that the Soviets were obliged to build. That they got a capable platform like Backfire on the back of the missile tech is about the only saving grace to the whole sorry mess IMO!.

Deeply flawed – yeah according to you. The Russian military doesn’t agree, and they’d know better than someone on an online forum.

With what assets. There are precisely 5 reasonably competent AAW ships spread out over three Russian fleets – the 2 working Kirovs and 3 Slava’s how many are deployable simultaneously?. Neustrashimy has had to transit from the Baltic to get a vessel deployed on anti-piracy in the IO – such is the parlous state of the Black Sea Fleet. If there are 25 deployable blue-water surface combattants in the whole Russian Fleet I’d be stunned!.

Build the ships….then rattle the sabre!.

You do realize that all other ships have extremely capable medium range defenses that will have no issue shooting down subsonic NATO weapons if they even get close enough to the fleet?

And yeah Jonesy – genius you are! Let’s send a CRUISER to take out 30 pirates. :rolleyes:

Or maybe a Corvette? :rolleyes:

Why would they bother with that stuff with from the Black Sea Fleet?! Not to mention Neustrashimy was well underway. Also, recently, a Russian military spokesman was videotaped showing the Black Sea Fleet – commenting about how all the Ukrainian ships are rusty and the new looking ones are Russia. This isn’t 2000 – get real!

Aircraft have no strategic persistence. Never have and never will. Bombers spend a couple of hours in theatre at most – great for point strikes, but, valueless for anything else. If you need to sustain combat power in theatre on the other side of the planet you need a carrier. Local base-in is never guaranteed and even if it is granted is vulnerable, in security terms, to the same extent as the host nation is. Remember long fixed runways are very easy things to interdict – likewise logistics – when your in someone elses country!.

It’s NOT about the other side of the planet for Russia – ever! You can’t seem to grasp this simple concept and blabber on about something completely irrelevant each time.

Also – Those same runways can also be protected, or assets can be moved around to other airfields.

Erm…if I were you I’d check your link before posting it a bit more thoroughly. The Svobodny launch site listed hasnt launched anything from its own infrastructure since Feb 20, 2001. There was a launch in 2006, but, that was a converted ICBM on a mobile launcher and little, in fact, to do with Svobodny.

I want a thorough list of all 100 satellites. Model description, and a valid confirmation of it. Then I’ll believe you. Have fun with your binoculars. :rolleyes:

As to details and ‘secret satellites’ we’ve covered that one. With a little reading, a clear night and a decent pair of binoculars you can go out satellite spotting yourself!. They are not difficult to observe from the ground. What makes you think that there are LEO satellites up there that are not very widely known…I’ve already put up a list of launches going back 18 months or so on an earlier thread…all military birds. Show me any I missed if you can?.

Same as above.

Ahh a new tactic….outright denial!!!. Lets examine shall we:

——————————————————————
Scooter: Just look at the Grand Fleet Russia is sending to Venezuela. Talk about a joke….

Echo: As much of a joke as a carrier that’s been hit by even ONE SS-N-19?

Scooter (after a very pertinent point by Stevo): Its likely the Russian Cruiser would be tracked a destroyed by Carrier Aircraft before it could even fire a SS-N-19. Regardless, USN Carrier Battle Groups have a every effective aerial defense.

Echo: Russian ships don’t have any defenses of course, and the Russian aircraft are just a myth too I assume.

Scooter: Russian ships of course have defenses. Yet, they haven’t had the resources nor does it have nearly the numbers of the once mighty Soviet Fleet. Sorry, a hand full of old ships don’t make a fleet……..

Echo: Enough to defend itself in combination with the rest of armed forces from any kind of attack.
———————————————————————–

Nothing wrong with the way I’m reading this I dont think. It looks fairly straight forward to me. You resorting to your usual vague commentry, bluster and hyperbole to attempt to cover an inherently weak position.

You offer no quantifiable measure as to how, or even, whether the Russian naval group could withstand an attack from a USN CAW essentially because you know that it couldn’t. How can a USN group avoid contact with searching forces and the Russian group not manage the same?.

Simple. E-2, SURTASS, SOSUS. The Russians have no equivalents available in the Atlantic – the USN commander has all three available at his request.

Any specific argument or are you just going to come back with more generic gibberings like what I am saying is ‘crap’?. 😎

Yeah, your English is definitely bad and your delusion out of proportion.

THIS IS NOT ABOUT THE ATLANTIC DO YOU UNDERSTAND?

OR NO?

You have provided nothing but that – CRAP – and have not said anything except vague commentary either. :rolleyes:

You love to pretend the Russians have no assets similar to the E-2 (A-50 in this case, much more powerful in general).

Atlantic recon here isn’t even in question, because for the third time, you don’t even realize I’m not discussing the Atlantic now am I?

Why is it that if Russia is so superior to everyone else, that they’re using Western computers, rather than the latest Russian Super Computers, to design their latest weapon systems? I’m sure their computers would enjoy the same superiority as their aircraft, missiles, etc…
:rolleyes:

This is called a global market. Isn’t this something you should love and praise?

Right, in deference to you Echo, we’ll take this slowly. Venezuela is on one side of the Atlantic and Russia is on the other side of it. That means to get to Venezuela your little Russian Navy group has to go across the Atlantic.

Scooter started this by observing that the group transitting to Venezuela was less than impressive to which you, waving your little banner fervently, leapt in on. Then to go on and, accurately, note that the Russian Navy needed the shelter afforded by ‘the rest of the armed forces’ to protect it.

I make the point that in the context of discussion….which you are so desperately trying to change…Scooter was quite right.

Is English your first language? Because it seems like it isn’t since you don’t seem to read in to what people are saying. Why don’t you try READING slowly? :rolleyes:

LOL Now you are putting words in my mouth wrongly and then telling me I’m wrong!. Do you need me in this argument or do you want to just fabricate it all?.;)

I said that a carrier isnt detectable if you dont have the sensor coverage to detect it. Does that make it invisible….of course not…it means it has the capability to be where the opposing detection systems aren’t. With the ability to monitor and plot those detection systems, and skillful handling, the carrier has historically been able to avoid detection.

Thing is thats nothing new to you as your post earlier confirms. You do understand this you are just, with increasing desperation, trying to deny the reality of it!.

Historically – LOL! Based on crap you’ve been saying, nothing more. :rolleyes: