It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Mini-Kilov Project1157

page: 2
0
<< 1   >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jan, 31 2006 @ 11:40 PM
link   

Originally posted by xmotex
And Mirthful your statement about the Neustrashimyy is incorrect, it's been in active service since 1993, I can find you pics if you want. However there is ony one, and it's an relatively small (but well armed) ASW frigate built to replace the Kirivaks, not anything comparable to the ship in the lead post.


Please note that it wasn't my source, it was Maincloak's, and as I previously pointed out, the keel laid in 1988 has never been commissioned:

www.fas.org...

Attention to detail is a nautical staple.




posted on Feb, 1 2006 @ 02:12 AM
link   
Meh I didn't follow the quote trail carefully enough.

Neustrashimyy is in service, Mudryy isn't.

I am surprised it is listed as "75% complete", I thought Neustrashimyy was a one off...



posted on Feb, 1 2006 @ 02:50 AM
link   
In relation to all the quotations by Mirthful Me.

The only thing I was wrong about is the timeline of the carriers, and it's been a while since I dealt with that, so honestly you can't blame me.

As for Sovcomflot, they could be getting readdy to build carriers who knows? It doesn't take a day to build ships of huge size, takes many years, maybe they don't want to start too many things, I'm sure they are going to need a lot of manufactoring capacity, maybe they want to keep a buffer or maybe they are upgrading their plants to make sure they are able to produce the highest quality / newest parts.

As for the ship that was laid down in 88,


And Mirthful your statement about the Neustrashimyy is incorrect, it's been in active service since 1993, I can find you pics if you want. However there is ony one, and it's an relatively small (but well armed) ASW frigate built to replace the Kirivaks, not anything comparable to the ship in the lead post.



Originally posted by xmotex
I suspect this ship is just fan art


I don't think it's fanart, probably one of the ambitious soviet projects that got dumped after the breakup.


Originally posted by xmotex
I wouldn't discount the Russians' ability to put more large hulls in the water in the long term, including CV's. The have the necessary experience and technology.


Exactly.


Originally posted by xmotexThe Russian economy, contrary to what a lot of people seem to think


Indeed.

Last I hear the 2006 budget is going to be increased by 1.2 Trillion Rules - about 50 Billion USD, bringing it to $65 or so Billion, which would still keep it under 5% GDP, as is Putin's plan.

Anyway, as for large ships, I'd say these look aight.
www.warfare.ru...
www.warfare.ru...

Some others are fairly large sized too..



posted on Feb, 1 2006 @ 07:31 PM
link   
I guess you guys misinterperated my post. I meant that the russians can NOT build this good of a ship, i know i said "great", which you guys mistaked for "large".



posted on Feb, 2 2006 @ 01:39 AM
link   

Originally posted by punkmonkey14
I guess you guys misinterperated my post. I meant that the russians can NOT build this good of a ship, i know i said "great", which you guys mistaked for "large".


The hell they can't!

Give me any good reason why not? They have....countless decades of ship building experience behind them.



posted on Feb, 2 2006 @ 01:41 AM
link   
Having the experience doesn't do you any good if you don't have the other tech you need to get a ship like that. Or the tools to build said tech. Or the tools to built the tools, etc.



posted on Feb, 2 2006 @ 02:12 AM
link   
What do you think they built the Kirov's with, stone axes and oxcarts?

Yeah they probably dont have the infrastructure available they had in the Soviet days, if they want to ramp back up on major naval shipbuilding it will probably take them a few years. However they're in a much better position than simply starting from scratch.

They just delivered a Sovremenny and seven Kilo's to the Chinese, so obviously their shipyards are not entirely defunct.



posted on Feb, 2 2006 @ 02:15 AM
link   
You're not just building a hull like before. You're building it out of new materials, and you're building it with all new features, like IR masking, semi-stealth characteristics. If you just want a hull that's on the water and shoots, yeah they can do that easily, but you need new tooling to do some of the new features on ships, and you need tools to build the tools, etc. It's not just "We're gonna do this, and it's gonna make us more stealthy." using the same materials.



posted on Feb, 2 2006 @ 06:34 AM
link   

Originally posted by Zaphod58
Having the experience doesn't do you any good if you don't have the other tech you need to get a ship like that. Or the tools to build said tech. Or the tools to built the tools, etc.


And how don't they have these?

They've built carriers before....theyr'e doing it again.
What is bigger and more complex than carriers? Nothing!

btw. Screw costly and compromising stealth tech that the US use.....they just slap on a plasma shield generator and that's it!



posted on Feb, 2 2006 @ 06:58 AM
link   
a plasma sheild on the water? super heated gas and water would creat a ton of steam might even sink the ship oh yeah thats stealthy



posted on Feb, 2 2006 @ 07:06 AM
link   
All you have to do is LOOK at the picture and anyone that knows ANYTHING about ships can see the obvious stealth built into the design. Not just a hull in the water using plasma to hide in.



posted on Feb, 2 2006 @ 01:00 PM
link   
Stealth with ships is primarily a function of hull/superstructure shape and minimizing deck clutter. No special materials are required - the Arleigh Burkes and the new DDX are still largely steel, with some kevlar guarding vital areas of the ship. RAM coatings and other exotic materials are not widely used - they don't stand up well to the corrosive effects of the sea.



new topics

top topics



 
0
<< 1   >>

log in

join