ships make port calls in foriegn countries for one purpose, to wave thier flag. Kindof a "Hi, how are you doing?" between nations.

And as for getting off subject, I think that was a result of discussing the original purpose of the Moskva's design. While we could discuss it's capability to fully achieve that mission, and thepolitical implications of it forever, I'm pretty sure the vessel has enough firepower to destroy many nation's entire navies, almost singlehanded. (The US is not one of these nations, we've got more ships than that ship has missiles) 16 missiles=16 surface ships destroyed. 2 missiles per AAW ship and one for everything else=8-16 ships destroyed.

Actually if we do things properly this vessel shouldn’t even get to launch a single missile at our ships. It may have long range SSM’s but it’s range is limited by its radar and unless this ship has some long reaching air assets it wont be able to fire on what it cant see. This cruiser also has mediocre AAW capability, if we launch 6 Hornets with 2-4 SLAM-ER’s each should be enough to put this ship out of commission. Of course the scenario I’m mentioning only applies if this was a blue water engagement, any in shore close engagement does not favor the USN.

Originally posted by Travellar
ships make port calls in foriegn countries for one purpose, to wave thier flag. Kindof a "Hi, how are you doing?" between nations.
.

What stands out in my mind is that Russia would allow a carrier killer to slip its berth mid exercise, unannounced, and go to a country such as Syria in the current atmosphere (I don't know how bad this is in naval terms).

It strikes me as being more of a finger sign to NATO than a friendly "how are you doing" to Syria. That said, there's plenty of people on this board with much more naval expertise than I.



[edit on 2-3-2006 by JamesinOz]

well, You've got a point. Public relations like port visits usually do tend to carry all of the possible implications.