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.

 

Does the Russian Tor-M1 render most of the USAF worthless?

page: 7
2
<< 4  5  6    8  9 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Feb, 10 2007 @ 10:26 AM
link   

Originally posted by ape
easy, pilot error. ever heard of it? of course just because it happened to be shot down means stealth tech is way overrated in your opinion right?



* US stealth aircraft were tracked with radars operating on long wavelengths. If stealth jets got wet or started to drop bombs they would become visible on the radar screens. An F-117 Nighthawk was spotted in this way and downed with a missile, although this was admittedly a lucky shot. There were rumors that a new prototype of Russian SAM could detect and hit the F-117. This would explain why the Russian foreign secretary Primakov came with a huge transport the very next day to Belgrade.

en.wikipedia.org...



One F-117 has been lost in combat, to Serbian/Yugoslav forces. On March 27, 1999, during the Kosovo War, the 3rd Battalion of the 250th Missile Brigade under the command of Colonel Zoltán Dani, equipped with the Isayev S-125 'Neva-M' (NATO designation SA-3 'Goa'), downed F-117A serial number 82-806 with a Neva-M missile. According to Wesley Clark and other NATO generals, Yugoslav air defenses found that they could detect F-117s with their "obsolete" Soviet radars operating on long wavelengths. This, combined with the loss of stealth when the jets got wet or opened their bomb bays, made them visible on radar screens. The pilot survived and was later rescued by NATO forces. However, the wreckage of the F-117 was not promptly bombed, and the Serbs are believed to have invited Russian personnel to inspect the remains, inevitably compromising the US stealth technology.[9]

www.answers.com...


Can't find the other article but Wesley Clark admitted that the F-117 could in fact be tracked by radars dating from the 60's....


the 129a was brought up because stellarX started running his mouth piece about nuclear war and how russias defenses were inpregnable


I NEVER EVER stated that it was impregnable and neither does it have to be for them to 'win' a nuclear war under the standards for victory. The AGM 129's are as far as i can tell quite limited in number and their means of deployment subject to interception and destruction so i don't see why they will change the balance of force or even be able to penetrate Russian air defenses in any great numbers. Even if they are able would that guarantee destruction of the targets or are they as inaccurate as the tomahawks? What about the air defenses that were designed to actually counter these weapons?


The S-300 grouping features several different types of missiles built to strike at everything from low-flying drones and stealth cruise missiles to high-altitude reconnaissance airplanes and distant sensor platforms. Arrival of these systems in the arsenals of military foes will greatly complicate US operations, which continue to depend heavily on nonstealthy aircraft and will for years to come.

Gen. Richard E. Hawley, the now-retired former commander of USAF's Air Combat Command, told an AFA symposium in February that these new SAMs, if deployed in numbers large enough to create overlapping zones of engagement, would figuratively present "a brick wall" to nonstealthy fighters,

www.afa.org...



now that the cold war is over it is said they have converted many 129a's to conventional b's. but this is sensitive information.


And they have plans to convert some of the rest as well since stocks of conventional weapons were so depleted in Yugoslavia. All those cruise missiles and they managed to do so very little....

www.aeronautics.ru...


the US will make ICBM's obsolete anyways and you can see this on the discovery channel every monday night, what program does russia have to display it's tech?


Lol.... I already think ICBM's are obsolete so I'm just playing along showing that Russia has more and better obsolete ICBM's and SLBM's than the US have.



oh yeah they can't even afford to invest in such weaponry.


Based on?


yeah russian ABM tech is really going to be in high demand once DEW and THAAD takes over.


Both countries already deploy DEW's even if we do not know for certain the strengths or deployment numbers in either countries...


russia should just give up and invest in their domestic infrastructure. the US wins, everyone give up soon you wont be able to lob missiles.


Giving up is apparently no on the cards in Russia but it does seem to be what is happening to the American economy. The Russians never had much of a civilian economy but one can only cry if you see what has happened to the American civilian sector....


my ultimate dream is having US deployed DEW and THAAD all over the world


The US policy makers would even defend their own citizens so what on Earth gives you the idea that they will ever defend others?


protecting her allies and basically crushing the moral of every dictator or commie


The US is sponsored more dictators and 'communist' into power than the USSR did. History is a wonderful topic and you really should check it out.



out there who thinks they have parity because they have ICBMS or any kind of missile for that matter, hopefully this will make certain countries disarm and move towards peace.


The west is generally disarming so i don't see how they can reach parity with nations who are already deploying geophysical weapons in numbers that apparently give the capacity to terrorize the US and allies at will.

Stellar




posted on Feb, 10 2007 @ 05:46 PM
link   
A few issues ....


Originally posted by urmomma158
And russia has not tested against the AGM 129


And the AGM 129 has not tested against the S-300, S-200 or basically anything else. That is all good and well but western defense sources does seem to credit Russian ( and other ) air defense systems with capabilities against these types of 'stealthy' weapons.


The S-300 grouping features several different types of missiles built to strike at everything from low-flying drones and stealth cruise missiles to high-altitude reconnaissance airplanes and distant sensor platforms. Arrival of these systems in the arsenals of military foes will greatly complicate US operations, which continue to depend heavily on nonstealthy aircraft and will for years to come.

Gen. Richard E. Hawley, the now-retired former commander of USAF's Air Combat Command, told an AFA symposium in February that these new SAMs, if deployed in numbers large enough to create overlapping zones of engagement, would figuratively present "a brick wall" to nonstealthy fighters,

www.afa.org...



The Antey-2500 is designed to combat aircraft and tactical missiles, including ballistic missiles with a launch range of up to 2,500 kilometers. The Antey-2500 mobile complex, developed on the basis of the well-known S-300V [SA-12] air defense complex, is a new-generation system, capable of autonomous combat action. It can simultaneously engage 24 aerodynamic targets, including stealth targets, or 16 ballistic targets with a RCS of up to 0.02 meters, flying at speeds of up to 4,500 m/s. Improved characteristics of the radar information facilities and optimization of radar signal processing technics make it possible to combat high-speed ballistic targets with a small radar cross section. Antey-2500 can effectively protect an area of up to 2,500 sq. km and engage targets at altitudes of 25 to 40,000 m.

www.globalsecurity.org...



In 1999 trials began at the test range of a new surface-to-air missile, the S-400 Triumf. This fourth generation system used S-300 missiles, but possessed capabilities against low RCS stealth aircraft, small cruise missiles, and future low-RCS re-entry vehicles. The electronics were on a completely new technical basis and used new solutions to the detection, tracking, and guidance problems. The system actually represented a bigger step from third generation systems (S-300PMU, S-300PMU-1, S-300PMU-2) than third generation systems represented to first generation systems.

www.astronautix.com...



On March 27, 1999, the 3rd Battalion of the 250th Missile Brigade under the command of Colonel Zoltán Dani, equipped with the Isayev S-125 'Neva-M' (NATO designation SA-3 'Goa'), downed an American F-117A "Stealth Fighter" with a Neva-M missile. According to Wesley Clark and other NATO generals, Yugoslav air defenses found that they could detect F-117s with their "obsolete" Soviet radars operating on long wavelengths. This, combined with the loss of stealth when the jets got wet or opened their bomb bays, made them visible on radar screens. The pilot survived and was later rescued by NATO forces.

www.answers.com...


So they shoot down stealth aircraft with weapons dating from the 60's but the most modern of Russian weapons are just useless against a few hundred stealth cruise missiles that must be air delivered?


hilarious really............. sure they may not have 460 but there are more than enough for decapiating strikes.


Against as many S-300 systems with four missiles ready to fire? What about the vast numbers of lesser systems and the large number of long range interceptor aircraft Russian still operates for this specific purpose? What about direct energy weapons?


The idea isn't new but in order to look at the proper target it must first be put in a general location. Low frequency radars that have low eneough frequencies to detect stealth aircraft can do this but they are highly immobile and are tempting targets.


The NATO air units seemed to have a pretty hard time against the positively ancient Sa-3 systems in Kosovo so where is the evidence that far more modern Russian systems will have as hard a time as you suggest?


That one place whrre are the signals are put to together don't just make the stealth aircraft more visible it makes the clutter and actual targets(bombers etc) reurns stronger. Not to mention that single palce where all the signals get combined would need massive computing power.


They do not need to actually use that information for anything other than basic targeting and can fire by optic means and use command detonation....S-300 and other air defenses are also being upgraded ( whatever does not have such yet ) to use LPI radars and the like and considering the density of such systems in Russia, the number of re fires and the general decentralized and mobile nature of these systems i would be more worried about what the Russian long cruise missiles can do considering that backfires and blackjacks are far more likely to get into launch positions than B-52's are.

Basically if you fly high your DEW food and if you want to go stirring up dust you better get ready for optic guidance and general IR shots at your not so protected rear. Remember that it's just F-16 CJ's ( with their rather short legs) that can actually operate the HARM's that will discourage air defenses radars from staying on for extended times...


remeber your receievrs and transmitters are seperated and accuracy isn't all that high. not to mention you should be considering you'll be operating in a HEAVY ecm environment so your comm linkd may need fiberoptics which are cost prohibitive and wires have their own limitations.


And that's why such a thing as SARH come standard with long range weapons that are prone to ECM interference.


103 As both the Gulf War, and now the Balkans have shown, Electronic Warfare (EW) support is an essential feature if operations are to be conducted without heavy losses against a modern air defence system. The Suppression of Enemy Air Defences (SEAD) can be achieved with either hard-kill systems such as bombing or anti-radar missiles,[227] or by soft-kill systems that rely on electronic attack on enemy IADs. Electronic counter-measures (ECM), or jamming, can be directed against air defence surveillance systems (so that aircraft are not detected in the first instance) or against SAM missile guidance systems (either the ground-based element, or in the missile itself).

104 Even against relatively unsophisticated air defences a comprehensive jamming capability is essential if losses are to be restricted, particularly if aircraft are to penetrate at low level. In the case of the US EA-6B Prowler the aircraft stands-off in such a way that the geometry of the total attack allows its jamming to cover the penetrating bombers. In the Balkans almost all of the stand-off ECM capability was provided by the EA-6B, a force of only a little over 90 aircraft world-wide, already stretched, and one providing the bulk of the US capability in this field. As a result, providing aircraft for the Balkans resulted in withdrawing units from the Middle East and even reinforcing from the Far East. The increasing age of the EA-6B force is a concern for the Pentagon and there is now much debate about a follow-on system, but that will be expensive and certainly not easy to bring into service quickly.[228]

105 No European Ally deployed airborne electronic warfare aircraft with capabilities to match the American EA-6B Prowler. This aircraft and system proved critical in suppressing enemy air defences and the need for this capability is being examined by the MoD with other NATO European allies.[229] We discussed European shortfalls in this and other areas in our recent Report on European Security and Defence.[230] Remedying these shortfalls is part of NATO's 'Defence Capability Initiative'. We taxed the Secretary of State on whether Europe was ever likely actually to acquire such capabilities. He told us—

www.publications.parliament.uk...


Continued



posted on Feb, 10 2007 @ 05:47 PM
link   

With the advent of the F-4G Wild Weasel IV and EF-111A Raven during the late seventies, the Soviets responded in 1982 with the highly mobile S-300PS/SA-10B (S -Samokhodniy – Self Propelled), which saw the improved Flap Lid B and 5P85 TEL integrated on a 8x8 MAZ-7910, based on the MAZ 543 Scud TEL. The S-300PS is the forerunner of most current S-300PMU/SA-10 variants and a true 'shoot and scoot' system, unlike the Patriot. A key innovation was the new 5V55KD SAM, which introduced a Track Via Missile (TVM) terminal guidance scheme similar to the Patriot, and highly jam resistant.

It employs a broadband passive anti-radiation seeker with coverage cited between 2 GHz and 18 GHz, with inertial midcourse guidance and memory capability to retain the location of an emitter which shuts down. CPMIEC released images of the antenna array, which used a two axis gimbal and platform with multiple antenna elements, a technique also used in the Russian Kh-31P missile's L-111E passive seeker. The seeker is claimed to include a home-on-jam capability.

The Triumf thus provides a layered air defence capability within a single highly mobile system, with the 96M6 family missiles providing an organic self-defence engagement capability against smart weapons such as the Tomahawk, ALCM, JASSM, JSOW, HARM, JDAM-ER and SLAM-ER.
The high mobility of the SA-10/20 and their high jam resistance force engagement techniques using stealthy fighters and hard kill weapons, as conventional SEAD and EW techniques become exceptionally risky.

www.strategycenter.net...


So one wonders how 90 aircraft will be enough to do something against Russian air defenses when it could barely keep the Kosovo bombing campaign from becoming completely ineffective against strictly military targets protected only by weapons that lacked any true capability to counter the modern systems deployed against it.


I get some of this info from people who work with radars,computers,chips etc.they're not on ATS though so register at worldaffairsboard to talk to them.


So do i.


www.worldaffairsboard.com...


me more on the histpry of stealth with subs and how so many anti sub technologies we're proposed but the sub is still a very useful tool todays. People were predicting it's death since WW2 but we know that's a laod of BS now.


Things change and things stay the same.


If one looks at how frequently subs sinks fishing boats or runs into each other all these claims of exceptional tracking and trailing abilities becomes quite laughable. Submarine warfare is quite akin to two men with acoustic earmuffs trying to club each other to death in a very dark room; don't let so called experts tell you otherwise!

Stellar



posted on Feb, 11 2007 @ 10:58 AM
link   

Originally posted by vK_man
and russians do deploy a large number of radars like clam shell low altitude detection radar ..


Many many hundreds if not thousands....


straf_rus , tor-m1 is designed to be used against more on cruise missiles,low flying aircraft and UAV....


It's designed for far more than that but has obviously capabilities for such and relative great mobility. Cruise missiles for that matter can be shot down by second world war era AA weaponry given some training and proper doctrinal employment.


also this is one of the most silly topic of discussion that i can been think off. usa HAS 1 HUNDRED THOUSAND CONVENTIONAL CRUISE MISSILES(THOUGH MANY ARE 1970 DESIGN)


I have seen far far sillier topics BTW and you have not yet indicated where that hundred thousand number comes from or how the US air force is going to get it to places where it might be used against Russian air defenses. While the Russian defenses are certainly deployed en-mass it's just no proof that even those 400 stealth cruise missiles do not have capabilities to effectively escape destruction so one does not have to invent a hundred thousand 1970 era weapons with which to help support your low opinion of current Russian strength...


... THINK OF THOSE ... ITS OVERKILL those would overwhelm and saturate russian defences ,


Since they do not exist as far as i am concerned no overwhelming is going to take place.



STELLARX , WHY DO YOU CONTINUE POSTING HERE ......


Because people like you need to be corrected when you make claims you can not in any credible way support?


THE only thing i see here is personal attacks and nonsensical conspiracy theories just like how neo-cons on pravda do


I don't go to pravda forums and i doubt any neacons do.
Personal attacks against who? Conspiracy theories where?


..... and yes small advice , do not continue with trying to prove that russia can or cannot win nuke war ...


Your opinion has been noted.



it only fuels ultra-nationalists like ape to make more nonsensical comments about you or others ,


Ape will go on making up nonsense no matter what is said as it's all about him and what he beliefs.


who do not agree ...
as a matter of fact, only USSR was capable of such a feat


What has really changed when the USSR reformed with the same people still in all the real power positions?


NOT RUSSIA


And you have not really shown why you think they 'lost' the capability to fight and very likely win such a conflict...


though , i agree with your claim that russians severely understate their capabilites


I don't honestly care if any of you agrees with me or not as i am only stating what defense and intelligence specialist consider true. You can disagree with me all you like but that wont change reality any more than your ignorance of these specific issues would have.

We can all have our own opinions about reality but reality does not much give a damn and is very unforgiving when you disregard such things as gravity.


Stellar



[edit on 11-2-2007 by StellarX]



posted on Feb, 11 2007 @ 05:13 PM
link   
Since the Tor is short range it is used against lowflying aircraft and munitions, a well prepared military would field this in conjunction with S-400s, Tanguskas, and SA-11s, none of this weapons should be used alone, they should be used together, because they all have their strengths and weaknesses......for a short range SAM system, the Tor is pretty good, though.



posted on Feb, 11 2007 @ 05:28 PM
link   
Oh yeah, I saw talk about stealth aircraft on this thread, stealth aircraft have a dangerous opponent in the new S-400, which can detect and destroy stealth aircraft

link:images.google.com...://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/a/a1/S-400.jpg/200px-S-400.jpg&imgrefurl=http://de.wik ipedia.org/wiki/S-400&h=285&w=200&sz=7&hl=en&start=33&tbnid=ALRjQySmQoYG1M:&tbnh=115&tbnw=81&prev=/images%3Fq%3DS-400%26start%3D20%26ndsp%3D20%26svnum %3D10%26hl%3Den%26safe%3Doff%26client%3Dfirefox-a%26channel%3Ds%26rls%3Dorg.mozilla:en-US
fficial%26sa%3DN


looks like the S400 is currently the best SAM on the planet



posted on Feb, 12 2007 @ 04:46 AM
link   


Cruise missiles for that matter can be shot down by second world war era AA weaponry given some training and proper doctrinal employment.


thats possible only if the cruise missiles can be possible if the missiles are flying at lower than 80 meteres or it can be optically seen ... i mean it is near impossible to shoot in night ..



I have seen far far sillier topics BTW and you have not yet indicated where that hundred thousand number comes from


colonel krutov ,



WRM: What was the view of you and your allies on the Russian stance during the Iraq War?
IK: I thought that Russia should support Saddam in a militarily way—send tanks and MiGs there. If the USA wins this war, oil prices will fall and Russia is ruined. Supporting America is an economically and morally wrong choice for Russia. Iraq was our friend for years, and the USA was our enemy since the Russian Revolution. Besides, Russia is one of the targets of future American attacks. At least that’s what military experts say.
They say that after Iraq, the USA will attack a Russian ally—North Korea (not because of oil, actually, just to pay back the North Koreans for kicking the ass of the American forces, I think), and then—Belorussia (one of Russia’s closest allies), because Belorussia is ruled by the dictator Lukashenko. After that, the USA is going to attack Russia. Why else does the USA need 100,000 cruise missiles? A thousand was enough to subjugate Yugoslavia.

www.worldthreats.com...




What has really changed when the USSR reformed with the same people still in all the real power positions?


like the gangster capitalist yeltsin.... what a joke , this guy ruined russia , realise why russian people want stalin .....




don't honestly care if any of you agrees with me or not as i am only stating what defense and intelligence specialist consider true. You can disagree with me all you like but that wont change reality any more than your ignorance of these specific issues would have


what analysts ?? western or russian defectors(traitors) ??? ...i am not believer of theirs as they(western except DIA ) understated USSR in cold war and overstate capability of current Russia and what ignorance
.... i mostly accept the analysis of russian military analysts like leonid Ivanshov(a former soviet russian general), Ivan krutov(a former soviet officer ) , sergei Pavlov , Pavel podvig etc...
please provide me a article from russian analysts who say Russia can win all-out nuclear war and ....



not much give a damn and is very unforgiving when you disregard such things as gravity

and since you disregard things like mass,momentum, velocity, relativity etc... i diregard too
----
stellar posted:
And you have not really shown why you think they 'lost' the capability to fight and very likely win such a conflict...
---

i think i had shown why i think so i on the thread russian ballistic missile fails :

www.abovetopsecret.com...
my and your opinions will not match on many issues , because i base my analysis on russian military analysts, while you on DIA analysts


I don't go to pravda forums and i doubt any neacons do.


go to news, world and main section of pravda the names of neocons here - astrojet, mandrake, Rickk, american eagle, farmer, Cascade, chaplakid,Steedbonnet,pirata,thetruth,thirteen , SCA, Slick etc ... and amany others ... a small list of neocons on pravda


Personal attacks against who?

you ..... goodness how do you stick around here... don't posters like ape ,rogue1,centurion etc.. irritate you.... man must say, you have some control over yourself ..hats off to you


[edit on 12-2-2007 by vK_man]



[edit on 12-2-2007 by vK_man]



posted on Feb, 12 2007 @ 11:42 AM
link   
Only low flying aircraft such as A10's and AH-X(X) will have to worry about Tor-M1.

High fliers like F15, F16, B-2, B-52 etc. should be more affraid of the S-300, if linked up with Kulchuga then they will be soiling themselves.

If they have been positioned correctly they will be formidable.

IRIAF will be able to get into the skys and fight with the help SAM systems to protect them from long range threats.



posted on Feb, 12 2007 @ 02:20 PM
link   

Originally posted by otester
Only low flying aircraft such as A10's and AH-X(X) will have to worry about Tor-M1.


I'm not just posting this ofr you but in general to everybody who is posting about Iran using thr tor-m1 as a anti-aircraft missile.

The Iraninas are not and i repeat not going to use this to take out aircraft. If the Iranians wanted to take out aircraft they would have never bothered to buy these becuase they already have 2 short range SAM systems one based around the British rapier and the Second system is the French crotale which both are locally manufactured in Iran. Iran also exports and sells there versions of the Crotale system you can see it advertised in there sales brochure advertisment :

Iranian Shahab SAM Short range system based on Crotale

The Iraninas are going to use the Tor-m1 for only 1 purpose and that is to target incomming cruise missiles,GPS bombs and laser guided bombs and thats it. They will not use the Tor-m1 systems against aircraft becuase they will use the crotale/rapier systems against short range aircraft.

And those are not the only short range Iranin missiles the Iranians also have the laser guided RBS-70 surface to air missiles system which is unstoppable and is immune to both CHAFF and IR flairs. And they also use the Misagh-1 and Misagh-2 Infra red SAM systems as well for short range attacks against UAV, Helicopter gunships and low flying fast aircraft like the A-10.

picture of the Iranian Misagh-1 from there international sales brochure :

Misagh-1 Pictire - Click on this link

Misagh2 missile :

Misagh-2 Pictire - Click on this link





Originally posted by otester
High fliers like F15, F16, B-2, B-52 etc. should be more affraid of the S-300, if linked up with Kulchuga then they will be soiling themselves.

If they have been positioned correctly they will be formidable.

IRIAF will be able to get into the skys and fight with the help SAM systems to protect them from long range threats.


The Iraninas already are supposed to have the Kolchuga according to Janes Defence :



The Kolchuga is intended to detect the take-off and formation of aircraft groups at ranges beyond those of existing radar, as well as determine the course and speed of targets while designating them for air-defence systems. It can identify aerial targets through their emissions and identify the mode of aircraft weapon control systems.

Three Kolchuga stations would normally operate along with a command vehicle to provide accurate triangulation on a target. The system is claimed to have a range of 600 km (narrow beam) or 200 km (wide beam) along a front of 1,000 km.

It is not known how many Kolchuga stations Iran has acquired. However, sources told Jane's that each costs about USD25 million, with deliveries either recent or imminent.

www.janes.com...






.

[edit on 12-2-2007 by iqonx]



posted on Feb, 12 2007 @ 02:32 PM
link   

Originally posted by ape
even though im 100% positive you have me ignored


I don't have anyone on ignore and i never will resort to such childish antics.....


since I destroyed you in the peak oil forums I will respond to this because I cannot let misinformation like this pass.


You will have to point me in the right direction as i am not aware of my own 'destruction'.
Speaking of misinformation.....


IF the US were to ever attack russia one of the first things launched would be the AGM-129A STEALTH ACM,


It can not be launched first as it can only be deployed by one plane and as far as i know they are not stationed that near Russian borders. At best these types of weapons will start hitting targets , if any, many hours after the nuclear weapons have started raining down and few might in fact even get airborne when the planes that carry them are destroyed on the ground.


a weapon you constantly ignore here because it is the 1 weapon that would penetrate your mother russias super defenses,


Who said anything about 'super defenses' and why do you think this is the only weapons that could penetrate Russian defenses? I never made such a claim and i think it would be quite silly to bother doing so. I do not 'ignore' your post but when you type up five posts in 30 minutes,while foaming at the mouth it seems, i can hardly 'keep up' with the level of propaganda considering my average 3 post's a day spread over the wide variety of issues i find interesting. As time allows i will get to the 20 odd post's of yours you seem to think i am 'ignoring' but if you keep up the high volume of posting it will just take longer....


that is the first weapon along with cruise missiles to take out russian targets followed by ICBM's


Cruise missiles are in fact quite 'slow' ( the AGM-129 takes nearly 4 hours to fly out to it's maximum range of 3000 km) and there is no way any of them will arrive before SLBM's/IRBM's/ICBM's or even general SEAD/DEAD strikes on forward positions. ...

In fact B-52's are now only stationed in the continental US meaning that in a 'surprise attack' ( extremely unlikely if not completely impossible) very few B-52's will get airborne and it's unlikely that any of them will have had time to arm with weapons that are sored in secure depot's due to their nuclear warheads. In a more likely scenario half a dozen or so B-52's will be kept on station somewhere close to Russian border and will then be able to deliver their warheads against Moscow or other targets within a few hours.


so now thats the excuse?


It's not a excuse as much as a question to establish which 'authorities' ( or not) you are speaking of.


i thought it was because the people who operated them didn't know what they were doing, continue to deny reality.


Bullets and missiles kill the arrogant and cowardly with the same general disdain. If you want to presume that the enemy can not operate his weapons within their design specifications , or at least as the manual you stole tells you they will, that is your choice but probably not one you will survive if you are close enough to frequently test your presumptions.


i suggest you stop jumping to conclusions stellar,


I don't think i did but i wont mind considering the accusations if you set a example....


what makes you think the US would hold back in a war with russia or china and treat it like an iraq or afghanistan??


What makes you think not holding back will make much if any difference? If the so called 'leaders' of America will throw away thousands of American lives ( WTO+ Iraq+Afghanistan and to say nothing of the tens of thousands of disabled or wounded)simply for political ends why do you think they can be trusted to save your bacon when a 'real war' happens? If they can allow the deaths of a hundred thousand Americans in pointless wars ( in terms of ensuring American economic security) such as Korea and Vietnam why do you think they care? Very little of what they are doing actually serves the interest of the average American so what we should be asking is who the hell they are in fact working for...


we would not. we would bomb the living hell out of everything and russias only resort would be to start launching nuclear weapons in which we all woud die.


The Russians always planned to go nuclear in a full scale strategic war and their entire nation ( military and civilian infrastructure and armaments) were prepared to fight and survive such as a national entity.


your foolishness and ignorance knows no bounds now does it? I suggest drinking a nice warm cup of common sense.


I prefer tea myself but you can probably send me some of the common sense you have refused to employ; one can never have enough of that as far as i am concerned.



HAHAHA, right WW2 is going on 70 years old now since the start, take a good look at th technology gap and the strategies used now to take our air defenses,


IF you spent a the next few following years only reading about the second world war you will not have caught up to the volume of books i have.....


no other nations have the ability to match the US navy and air force unless a MASS coalition forms against the US,


It's relatively simply to form coalitions when your terrorizing third world nations but i can assure you the Russian have more than enough nuclear warheads to spare for those governments that attempt to sell out their nations by joining the US in yet another war of aggression. Some people on this forum have actually compared the firepower of the Russian and American navy and you might be surprised by the result..... As for the US air force whatever is left after the airfields went up in mushroom clouds will spend the next few months or years trying to breach Russian air defenses which will be largely unaffected by nuclear war or nuclear conditions. If the Russian air force can disperse in time ( The US air force might also do so but will have to fall back to the continental US for lack of infrastructure) the USAF is unlikely to ever be able to mass sufficient numbers to breach Russian air defences.



one nation. Air defenses do work but will not hold back any powerfull force for long, especially a force like the US if they are not restraining themselves.


Based on what historic examples? When last has the US every fought a nation with similar technical ability that deployed high technology air defenses within design specifications and in the same general numbers as the US deployed aircraft? Air defenses have worked relative well when properly operated and that was in the hands of third world nations that had to buy it all and adapt the scraps they got to local conditions while facing the overwhelming numbers of planes and skilled personal the US could deploy... The last time two 'empires' with similar resource capabilities engaged in a full blown war in the air the nation deploying the air power lost TWENTY thousand bombers ( two and four engine) and one hundred and sixty thousand trained personal. Things have surely changed by lets try remember what type of overwhelming power the attacker must normally deploy and note that the USAF simply had no such ability in the 70's or 80's.


actually you attack truths constantly and defend soviet lies


Who's truths and based on who's assumed authority are they? If you can not contest the claims i make in a factual manner nothing will come of all your typing... Does it matter that i defend 'soviet lies' using western intelligence and defense literature?


as much as you can followed along by ' im only interested in educating '. I caught you twisting soviet facts about the sabre mig kill ratio,


Where exactly did this happen and last i checked it's you who changed your mind on the numbers downed...


I caught you twisting facts about russian technology in WW2,


Such a broad claim but feel free to enlighten the rest of us with links to said 'discussion'.


you made it sound like they all of a sudden made some miracle come back against the nazis with mega tech while the US and UK were 'having troubles',


The US and UK were having trouble despite the fact that Nazi Germany were expanding the massive majority of resources and manpower fighting the USSR. The USSR certainly did not make a 'miracle come back' ( i never suggested that to be the case) and in my opinion their recovery was mostly due to German strategic blunders; i believe i can show that with minor changes in planning Germany could have taken Moscow before December 1941 forcing the USSR into a settlement,before the end of 1942,which Stalin were still willing to consider in mid 1943.

The American and allied lend lease was massively significant but arrived after the USSR had already ensured that they could keep on fighting effectively if not efficiently. The resources sent tot he USSR before the war even broke out certainly played a far larger role in enabling the USSR to survive the initial assault and if you want to discuss that just say so .

To put that in perspective the American lend lease effort in regards to Russia and Britain was to ensure that others had the materials enabling them to do most of the bleeding; without the supplies the allies provided the USSR they might have very well faced a significantly stronger occupation force in France...

Continued



posted on Feb, 12 2007 @ 02:38 PM
link   

they wouldn't even have the ammunition to fire a shot if it wasn't for the US lend lease yet alone the materials to transport goods and supplies to troops on the front line,


Talk about vapid lies.... The lend lease effort enabled them to fight back far more effectively than they otherwise could or would have but do not for a moment think you will get away with believing the USSR would have just 'folded' for lack of these materials.


you are a proven manipulator


Proven by who based on what?


and you insult people who attempt to debate your opinion and in my case when I prove you wrong you ignore me, enough said.


Where did you prove me wrong and in what fantasy reality can this be called 'debate'? Talk about arrogance....


i also noticed in conversation you have had here with other russian supporters when you talk about russia and russian pride etc you always say WE,


Where did i use 'we' in a way that could be interpreted to mean 'us Russians'?


well that would lead me to assume your a russian living in south africa,


As with the rest of your so called 'assumption' ( and i am being generous as they are closer to delusional flights of fancy than 'assumption') it's dead wrong and based on nothing you have, or apparently can, verify. I am NOT Russian and i don't like 'communist', socialist, fascism or any form of autocracy where the people are forced into dependence on state organs for their day to day living. If i built a country working in government would be a respectable well paid job for all of the few hundred (or thousand depending on size of nation and wealth of it's citizens) people working in it.


which is funny because I would think if someone is russian and so proud of russia they would be living in russia????? I wonder why based on my assumptions you dont live in russia??


Because i am not Russian and i would rather not live in a country run by former communist and KGB/FSB officials. Whatever issues i have with the terrorist tendencies and practices of the US government i still respect the freedoms that can be found there however infrequently they are employed by Americans to ensure a better life without the normally resulting suffering of so many others around the world.

Stellar



posted on Feb, 12 2007 @ 03:30 PM
link   
Stellar you do know that the F-117 will be fully retired by the end of the year right? Try something more recent, like, say a B-2, F-22 or even the TacTom.



posted on Feb, 12 2007 @ 03:50 PM
link   

Originally posted by vK_man
thats possible only if the cruise missiles can be possible if the missiles are flying at lower than 80 meteres or it can be optically seen ...


World war era weapons shot down planets flying much higher than that but modern cruise missiles do tend to fly relatively far lower.


i mean it is near impossible to shoot in night ..


The had radar guided anti aircraft guns during the second world war and they were very accurate against fighter sized targets.


colonel krutov ,


Obviously he must be involved as that seems to be the type of fantasy he indulges in. Does it not make sense that the US would use 1970 cruise missiles against Iraq and Serbia instead of wasting their limited stocks of modern weapons? Krutov might be right but i wont believe the incredibly illogical based on his say so.



WRM: What was the view of you and your allies on the Russian stance during the Iraq War?
IK: I thought that Russia should support Saddam in a militarily way—send tanks and MiGs there.


Why on Earth do you want to help a man that served American interest for so long and attacked Russia's ally Iran resulting in many hundreds of thousands of Iranian dead?


If the USA wins this war, oil prices will fall and Russia is ruined.


The US attacked Iraq to shut down it's oil rigs as there was simply too much oil available on the world markets. Iraq is currently pumping less than half of what it did before the American invasion and even that was far less than it's capacity which resulted from ten years of sanctions and war.


Supporting America is an economically and morally wrong choice for Russia. Iraq was our friend for years, and the USA was our enemy since the Russian Revolution.


When was Iraq Russias friend? What is now so morrally wrong after Russia allowed the US to terrorize the third world for decades doing NOTHING to protect those millions of innocents?


Besides, Russia is one of the targets of future American attacks. At least that’s what military experts say.
They say that after Iraq, the USA will attack a Russian ally—North Korea (not because of oil, actually, just to pay back the North Koreans for kicking the ass of the American forces, I think),


America already probably tried to start a war when they nuked North Korea a few years ago; something you should be aware of mister Krutov. North Korea did not bite and simply said that it was a big train wreck; clever Kim...


and then—Belorussia (one of Russia’s closest allies), because Belorussia is ruled by the dictator Lukashenko.


He was elected and as fairly as elections go these days considering how Bush stole the last two.


After that, the USA is going to attack Russia. Why else does the USA need 100,000 cruise missiles? A thousand was enough to subjugate Yugoslavia.

www.worldthreats.com...


'Yugoslavia' had not the slightest means of defending itself in any active fashion and still the US had to resort to terror bombing of civilian infrastructure to force a political settlement.

Krutov should stick to saying things that can not be verified ( like claiming the US has a hundred thousand cruise missiles which they probably deploy on the 'UFO's') as his not very good when it comes to actual established reality...


like the gangster capitalist yeltsin.... what a joke this guy ruined russia , realise why russian people want stalin .....


Capitalist Yeltsin? Ruined Russia? Russian people want Stalin? Non of these claims are related to reality in any verifiable fashion but you should feel free to attempt doing so if you please.



what analysts ?? western or russian defectors(traitors) ???


It depends entirely on whether it's verifiable or fits in with the general picture but i am familiar with the 'accepted' views so i know what contradictions to resolve before assuming something that is not widely accepted.


...i am not believer of theirs as they(western except DIA ) understated USSR in cold war and overstate capability of current Russia


The DIA understated the strength of the USSR in the cold war ( the CIA were much worse in their underestimations) and they have continued this trend getting ever more inaccurate as the decades went by.


and what ignorance
.... i mostly accept the analysis of russian military analysts like leonid Ivanshov(a former soviet russian general),


Only a general? Since when did or do Soviet/Russian general say things they were not allowed to say?


Ivan krutov(a former soviet officer ) ,


Captain?


sergei Pavlov ,


The science fiction writer or the 'statesmen'?


Pavel podvig etc..


As if Mister Podvig agrees with what you have said so far...


please provide me a article from russian analysts who say Russia can win all-out nuclear war and ....


Why do they have to keep saying it only to have the CIA tell us that it's not true and impossible? US intelligence officials know exactly where they stand with Russia and you only need to remind the public of your strength when you intended to terrorize them...


and since you disregard things like mass,momentum, velocity, relativity etc... i diregard too


I am saying that denial of reality will not change it and that the Soviet strategy was , since the dawn of the nuclear age, to fight a truly global war with nuclear weapons and to enable themselves by active and passive means to win such. This has not changed and there is no need for any of their high level officials to say it.


i think i had shown why i think so i on the thread russian ballistic missile fails :

www.abovetopsecret.com...
my and your opinions will not match on many issues , because i base my analysis on russian military analysts, while you on DIA analysts


Well i don't recall you actually proving anything and from reading it again it seems my memory is still working well. I base my views on as many views from as great a spectrum as i can and it is most certainly not restricted to what DIA officials have to say.


go to news, world and main section of pravda the names of neocons here - astrojet, mandrake, Rickk, american eagle, farmer, Cascade, chaplakid,Steedbonnet,pirata,thetruth,thirteen , SCA, Slick etc ... and amany others ... a small list of neocons on pravda


As if i could possibly begin to care about anyone who seems neo-con like frequents those forums.



you ..... goodness how do you stick around here...


Well i can't be making personl attacks ( that is not allowed and you will be banned for such behaviour) as i only sometimes respond in kind to others who do it all the time and keep right on posting with a few warnings and no banning. Aint logic 'cool'?


don't posters like ape ,rogue1,centurion etc.. irritate you....


They do not but the blatant lies they attempt to spread as truth most certainly do.


man must say, you have some control over yourself ..hats off to you


It's the Borg part of me i suppose.... If they want to spam so can i but i will spitefully employ large volumes of 'technical' information/ claims made by 'specialist' ( each and everyone one of which i even more spitefully defend with even larger volumes of 'technical' information and claims by 'specialist')
just to rain on their empty parades. A few of them have realised that the best way to silence me is to simply stop lying and spreading disinformation but few are apparently that bright, or paid to remain silent, so i will probably spend the next few years endlessly repeating myself as they insist to presume that no one is willing or able to play their childish games.

Stellar



posted on Feb, 12 2007 @ 10:54 PM
link   
do you really think the russians or other countrys are not working on next generation radars that can detect the so called stealth technic? I bet russian defence companys are working their asses off right now to improve the radar technic, maybe they have it already. Iran will buy all this and the F22, F117 are useless but expensive "toys".


ape

posted on Feb, 12 2007 @ 11:07 PM
link   

posted by .ru stellar
It can not be launched first as it can only be deployed by one plane and as far as i know they are not stationed that near Russian borders. At best these types of weapons will start hitting targets , if any, many hours after the nuclear weapons have started raining down and few might in fact even get airborne when the planes that carry them are destroyed on the ground.



if you think the US wont have birds in the sky when it gets that hot to the point we are on the brink of nuclear war then anything you say should be disregarded as suggested to people who read your garbage many times over. christ you killed the hell out of this thread with your cut'n'paste. and I meant to say fired but it wouldn't let me edit when i noticed the error. you underestimate the US, the US along with the corrupt commie politics within the soviet bloc brought down the USSR. we will easily knock russia down economically again if needed, and any other country for that matter.

people can talk crap all they want on this site, the US will own any sky it flies over in the 21st and you can bet on that, I can't wait for the f-22 to perform in iran.

you also keep saying the american economy will collaspe, not if the american people force politicians to replace certain arcane 'laws' which we are in the process of doing. you keep googling up your info there google king.



[edit on 12-2-2007 by ape]



posted on Feb, 13 2007 @ 03:09 AM
link   


The had radar guided anti aircraft guns during the second world war and they were very accurate against fighter sized targets.


the radiolocators of those ww2 days were not capable of tracking low flying objects i.e. lower than 500 metres , the fiirst soviet radar capable of tracking low flying objects was in irkutsk and was capable of tracking even low flying geese..





The science fiction writer or the 'statesmen'?


sergei was a high level officer in the Siet , a hybrid of KGB and soviet academy of Sciences under Displan





I am saying that denial of reality will not change it and that the Soviet strategy was , since the dawn of the nuclear age


hah time out, there is no soviet strategy now .. only banana russian republic ....




I base my views on as many views from as great a spectrum as i can and it is most certainly not restricted to what DIA officials have to say.

what spectrum .... russsian defectors .... they are traitors and i do not accept their analysis ... the only analysis you have partially proven is DIA analysis..




America already probably tried to start a war when they nuked North Korea a few years ago; something you should be aware of mister Krutov. North Korea did not bite and simply said that it was a big train wreck; clever Kim

nonnsense .... provide me a scientific report that proves usa nuked korea ...



Krutov should stick to saying things that can not be verified ( like claiming the US has a hundred thousand cruise missiles which they probably deploy on the 'UFO's') as his not very good when it comes to actual established reality...

nonsense again...is possible to for the public to verify military secrets
the prediction about NATO encircling russia in prepartions to destroy it is coming true and as well as rising Stalinism



Capitalist Yeltsin? Ruined Russia? Russian people want Stalin? Non of these claims are related to reality in any verifiable fashion but you should feel free to attempt doing so if you please

definitely u suffer form amnesia ... do u only read ATS or BTS ....
on Yeltsin and his effects :
--------
The first huge blow to democracy came when Yeltsin destroyed the opposition parliament with tanks – with full support from newly-elected President Clinton. The next blow to democracy came from the creation of an oligarchy and the mass impoverishment of Russia, all due to economic policies that came straight out of the US Treasury Department. The last big blow came in 1996, when the once-free Russian media was coapted by the pro-government oligarchy. The media in turn was used to support Yeltsin's presidential run that year – which he lost, but which he stole with massive manipulation, with the help and support and cover of the Clinton Administration.

By the time of the economic collapse in 1998, democracy had become known as "sh-t-ocracy," a dirty word and a cruel joke. The Clinton Administration sacrificed every decent value here, starting with the concept of democracy, in order to both enrich their backers on Wall Street and to make sure that the Communists didn't return to power, whether the Russians wanted them or not.
www.russian-victories.ru...
-----



Russian people want Stalin?

yep , they do
------
In recent years, support of Stalin has resurged. Millions of Russians, exasperated with the downfall of the economy and political instability after the breakup of the Soviet Union, want Stalin back. A recent controversial poll revealed that over thirty-five percent of Russians would vote for Stalin if he were still alive.[23] This is seen by some as a return of Stalin's cult.

en.wikipedia.org...
-----
this was a western one , russian ones indicate b/w 53 -77%


[edit on 13-2-2007 by vK_man]



posted on Feb, 13 2007 @ 03:33 AM
link   


Well i don't recall you actually proving anything and from reading it again it seems my memory is still working well.

well u seem to have forgot stalinism and NATO encirclement of Russia ..



As if Mister Podvig agrees with what you have said so far...

as if he agrress with you





Krutov should stick to saying things that can not be verified

many things are verified:
go to:
www.communist.ru
www.xakep.ru ...

or go on russian part of internet ...




as his not very good when it comes to actual established reality...

as if u are good.... , what established reality shows russia as weak , the conspiracy reality or 'hidden' reality shows something different ..stick to DIA sources .... these are only things that prove your point on USSR



posted on Feb, 13 2007 @ 09:56 AM
link   


Why on Earth do you want to help a man that served American interest for so long and attacked Russia's ally Iran resulting in many hundreds of thousands of Iranian dead?


when was USSR iran's friend.... they were enemies as iran was helping afghan fighters




The US attacked Iraq to shut down it's oil rigs as there was simply too much oil available on the world markets.


cannot agree as usa wanted iraq's large reserves for itself ..#



allowed the US to terrorize the third world for decades doing NOTHING to protect those millions of innocents?


durin the 1970 indo-pak war, when americans sent a aircraft carier to bay of bengal , the russians sent a strke task force to threaten the carrier group and prevented usa from entering the war and terrorizing India



posted on Feb, 13 2007 @ 01:25 PM
link   
I think Iraq could have won in 2003 assuming they hadn't of invaded Kuwait or had the 8 year long war.

Just upgrading their T72M1A to something simular than that of the T-72AG (with 2A46M-5). Even without good air force, good tanks would make a huge difference along with FLIR+FCS+LRF.



posted on Feb, 13 2007 @ 03:00 PM
link   

Originally posted by ape
if you think the US wont have birds in the sky when it gets that hot to the point we are on the brink of nuclear war then anything you say should be disregarded as suggested to people who read your garbage many times over.


I said quite specifically that there will be a number on patrol close to the Russian border at any one time ( say maybe half a dozen or maybe even ten in extreme cases) in times of heigtened tensions and it's no more illogical to assume that there will be no American planes on patrol in such times than it is to believe that a American first strike will catch any large number of Russian ICBM's/SLBM's in their silo's or submarines.


christ you killed the hell out of this thread with your cut'n'paste.


I just respond to all the nonsense i see and that takes time and lots of space; if you and so many others stop making up 'facts' to suit yourselves i will just merrily keep on doing what i'm doing.


and I meant to say fired but it wouldn't let me edit when i noticed the error. you underestimate the US,


I do not underestimate what the US could do but i do understand how the current rulers of that country is actively undermining it like those before them have for decades on end.


the US along with the corrupt commie politics within the soviet bloc brought down the USSR.


Show me the so called 'evidence' as the CIA director and plenty of other 'authors' of that so called 'fall' say that they were as surprised as the rest of us.


we will easily knock russia down economically again if needed, and any other country for that matter.


You can believe that if you like but then you should probably at least attempt to prove that it was the US that was responsible the last time.


people can talk crap all they want on this site, the US will own any sky it flies over in the 21st and you can bet on that,


Your free to believe whatever you like and so am i. Since your not actually presenting anything of substance it your opinion as worth about as much as the next ignorant guys.


I can't wait for the f-22 to perform in iran.


And now you arehoping for another war to break out? Bloodthirsty ignorant people like you are very much part of the reason i am on these types of forums.


you also keep saying the american economy will collaspe,


I don't really mention it often unless some ignorant person mentions how 'dominant' and 'strong' the US economy is. I don't take pleasure in reporting on reality ( well sometimes it's hard not to but I'm working on it) but i don't see why others should be allowed their feverish nationalistic rants when it has so little to do with reality.


not if the american people force politicians to replace certain arcane 'laws' which we are in the process of doing.


The American people have tried to do such for a long time but the forces they are facing down in governments are past adept at robbing the American people of their liberty, energy and the American dream in general. Don't pretend that tax laws are going to change for the better ( fair tax is just another way to rip off the American people) by the introduction of yet another system of taxes.


you keep googling up your info there google king.


How i come to find information is now the problem? You don't see how rabid you look when you attack the method of information gathering instead of the information itself?

Stellar



new topics

top topics



 
2
<< 4  5  6    8  9 >>

log in

join