Russian vs. USA Tech

page: 5
0
<< 2  3  4    6  7  8 >>

log in

join

posted on Nov, 29 2003 @ 09:30 AM
link   
f117 is junk, it wont be effective against russian SAMs, only against 3d world countries like iraq and maybe nk, lets compare the kirov HEAVY MISSILE CRUISER, whats its american counterpart?
www.naval-technology.com...



[Edited on 29-11-2003 by SectorGaza]




posted on Nov, 29 2003 @ 09:42 AM
link   
The United States uses ships that are more rounded. We do not have s specific ship. Ours can perform all the tasks of the ship above and more.



posted on Nov, 29 2003 @ 09:43 AM
link   
Besides that ship is all ready out of date. Look at that design. Can you imagine the radar signature.



posted on Nov, 29 2003 @ 09:52 AM
link   
stop the crappy propaganda, what about teconderoga?[sp]



posted on Nov, 29 2003 @ 09:58 AM
link   
2 Kirovs can put an entire US CVBG on the bottom!


Replacement for MiG-29? The MiG I-2000, which is being devleoped in a modified version by iran.

MiG-35 was probably sold to the chinese so they can make their J-12.

Su-47 is being developed into the Su-pakfa, together with india.

Then theres MiG-29SMT, a versio with reduced RCS.



posted on Nov, 29 2003 @ 10:11 AM
link   

Originally posted by Hyperspace
Let's see a Russian laser cannon...here is the American version.





Keep dreaming Jetboy..

It isnt American..

Not by far!!!



Its made and designed in small nation called Isreal..




posted on Nov, 29 2003 @ 10:26 AM
link   

Originally posted by jetsetter
Besides that ship is all ready out of date. Look at that design. Can you imagine the radar signature.


earnt urself enough points then?? why not post up a link...*spammer*!!


my objection to that? you changed the viewing size of the first&second pages, ie: it's a pain in the ass to read.

russian...are u a ruski?? or do u feel it's ur purpose as anti-american to pose as the artificial enemy??

just some thoughts,
Cyrus



posted on Nov, 29 2003 @ 10:27 AM
link   
Even China has anti-satelite lasers..

Who do you think that sold them the techs?

..

Let me tell ya..

RUSSIANS..




posted on Nov, 29 2003 @ 10:28 AM
link   

Originally posted by bisonn
2 Kirovs can put an entire US CVBG on the bottom!


Replacement for MiG-29? The MiG I-2000, which is being devleoped in a modified version by iran.

MiG-35 was probably sold to the chinese so they can make their J-12.

Su-47 is being developed into the Su-pakfa, together with india.

Then theres MiG-29SMT, a versio with reduced RCS.


u still have that 9mm lodged in ur other lung..


what's with the name?

btw, i concur with u on that one.



posted on Nov, 29 2003 @ 11:45 AM
link   

Originally posted by bisonn
2 Kirovs can put an entire US CVBG on the bottom!


What "could" or "would" do is immaterial in regards again to what you have mentioned. Why? Ever heard of the word: DECOMMISSIONED?
There were only 4 Kirov class BCGN's built:
Admiral Ushakov---ex-Kirov; was stricken in 1998, but political efforts were launched in the Duma to reinstate the ship as an active vessel. A public fundraising campaign was instituted to save the ship, but this has failed to produce the needed funds
Admiral Lasarev---ex-Frunze; decommissioned Jun 99. May be recommissioned for Pacific Fleet if funds can be found. Currently maintained in reserve in Strelok Bay. Suffered damage in a fire that broke out in Dec. 2002.
Admiral Nakhimov---ex-Kalinin. Undergoing refit. Due to lack of funding, currently maintained in Strelok Bay.
Pyotr Veliky---only Pyotr Veliky is in active service, based in Severomorsk.

Answer to countering the only single 'Kirov' class the Russians have: Arleigh Burke class!



Replacement for MiG-29? The MiG I-2000, which is being devleoped in a modified version by iran.

Mig I-2000 is having funding problems, by both the Iranians and Russian parts.


MiG-35 was probably sold to the chinese so they can make their J-12.

Wrong answer!


Su-47 is being developed into the Su-pakfa, together with india.

The Pak-fa is also experiencing finding problems from bith Indian and Russian counter-parts. The Indians are concentrating on the their LCA program, nonetheless.


Then theres MiG-29SMT, a versio with reduced RCS.

Reduced RCS? How so? In any case, it's RCS is nothing when compared to the F-22. And the 29SMT is being countered by the F-16 Block60's, F-15 AESA's, and obviously the F-22.




regards
seekerof



posted on Nov, 29 2003 @ 12:05 PM
link   
Can anyone actually come close to taking this thread seriously when most of the parties invloved are so obviously biased one way or the other?

You've got a guy named "Russian" in the thread. Hmmmm....geee...I wonder if HE'S biased or not.

You've got the patriotic american guy....hmmm...I bet he's going to have an unbiased view.

This is all so obviously speculative and one-sided. No one can argue this either way until you see these in action, because WHO ARE YOU TO SAY WHETHER IT IS PROPOGANDA OR NOT? You don't KNOW if any of these weapons that "look really scary!" can actually do half of what they are touted as being capable of until they are put through real combat. A bunch of civlians sitting around arguing about which is cooler and standing up for their respective countries.

I'm sorry, don't mean to burst any bubbles, but reading this thread is like reading a Star Trek vs. Star Wars thread with "Obi-Wan" and "Cpt Kirk" as the main contributors.



posted on Nov, 29 2003 @ 12:18 PM
link   

Originally posted by SevenZeroOne
Can anyone actually come close to taking this thread seriously when most of the parties invloved are so obviously biased one way or the other?

You've got a guy named "Russian" in the thread. Hmmmm....geee...I wonder if HE'S biased or not.

You've got the patriotic american guy....hmmm...I bet he's going to have an unbiased view.

This is all so obviously speculative and one-sided. No one can argue this either way until you see these in action, because WHO ARE YOU TO SAY WHETHER IT IS PROPOGANDA OR NOT? You don't KNOW if any of these weapons that "look really scary!" can actually do half of what they are touted as being capable of until they are put through real combat. A bunch of civlians sitting around arguing about which is cooler and standing up for their respective countries.

I'm sorry, don't mean to burst any bubbles, but reading this thread is like reading a Star Trek vs. Star Wars thread with "Obi-Wan" and "Cpt Kirk" as the main contributors.


i propose that someone lock this thread



posted on Nov, 29 2003 @ 12:27 PM
link   

Originally posted by Laxpla
www.naval-technology.com...
www.lowobservable.com...

Hi typhoon



Both of these subs dont compete with the typhoon.

you are a plain moron



posted on Nov, 29 2003 @ 12:42 PM
link   

Originally posted by SevenZeroOne
Can anyone actually come close to taking this thread seriously when most of the parties invloved are so obviously biased one way or the other?

You've got a guy named "Russian" in the thread. Hmmmm....geee...I wonder if HE'S biased or not.

You've got the patriotic american guy....hmmm...I bet he's going to have an unbiased view.

This is all so obviously speculative and one-sided. No one can argue this either way until you see these in action, because WHO ARE YOU TO SAY WHETHER IT IS PROPOGANDA OR NOT? You don't KNOW if any of these weapons that "look really scary!" can actually do half of what they are touted as being capable of until they are put through real combat. A bunch of civlians sitting around arguing about which is cooler and standing up for their respective countries.

I'm sorry, don't mean to burst any bubbles, but reading this thread is like reading a Star Trek vs. Star Wars thread with "Obi-Wan" and "Cpt Kirk" as the main contributors.


aight 701, u could'a landed it a little softer, but hey, i'm ukrainan...am i biased?
am i pro american?? no
am i anti american, not yet


will the rest of europe take a sudden leap with the economy and cripple the U.S? yes.

oh....and btw, the russian prototypes tend to be created in pairs', one for testing, the other to survive.
keep your knowledge on the U.S side of things, for you will be labelled ignorant if you get pissed off on the accounts of your "alleged" superior knowledge, my advice is this: verify your information first, and then come bellowing at all.
Cyrus



posted on Nov, 29 2003 @ 12:45 PM
link   

Originally posted by Russian

Originally posted by Laxpla
www.naval-technology.com...
www.lowobservable.com...

Hi typhoon



Both of these subs dont compete with the typhoon.

you are a plain moron


russian, try and keep things at a mature level....it is not wise to label others inferior due to a possible mistake.
keep your comments to yourself, i understand they count as oppinion, they also count as lout-like & against ATS foundation rulz, it is not my place to point this out, for this is likely to purpotrate me as "envisioning myself" as a MOD, but since no1 else has bothered to comment i might just as well knock u off ur high horse

Cyrus



posted on Nov, 29 2003 @ 01:02 PM
link   

Originally posted by Seekerof

Originally posted by bisonn
2 Kirovs can put an entire US CVBG on the bottom!


What "could" or "would" do is immaterial in regards again to what you have mentioned. Why? Ever heard of the word: DECOMMISSIONED?
There were only 4 Kirov class BCGN's built:
Admiral Ushakov---ex-Kirov; was stricken in 1998, but political efforts were launched in the Duma to reinstate the ship as an active vessel. A public fundraising campaign was instituted to save the ship, but this has failed to produce the needed funds
Admiral Lasarev---ex-Frunze; decommissioned Jun 99. May be recommissioned for Pacific Fleet if funds can be found. Currently maintained in reserve in Strelok Bay. Suffered damage in a fire that broke out in Dec. 2002.
Admiral Nakhimov---ex-Kalinin. Undergoing refit. Due to lack of funding, currently maintained in Strelok Bay.
Pyotr Veliky---only Pyotr Veliky is in active service, based in Severomorsk.

Answer to countering the only single 'Kirov' class the Russians have: Arleigh Burke class!



Replacement for MiG-29? The MiG I-2000, which is being devleoped in a modified version by iran.

Mig I-2000 is having funding problems, by both the Iranians and Russian parts.


MiG-35 was probably sold to the chinese so they can make their J-12.

Wrong answer!


Su-47 is being developed into the Su-pakfa, together with india.

The Pak-fa is also experiencing finding problems from bith Indian and Russian counter-parts. The Indians are concentrating on the their LCA program, nonetheless.


Then theres MiG-29SMT, a versio with reduced RCS.

Reduced RCS? How so? In any case, it's RCS is nothing when compared to the F-22. And the 29SMT is being countered by the F-16 Block60's, F-15 AESA's, and obviously the F-22.




regards
seekerof

THis thread is not for discussing funding problems or training, k? Its for discussing russian vs american TECH!



posted on Nov, 29 2003 @ 01:25 PM
link   
ZUBR CLASS (POMORNIK) AIR CUSHIONED LANDING CRAFT
Specifications
Designer:
Builder: Sudostroil'noye Obyedieneniye (Almaz), Dekabristov SY, St. Petersburg
Yuzhnaya Tochka SY, Feodosiya

Displacement (tons): 480 tons standard
535 tons full load

Speed (kts): 60-63 knots

Dimensions (m): 56.2 meters long
22.3 meters beam
2.0 meters draft

Propulsion: 5 gas. turbines x 10000 hp; 3 four bladed variable air props., GT generator: 4x100 kW; 300 n.m/55 kts; endurance: 5 days

Crew: 21-31 crew

Armament:

Missiles: 2x22 140mm Ogon launchers (132 missiles)
4 x 4 SA Strela-3 total: 32

Guns: 2 x 6 AK-630 gattl. AA (6 x 30 mm; r: 6'000rds/m/mount; 6000 rounds)

Military lift: 3 T-80 tanks or 8 BMP-3 or 10 BTR-80 APC or 140 assault troops with 130 tons cargo













General Characteristics

Class: LCAC 1

Builder: Textron Marine and Land Systems/Avondale Gulfport Marine

Power Plant: 4- Avco-Lycoming TF-40B gas turbines (2 for propulsion/2 for lift); 16,000 hp sustained; 2- shrouded reversible pitch airscrews; 4- double-entry fans, centrifugal or mixed flow (lift)

Length: 87 feet 11 inches (26.4 meters)

Beam: 47 feet (14.3 meters)

Displacement: 87.2 tons (88.60 metric tons) light; 170-182 tons (172.73 - 184.92 metric tons) full load

Range: 200 miles at 40 kts with payload / 300 miles at 35 kts with payload
Speed: 40+ knots (46+ mph; 73.6 kph) with full load

Load Capacity: 60 tons / 75 ton overload

Military lift: 24 troops or 1 MBT

Crew: Five

Armament: 2 - 12.7mm MGs. Gun mounts will support: M-2HB .50 cal machine gun; Mk-19 Mod3 40mm grenade launcher; M-60 machine gun






The Russian LCAC is better then the US one.

Look at the specs!






posted on Nov, 29 2003 @ 01:30 PM
link   
do americans got ekranoplans like the lun or orlenok?


it can transport troops and it is armed with Sunburn Anti ship missiles



[Edited on 29-11-2003 by SectorGaza]



posted on Nov, 29 2003 @ 04:18 PM
link   

Originally posted by bisonn

THis thread is not for discussing funding problems or training, k? Its for discussing russian vs american TECH!




Also i want to add:

This all talk about Russia being broke today is BS, it was reality during Yeltsin years.. but is now past..

(Yeltsin beign that whore that sold whole of the USSR to US and to criminals..)

..

Our American 'friends' just want to us/others to make belive that this is still the case..

But it isnt..

You see, they envy everything Russian..

As during the cold war US was so tiny.. and USSR was so mighty..

Now they are just trying hard to get over it by bullying 'weak' Russia..

Trying to play it down..

Sad part just being that Russia really arent that weak..



[Edited on 29-11-2003 by FULCRUM]



posted on Nov, 29 2003 @ 06:38 PM
link   

Originally posted by Cyrus

Originally posted by jetsetter
Besides that ship is all ready out of date. Look at that design. Can you imagine the radar signature.


earnt urself enough points then?? why not post up a link...*spammer*!!


my objection to that? you changed the viewing size of the first&second pages, ie: it's a pain in the ass to read.

russian...are u a ruski?? or do u feel it's ur purpose as anti-american to pose as the artificial enemy??

just some thoughts,
Cyrus


I was just stating my opinion and it is true. That is why the US and many other countires are switching to more stealthier designs. As for the posts, just suck it up.





top topics
 
0
<< 2  3  4    6  7  8 >>

log in

join