|
reply posted on 29-11-2003 @ 09:30 AM by SectorGaza
|
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]
|
copyright & usage
|
 |
reply posted on 29-11-2003 @ 09:42 AM by jetsetter
|
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.
|
copyright & usage
|
 |
reply posted on 29-11-2003 @ 09:43 AM by jetsetter
|
Besides that ship is all ready out of date. Look at that design. Can you imagine the radar signature.
|
copyright & usage
|
 |
reply posted on 29-11-2003 @ 09:52 AM by SectorGaza
|
stop the crappy propaganda, what about teconderoga?[sp]
|
copyright & usage
|
|
AboveTopSecret.com is advertising supported.
|
reply posted on 29-11-2003 @ 09:58 AM 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.
|
copyright & usage
|
 |
reply posted on 29-11-2003 @ 10:11 AM by FULCRUM
|
!!!!!
|
copyright & usage
|
 |
reply posted on 29-11-2003 @ 10:26 AM 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Besides that ship is all ready out of date.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
|
copyright & usage
|
 |
reply posted on 29-11-2003 @ 10:27 AM by FULCRUM
|
BTW,
Even China has anti-satelite lasers..
Who do you think that sold them the techs?
..
Let me tell ya..
RUSSIANS..

|
copyright & usage
|
 |
reply posted on 29-11-2003 @ 10:28 AM by Cyrus
|
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.
|
copyright & usage
|
 |
reply posted on 29-11-2003 @ 11:45 AM 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
|
copyright & usage
|
|
AboveTopSecret.com is advertising supported.
|
reply posted on 29-11-2003 @ 12:05 PM 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.
|
copyright & usage
|
 |
reply posted on 29-11-2003 @ 12:18 PM by SectorGaza
|
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
|
copyright & usage
|
 |
reply posted on 29-11-2003 @ 12:27 PM by Russian
|
Both of these subs dont compete with the typhoon.
you are a plain moron
|
copyright & usage
|
 |
reply posted on 29-11-2003 @ 12:42 PM by Cyrus
|
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
|
copyright & usage
|
 |
reply posted on 29-11-2003 @ 12:45 PM by Cyrus
|
and as for you
Originally posted by Russian
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
|
copyright & usage
|
 |
reply posted on 29-11-2003 @ 01:02 PM by bisonn
|
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!
|
copyright & usage
|
|
AboveTopSecret.com is advertising supported.
|
reply posted on 29-11-2003 @ 01:25 PM by Russian
|
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!

|
copyright & usage
|
 |
reply posted on 29-11-2003 @ 01:30 PM by SectorGaza
|
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]
|
copyright & usage
|
 |
reply posted on 29-11-2003 @ 04:18 PM by FULCRUM
|
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]
|
copyright & usage
|
 |
reply posted on 29-11-2003 @ 06:38 PM by jetsetter
|
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.
|
copyright & usage
|
 |