The Entire Russian Fleet

page: 1
0
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join

posted on Mar, 22 2008 @ 07:30 AM
link   
I found new large article from Russian Navy today from Kommersant OnLine news. Dated 20.3. 2008.

www.kommersant.com...

Incl:
- Navy vessels with pics
- Commanders with pics
- Group Informations
- Technical info
- Numbers and ages
- Fleets in five seas ...

HUGE POWER THEY HAVE!!! ( And in article they have rightly separated 2nd and 3rd line ships from modern war machines... But still. )

Enjoy from the knowledge!




posted on Mar, 22 2008 @ 08:33 AM
link   
They could probably take on the Argentinean navy and should win. The UK fleet of 90 ships would defeat them in surface action. The US Navy is the big boy.

Russia has quite a few old ships. 2 problems, they are old ships and they don't have the money for proper upkeep on them. You see the ships tied to piers in harbor. This doesn't make them seaworthy, it just means they haven't sank in harbor, yet.

Great article on Russia's navy and top personnel.



posted on Mar, 22 2008 @ 02:24 PM
link   

Originally posted by hinky
They could probably take on the Argentinean navy and should win. The UK fleet of 90 ships would defeat them in surface action. The US Navy is the big boy.

Russia has quite a few old ships. 2 problems, they are old ships and they don't have the money for proper upkeep on them. You see the ships tied to piers in harbor. This doesn't make them seaworthy, it just means they haven't sank in harbor, yet.

Great article on Russia's navy and top personnel.
Please show us some proof that the U.K. Navy could do this, as far as I'm concerned based on what I've read from different sources I can assure you with "CONFIDENCE" the U.K. Navy wouldn't last 4 days.



posted on Mar, 22 2008 @ 03:02 PM
link   
reply to post by Lambo Rider
 


I cannot say I completely agree with you, but you do have a point.
Its not as lopsided as one would have us believe.



posted on Mar, 23 2008 @ 12:21 AM
link   
I get a service unavailable message when I try and enter the site



posted on Mar, 23 2008 @ 12:41 AM
link   
Russia is a “Has Been” trying to remain a player at the UN Security Counsel Table.

Virtually no one takes them seriously anymore.

Russia knows that China and the U.S. rule the world and so Putin has been trying to flex his military muscles like a child whining at his bigger brothers saying, “Give Me More Respect Dangit!”

Russian technology is completely outdated; and now that the iron “lie” curtain has fallen, everyone who matters fully knows how weak and sad Russia has become. It’s pathetic really, how hard Putin is trying to remain a “Big Boy” at the international table.

Sorry Putin, we’re all out of booster seats at the U.N. Security Counsel. Why don’t you go sit with the kiddies over at the World Hunger Table. I think there is a seat left open right next to the Somalian representative.

American Military Forces have utterly destroyed the Russian weapons that they sold to the Iraqis. That crap was practically garbage, and now that we have taken out Iraq, not once, but twice, the world doesn’t buy Russian crap anymore.

Well, that is unless its more of that old crap and it’s practically given away.



posted on Mar, 23 2008 @ 04:10 AM
link   

Originally posted by Hot_Wings
Sorry Putin, we’re all out of booster seats at the U.N. Security Counsel. Why don’t you go sit with the kiddies over at the World Hunger Table. I think there is a seat left open right next to the Somalian representative.


Whoa Nelly! Way to go with the jingoistic viewpoint.

Let me guess, you eat apple pie, drink milk and cookies, have those good 'ol uncle sam boxer shorts on and was born on the 4th of July - right?

But how about some substance as well as the rhetoric? You are referring to a country with the second largest stockpile of nuclear weapons on the planet. One who produces some of the finest fighter aircraft in the world, is sitting on the largest stock of fossil fuels on the planet and is in the process of re-arming itself to the teeth in order to defend them. Writing them off in the way you just have done is a little bit premature.

Also - be careful what you wish for with regards to the "world hunger table", because if your economy heads into the recession it seems to driving into at full tilt, theres going to be an awful lot of very hungry, very poor american citizens with very little to smile about.



posted on Mar, 23 2008 @ 04:31 AM
link   
Sorry to burst the bubble, but our economy has been in recession for over a year now. What we might be headed to here is a depression. But it won’t last that long because warfare, and lower gas prices, will bring us right out of it.

Yes, America is due for some really hard times. We’ve fully earned it too. Our people are largely stupefied by the mass media and wholly incapable of logical reasoning. Our politicians have sold us down the river almost completely now and very soon we will have to pay the piper.

The falling…oops, did I say falling. I mean, the plummeting dollar will enable our pathetically incompetent and innovatively deficient export market companies to perhaps fully stay afloat in the realm of the global economy. This, of course, precariously, and hopefully, preventing the utter collapse of the American Government Worthless bond market.



posted on Mar, 23 2008 @ 04:31 AM
link   
re post please delete

[edit on 23-3-2008 by Hot_Wings]



posted on Mar, 23 2008 @ 06:38 AM
link   
reply to post by Lambo Rider
 


I think you will find the royal navy is the second biggest in the world only smaller than USN. It is also one of the most technologically advanced and also one of the most highly trained. Check your facts before you post with "confidence", thank you.



posted on Mar, 23 2008 @ 07:54 AM
link   
reply to post by Lambo Rider
 


Fact File

Invincible Class Aircraft CarriersName Pennant Number
Invincible RO5
Illustrious RO6
Ark Royal RO7


CVS StatisticsDisplacement: 22,000 tonnes
Length: 210m / 686ft
Beam: 36m / 118ft
Speed: 30 kts
Complement: 726 Ship's company 384 Air Group personnel
Armament: 3 x Phalanx/Goalkeeper (CIWS) 2 x 20mm Close range guns
Aircraft: A mix (depending on role) of Harrier GR7 and GR9s, Sea King AEW and Sea King and Chinook stores or troop-carrying helicopters and Merlin anti-submarine helicopters.
Propulsion:
COGAG (Combined Gas and Gas), 2 Shafts
4 x Gas Turbines producing 72MW

Royal Navy Community Site

Type 42 DestroyersShip Name Pennant No. Ship Name Pennant No.
Batch 2
Exeter D89 Nottingham D91
Southampton D90 Liverpool D92

Batch 3
Manchester D95 Edinburgh D97
Gloucester D96 York D98
www.royal-navy.mod.uk...

Thats how! There are many more surface ships and subs to list, Should I go on?

[edit on 23-3-2008 by Sky watcher]



posted on Mar, 23 2008 @ 08:19 AM
link   
Sorry, but being British and all, I have to say that you lot over there in the states seriously, and I do mean seriously, overestimate the strength of the Royal Navy, and British Forces in general.

There are currently 81 ships in service with the RN, 38 of which are Mine counter measure and patrol ships. 25 Surface Combatants, 3 Assault Ships, 2 Carriers (Light Aviation Cruisers is a better description, with a combined fixed air wing of 18 Harriers ) and 13 subs make up the rest.

40 years ago there were 202 ships in service.



posted on Mar, 23 2008 @ 08:23 AM
link   
I would still place my money on the British Navy over the current Russian Navy. Do you not agree?



posted on Mar, 23 2008 @ 08:54 AM
link   
reply to post by neformore
 


I am British, live in East Yorkshire, bit worried you thought I was an American



posted on Mar, 23 2008 @ 09:15 AM
link   

Originally posted by Sky watcher
I would still place my money on the British Navy over the current Russian Navy. Do you not agree?


I would give the edge to the Russians in some areas, and to the RN for others, but toe-to-toe the Russians simply have more firepower overall if they bring it to bear.



posted on Mar, 23 2008 @ 11:22 AM
link   
Interesting article, but some of the numbers are wrong i think. At first he talks about the operational state of each fleets ship, but further down the number does not match up with what just said. For example Northern fleet.
Nuclear submarines with ballistic missiles** 15 (5)
Large nuclear submarines 8 (3 )
*In brackets is the number of ships and submarines that are in repair, reserve or conservation."

That is 23 (8 ) submarines (large)
What is large submarines anyway? I dont get this list..The cruise missile submarines are already listed, so are the ballistic carrying ones and SSN's
Further up he writes about each ship, 8 Delta class submarines (Delta IV and Delta III), and 3 Typhoons. That makes 11 "operative" SBBN's..You see my point?

There is several other errors as well. The Delta III is called 667BDR while the Delta IV are called 667BDRM.
Also the model of Typhoon is totaly wrong, he has posted a Delta modell.
Also the model of Udaloy class and Slava class has switched place.
Not impressed with the quality of this report. I agree at some point on status of ships and the Navy, but he could have done he's homework better regarding the numbers listed and ship-specifications.



posted on Mar, 23 2008 @ 12:30 PM
link   
With the Royal Navy you have men and systems that can be trusted, You can not say that with a navy that is in taters and has no combat experience at all. When it all comes down to it British subs will sink every Russian surface ship in one day if the whole Russian fleet is in range of the British sub fleet. Then the same may happen to the Brits surface ships because the subs are going to be the last ones to survive. Then again you would never just have the Brits taking on the Russians by themselves, That would result in the U.S. Navy making sure every Russian ship and sub meets the bottom.
During the cold war in the late 80s or early 90s the U.S. president decided to send Russia a message to back off on a certain issue and the message was a ping in the rear to every Russian sub around the world at the same time to let them know that our U.S. subs were right behind them and we could sink them at any time any place of our choosing. I can only imaging the reports coming into the Kremlin and the look on the old Admirals faces



posted on Mar, 23 2008 @ 03:02 PM
link   




Maybe someone should take them seriously because even an ant, and I'm not saying they are that small, can be anoying. There is also about 50 to 70 million Ak-47s around the world today and these are just Russian made assault rifles. As for them being garbage, well there is an unfortunate deathcount of American Soldiers that would challenge that argument. Last time I checked, and it was this morning, Iraq is anything but safe to visit. Also I believe that Hugo Chavez is buying AK-47s and Sukhois aswell.

Dont mean to burst your bubble but if our leaders are as arrogant as you, we are in alot more trouble than a recession or depression could bring. Just my 2 cents.



posted on Mar, 23 2008 @ 03:22 PM
link   
Its always interesting to see detalied information on someones navy. However.

How many of the ships listed have or for that matter can leave port? No go on long range patrol mind you but actually leave post if needed?



posted on Mar, 23 2008 @ 05:36 PM
link   

Originally posted by 3vilscript




Maybe someone should take them seriously because even an ant, and I'm not saying they are that small, can be anoying. There is also about 50 to 70 million Ak-47s around the world today and these are just Russian made assault rifles. As for them being garbage, well there is an unfortunate deathcount of American Soldiers that would challenge that argument. Last time I checked, and it was this morning, Iraq is anything but safe to visit. Also I believe that Hugo Chavez is buying AK-47s and Sukhois aswell.



Not much of the way of Russian Naval ships in the Iraqi desert.

This is about their fleet, not a rifle.





new topics
top topics
 
0
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join