Russia could destroy NATO ships in 20 mins: Admiral

reply to post by manson_322


Here is an article on the subject. There isn't a great deal of information on this, because it is such old news.

money.cnn.com...

(FORTUNE Magazine) – A SOVIET NIGHTMARE is coming true. Despite impressive success in closing its technology gap with the West since the atomic age began in 1945, the U.S.S.R. is in danger of falling further behind in a crucial field where a breakthrough could dramatically shift the balance of military power. That area is microelectronics and everything that goes with it, from the engineering of integrated circuits to the art of programming. The West -- particularly the U.S. -- is good at microelectronics, and the Russians are woefully behind. The Soviets already devote proportionally more resources to the military than the U.S. does. With some horror they are learning that vastly greater commitments would be necessary to match the West's drive to incorporate microelectronic components into a new generation of high-tech weapons and battle management computers. The revolution in defense microelectronics challenges the Soviets to compete on a new playing field just as they were attaining parity with the West in more traditional areas of weaponry. ''The Russian nightmare has always been that a revolution in technology will challenge the way they've designed their forces,'' says Arthur Alexander, a Rand Corp. expert on military technology. ''Suddenly, out of nowhere, microelectronics is forcing the Soviets to reconsider everything they've done. It could make a 25-year investment in military technology obsolete.'' For example, ''smart'' missiles that can locate and destroy targets could overcome the numerical superiority in tanks that has been central to Soviet strategy in Europe. Most Western military analysts believe that the Soviets will try to counter the U.S. microelectronics offensive, even if the cost to their economy is excruciating.

While Russian computer technology employed some very excellent techniques, and worked from different perspectives, it never has kept up with U.S. computer technology. Certainly the different approach is now helping U.S. companies move in different directions in improving their computing technology, these concepts were never good enough to give the Soviets and type of lead.

I don't know what tangent you are going off on when talking about AI, I think maybe you are getting confused with science fiction.

reply to post by C0bzz


This is from Force magazine - an Indian defence publication


Volume 1 No 6 April 2004 , Page 55 .



Excerpts from the Article:

India Starts Defence Exports : Joint Ventures Now yielding rich Dividends


KS -172

- Joint Venture between India's DRDO and Russias NPO Novator.

SpeciFications :

- It is an ultra Long Range AAM with a Development Range of 400KMs To Target AEW/AWAC Type High Value Aircrafts.

- Sole Carrier in the Indian AF will be the Su-30MKI

Features ( Dimensions) :

- 1.4 Meter long Rocket Booster

- Weight 748Kgs

- Core Diameter 0.40 Meter , Total Lenght 6.01 Meters , Span .61 Meters

- Launched by a Solid-propellant Tandem Rocket Booster

- The KS 172 will attack its Targets with an adaptive high explosive ( HE) fragmentation warhead.

Guidance

- Secure Data-Linked Based inertial Navigation System for MidCourse Guidance ( This would probably be done by AWACS or the 2-3 MKIs Working in Tandem with their Mini AWACS Capability)

- Active Radar Homing for its Terminal Phase.

-The missile will be used against air targets flying at altitudes from 3m to 30km with speeds up to 4,000km/h and manoeuvring at up to 12g.

INDO-RUSSO CO-OPERATION

DRDO and NPO will jointly Develop:

- An Active Homing Radar Seeker with a Wide Lock-On Range Which is able to recieve targeting data from the launch AC.

- Design a combined Gas/AeroDynamic Control system with 3d TVC . Provides High Manoeuvrability irrespective of launch Conditions and allows for missle launch with AC in super Manoeuvrability flight mode.

- Create and Adaptive Rapid Reaction Autopilot Which Optimises with Missile Stabilization and control Parameters within the firing range.

- Development of Special Interaction Logic btween the KS-172 Explosive Fuse and Guidance system Which ( In addition to structural and config features) gurantees absolute immunity of the Warhead detonation system to Jamming

given that brahmos was first tested in 2002 and is now in squadron service , i wouldquite happily say that novator got a quiet one here and this will be available for use very soon - picture of the K-172s-1 in india colours have allready been seen.

heres another :

english.pravda.ru...

a mach 8 ACSM

Pravda? I would eat all my words for simple concrete proof that this missile is operational. Alas no such is forthcoming, like the mythical PAK-FA talk is very abundant yet production line end results are missing.

[edit on 11-9-2008 by WestPoint23]

reply to post by poet1b

While Russian computer technology employed some very excellent techniques, and worked from different perspectives, it never has kept up with U.S. computer technology. Certainly the different approach is now helping U.S. companies move in different directions in improving their computing technology, these concepts were never good enough to give the Soviets and type of lead.

Soviets were lagging by five years or so in 1984-85 , yes, soviets never had the lead in computer technology , as they did not have requisite miniaturization tech to improve chip density,so to compensate for problems they used superior logic design and superscalar processor

I don't know what tangent you are going off on when talking about AI, I think maybe you are getting confused with science fiction.

I was referring to DARPA 's Ixo AI grid ...



[edit on 11-9-2008 by manson_322]

Originally posted by WestPoint23
Pravda? I would eat all my words for simple concrete proof that this missile is operational. Alas no such is forthcoming, like the mythical PAK-FA talk is very abundant yet production line end results are missing.

[edit on 11-9-2008 by WestPoint23]

the pravda link is about the `mach 8 ` brahmos under developement - the fist quote (and bulk of the post) is about the K-172S-1 which has now gone to india (well 4 years ago) , and seems to have quietly missed everyone....

Originally posted by Harlequin
...and seems to have quietly missed everyone....

Even reality apparently.

Not trying to belittle you or dismiss the first source but I couldn't help myself.

reply to post by WestPoint23


*sigh*

img473.imageshack.us...

offtopic - nice to see you posting again

reply to post by manson_322

to compensate for problems they used superior logic design and superscalar processor

Yeah, sure, whatevery you want to believe. Coulda, woulda, shoulda, we were better except______.

Like I pointed out earlier, people all over the world want to come and live in the U.S., not so with Russia, so the U.S. attracts the best and the brightest from around the world, because of our concepts of equal opportunity for all. This is why the U.S. has been leading science for two centuries now.

All the talk of this advanced Russian weapons technology is just talk, unfortunately it plays right into the hands of the powers who be who love arms races. This is true of the powers that be in Russia as well as the U.S. or Venezuela.

Originally posted by poet1b
reply to post by manson_322

 

Certainly the different approach is now helping U.S. companies move in different directions in improving their computing technology, these concepts were never good enough to give the Soviets and type of lead.

Ummm, that article is from 1985

It's 2008.

The Russians get their electronics these days from the same places we do: China, Taiwan, etc...

reply to post by poet1b

Yeah, sure, whatevery you want to believe. Coulda, woulda, shoulda, we were better except______.

sure, please continue believing in your 'USA is great ,invincible blah blah'

Like I pointed out earlier, people all over the world want to come and live in the U.S., not so with Russia, so the U.S. attracts the best and the brightest from around the world, because of our concepts of equal opportunity for all.

concept of equal opportunity ??? this is BS and by the way, USA attracted the best talent because it was the richest nation for 60 years...
now USA is suffering from brain drain

All the talk of this advanced Russian weapons technology is just talk, unfortunately it plays right into the hands of the powers who be who love arms races. This is true of the powers that be in Russia as well as the U.S. or Venezuela.

using your logic of analysis , it can be said that All the talk of this advanced USA weapons technology is just talk,

All the talk of this advanced Russian weapons technology is just talk,

already disproven claim , forgot how Russian kornet ATGM and RPG-29
destroyed 45 Israeli merkavas 'supertank' in 2 weeks in 2006...

Merkavas are believed to be the best MBT in world

russian bioweapons and narrowband HPM weapons are most advanced in the world,:
english.pravda.ru...

The Soviet union was considered the world leader in HPM at the time of its disintegration. The Russians have concentrated on development of HPRF generators such as various types of gyrotrons and klystron amplifiers.
www.fas.org...

Soviet development in DEW was more advanced and massive one than american one:

The USSR's high-energy laser program, which dates from the mid-1960s, is much larger than the US effort. They have built over a half dozen major R&D facilities and test ranges, and they have over 10,000 scientists and engineers associated with laser development. They are developing chemical lasers and have continued to work on other high-energy lasers having potential weapons applications - the gas dynamic laser and the electric discharge laser. They are also pursuing related laser weapon technologies, such as efficient electrical power sources, and are pursuing capabilities to produce high-quality optical components. They have developed a rocket-driven magnetohydrodynamic (MHD) generator which produces 15 megawatts of short-term electric power - a device that has no counterpart in the West. The scope of the USSR's military capabilities would depend on its success in developing advanced weapons, including laser weapons for ballistic missile defense.
www.fas.org...

MOSCOW (RIA Novosti) - Russia started developing tactical laser weapons before the United States and has several prototypes of high-precision combat chemical lasers in its arsenal, a defense industry source said on Tuesday.

The Boeing Company said recently it had test-fired a high-energy chemical laser fitted aboard a C-130H aircraft for the first time. The successful ground tests, "a key milestone for the Advanced Tactical Laser Advanced Concept Technology Demonstration program," took place on May 13 at the Kirtland Air Force Base, New Mexico.

Commenting on the announcement, the Russian expert said: "We tested a similar system back in 1972. Even then our ‘laser cannon was capable of hitting targets with high precision."

"We have moved far ahead since then, and the U.S. has to keep pace with our research and development," he added.
www.mnweekly.ru...

here , are the pics of soviet mltk laser truck and its tests in 80's:
on a plane , (project was suspended by in 1987-90 after possibly INF treaty)




Test:


www.militaryphotos.net...


DIA artwork of MLTK laser:

www.militaryphotos.net...

topic on soviet lasers:
forum.warfare.ru...

soviets were leading in areas like plasma weapons,laser weapons, nanotechnology, civil defence , Metallurgy,radars etc.. they were lacking to USA in electronics,computer systems , software development and sensor developement,electronics,communications etc ..


Edward Tellar , (the father of american hydrogen bomb) himself stated that soviets were ahead of USA in laser development by a decade

Radar and Laser Beams
The Soviet radar station in Krasnoyarsk has been completed. That radar will show how our missiles approach. The information can be handed out to the SA-12s, which will make a good defense after retaliatory missiles have reentered the atmosphere.

We are approaching the point where mutually assured destruction is not only a terrible idea, but it won't even work. We are allowing our forces of retaliation to become obsolete.

The Soviets have worked for at least 10 years on lasers -- high intensity lasers which can be directed so accurately that in 1000 miles, the spread of the beam will be no more than five feet. We have seen at least one published deployment of such lasers in the Soviet Union on the military test site of Shari Shagan on the shores of Lake Baikal. I suspect that this is not the only one. We act as though the ABM Treaty were a reality.
www.commonwealthclub.org...

Starting at the end of the 1960s, the Russians also developed ground-based nuclear laser systems for combating spacecraft. Unlike the American x-ray lasers, they could be used several times over. The programme was terminated after the USSR announced a unilateral moratorium on trials of the space defence system and the puzzling deaths of the two project managers in the mid-1980s. The mobile Pamir-SU electro-generator, with an output of 15MW and a mass of around 20t, could supply power to long-range lasers and ultra-high-frequency weapon systems. It could be used both on the Earth and also in space.
www.flug-revue.rotor.com...

and way the Oganok Report of 1993 stated that Russians have 200 underground bases , with 27 of them the size of cities , the largest being Yamantau and Uragan Defence ,

so how many underground cities does USA have ??
from what i know it has only 3-5 underground bases , not been comparable to any of the soviet/russian underground cities like Yamantau that can sustain massive nuclear assault

[edit on 12-9-2008 by manson_322]

[edit on 12-9-2008 by manson_322]

Originally posted by poet1b
Here is an article on the MIG that was turned over to the U.S. by a pilot who defected to the west.

Which were very probably staged unless you desperately want to believe that police states don't actively work to discourage such things from happening.

Vacuum tubes were 50ties technology. In an aeroplane flying high up in the atmosphere, heating is not a problem, as it is extremely easy to pull in air from the frigid atmosphere and cool the electronics. By the seventies, transistor technology would have been more available in remote outposts, except perhaps for the USSR which still ran on fifties technology.

It would have still required far better trained personal hurting the civilian economy even more and generally making industrialization efforts harder. The US fighting system is extremely top heavy as one can see by comparing the USAF ground crew requirements with that of Canada or other better organized countries. Clearly they prove that things can be done more efficiently but apparently the USSR were determined to make the compromises required to win a nuclear war. At the time of the deployment of the Mig-25 it was certainly very effective in regards with it's capabilities so it met it's long range high speed interceptor role well. What isn't frequently mentioned is that the USSR were on the DEFENSIVE and that all technologies could not be pursued as they sometimes were in the US. Having said that there is nothing inherently impossible as the following easily illustrates.

langaitis.zenonas-old.radios.fotopic.net...

To suggest that the Russians could not have or did not pursue solid state electronics because they were 'unable' is just basically ignorant since they could and they did where they absolutely could not do without it.

en.wikipedia.org...

If the Mig-25 used vacuum tubes it was very probably the most efficient or expedient way of doing it at the time.

The most important factor, vibration, is where tubes are most vulnerable. This made transistorized technology far superior, not to mention space saving. By 1976, the U.S. was already mastering the technology of microprocessors, which by the eighties gave them a technological supremacy that made the Soviets throw in the towel. That was the real scenario.

The USSR were not , and probably could not be according to most ( North Korea continues to exist.....) , 'defeated' by advanced technology or anything as silly. As compared to the destructive capability the USSR had by the 80's no amount of transistors or integrated circuits were apparently enough to create equivalent power projection in the US.

I see this claimed, but it is BS. Electronic shielding was an easy solution to this problem.

Well since most of the US military is completely unshielded it's either not that easy or far too expensive too contemplate.

Specific Threatto the Military
So what is the non-nuclear EMP threat to our military today? It is, put simply, that while we are quite enamored of our technological progress, we would do well to ensure that basic infantry skills, those things that have enabled America to have the greatest army in the world, are not forgotten. It can be readily observed that the United States is devoting a significant amount of time, energy, and hard working tax-payer dollars to "push the technology envelope" to prepare for the Force XXI battlefield.
The Army will equip tomorrow's infantry soldier with a totally integrated fighting system that takes full advantage of technological advances. Their fighting load modules include vests with removable ammunition pouches enabling them to carry the soldier radio, battlefield computer, global positioning system (GPS), and required antennas. One burst of EMP will render this equipment inoperable, rendering the 21st century land warrior ineffective on the Force XXI battlespace. He will still be able to fight, but without his wondrous gadgets and gizmos.

Conclusion
Therefore, it seems to me that while developing and implementing technologies and strategies for the Force XXI battlespace, we also need to emphasize force modernization in developing technologies and strategies to counter the EMP threat. It is even more important that our junior leaders and soldiers become and remain exceptionally proficient in basic skills of land navigation, small unit tactics, and sandtable operations and operations orders. I would not discard that Ranger handbook just yet. At the battalion level, I recommend that the battalion intelligence officer keep those grease pencils, templates, and manual weather forecasting equipment handy because the Joint Surveillance and Target Attack Radar System, All-Source Analysis System, and most other "high tech" intelligence connectivity systems will not be working.
In sum, while I advocate taking full advantage of any and all technologies that will enhance our ability to fight and win America's battles, we must not lose sight of one essential fact. Gadgets and gizmos do not take and hold terrain, nor do they fight and win on the battlefield well-trained soldiers do! Non-nuclear EMP has the potential to reduce the battlefield equation to very simple terms. I submit that in this scenario, "back to basics" becomes more than a simple clich‚. Stripped of the technology, the soldier who is well versed in basic soldiering skills will be victorious.
One thing is certain: in case of an EMP attack, don't bother calling James Bond. Your telephone won't be working.

www.fas.org...

Mr. BARTLETT. Is it not true that a vacuum tube is one million or so times less susceptible to EMP effects?
Page 66 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 2 Of 2
Dr. ULLRICH. Absolutely. Vacuum tubes are inherently hard to these kind of effects.

Dr. WOOD. Yes, sir. It is a reasonable projection that most, if not all, modern computer systems exposed to referenced EMP field levels—which are 50 kilovolts per meter, not just 10—but the very high levels you might see in most of the United States—most modern computer systems ranging from laptops to mainframes would wilt. By wilting, they would at least cease to function. In many cases, they would be burned out. So it would require very major maintenance before they could be restored to operation.
Not just computers in aircraft but computers everywhere, other than in this type of very high integrity metallic enclosures that Dr. Ullrich sketched in his opening statement. Computers in any other enclosure than that type would be compromised, if not destroyed outright.

commdocs.house.gov...

EMP is very destructive because any length of metal will pick up this radio energy. Look at the cars on the street with coat hanger aerials - their radios work fine. So if you have a telephone line or a power line which crosses a continent, an EMP will make it generate about 10 million volts and 10,000 amperes. This is enough to burn through any insulation we have today. If you were to touch a telephone or a radio when the nuke popped, you could be in big trouble.

Modern electronic components (integrated circuits and chips) are very sensitive to EMP. But older electronic components, such as valves (or vacuum tubes) are 1 billion times more resistant. The Russians know this, and they use valves in their MIG 25 Foxbat interceptor fighter. United States investigators found this in 1976 when a Soviet pilot defected to Japan and they pulled the plane to pieces. They started laughing and thought, "Valves in 1976, how primitive!" But late in 1977, the Pentagon rewrote the handbook on the effects of nuclear weapons to advise the use of valves where possible. One Soviet war manual said, "To achieve surprise in a war, high altitude nuclear explosions can be carried out to destroy the electronics of satellites whether they are spy satellites or communication satellites".

If you were flying in a modern aeroplane, and an EMP rippled past, the plane would fall out of the sky like a bunch of car keys. In 1970, Boeing tried to harden some 747s by wrapping the cables in lead, and putting wire mesh on the windows. When they tested it they found that some 12,000 circuits, essential for the running of the aircraft, had fused. Later, they started from scratch, and hardened the 747 right from the very beginning. It didn't have any windows, and it cost five times as much as a normal 747, but it was hardened - and there was only one ever built.

www.abc.net.au...

Continued

The Blackout Bomb is simply a high-yield nuclear weapon, or a smaller nuclear weapon designed to maximize gamma-ray emissions. The EMP "laydown" of a thermonuclear burst moves at the speed of light, striking the Earth to the horizon at line-of-sight from the detonation. Gamma rays actually radiate spherically from the blast point, creating space EMP which, Dr. Wood explained in written hearing testimony, would damage satellite electronics even at great distances from the explosion. "The basic point," he said, "is that essentially all of our conventional military capability and all of our civilian infrastructure is highly vulnerable to EMP damage. The dollar numbers in the civilian infrastructure alone can be conservatively estimated at several trillion dollars' worth of infrastructure which is at risk potentially even from a single pulse--several trillion dollars."

Any future global war is likely to begin with a few Blackout Bombs. China, Russia, the United States, and other nuclear powers have several nuclear missiles, and perhaps weaponized satellites, designed to lay down EMP over continent-size areas instantaneously. While every nation on Earth is vulnerable to attack from the United States, the United States is vulnerable, indeed defenseless, to a secret class of nuclear weapons which has captured the attention of the major nuclear powers--China, Russia, Britain, France, and the United States itself--for the past thirty-eight years.

Dr. Wood noted that hardening systems to withstand EMP is a small part of the cost, if done as part of the initial design. Yet no civilian and few military systems have been hardened to resist EMP. However, I respectfully disagree with Dr. Wood's recommendation that any civilian hardening to protect us from EMP be done. After a flirtation with civil defense and bomb shelters, Americans realize that nuclear attack against the United States is not something they are willing to prepare for because there is no rational way to prepare for it.

The United States and Russia took different approaches to EMP warfare from the outset, stated Dr. Wood: "The Soviets basically decided that EMP represented not only an exceptionally severe threat to the integrity of their military apparatus and their civilian infrastructure, but also offered extraordinary opportunities to their strategic offensive forces." The Russians now have inherited "more than a dozen Soviet SS-18 ICBM's which carried large unitary warheads in the 10 megaton class that were believed to have the primary function and military role of conducting an extremely severe military EMP laydown":

"That EMP strike component exists today in the Russian strategic order-of-battle, moreover at its maximum Cold War strength. I very confidently predict that it will be one of the last features of Soviet strategic nuclear weaponry to be retired from the Russian force structure."

The Russians have done much more EMP hardening and military/civilian preparedness training than has the United States, testified Dr. Wood. "We Americans, in contrast, collectively saw EMP as a major nuisance which could be rather precisely understood, defended against 'good enough' and thereafter largely ignored." Satellites are especially vulnerable to the x-rays and gamma rays from a high-altitude nuclear explosion, which is different from atmospheric EMP but radiated spherically around the explosion. No United States satellites, he added, can be considered reliably protected from space EMP, because EMP testing of protective systems is erratic.

www.sonic.net...

If the USSR had known what they were doing, they would have known this, but having worked with Russian electronic Engineers, this was something they just weren't aware of.

Nonsense. The USSR was and Russia still is far better prepared to sustain and deal high altitude nuclear burst effects.

The integrated circuit, the microprocessor, put the U.S decades ahead of the Soviets, and the rest of the world for that matter.

Based on what exactly? How was the the US 'ahead' of the USSR in 1985 in terms of operational and applied technologies and if so why was defense

Having worked in Aerospace for several years, I know a little about the subject. Computer controlled electronics greatly enhance instrumentation and controls to a degree that few can appreciate. Supersonic missiles are not easy to turn and maintain control, especially in short distances, like less than 2KM. Without wings, there isn't a whole lot to stabilize maneuvers. I completely doubt that the soviets have the microprocessors or the software capable of generating the real time control needed to accomplish such feats.

Today or for most of the cold war? What leads you to believe that when their missiles proved just about as effective as western counterparts in combat?

Can you name some commercially viable Russian made computers? Where is the evidence that Russia has leaped to the leading edge of computer technology? Do you really think that Russia can best U.S. technology using U.S. computers that the U.S. allows to be sold internationally?

There is a huge difference between making something that is commercially viable and making systems that are more expensive than the general norm but sufficient for military implementation.

You might want to consider that the military industrial complex in both the U.S. and Russia have vested interest in resuming the cold war, not to mention the IC's and the NWO. Don't buy into the smoke and mirrors.

The USSR were never in the cold war by choice and it's design and weapon choices clearly indicates defensive priorities while both US conventional and strategic forces were geared for the offense.

Originally posted by poet1b
The U.S. pulled out of Vietnam because of the massive protests taking place in the U.S., mainly because of the draft. At that time kill ratios of the U.S. to the Viets, who were highly skilled in jungle warfare, tactically, were still 10 to 1.

The US pulled out of the war in Vietnam because it could not find enough soldiers to draft without causing further massive unrest. The US dropped more tonnage of bombs on the Vietnamese than it did on Germany in world war two so to suggest that the US could win or would win if it sent more soldiers or used more conventional folly is to fundamentally misinterpret how one wins 'hearts and minds'. The US lost the war in Vietnam because it backed a dictator and chose to fight a national liberation movement that refused to lose. The NVA ( to say nothing of the Vietcong) were composed of citizen soldiers that were far worse trained the US military personal in everything including jungle warfare. The Vietcong and NVA didn't win because they were better at anything other than proving willing to sustain the casualties required to force the US national security state to withdraw from Vietnam.

With technological advances currently kill rations of U.S. soldiers verses others is around 100 to 1, and those odds are only going to increase in U.S. favor. Sorry, but technological superiority has been winning out since the Persians attacked the Greeks, and no doubt long before that.

The US had achieved relative high 'kill ratios' not because it employs more or better technology but basically because it's army is professional and well trained and organized having fought enough wars since the second world war to learn and adapt to mistakes. Actually the only thing the attempted Persian invasions of Greece proved is that mustering larger armies and deploying them to other countries isn't sufficient to win wars. Your troops must be more professional and have the will to win. I would like to know which Greek 'technologies' you think enabled them to beat the Persians.

Russia never had a chance to take Europe, in that respect they have always been a paper tiger, and the results of the meeting of U.S. tanks with Soviet tanks proved that.

Thanks for giving us your opinion but frankly that isn't what post war looks at Soviet equipment showed. The meetings between US and Soviet tanks were largely one sides because Soviet tanks were made to fight in European conditions were very long engagement distances were not the norm. At European combat distances of 500 -1000 meters and in build up areas Soviet main guns were very much up to task and their armor more than sufficient. Russian export models of all types ( aircraft/tanks) have also mostly consisted of downgraded or obsolescent models that were no longer the primary weapons in the Soviet armed forces.

The only thing that stops the U.S. military from doing whatever it wants to do is the U.S. public's will to do such things.

The US military machine still inflicts massive casualties to this day as a million dead Iraqi's proves.

Basically you should familiarize yourself with what i have posted on this topic before continuing to presume that you know much anything about cold war era Soviet weaponry.

Stellar

I disagree that Russia could destroy the NATO fleet in 20 minites because those ships have defences and so it would take a lot more than a few missiles to destroy them. Even if it was possible and the ships were destroyed Russia would have probably started a nuclear war or at the very least a conventional war that it can not hope to win against NATO.

Maybe Russia could do so...and vice versa?
What could Nato do?
The same or even more ?

There are many countries in the world, armed and able to destroy...so what?
Are all of them dangerous? Enemies?

Or is it once more another game of frightening a nation by such articles?

reply to post by manson_322


Yes, the U.S. is a great nation, in this period of human history the U.S. happens to be on top. Russia isn't exactly chopped wood either, and as a nation came a long ways during the twentieth century. No, the U.S. is not invincible, but we are the ones to beat in order to prove yourself.

So, you don't believe in the concept of opportunity for all, well that is your problem. While the U.S. doesn't always succeed in providing opportunity for all, we lead the world in providing opportunity for all, which is why we lead the world. See above.

Unlke Russia, the U.S. can back its talk of technological superiority by our commercial success. Russians today use computers design by the U.S., primarily built by U.S. companies, as least the most critical parts, and the same is true for almost all technology.

While electronics are being made all over the world, and most commercial electronics are not made in 1st world nations, the research and development that creates these commercials producst is done primarily here in the U.S., and all major Japanese and European countries have a strong presence in Silicon Valley.

If the Soviets are leading in all of these technologies, then were is their commercial products to back up their technological superiority. If they are sooo far ahead in everything, you'd think they might be able to sell stuff that isn't currently based on their state of the art technology. You're talking out your arse, and you know is as well as everyone else.

Nanotechnology, give me a break, Russia is decades behind on developing microprocessors, they haven't mastered the basics in minaterization, yet they are ahead in nanotechnology?

If Russia has such advance laser technology, they should be concentrating on developing some commercial success with this technology, rather than selling misiles that can hide behind classified technology.

Oh yeah, the U.S. proved the effectiveness of their anti-tank weapons in Afgahnistan back in the eighties. Big deal. You are clutching straws.

reply to post by poet1b

Unlke Russia, the U.S. can back its talk of technological superiority by our commercial success. Russians today use computers design by the U.S., primarily built by U.S. companies, as least the most critical parts, and the same is true for almost all technology.

nah, rahter , they are mostly from Japan , they import their semiconductors nowadays

If the Soviets are leading in all of these technologies, then were is their commercial products to back up their technological superiority. If they are sooo far ahead in everything, you'd think they might be able to sell stuff that isn't currently based on their state of the art technology. You're talking out your arse, and you know is as well as everyone else.

it is you who is talking out of your arse as usual
gazprom uses MLTK industrial lasers for oil drilling purposes and russian heavy industries

Mobile Laser Technological Complex was developed by NPO “Almaz” ( www.raspletin.ru... ), the producer of such famous Russian air defence systems as C-300, C-400, systems “Triumph”, “Favorit”, and many others. There were successful tests of the military version of the MLTK, as photographic evidence indicates.

However, the work continues for the development and manufacturing of MLTK for civilian purposes. Thus MLTK-50, and MLTK-5 (see photos) were developed and are currently manufactured for Gazprom. The systems are used for remote (50 meters) metal cutting, and oil removal from water surfaces. The system is capable of cutting through 120mm of reinforced steel at 30 meters. Smaller variants of the system are used for precision metal cutting in manufacturing.

Other Laser System for Transfer of Energy, or LSTE (ЛСПЭ), developed in the 80’s (1979-1985) include “Aydar” LSTE (50 megawatt) installed on Black Sea transport ship “Dikson”. This experimental system was capable of hitting targets at a distance of 4 km, albeit, with insufficient impact. These results were considered outstanding, considering that LSTE system was meant for service under the conditions of vacuum and as part of a space military satellite system. Nevertheless, even this experimental system was capable of cutting through a plane at a distance of 400 meters under the conditions of atmospheric dispersion.

Less is known about the experimental system A-60, which was developed approximately the same time on the basis of IL-76. The system was lost in a fire.

check the pics of MLTK -50








Russians are using MLTK-50 civilian version CO2 industrial laser for Gazprom
resources.metapress.com...

another link:
www.springerlink.com...

Mobile Laser Technological Complex MLTK-50 for Remote Cutting of Metal Structures. Authors: Vostrikov V.G.1; Gavrilyuk V.D.1; Krasyukov A.G.1; Naumov V.G.1; .
www.ingentaconnect.com...

Nanotechnology, give me a break, Russia is decades behind on developing microprocessors, they haven't mastered the basics in minaterization, yet they are ahead in nanotechnology?

Russians were the first to create carbon nanotubes in 1952, 20 years before the west even understood the concept ....

In 1952 Radushkevich and Lukyanovich published clear images of 50 nanometer diameter tubes made of carbon in the Soviet Journal of Physical Chemistry.[3] This discovery was largely unnoticed, the article was published in the Russian language, and Western scientists' access to Soviet press was limited during the Cold War.
en.wikipedia.org...

the soviets created carbon
also , thanks to nanotechnology, the soviets created substances harder than diamond , particularly a famous one known as c8

In the 1950s, while American industry started manufacturing diamonds at 2,000 degrees C and 55,000 atmospheres pressure, Soviet scientists developed a vapor deposition method for growing diamond fibers at 1,000 degrees C and low pressures.
During the 1960s and 1970s, the Soviet group improved on this process, aiming to produce diamond films.
The technological implications of diamond films have recently been realized in Japan and the U.S., and so a race has begun to develop this technology. Dramatic discoveries are being made:
At the University of Texas 10-nanosecond laser pulses are being used to vaporize graphite, which then deposits as a film 20 nm thick over areas as large as 10 square centimeters. The film is diamond-like, but may turn out to be something new. [3]
Soviet researchers report the discovery of a new form of carbon much harder than diamond, called C8. They use an ion beam of low energy to produce thin films of the substance. Carbon atoms in C8 appear to have tetrahedral bonds, but the lattice is somehow different than in diamond--it may simply be somewhat random, resembling a glass rather than a crystal.

Much of the new interest in diamond is motivated by near-term commercial applications like diamond-coated razor blades, scratch-resistant windows and radiation-resistant semiconductors for nuclear missiles. The C8 results, however, are of special relevance to nanotechnology, showing us that diamond is just the default form of more general tetrahedral bonding patterns for carbon. Choosing from among the many possible departures from crystalline regularity may turn out to be an important of nanomachine design.
www.islandone.org...

this was orginally part of article of new scientist magazine and the economist in 1988 , emphasising on soviet lead in nanotech before end of cold war

also xakep.ru has stated that Soviets used diamond created by nanotech in missile parts and were experimenting with its future potential for MBT armour

Diamond is in the news, and this is good news for nanotechnology. Diamond is a prime candidate material for building nanomachines for several reasons: the tetrahedral geometry of its bonds lets it be shaped in three dimensions without becoming floppy; it is made of carbon, the chemistry of which is well understood; and carbon atoms make a variety of useful bonds with other types of atoms. Diamond research may therefore advance nanotechnology even when it is pursued for its short-term commercial potential. Progress in understanding and making diamonds has been driven mainly by work done in the Soviet Union
www.islandone.org...

If Russia has such advance laser technology, they should be concentrating on developing some commercial success with this technology, rather than selling misiles that can hide behind classified technology.

Russians are using MLTK-50 civilian version CO2 industrial laser for Gazprom
resources.metapress.com...

another link:
www.springerlink.com...

Mobile Laser Technological Complex MLTK-50 for Remote Cutting of Metal Structures. Authors: Vostrikov V.G.1; Gavrilyuk V.D.1; Krasyukov A.G.1; Naumov V.G.1; .
www.ingentaconnect.com...

Oh yeah, the U.S. proved the effectiveness of their anti-tank weapons in Afgahnistan back in the eighties. Big deal. You are clutching straws.

lol, the only things Us supplied atgm and Milan ATGM and managed to destroy was few obsolete T-55 and T-62, it consistently failed to destroy the advanced T-64 MBT , check btvt.narod.ru for this

Big deal. You are clutching straws

and so called great U.S army cannot fight iraqi insurgents on camels lol,

[edit on 14-9-2008 by manson_322]

reply to post by StellarX


Police states work to discourage all kinds of things, deception is their best weapon. Take Russia for example, the nation is ran by ex-KGB, they know a little about the art of deception.

If Russia was on the defensive, then why were they so busy spreading communism all over the world, and encouraging revolution everywhere. The USSR was out to prove that communism was superior to capitalism. Guess what, they lost.

As far as what the Soviets were capable of doing back in the seventies, I am just giving the opinion of the people who looked at the MIG-25 electronics. It seems your big counter is to ridicule U.S. scientist as being backwards. The joke is on you.

"The USSR were not , and probably could not be according to most ( North Korea continues to exist.....) , 'defeated' by advanced technology or anything as silly. As compared to the destructive capability the USSR had by the 80's no amount of transistors or integrated circuits were apparently enough to create equivalent power projection in the US."

Ah, but this exactly what defeated the Soviets, superior U.S. technology. Technology not only gives the U.S. a huge advantage in developing military weapons, it gives us a huge advantage economically, being the most productive nation on the Earth. Not only did we have the advanced technology, we have the means to aford to develop a more advanced military.

The US had achieved relative high 'kill ratios' not because it employs more or better technology but basically because it's army is professional and well trained and organized having fought enough wars since the second world war to learn and adapt to mistakes.

Make up your mind, either the U.S. is extremely top heavy and needs to be better organized, or they are "professional and well trained and organized", they can't be both, you are talking in circles.

By the way, more Iraqis have been killed by Muslim extremist than have been killed by U.S. soldiers. The U.S. is currently succeeding in Iraq, and has established a representative government in Iraq, and amazing accomplishment.

As far as EMP effects goes, why do all of your web links look like they were designed by gamers? ABC lost credibility long ago, and everything they turn out any more is sensationalistic crap.

You should know that the U.S. power grid and telecommunications grids are filled with circuit protection against power pulses. Any large EMP would run into numerous circuit protection interupts of various kinds, many of which are instantaneous, including numerous bonding shunt circuits. All the grounded and shielded networks would work together to pull a great deal of the EMP punch directly to ground. Circuit isolation has improved a great deal since the 1950ties.

The U.S. has been aware of the effects of EMPs since before the first atomic blast, when the effects were predicted by a U.S. scientists. When they laughed at the electronics on the MIG-25, they knew what they were laughing about.

Here is an article that puts the situation into a far better perspective.

www.military-information-technology.com...

The ending statement is clearly puts the facts in order.

The Pentagon has a “Balanced Electromagnetic Hardening” program. According to a budget item justification sheet, the program “provides the science and technology to ensure protection and survival of military battlefield and civilian infrastructure electronic systems against multiple electromagnetic environments, including nuclear electromagnetic pulse, high-power microwaves, as well as WMD threats. Designs and develops innovative, low-cost, balanced EM protection and test technologies for weapon systems; C3; and supporting infrastructure systems to the CINCs, services and other DoD agencies.”

Although information on military EMI/EMP hardening is classified, Wilson suggested that DoD is paying attention to the issue. “It is not something they are ignoring,” he said.

You might want to consider that maybe the U.S. might know something about electronics, since the U.S. pioneered the technology from the beginning, and almost every major break through since, while Russia, not so much.

more on russian industrial laser MLTK-50 :

TECHNOLOGY
RUSSIAN LASER "CANNON" FOR SALE
According to reports from Moscow an extremely powerful laser "cannon" - the MLTK-50 - will be presented to the public for the first time this month at an international industrial technology exhibition in Lillehammer, Norway.
www.intelligenceonline.com...

MLTK-50” MOBILE LASER COMPLEX

“Gazobezopasnost” Firm together with Troitsk Institute of innovative and thermonuclear investigations have developed and produces “МЛТК-50” Mobile Laser Complex for gas industry due to necessity of remote cutting of metallic constructions during emergency & restoration work at gas, gas-oil, gas-condensate blowout wells, including burning ones.

The periodically pulsing electric ionization CO2 - laser has radiation power of 50 kW. Laser ray of the unit can cut metal up to 80 mm thick at a distance up to
80 m, being remotely controlled. To determine the coordinates of metallic parts to be remotely cut, which can’t be seen because of smoke and flame of a burning well, the complex is equipped with a special laser locator, which controls the direction of a cutting laser ray. Laser can work during 1 - 10 Minutes with intervals between its activations about 30 Minutes.

The complex is usually transported on two serial automobile semi-trailers. This equipment can be transported in containers by railway. The cooling system of the equipment is water self-propelled one. Electric supply of the unit is required about 600 kW to make the unit function. Operative service personnel of the unit consists of 3 persons.
gazobezopasnost.chat.ru...

this MLTK-50 industrial laser was orginally based on military version of much more powerful mobile version of truck based military MLTK laser(military truck based MLTK was 5-10 MW laser)

So, you don't believe in the concept of opportunity for all, well that is your problem. While the U.S. doesn't always succeed in providing opportunity for all, we lead the world in providing opportunity for all, which is why we lead the world. See above.

more BS from a brainwashed propaganda fed american , go watch fox news silly yankee

[edit on 14-9-2008 by manson_322]

[edit on 14-9-2008 by manson_322]

Oh yeah, the victory of the Greek over the Persians was due to superior technology.

www.mlahanas.de...

reply to post by manson_322


Actually, Japan imports most of its electronics these days as well. Semi-conductors were developed by the U.S., and the technology sold to Japan, because the U.S. was already busy working on integrated circuits, which put them decades ahead of the Soviets.

Numerous discoveries have been made throughout the decades on developing stronger atomic structures for stronger materials. The key is making the technology happen. The U.S. is obviously far ahead of Russia in these areas. If Russia knew what they were doing in these areas, they would have succeeded in putting the technology to use. Always you have some evidence of some technolgy that the world doesn't know about, proving Russian superiority, but never any solid proof to point at.

I guess the Soviets should have used a great deal more of those advanced tanks that were so invulnerable to U.S. technology, if they existed, and then they would have gotten their butts kicked in Afghanistan.

Gee, if the Soviet nanotechnology was so advanced, why couldn't they ever develop a Mach 3 aircraft to match the SR-71 built with U.S. 1950ties technology. If Russia were to succeed in building a Mach 3 aircraft like the SR-71 today, they would still be fifty years behind U.S. technological capabilities. Where is the Russian space shuttle? By the way, the U.S. has been using laser technology in industry for decades. We now have a laser cannon that we can mount on aircraft, where as the Russian laser cannon must be mounted on a semi-truck. Chances are the that it constantly breaks down, and can't be relied upon for tactical military uses. Good for bragging rights, but not much else.