Author The Russia Thread  (Read 23897 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Re: The Russia Thread
« Reply #270 on: November 15, 2016, 08:48:11 PM »
Couple differences, Walks.  First the Italians use SHARs, not navalized conventional aircraft.  Historically this has been less than successful.  Secondly the Italian carriers were designed to operate within a NATO command structure where CVs formed the bulk of the aerial striking force.

Oh no argument.  Still they do operate both of those sons of bitches - no tugs, no belching clouds of black smoke, no mountains of over flowing shit.

Re: The Russia Thread
« Reply #271 on: November 15, 2016, 08:48:50 PM »
jokes aside, nukes don't factor in here. since they are last resort weapons

@JonSnow, massive rolleyes

Re: The Russia Thread
« Reply #272 on: November 15, 2016, 08:53:57 PM »
lol

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2016/10/21/russian-carrier-plagued-by-technical-problems/

"Belching smoke through the Channel, Russian aircraft carrier so unreliable it sails with its own breakdown tug"

Fair enough,,,but:

Peter Roberts, naval expert at the Royal United Services Institute, said:
But Mr Roberts said despite the ship’s troubles, it could not be written off.
He said: “She’s a big, fast and impressive ship with capable jets and she’s going to war in Syria.”

He said the Royal Navy still does not yet have any aircraft carriers of its own and Britain is a decade away
from being able to carry out a similar deployment with its own warships and jets.
“The [Kutnetsov’s] power plant is bad, but I am not sure we in Britain should over criticise that given our recent history with the Type 45.”
The Navy announced earlier this year that all six of its Type 45 destroyers needed engine refits after troubles with power outages.

He went on: “It’s easy to be disparaging, she’s an unlucky ship and she has really basic errors in design, but she still represents an impressive capability.”

Nick Childs, a naval expert at the International Institute for Strategic Studies, said: “It’s had a troubled history, it’s had reliability issues and its old. But on the other hand, there’s capability there.
“It’s a limited capability compared to a US carrier, but it’s not to be dismissed.
“It can provide limited capability and it they get to the eastern Mediterranean they can launch some strikes in Syria with these planes.”


...SO IT'S NOT THAT DOOM AND GLOOM GUYS for Russians, I think that they can managed what Americans refused (for very strange reason) not to achieve :)


Re: The Russia Thread
« Reply #273 on: November 15, 2016, 08:54:00 PM »

Re: The Russia Thread
« Reply #274 on: November 15, 2016, 08:57:32 PM »


...SO IT'S NOT THAT DOOM AND GLOOM GUYS for Russians, I think that they can managed what Americans refused (for very strange reason) not to achieve :)

what are you talking about, we actually know how to do carrier ops


Re: The Russia Thread
« Reply #276 on: November 15, 2016, 08:58:50 PM »

Re: The Russia Thread
« Reply #277 on: November 15, 2016, 09:00:00 PM »


hmmm, all that time I thought that our Jackstar was a male, hmmm :o

Re: The Russia Thread
« Reply #278 on: November 15, 2016, 09:02:10 PM »
what are you talking about, we actually know how to do carrier ops

no I meant to fight ISIS in Syria... {no dispute on American supremacy in the carriers technology}

Re: The Russia Thread
« Reply #279 on: November 15, 2016, 09:03:17 PM »
no I meant to fight ISIS in Syria... {no dispute on American supremacy in the carriers technology}

that one is simple. its pussy obama that never did what needed to be done.

Re: The Russia Thread
« Reply #280 on: November 15, 2016, 09:03:48 PM »

Re: The Russia Thread
« Reply #281 on: November 15, 2016, 09:15:15 PM »
that one is simple. its pussy obama that never did what needed to be done.

yes, too bad because those two nations America and Russia could work so nicely togheter and kick some ass in the World
to bring change and stop scums like ISIS or Somalian pirates or Chinese expansions or muslim terrorist under control
but many people making today's Russia to be that evil that needs to be attacked for very flimsy reason,
and for example Ukraine is not one sided situation,..it has several issues that western media is not presenting to it's people

that's why for a change I like to check RT news ,and many times there is big difference in the accuracy of the western media
reporting and they just bluntly lie or severely twist facts...

Re: The Russia Thread
« Reply #282 on: November 15, 2016, 11:31:54 PM »
NEW !!!

"Russian carrier takes part in massive strikes on terrorists in Syria’s Idlib & Homs" (VIDEO)
https://www.rt.com/news/366995-anti-terrorist-operation-carrier/
Published time: 15 Nov, 2016 11:35

*The Russian military has launched a large-scale operation against terrorists in Homs and Idlib provinces of Syria,
Russian Defense Minister Sergey Shoigu said on Tuesday. It includes the first-ever combat mission
involving Russia’s aircraft carrier Admiral Kuznetsov*

"Today at 10:30 and 11:00 we launched a large-scale operation against the positions of Islamic State and Al-Nusra [terrorist groups]
in the provinces of Idlib and Homs," Shoigu said at a meeting between Russian President Vladimir Putin
and the top leadership of the Russian Armed Forces.


"Terrorist positions hit with cruise missiles from Russian frigate ‘Admiral Grigorovich’" – MoD




...couple nice videos there

Re: The Russia Thread
« Reply #283 on: November 16, 2016, 09:58:27 AM »
yes, too bad because those two nations America and Russia could work so nicely togheter and kick some ass in the World
to bring change and stop scums like ISIS or Somalian pirates or Chinese expansions or muslim terrorist under control
but many people making today's Russia to be that evil that needs to be attacked for very flimsy reason,
and for example Ukraine is not one sided situation,..it has several issues that western media is not presenting to it's people

that's why for a change I like to check RT news ,and many times there is big difference in the accuracy of the western media
reporting and they just bluntly lie or severely twist facts...

Because RT doesn't give the same story? Who knew?

Re: The Russia Thread
« Reply #284 on: November 17, 2016, 05:41:09 AM »
Because RT doesn't give the same story? Who knew?

Maybe RT would be kind enough to explain why Russia is using very expensive cruise missiles to do a job they could easily do with their bombers. Granted, they don't have a lot of sat-guided bombs in Syria but they probably have more than enough. Maybe a case of Putin wanting to play with all his cool toys, screw the cost.

Re: The Russia Thread
« Reply #285 on: November 17, 2016, 11:57:39 AM »
Maybe RT would be kind enough to explain why Russia is using very expensive cruise missiles to do a job they could easily do with their bombers. Granted, they don't have a lot of sat-guided bombs in Syria but they probably have more than enough. Maybe a case of Putin wanting to play with all his cool toys, screw the cost.

No amount of peacetime training is as good as operational/combat experience.  Even the benign operational/combat conditions for those involved is beneficial, and allows them the opportunity to see how well the weapons work under combat conditions.  Also a chance the Russians are taking advantage of the situation to clear their bunkers of missiles near service life expiration or due for depot maintenance or upgrades.  Using them might be expensive, but money not spent maintaining older weapons can often be better spent on new production systems with upgrades already integrated. 

Re: The Russia Thread
« Reply #286 on: November 17, 2016, 12:13:11 PM »
No amount of peacetime training is as good as operational/combat experience.  Even the benign operational/combat conditions for those involved is beneficial, and allows them the opportunity to see how well the weapons work under combat conditions.  Also a chance the Russians are taking advantage of the situation to clear their bunkers of missiles near service life expiration or due for depot maintenance or upgrades.  Using them might be expensive, but money not spent maintaining older weapons can often be better spent on new production systems with upgrades already integrated.

Only the 'combat' is mainly against civilians who just want a peaceful life. Still, its only flesh and blood. Wait until Trump gets cosy with Putin; you'll have nightly results of who got more kids.

Re: The Russia Thread
« Reply #287 on: November 17, 2016, 01:13:36 PM »
Only the 'combat' is mainly against civilians who just want a peaceful life. Still, its only flesh and blood. Wait until Trump gets cosy with Putin; you'll have nightly results of who got more kids.

That's why I used the term "benign", no one is shooting back at them.

Ultimately Pud, all war/combat is "mainly against civilians".  At Dresden they were enemy civilians, leading up to and  during the invasion of Europe they were friendly civilans. Advances in technology have increased accuracy of weapons delivery, decreasing but not eliminating civilian casualties.  Sadly however, civilians will never be safe in war; "collateral damage" just makes it sound cleaner.

Re: The Russia Thread
« Reply #288 on: November 17, 2016, 01:18:15 PM »
i do the Russians using Syria as a way to show off their gear and get some sort of institutional experience

Re: The Russia Thread
« Reply #289 on: November 17, 2016, 03:47:28 PM »
After I've read yesterday one particular post (in a different thread on this forum) I got disgusted with it
and decided to quit this board for good (I know that would be a huge relief to many of you fuckers) but seeing this article today
on RT site, I decided to share it with you, so you can see how rotten current Boama administration is.

Watch this 8 minute video very attentively and if you have any brains you will see the ugliness of your current government.
"‘New form of segregation?’: Moscow reacts to US State Dept treatment of RT reporter"
https://www.rt.com/news/367308-zakharova-kirby-journalists-treatment/
Published time: 17 Nov, 2016 18:41

*The US State Department's recent comments toward an RT reporter during a briefing were "outrageous" and demonstrated
that Washington divides the media "on an ideological basis," the spokeswoman for the Russian Foreign Ministry said.
At a US State Department briefing on Wednesday, when asked by RT reporter Gayane Chichakyan for facts to prove allegations
that Russia is targeting hospitals in Syria, spokesman John Kirby said that he wasn't "going to put Russia Today [RT] on the same
level with the rest of [the journalists] who are representing independent media outlets."

Moscow has now responded to the incident, with Foreign Ministry spokeswoman Maria Zakharova calling it "outrageous" and "revolting."
"Is this some new form of segregation? Dividing media on an ideological basis?" Zakharova said at a press briefing in Moscow on Thursday.

She also warned her colleagues in Washington that if they kept on treating RT and other Russian media outlets with disrespect,
she would make sure US journalists working in Russia experience a similar attitude.
The Foreign Ministry could arrange a “special place” for American journalists at briefings, Zakharova said, adding “I can deliver that.”
"I don't think that American journalists will be happy with such a scenario," Zakharova said.

The Foreign Ministry spokeswoman stressed that not all American diplomats found Kirby's remarks "normal,"
and some privately apologized and expressed their regret about the incident to RT representatives.*



....UGLY VERY FUCKING UGLY --and for those of you 'fuckers' who always shit on Russia now have courage
and at least once go and shit at your current administration especially on this fucking shit*head ...spokesman John Kirby

Re: The Russia Thread
« Reply #290 on: November 17, 2016, 04:02:11 PM »
"Russian strategic bombers strike ISIS & Al-Nusra in Syria with cruise missiles" (VIDEO)
https://www.rt.com/news/367290-russia-cruise-missiles-isis-nusra/
Published time: 17 Nov, 2016 16:31

*Russia has deployed strategic bombers to launch strikes on Islamic State (IS, formerly ISIS/ISIL) and Al-Nusra Front targets in Syria,
the Defense Ministry reported.
The bombers flew from Russia for the mission, and fired cruise missiles while over the Mediterranean Sea.
With in-flight refueling on two occasions, the bombers covered a distance of some 11,000km (6,835 miles),
flying over a northern sea route and the eastern Atlantic.*



Re: The Russia Thread
« Reply #291 on: November 17, 2016, 04:44:36 PM »
"Russian strategic bombers strike ISIS & Al-Nusra in Syria with cruise missiles" (VIDEO)
https://www.rt.com/news/367290-russia-cruise-missiles-isis-nusra/
Published time: 17 Nov, 2016 16:31

*Russia has deployed strategic bombers to launch strikes on Islamic State (IS, formerly ISIS/ISIL) and Al-Nusra Front targets in Syria,
the Defense Ministry reported.
The bombers flew from Russia for the mission, and fired cruise missiles while over the Mediterranean Sea.
With in-flight refueling on two occasions, the bombers covered a distance of some 11,000km (6,835 miles),
flying over a northern sea route and the eastern Atlantic.*

The USAF flew B-52s over 14000 miles to fire cruise missiles against Iraq in 1991, or 25 years ago.

The RAF flew Vulcans over 6800 miles to bomb and fire Shrike missiles against Argentina in 1982, or 34 years ago.

Both those enemies had the ability to shoot back.

Re: The Russia Thread
« Reply #292 on: November 17, 2016, 05:17:41 PM »
The USAF flew B-52s over 14000 miles to fire cruise missiles against Iraq in 1991, or 25 years ago.

The RAF flew Vulcans over 6800 miles to bomb and fire Shrike missiles against Argentina in 1982, or 34 years ago.

Both those enemies had the ability to shoot back.

from what ive read iraq in 1991 had the largest concentration of SAM sites that our Air force had ever faced.

Re: The Russia Thread
« Reply #293 on: November 17, 2016, 05:29:15 PM »
No amount of peacetime training is as good as operational/combat experience.  Even the benign operational/combat conditions for those involved is beneficial, and allows them the opportunity to see how well the weapons work under combat conditions.  Also a chance the Russians are taking advantage of the situation to clear their bunkers of missiles near service life expiration or due for depot maintenance or upgrades.  Using them might be expensive, but money not spent maintaining older weapons can often be better spent on new production systems with upgrades already integrated.

No doubt that the benefits you're citing could be part of the answer, but I would still say the main motivation is to demonstrate Russian military might (such as it is) and flex their muscles. Putin felt the need to demonstrate that their cruise missiles work (from as far away from Syria as the Black Sea) and that their one carrier -- a very limited capability to project conventional power globally along with their aging Bear bombers -- also works.

Therefore, any foes will be properly intimidated by the breadth of power Russian forces are capable of utilizing and Putin's resolve to use it. The problem for Putin is that the West and the East (China, in particular) already operate or formulate contingency planning based on the worst-case assumption that everything Russia could deploy will work perfectly based on brilliant military strategic and tactical decision-making.

In the end, only smaller, less powerful countries are likely to be intimidated or even impressed -- the kinds of countries the Soviets had great influence in or outright controlled. Putin really misses the old days.

Re: The Russia Thread
« Reply #294 on: November 17, 2016, 05:51:12 PM »
No doubt that the benefits you're citing could be part of the answer, but I would still say the main motivation is to demonstrate Russian military might (such as it is) and flex their muscles. Putin felt the need to demonstrate that their cruise missiles work (from as far away from Syria as the Black Sea) and that their one carrier -- a very limited capability to project conventional power globally along with their aging Bear bombers -- also works.

Therefore, any foes will be properly intimidated by the breadth of power Russian forces are capable of utilizing and Putin's resolve to use it. The problem for Putin is that the West and the East (China, in particular) already operate or formulate contingency planning based on the worst-case assumption that everything Russia could deploy will work perfectly based on brilliant military strategic and tactical decision-making.

In the end, only smaller, less powerful countries are likely to be intimidated or even impressed -- the kinds of countries the Soviets had great influence in or outright controlled. Putin really misses the old days.

In the early 80's and for the next twelve years I think, a good friend of mine was in the Royal Navy. He described the then Soviet capability as a box of dead matches, and NATO's one good one. But that's all we needed.

Re: The Russia Thread
« Reply #295 on: November 17, 2016, 06:04:43 PM »
In the early 80's and for the next twelve years I think, a good friend of mine was in the Royal Navy. He described the then Soviet capability as a box of dead matches, and NATO's one good one. But that's all we needed.

pud..Welcome to the 2016 --you muslim terrorist's cock sucker
BTW. look at how shitty navy you have now ,..hahaha 

Fair enough,,,but:

Peter Roberts, naval expert at the Royal United Services Institute, said:
But Mr Roberts said despite the ship’s troubles, it could not be written off.
He said: “She’s a big, fast and impressive ship with capable jets and she’s going to war in Syria.”

He said the Royal Navy still does not yet have any aircraft carriers of its own and Britain is a decade away
from being able to carry out a similar deployment with its own warships and jets.
“The [Kutnetsov’s] power plant is bad, but I am not sure we in Britain should over criticise that given our recent history with the Type 45.”
The Navy announced earlier this year that all six of its Type 45 destroyers needed engine refits after troubles with power outages.


He went on: “It’s easy to be disparaging, she’s an unlucky ship and she has really basic errors in design, but she still represents an impressive capability.”

Nick Childs, a naval expert at the International Institute for Strategic Studies, said: “It’s had a troubled history, it’s had reliability issues and its old. But on the other hand, there’s capability there.
“It’s a limited capability compared to a US carrier, but it’s not to be dismissed.
“It can provide limited capability and it they get to the eastern Mediterranean they can launch some strikes in Syria with these planes.”

...SO IT'S NOT THAT DOOM AND GLOOM GUYS for Russians, I think that they can managed what Americans refused (for very strange reason) not to achieve :)

Re: The Russia Thread
« Reply #296 on: November 17, 2016, 06:19:57 PM »
In the early 80's and for the next twelve years I think, a good friend of mine was in the Royal Navy. He described the then Soviet capability as a box of dead matches, and NATO's one good one. But that's all we needed.

I'd definitely choose quality over quantity, but with Pres Trump, I'd definitely start worrying about quantity too if I were a NATO country in Europe. Think about a situation where Putin starts making aggressive moves against the Baltic states, for example, and the U.S. doesn't provide the deterrent effort necessary to discourage the Russians.

Europe needs to think about having the capability, military and diplomatic,  to put up a fight for a period of time, until the U.S. is compelled to get its ass in gear. NATO needs to be able to defend itself with either more or less support from the U.S. Britain needs to maintain its nuclear deterrent (the debate notwithstanding), and as Europe's "aircraft carrier," plan for its conventional forces playing a bigger role in NATO.

Think 1935 as a very roughly analagous situation. Start building Hurricanes and Spitfires and training up, should the need arise.

Re: The Russia Thread
« Reply #297 on: November 17, 2016, 06:25:46 PM »
I'd definitely choose quality over quantity, but with Pres Trump, I'd definitely start worrying about quantity too if I were a NATO country in Europe. Think about a situation where Putin starts making aggressive moves against the Baltic states, for example, and the U.S. doesn't provide the deterrent effort necessary to discourage the Russians.

Europe needs to think about having the capability, military and diplomatic,  to put up a fight for a period of time, until the U.S. is compelled to get its ass in gear. NATO needs to be able to defend itself with either more or less support from the U.S. Britain needs to maintain its nuclear deterrent (the debate notwithstanding), and as Europe's "aircraft carrier," plan for its conventional forces playing a bigger role in NATO.

Think 1935 as a very roughly analagous situation. Start building Hurricanes and Spitfires and training up, should the need arise.

I like to remind you that U.S. only entered WWII when it become financially beneficial for the U.S. -NOT A DAY SOONER !!!
So don't be so naive that it will do it based only on humanitarian grounds,...

Re: The Russia Thread
« Reply #298 on: November 17, 2016, 06:29:22 PM »
I like to remind you that U.S. only entered WWII when it become financially beneficial for the U.S. -NOT A DAY SOONER !!!
So don't be so naive that it will do it based only on humanitarian grounds,...

no we entered WW2 after the Japanese attacked pearl harbor, also dont forget that Russia was orginally allied with Nazi Germany before being betrayed

Re: The Russia Thread
« Reply #299 on: November 17, 2016, 06:47:40 PM »
no we entered WW2 after the Japanese attacked pearl harbor, also dont forget that Russia was orginally allied with Nazi Germany before being betrayed

isn't there some ugly secret about US generals knowing that Japan will attack Pearl Harbor but they waited and sacrificed
American lives ??

I'm sure U.S. could enter WWII sooner to help suffering European friends - as you know there was hidden agenda not omitting
the fact that American companies were making huge profits supplying Nazzi Germany with "stuff" so they can be well equipped
taking over Europe and rest of the World.