The Russia Thread

Started by GuerrillaUnReal, August 01, 2016, 02:49:39 PM

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

GravitySucks

Quote from: norland2424 on November 18, 2016, 05:44:21 PM
heres hopeing we have something in dev to stop these threats

Can you imagine a nuclear weapon that you fire 90 hours before it detonates?  Kind of breaks the paradigm.

Yorkshire pud

Quote from: Dr. MD MD on November 18, 2016, 05:45:30 PM
American! Do you speak it?!  :D

Nope, and I'm not going to learn it. You learn English.

Dr. MD MD

Quote from: Yorkshire pud on November 18, 2016, 05:47:16 PM
Nope, and I'm not going to learn it. You learn English.

Cronkite was not British nor did he work for a state run news organization, nice though the BBC is.  :)

norland2424

Quote from: GravitySucks on November 18, 2016, 05:46:56 PM
Can you imagine a nuclear weapon that you fire 90 hours before it detonates?  Kind of breaks the paradigm.

then again i know there are treaties outlawing it but im surprised we dont have hidden nukes in earths orbit

GravitySucks

Quote from: norland2424 on November 18, 2016, 05:48:57 PM
then again i know there are treaties outlawing it but im surprised we dont have hidden nukes in earths orbit

That would get messy quick. Plus quadrad is too hard to say.

norland2424

Quote from: GravitySucks on November 18, 2016, 05:52:58 PM
That would get messy quick. Plus quadrad is too hard to say.

then again who knows what that Airforce mini shuttle drone is actually used for.

Uncle Duke

Quote from: Walks_At_Night ¯\_(ツ)_/¯ on November 18, 2016, 04:54:09 PM
Since it is the Russia thread, I thought I'd wade on into this mess a little bit.  If nothing else but to
keep Uncle Duke interested.  ::)

What does Ivan keep in his bag of tricks that is any good?

He has a clever little intelligence gathering boat called the Sarov class.   Unique in that it uses
diesel electric propulsion but uses a small reactor to charge the batteries.  This makes it quiet as a
thief with the ability to stay submerged for up to 20 days.  Officially it is a technology demonstration
platform but with its unique capabilities it should be able to gather all kinds of intelligence.  There
is only boat in this class - the Sarov itself and it is new - being commissioned in 2008.



Way out of my league talking about subs, closest I ever came was going on the submarine ride at Disney World with my daughter in my pre-dotage days.  I did have experience professionally with two Soviet/Russian systems, however.  The first was long ago and classified, but the latter was during my time working the Joint Strike Fighter Program out of the Joint Program Office (JPO) in Crystal City and involved the Russian K-36 ejection seat.

As some may remember, this seat got a lot of love in the media after a Russian pilot ejected safely during a flight demonstration (MiG-29?) at the Paris Air Show.  This led eventually to the USAF conducting a series of tests on the K-36 under the DoD's Foreign Comparative Testing (CFT) Program, and interest in the escape system by at least one of the JSF competitors.  The bottom line was the K-36 was significantly heavier than Western seats, took a decidedly low tech (totally mechanical) approach to address inflight emergency egress, and was a maintenance nightmare.  It also used really bad environmental actors in the seat/system pyrotechnic devices, bad to the extent they would not have been legally produceable in the US or allowed on US military bases.  On the other hand, the seat had better performance (stability) than Western seats at high speeds and, with its integrated flight gear, better protected the ejecting aircrew from dymanic pressure effects during ejection.  Neither of the final JSF competitors saw fit to include the K-36 in their JSF proposals, primarily because it was unsustainable in US service.

My take is the Russians do things differently, but not wrong.  Think back to the story of NASA paying millions for the development of the Space Pen that would work in zero gravity.  The Russians used a pencil.  I've always been a fan of the KISS (Keep It Simple Stupid) approach to things, so my personal (legally) concealed carry weapon is a Russian (mine is actually Bulgarian) Makarov (9x18).  Easy to field strip/clear, almost indestrutable, and reasonable accurate.  The down side?  Spare parts and its relatively unique ammo can be tough to come by, similar to, but to a far less extent, the issues the JSF competitors faced with the K-36.

Value Of Pi

Quote from: Walks_At_Night ¯\_(ツ)_/¯ on November 18, 2016, 04:54:09 PM
Since it is the Russia thread, I thought I'd wade on into this mess a little bit.  If nothing else but to
keep Uncle Duke interested.  ::)

What does Ivan keep in his bag of tricks that is any good?

He has a clever little intelligence gathering boat called the Sarov class.   Unique in that it uses
diesel electric propulsion but uses a small reactor to charge the batteries.  This makes it quiet as a
thief with the ability to stay submerged for up to 20 days.  Officially it is a technology demonstration
platform but with its unique capabilities it should be able to gather all kinds of intelligence.  There
is only boat in this class - the Sarov itself and it is new - being commissioned in 2008.



Interesting but not really that impressive. NATO has many quiet diesel-electric subs, though mainly short-range types, and long experience with using nuclear subs to gather key intelligence around the world while escaping detection. This doesn't strike me as a game-changing threat if that's what you meant to imply.

GravitySucks

Quote from: norland2424 on November 18, 2016, 05:55:18 PM
then again who knows what that Airforce mini shuttle drone is actually used for.

I wish I knew. We did a lot of development on a similar craft, so I wasn't surprised when the USAF launched one, but not really sure what kind of mission profile or experiments they could be doing up there. Not sure how many people knew it but we had autoland on the Shuttle as well. It was engaged on one mission but then the astronauts took back manual control. I used to remember the mission and the crew names but can't remember them now. (STS-3)

norland2424

Quote from: GravitySucks on November 18, 2016, 06:01:07 PM
I wish I knew. We did a lot of development on a similar craft, so I wasn't surprised when the USAF launched one, but not really sure what kind of mission profile or experiments they could be doing up there. Not sure how many people knew it but we had autoland on the Shuttle as well. It was engaged on one mission but then the astronauts took back manual control. I used to remember the mission and the crew names but can't remember them now.

the last i heard about it, the news had reported that it had been up in orbit for two years

Quote from: Value Of Pi on November 18, 2016, 06:00:52 PM
Interesting but not really that impressive. NATO has many quiet diesel-electric subs, though mainly short-range types, and long experience with using nuclear subs to gather key intelligence around the world while escaping detection. This doesn't strike me as a game-changing threat if that's what you meant to imply.

Not trying to imply anything.  Like I said, just thought I'd list something they have that isn't worn out garbage.

albrecht

Quote from: Value Of Pi on November 18, 2016, 06:00:52 PM
Interesting but not really that impressive. NATO has many quiet diesel-electric subs, though mainly short-range types, and long experience with using nuclear subs to gather key intelligence around the world while escaping detection. This doesn't strike me as a game-changing threat if that's what you meant to imply.
It would be as "quiet" as diesel-electric but would be able to stay down longer, like a nuclear is, I guess, the concern or threat?

Value Of Pi

Quote from: Uncle Duke on November 18, 2016, 06:00:22 PM
Way out of my league talking about subs, closest I ever came was going on the submarine ride at Disney World with my daugher in my pre-dotage days.  I did have experience professionally with two Soviet/Russian systems, however.  The first was long ago and classified, but the latter was during my time working the Joint Strike Fighter Program out of the Joint Program Office (JPO) in Crystal City and involved the Russian K-36 ejection seat.

As some may remember, this seat got a lot of love in the media after a Russian pilot ejected safely during a flight demonstration (MiG-29?) at the Paris Air Show.  This led eventually to the USAF conducting a series of tests on the K-36 under the DoD's Foreign Comparative Testing (CFT) Program, and interest in the escape system by at least one of the JSF competitors.  The bottom line was the K-36 was significantly heavier than Western seats, took a decidedly low tech (totally mechanical) approach to address inflight emergency egress, and was a maintenance nightmare.  It also used really bad environmental actors in the seat/system pyrotechnic devices, bad to the extent they would not have been legally produceable in the US or allowed on US military bases.  On the other hand, the seat had better performance (stability) than Western seats at high speeds and, with its integrated flight gear, better protected the ejecting aircrew from dymanic pressure effects during ejection.  Neither of the final JSF competitors saw fit to include the K-36 in their JSF proposals, primarily because it was unsustainable in US service.

My take is the Russians do things differently, but not wrong.  Think back to the story of NASA paying millions for the development of the Space Pen that would work in zero gravity.  The Russians used a pencil.  I've always been a fan of the KISS (Keep It Simple Stupid) approach to things, so my personal (legally) concealed carry weapon is a Russian (mine is actually Bulgarian) Makarov (9x18).  Easy to field strip/clear, almost indestrutable, and reasonable accurate.  The down side?  Spare parts and its relatively unique ammo can be tough to come by, similar to, but to a far less extent, the issues the JSF competitors faced with the K-36.

Excellent post, Duke, the kind that helps to keep this site from sinking totally into the slime. You deserve some praise for making that contribution.

Quote from: GravitySucks on November 18, 2016, 05:43:08 PM
I read an article that claimed a range of 5400nm and a speed of 65mph.

We would have to be on alert and have assets in the area even if the sonobuoys picked it up.
published stats always allow for a margin of error and are generally very conservative, ;) (intentionally misleading the enemy.)

If they are using THIS  propulsion system, any enemy is well and truly fu***d.   :o

Value Of Pi

Quote from: albrecht on November 18, 2016, 06:10:39 PM
It would be as "quiet" as diesel-electric but would be able to stay down longer, like a nuclear is, I guess, the concern or threat?

Yes, except that 20 days is not a long time when you need to get from a Russian base to a surveillance location undetected and then be able to still stay submerged for a significant period of time. Maybe it could deploy from Russia's base in Syria to spy on Israel or someplace close like that but its mission capability would inevitably be very limited IMO.

albrecht

Quote from: Value Of Pi on November 18, 2016, 06:19:58 PM
Yes, except that 20 days is not a long time when you need to get from a Russian base to a surveillance location undetected and then be able to still stay submerged for a significant period of time. Maybe it could deploy from Russia's base in Syria to spy on Israel or someplace close like that but its mission capability would inevitably be very limited IMO.
Lots of NATO, and neutral, countries and energy drilling operations in the Baltic and Arctic that could be spied on or interfered with/attacked in some kind of war (which I hope doesn't happen!) Especially in areas where a smaller vessel is better: ports, fjords, etc.

Yorkshire pud

Quote from: Value Of Pi on November 18, 2016, 06:19:58 PM
Yes, except that 20 days is not a long time when you need to get from a Russian base to a surveillance location undetected and then be able to still stay submerged for a significant period of time. Maybe it could deploy from Russia's base in Syria to spy on Israel or someplace close like that but its mission capability would inevitably be very limited IMO.

Agreed. I think six weeks isn't unusual for western subs to stay submerged. The cold war had many missions involving NATO subs hanging around Soviet ships and harbours listening out. Very brave, because detection would have been catastrophic.

GravitySucks

Quote from: Value Of Pi on November 18, 2016, 06:13:16 PM
Excellent post, Duke, the kind that helps to keep this site from sinking totally into the slime. You deserve some praise for making that contribution.

I know the point Duke is trying to make but most accounts of the space pen are urban legend. During the early space program, we used pencils. After the Apollo 1 fire, everything in the cockpit was evluated for combustion hazard. Fisher developed their anti-gravity pen using their own R&D budget. They spent over $1 million but the first order of 400 that NASA bought only cost $2.95 each.

Quote from: albrecht on November 18, 2016, 06:25:30 PM
Lots of NATO, and neutral, countries and energy drilling operations in the Baltic and Arctic that could be spied on or interfered with/attacked in some kind of war (which I hope doesn't happen!) Especially in areas where a smaller vessel is better: ports, fjords, etc.

Or drop off some dudes.......   

Thread back on track.     I'm outta here

Value Of Pi

Quote from: Walks_At_Night ¯\_(ツ)_/¯ on November 18, 2016, 06:05:22 PM
Not trying to imply anything.  Like I said, just thought I'd list something they have that isn't worn out garbage.

Yes I figured that was your intent and it's a real challenge to do. I think the Chinese military is the more interesting area to explore, since they are spending more money than Russia and rapidly expanding their capabilities. The Russian military tends to get more attention in the West but China is the bigger threat long-term, nukes aside.

Quote from: Value Of Pi on November 18, 2016, 06:30:52 PM
Yes I figured that was your intent and it's a real challenge to do. I think the Chinese military is the more interesting area to explore, since they are spending more money than Russia and rapidly expanding their capabilities. The Russian military tends to get more attention in the West but China is the bigger threat long-term, nukes aside.

They are some ambitious lads.  So we'll just have to have a China thread then as well!

Uncle Duke

Quote from: GravitySucks on November 18, 2016, 06:28:24 PM
I know the point Duke is trying to make but most accounts of the space pen are urban legend. During the early space program, we used pencils. After the Apollo 1 fire, everything in the cockpit was evluated for combustion hazard. Fisher developed their anti-gravity pen using their own R&D budget. They spent over $1 million but the first order of 400 that NASA bought only cost $2.95 each.

You might be right about the funding, I only repeated the story Prof. Armstrong told us in class.  He carried one at UC.

So just out of curosity, had Fisher not developed the pen, what would NASA have done?  Gone to the moon with a flammable wooden/graphite pencil?

Quote from: norland2424 on November 18, 2016, 06:04:04 PM
the last i heard about it, the news had reported that it had been up in orbit for two years
Saw an article about it that it landed a while ago after 2 years in space. ...

Got it...   and.

Search X-37B. ;)



norland2424

Quote from: (Sandman) Logan-5 on November 18, 2016, 06:37:39 PM
Saw an article about it that it landed a while ago after 2 years in space. ...

Got it...   and.

Search X-37B. ;)

there we go, i wonder whats its doing

GravitySucks

Quote from: Walks_At_Night ¯\_(ツ)_/¯ on November 18, 2016, 06:05:22 PM
Not trying to imply anything.  Like I said, just thought I'd list something they have that isn't worn out garbage.

Their thrust vectoring in their latest fighters is unbelievable. We have some capability but theirs is unbelievable.

GravitySucks

Quote from: Uncle Duke on November 18, 2016, 06:35:15 PM
You might be right about the funding, I only repeated the story Prof. Armstrong told us in class.  He carried one at UC.

So just out of curosity, had Fisher not developed the pen, what would NASA have done?  Gone to the moon with a flammable wooden/graphite pencil?

Probably used a grease pencil or a mechanical pencil with some type of lead that couldn't spark or conduct electricity. I heard the real story early in the Shuttle program during some type of tribute for Dr Robert Gilruth. He was JSC Center Director during Apollo. Never thought if asking the question that you just asked.

Value Of Pi

Quote from: albrecht on November 18, 2016, 06:25:30 PM
Lots of NATO, and neutral, countries and energy drilling operations in the Baltic and Arctic that could be spied on or interfered with/attacked in some kind of war (which I hope doesn't happen!) Especially in areas where a smaller vessel is better: ports, fjords, etc.

Sure,  this sub could be useful to some degree in one situation or another, but that doesn't make it the kind of threat that makes people in the Pentagon go grey and wanting to build new countermeasures. (Plus, there's only one and who knows if the damn thing even has flushing toilets.)

You have to ask yourself what would get Tom Clancy's attention and go from there.  :-X :-X


Uncle Duke

Quote from: GravitySucks on November 18, 2016, 06:42:49 PM
Their thrust vectoring in their latest fighters is unbelievable. We have some capability but theirs is unbelievable.

Is viffing effective in BVR air-to-air missile combat? 

GravitySucks

Quote from: Uncle Duke on November 18, 2016, 06:50:15 PM
Is viffing effective in BVR air-to-air missile combat?

Really not sure if it helps in jinking. I just know it looks cool at air shows.

norland2424

Quote from: GravitySucks on November 18, 2016, 06:52:34 PM
Really not sure if it helps in jinking. I just know it looks cool at air shows.

hehe

Powered by SMFPacks Menu Editor Mod