Jump to content
House Price Crash Forum

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

gruffydd

Russia Restarts Cold War Patrols

Recommended Posts

They are also cracking down on copyright infringement on the AK 57s--the favourite weapon of terrorists. The Soviets are also apparently now equal with the French in arms supplies but most of it is going to fringe groups and countries hostile to the West. The old idea that any enemy of yours is a friend of mine is back again as official Soviet policy. The scariest thing I have seen recently was a picture of Comrade Putin at a Russian Orthodox Church "service" making the sign of the cross on himself. That's all we need--religious fanaticism coupled with arming the fringe nations.

IMO Putin is trying to restore the Soviet Union to its pre-Gorbie days as the enemy of the West. Next they will be strengthening ties with the other "communist" power, China. Same old same old.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
They are also cracking down on copyright infringement on the AK 57s--the favourite weapon of terrorists. The Soviets are also apparently now equal with the French in arms supplies but most of it is going to fringe groups and countries hostile to the West. The old idea that any enemy of yours is a friend of mine is back again as official Soviet policy. The scariest thing I have seen recently was a picture of Comrade Putin at a Russian Orthodox Church "service" making the sign of the cross on himself. That's all we need--religious fanaticism coupled with arming the fringe nations.

IMO Putin is trying to restore the Soviet Union to its pre-Gorbie days as the enemy of the West. Next they will be strengthening ties with the other "communist" power, China. Same old same old.

good tea that RB

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
You see Putin knows that 9/11 was a false flag attack and also knows it's just an excuse to make a grab for the oil so who can blame him

Quite right. Those greedy oil companies--BP, Royal Dutch Shell, Total and Exxon just want to line the pockets of the Mullahs and Sheiks so they buy more goods from the West such as Bentleys, Lear Jets, Scotch Whiskey, Jacuzzi bathtubs etc. The more oil the West buy from the Mullahs the more they have to build palaces and the world's tallest buildings. As the west grabs the oil the Arabs get richer and richer and soon they will be so rich they will not know what else to buy as you can only have so many Bentleys and Rolexes.

I wonder if they will ever spend some of the oil grab money on their own people so that the wealth is distributed among the poor and the helpless. The vast majority of Arabs live in poverty while the Mullahs and Shieks build palaces with oil grab money. No wonder they con their people into thinking the West are robbing them when all the time its their own leaders.

IMO the money the Sheiks and Mullahs receive from the oil grab needs to be spread among the people. Make a stand for justice and instead of paying for the oil into accounts held by the Sheiks give it to the poor and the needy of the Arab world.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
They are also cracking down on copyright infringement on the AK 57s--the favourite weapon of terrorists. The Soviets are also apparently now equal with the French in arms supplies but most of it is going to fringe groups and countries hostile to the West. The old idea that any enemy of yours is a friend of mine is back again as official Soviet policy. The scariest thing I have seen recently was a picture of Comrade Putin at a Russian Orthodox Church "service" making the sign of the cross on himself. That's all we need--religious fanaticism coupled with arming the fringe nations.

IMO Putin is trying to restore the Soviet Union to its pre-Gorbie days as the enemy of the West. Next they will be strengthening ties with the other "communist" power, China. Same old same old.

Recently the Russian Orthodox Church in England was elbowed out by R.O.C.A. I always thaught it was a political move. The St Edward brotherhood in Brookwood are now under a different bishop and have jumped ship over to the Greek Orthodox. Its complicated but there is info about it on the net. Its also the Church i go too.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

"They are also cracking down on copyright infringement on the AK 57s--the favourite weapon of terrorists"

Has the AK-47 been updated?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So what?

They have a few deathtrap Tupolev 160 and 95's stagger around the sky near 'our' airspace.

The crews are barely trained. Their weapons are old and unreliable. Their electronic counter measures are poor and outdated.

They are detected and identifed at ranges far in excess of their attack range and could be blown out of the sky with ease by any number of US/UK assets both over, on or under the sea.

They operate without any credible Search and Rescue support and any number of credible and likely technical malfunctions would see them divert into unfriendly (our) airfields.

The data they could collect is available at zero risk by satellite or other means.

Utterly pointless.

ANDY

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
"They are also cracking down on copyright infringement on the AK 57s--the favourite weapon of terrorists"

Has the AK-47 been updated?

It has indeed but it's successor was the 1974 AK-74 not the 'AK-57'

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
So what?

They have a few deathtrap Tupolev 160 and 95's stagger around the sky near 'our' airspace.

Staggering?

The Tu-160 is a current production supersonic bomber. It could quite merrily cause us a massive intercept headache as it stormed in at mach 2 and deployed it's nuclear KH-55 missiles from their 1,800mile stand-off range.

The crews are barely trained. Their weapons are old and unreliable. Their electronic counter measures are poor and outdated.

Those who live in glass-houses...

They are detected and identifed at ranges far in excess of their attack range and could be blown out of the sky with ease by any number of US/UK assets both over, on or under the sea.

Just keep telling yourself that. The Tu-95s used to pop up out of nowhere in the early 90s and they're likely to be doing so again. I'm not saying we couldn't intercept the Bears but they sure as hell gave us the run-round.

Don't forget, our intercept capability has weakened, not strengthened since the Cold War.

They operate without any credible Search and Rescue support and any number of credible and likely technical malfunctions would see them divert into unfriendly (our) airfields.

SOP would be to bail out in international waters and let the aircraft crash pending possible recovery of the nuclear payload. However, the well known reliability of the Kuznetsov NK-12 would probably make this unnecessary.

The data they could collect is available at zero risk by satellite or other means.

They're not there to 'collect data' Andy, they're there to offer to deliver, along with the new Borei class SSBNs, a lovely 'warm feeling' to our cities.*

*'warm' meaning 10,000'C in 3 seconds.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Might have something to do with the most belligerent nation on earth wanting to station missiles about 5km off the russian border...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just keep telling yourself that. The Tu-95s used to pop up out of nowhere in the early 90s and they're likely to be doing so again. I'm not saying we couldn't intercept the Bears but they sure as hell gave us the run-round.

Er... so long as by "Nowhere" you mean "Russian airspace" then yes.

The idea of a Tu 95 giving any modern fighter "the run-around" is risible. They are lumbering great giants with no stealth capability and a top speed of less than 600mph. Thats like Jonny Vegas vs. Jonny Wilkinson.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Er... so long as by "Nowhere" you mean "Russian airspace" then yes.

The idea of a Tu 95 giving any modern fighter "the run-around" is risible. They are lumbering great giants with no stealth capability and a top speed of less than 600mph. Thats like Jonny Vegas vs. Jonny Wilkinson.

Jonny Vegas is more reliable than Jonny Wilkinson though.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Russia is ten years ahead when it comes to missile technology and they went down this route due to not having the cash to build super aircraft carriers like the american and apparantly the aircraft fleet has now answer to these misiles.

if you care to check you can now get anti-stealth radar and a misile that costs a few million can take out a fighter worth a whopping $2bn.

Germany belived that they could defeat Russia too and also remember Russia did not lose the armys race it decided to simply call it a day and concentrate on it's economy, a lesson the americans could well learn from.

You are all seriously mistaken to beleive the BBC propaganda about the Russians and togeather with China i think they would kick the a$$ out of europe and america.

FEMA is so good it could not even stop 1 out of 4 planes on 9/11 and strange as it may sound some planes that took off ended up further from the target planes than they were when they were on the ground. Just another coinicdence about 9/11

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Might have something to do with the most belligerent nation on earth wanting to station missiles about 5km off the russian border...

Who, where and what Rich?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Er... so long as by "Nowhere" you mean "Russian airspace" then yes.

The idea of a Tu 95 giving any modern fighter "the run-around" is risible. They are lumbering great giants with no stealth capability and a top speed of less than 600mph. Thats like Jonny Vegas vs. Jonny Wilkinson.

Quite simply, they gave us the 'run-round' by shadowing commercial flights and other such tactics.

Incidentally, the fighters involved in Thursdays intercept were the same 30 year old design Tornado F.3s from RAF Leuchars which were involved in the same intercepts in the 1990s.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So we're talking about a purely defensive ABM system? To which Russia thinks a measured response is to send Bombers on Cold War stylee probing missions???

That's insane. The ABM system will not have enough interceptors to impact the credibility of Russia's strategic nuclear deterrent.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quite simply, they gave us the 'run-round' by shadowing commercial flights and other such tactics.

Incidentally, the fighters involved in Thursdays intercept were the same 30 year old design Tornado F.3s from RAF Leuchars which were involved in the same intercepts in the 1990s.

Haven't the Tornado's been upgraded in the last 30 years? I'd assume that the avionics, radar and missiles would have been upgraded in the ADV.

Will the new Eurofighters be taking over this role soon or are they too short in range?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
So we're talking about a purely defensive ABM system? To which Russia thinks a measured response is to send Bombers on Cold War stylee probing missions???

That's insane. The ABM system will not have enough interceptors to impact the credibility of Russia's strategic nuclear deterrent.

Well a 'defensive' missile may or may not be. According to the doctrine, long range bombers are also a defensive weapon.

But on a more practical note, 'basing missiles' does not just mean buying up a detached house, and dumping a missile in it with 2 blokes drinking tea. You can guarantee that the fine print will have a large military establishment, including armour, air and ground attack aircraft, radar etc. Once all that is in place of course, it would be silly not to move up the cruise missiles and the rest. For some old fashioned reason Russia does not like troops on its borders. Nor do we, and nor does the us.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Haven't the Tornado's been upgraded in the last 30 years? I'd assume that the avionics, radar and missiles would have been upgraded in the ADV.

Indeed they were. The CSP (mid 90s) upgraded the air-air weapon systems to incorporate AMRAAM and ASRAAM. Unfortunately, the AMRAAM MCU facility was left out. (Why??!)

The F3 is, of course, still the same platform it was at the end of the Cold War tho.

Likewise, the Russian active air fleet platforms haven't changed but you can bet the Russian government hasn't been sitting on that multi-billion dollar tax windfall from Gazprom when it comes to their avoinics and weapon systems.

Will the new Eurofighters be taking over this role soon or are they too short in range?

The Typhoon F2 will be taking over from the F3 as soon as we can field some of them. AFAIK there's two in active service with 11 Squadron but they're a multi-role squadron based at Coningsby rather than a Northern based dedicated interceptor squadron.

Interestingly, the Typhoon is really what we need and the Russians are almost doing us a favour by justifying the Typhoons cost. The Tornado is adequate for chasing Bears around but has to re-heat and burn up it's fuel load to go supersonic. If the Russians were to start sending Blackjacks on supersonic sprint runs our way, we'd need the Typhoon's Mach 1+ supercruise efficiency.

It's probably a surprise to some that the Typhoon may actually end up doing the job it was mean to do ;)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Well a 'defensive' missile may or may not be. According to the doctrine, long range bombers are also a defensive weapon.

But on a more practical note, 'basing missiles' does not just mean buying up a detached house, and dumping a missile in it with 2 blokes drinking tea. You can guarantee that the fine print will have a large military establishment, including armour, air and ground attack aircraft, radar etc. Once all that is in place of course, it would be silly not to move up the cruise missiles and the rest. For some old fashioned reason Russia does not like troops on its borders. Nor do we, and nor does the us.

If it's only capable of shooting down a ballistic missile then it's clearly defensive. The number proposed in no way threaten Russia's detterant capability. Long rage bombers can be either offensive or defensive though I'd suggest flying regular sorties into your neighbours airspace isn't a very nice thing to do.

NATO already has sufficient forces in place to secure any such facilities... certainly you wouldn't waste armoured forces on such a point defence exercise.

BTW Neither Poland or Czech Republic share a border with Russia proper.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
BTW Neither Poland or Czech Republic share a border with Russia proper.

Now that's a whole other can of worms.

It's Russia's idea of what the CIS is vs. it's constituent members idea of what the CIS is. :ph34r:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quite simply, they gave us the 'run-round' by shadowing commercial flights and other such tactics.

I flew Northern Q for 3 years in the early 90s and never saw or heard of this happening. The Bear is very big, very noisy and requires an engraved invitation for a heading change so it usually wasn't very challenging to intercept. I've since flown with someone who had a few hundred hours in the Indian Navy Tu-142 variant. Among his many anecdotes (multiple avionics failures were to be expected and and shrugged off with a manly chuckle) he described the input discretes from the clockwork 2 axis autopilot as being so crude it used to shake the whole airframe like a shopping trolly going down a flight of stairs.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

  • 354 The Prime Minister stated that there were three Brexit options available to the UK:

    1. 1. Which of the Prime Minister's options would you choose?


      • Leave with the negotiated deal
      • Remain
      • Leave with no deal



×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.