Wait, are you saying the Russians will develop a new toy that they won't immediately sell? Like the SA-21, SA-22, SA-24, SU-34, SU-35.....
-
Please take a moment and update your account profile. If you have an updated account profile with basic information on why you are on Air Warriors it will help other people respond to your posts. How do you update your profile you ask?
Go here:
Edit Account Details and Profile
Is the M-1 Abrams outclassed now?
- Thread starter Randy Daytona
- Start date
Wait, are you saying the Russians will develop a new toy that they won't immediately sell? Like the SA-21, SA-22, SA-24, SU-34, SU-35.....
Max the Mad Russian
Hands off Ukraine! Feet too
"They" did never "sell" such stuff in Soviet time, rather loan with delayed benefits, except for the Cuban commies, where it have been fo free. Now there are the cases of fast market solutions, but again, I doubt the T-14 will be the case as Russians have to have some time before Chinese plants could copy those technologies to share.
They'll export it, just like most other front line assets they produced and could make $$$ off of... They always do.
Max the Mad Russian
Hands off Ukraine! Feet too
Yes they did, but never something brand new after Vietnam (actually after the breaking with Chinese commies, i.e. in Brezhnev's time, while he told in no uncertain tone: "let them to suck; we won't give them the new weapon"). Usually they did cut the new tech off replacing them with proven old one. Example is P-15 sea skimmer which had been exported as P-20 with worse active radar and IR seekers than Soviet own missile. Had Lybians used the original P-15s in 1986 there had been no need to switch the radar on as the IR target solution could allow the salvo against USS Yorktown on itself. But P-20 lacked that so cruiser had been able to strike back before.
Last edited:
Max the Mad Russian
Hands off Ukraine! Feet too
Concur;-) There is the field when we are 30+ years delay helplessly trailing USN, namely AEGIS-like defence systems, in which I am not good, aside from sensitivity of a matter, so let's drop it. Yet again, I think T-14 is forbidden for export and will be at least 20 years, as Russians now have no allies important enough to pass this system over to them and all of usual customers of Russian weapon are not giving their armour branches top priority for weapon import
Max the Mad Russian
Hands off Ukraine! Feet too
Gents,
Back to WWII, I found out that SUs (accidentally coinsiding with SU airplane names - here the tank destroyers) of Soviet Army were suffering most numerous losses in 1944 when they tried to oppose German naval gunnery from the sea - as it turns out, the 8" AP shells from German cruisers shelling the Baltic shore were naturally killing the SUs as well as tanks in dozens. Interesting thing is that, according to Soviet reports, the Kriegsmarine heavy cruiser Prince Eugen had been able to kill the SUs and tanks, half-dug in the sand ashore, with sniper-like precision from the sea. How could it be?
Back to WWII, I found out that SUs (accidentally coinsiding with SU airplane names - here the tank destroyers) of Soviet Army were suffering most numerous losses in 1944 when they tried to oppose German naval gunnery from the sea - as it turns out, the 8" AP shells from German cruisers shelling the Baltic shore were naturally killing the SUs as well as tanks in dozens. Interesting thing is that, according to Soviet reports, the Kriegsmarine heavy cruiser Prince Eugen had been able to kill the SUs and tanks, half-dug in the sand ashore, with sniper-like precision from the sea. How could it be?
Naval gunnery is highly accurate. The firing platform is more stable than an artillery carriage ashore and the weapons have the benefit of an integrated fire control system that's designed to hit high speed targets and long ranges while own ship is also maneuvering at high speed. US and British heavy naval gunfire also played a critical role in breaking up German efforts to counterattack at Normandy.
Pags beat me to it. In support for the US at Normandy were 3 battleships and 3 heavy cruisers (the Brits had 4 battleships and 2 heavy cruisers):
That size of fleet, along with the swarms of light cruisers and destroyers, would be able to blunt just about any type of attack within the arc of the ships guns.
(For those who might not remember, it was ship naming policy to name battleships after states, battlecruisers after territories and cruisers after cities.)
USS Arkansas BB-33
USS Texas BB-35
USS Nevada BB-36
USS Augusta CA-31
USS Quincy CA-71
USS Tuscaloosa CA-37
That size of fleet, along with the swarms of light cruisers and destroyers, would be able to blunt just about any type of attack within the arc of the ships guns.
(For those who might not remember, it was ship naming policy to name battleships after states, battlecruisers after territories and cruisers after cities.)
USS Arkansas BB-33
USS Texas BB-35
USS Nevada BB-36
USS Augusta CA-31
USS Quincy CA-71
USS Tuscaloosa CA-37
I think the Baltimore Class CA is one of the best looking class of ships the US has ever put to sea.
Max the Mad Russian
Hands off Ukraine! Feet too
I have read that the main battery's optical director that was installed on KMS Prince Eugen was one of a kind and it was the main aim of USN recco efforts to capture this ship in Denmark just hours after V-Day in Europe. It allows to fire that 8 inch shells with surgical precision. Aside, this type of heavy cruisers (Hipper-class) was very elegant in appearance, too. On a distance, it resembled battleships of Bismarck-class in details, by the way.
German optics have long been world-class so I am sure that was on the list but likely not the only reason. German naval gunnery also long had a good record too so that probably helped them to be effective against land targets as they were with seaborne targets.
I had read that USN only took Prinz Eugen (PE) to keep her (him?) out of Russian hands and really wanted nothing to do with it hence it's ultimate demise during Operation Crossroads. After American success with radar controlled gunnery I can't imagine there was too much interest in the optics. However, the exploitation of PE did result in a renewed US interest in magnetic amplifier technology based on what was found in PE's FC computer.
Max the Mad Russian
Hands off Ukraine! Feet too
Some books had credited namely PE with sinking of HMS Hood instead of Bismarck, but it's hard to believe. Pretty recently the sources in German archives have been found that revealed the secrets of 15" AP shells' caps, that allowed the shell to be turned to normal angle even if impact was happening far from normal. As no such shells were captured after the war (both Bismarck and Tirpiz were on sea botton and no such guns were installed somewhere else), the one capless unexploded shell found in the hull of HMS Prince of Walles from the same battle at May 1941provided no info about the caps.
Max the Mad Russian
Hands off Ukraine! Feet too
Probably "him", as in German this is Der Schiff and Der Kreuzer, so "him"