Author Topic: BORODA (or any russians out there) can you translate this for me? (Read 1416 times)

senna · « **Reply #15 on:** April 16, 2003, 04:12:18 PM »

Ehem, ok so since Im "extended" in this thread might as well add that the tango above then becomes a:

bandits...
1 vs 1 <-- incoming 1 ?
2 vs 2 <== incoming 2 ?

Thats not fun, that sort of sucks then. Ok my ranting is done.

MrCoffee · « **Reply #16 on:** April 16, 2003, 04:37:31 PM »

I can think of 17 reasons why you are wrong in some of the things you say.

1) Yor not a real fighter pilot.
2) You learned that stuff playing AH or EF2000 or something.
3) You made up most of that balony.
4) Yor not a real fighter pilot.
*
*
*17) Its all based on luck, ok.

Go buy yourself a cup of coffee.

mietla · « **Reply #17 on:** April 16, 2003, 07:17:05 PM »

Unless the missile can reach a velocity significantly higher than a launchig aircraft by the time it leaves the rail, it'll flip over and shoot a launching plane.

Anyone knows what kind of acceleration a missile can achieve?

Boroda · « **Reply #18 on:** April 17, 2003, 09:05:17 AM »

Ike, I doubt that Russian VVS has rear-fireing missiles now. In fact most of the weapons that you see in "Su-27 Flanker" game are officially adopted by VVS, but never were bought in significant numbers. At least it's as it was about 5 uears ago. Now the situation have changed when Putin gives some support to the military, and due to situation after 09/11.

Ike 2K# · « **Reply #19 on:** April 17, 2003, 09:29:04 AM »

Quote

Originally posted by Boroda
Ike, I doubt that Russian VVS has rear-fireing missiles now. In fact most of the weapons that you see in "Su-27 Flanker" game are officially adopted by VVS, but never were bought in significant numbers. At least it's as it was about 5 uears ago. Now the situation have changed when Putin gives some support to the military, and due to situation after 09/11.

Are the VVS pilots well trained to use BVR missiles, ACMs (air combat manuvers), and that rear firing missile? I heard that fuel shortages there lowers the flight hours of Su-27 and other aircraft.

Boroda · « **Reply #20 on:** April 17, 2003, 09:53:42 AM »

Quote

Originally posted by Ike 2K#
Are the VVS pilots well trained to use BVR missiles, ACMs (air combat manuvers), and that rear firing missile? I heard that fuel shortages there lowers the flight hours of Su-27 and other aircraft.

Again: I doubt that a rear-fireing missile reached the VVS regiments.

Planes like MiG-31 are specially designed for BVR combat.

Flight hours are significantly increased in past few years, but I can't give you exact numbers. I am not a jet aviation enthusiast, I can ask at http://www.sukhoi.ru board, but frankly speaking I am too lazy.

The whole situation in VVS is very strange now, after it was united with PVO (aircraft defence). For example: MiG-31s are PVO interceptors. At college military department we studied some things about PVO aircraft and SAM/Radiotechnical corps cooperation. BVR combat was not very important when the hostilities take place in the zone of friendly aircraft defence, echeloned and coordinated with early warning radars and planes, all ranges and altitudes covered by different classes of SAMs, from short-range low-alt S-125 (capable to intercept a 76mm artillery shell) to S-200 with it's range of 250+km.

The best BVR weapon is an S-300 SAM brigade on undiscovered position, getting targeting information from AWACS planes, sattelites and the radiotechnical corps grid.

BTW, S-200 long-range stationary SAM brigades were the first targets for your Minuteman ICBMs.

Ike 2K# · « **Reply #21 on:** April 17, 2003, 06:38:08 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by Boroda

BTW, S-200 long-range stationary SAM brigades were the first targets for your Minuteman ICBMs.

You have ABMs??? (anti-balistic missiles) LOL it takes more than 100 billion dollars in the united states just to develop a useless ABM missile and i cant dig that you guys have it.

Martlet · « **Reply #22 on:** April 17, 2003, 07:04:26 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by Ike 2K#
You have ABMs??? (anti-balistic missiles) LOL it takes more than 100 billion dollars in the united states just to develop a useless ABM missile and i cant dig that you guys have it.

in russia, abm=3 guys on the coast with rpg's

Ike 2K# · « **Reply #23 on:** April 17, 2003, 07:12:50 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by Martlet
in russia, abm=3 guys on the coast with rpg's

This is the S-300 missile. An anti-ballistic/anti-cruise missile

This is the equivalent of the Patriot missile (oh pleeese dont even tell me that they copied it)

Martlet · « **Reply #24 on:** April 17, 2003, 07:14:07 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by Ike 2K#
This is the S-300 missile. An anti-ballistic/anti-cruise missile

This is the equivalent of the Patriot missile (oh pleeese dont even tell me that they copied it)

The russians come up with all kinds of neat crap. Too bad it's just that.....crap.

Boroda · « **Reply #25 on:** April 18, 2003, 08:59:54 AM »

Quote

Originally posted by Ike 2K#
You have ABMs??? (anti-balistic missiles) LOL it takes more than 100 billion dollars in the united states just to develop a useless ABM missile and i cant dig that you guys have it.

First ICBM itercept was performed in USSR on March, 4th, 1960

Now we have a second generation ABM shield over Moscow, deployed in late-80s. First generation ABM system was deployed in early-70s, that's why US insited on 1972 ABM treaty, now wasted as useless.

In early-70s first ABMs had 1 megaton warheads, intercept alt 5-300km. A megaton explosion below 5km makes the whole concept useless

Around 1975 they solved the problem of target selection (recognizing the real warhead in a "cloud" of decoys), and switched to conventional warhead.

My Uncle worked in a PVO research center in Priozersk, Kazakhstan, after his "missions" in Vietnam and Middle East. He retired in 1990, he was a leader of the "combat algorythms department". They worked with Elbrus supercomputers, probably the last original Soviet calculating system.

He told me that this ABM compex can reliably intercept up to 10 warheads aimed at Moscow. It's more of a protection from an occasional launch then from a full-scale attack. US developes it's "NMD" system only because Russia is supposed to scrap (according to SORT, that probably will be never ratified after the recent affairs) it's MIRV ICBMs that can penetrate almost any ABM shield. More then 50% of their load are fake targets and active ECM jammers.

BTW, I meant that S-200 positions were the targets for ICBMs, but I don't know if this monster can intercept them. Maybe yes

That SAM's main target was B-52 formations, the "special" warhead was a 10kiloton nuke. The "ordinary" warhead is able to shred B-52 literaly into little pieces if it explodes at 60m distance. It's a system of a "first strike" defence, it has only 2-3 ready missiles per launcher, others are stored assembled, with compressed air, but not fueled. Technical division has to fuel them as they are spent. If it's not destroyed in first few hours - we have to assemble missiles out of factory containers... The damn thing is 11m long, launch thrust is over 160 tons, warhead is 300kg (60000 steel balls of different diameter), capable of mach 4+. Semi-active radar homing, new 5V28m missiles are rumoured to have IR and active radar homing too, capable to hit the target after the illuminating station is turned off or destroyed. Very resistable to ECM interference. Simple as a 3 kopeyka coin. Great design for late-50s. The Soviet klystron tubes were only 0.5 meter long, while American ones with the same output were the size of a refrigirator

S-300 can be used as a ABM point-defence, but it's not a main target for this SAM.

"Optimists invented airplanes, pessimists invented parachutes, cynics invented surface-air missiles"

Boroda · « **Reply #26 on:** April 18, 2003, 09:05:42 AM »

Quote

Originally posted by Martlet
in russia, abm=3 guys on the coast with rpg's

In america - "city" is a village of 2 houses and 1 pig-sty

Only bright American engineers could launch a Minuteman missile so that it have fallen to Cuba. Delivered to USSR it made our designers laugh their prettythanges off. They called it a "stone-age" design.

Wlfgng · « **Reply #27 on:** April 18, 2003, 09:14:56 AM »

actually Russia had some great weapons.. their gov't spent all the money on the military instead of balancing it out and helping out their economy, people, etc..

but Boroda is right.. they defiantely had some great hardware.
scared the hell out of us for a while ..specially the mobile stuff

Martlet · « **Reply #28 on:** April 18, 2003, 09:33:27 AM »

Quote

Originally posted by Wlfgng
actually Russia had some great weapons.. their gov't spent all the money on the military instead of balancing it out and helping out their economy, people, etc..

but Boroda is right.. they defiantely had some great hardware.
scared the hell out of us for a while ..specially the mobile stuff

The key word in your entire post.......had.

Now, they can't even clean out a group of rebels.

Boroda · « **Reply #29 on:** April 18, 2003, 09:36:48 AM »

Quote

Originally posted by Wlfgng
actually Russia had some great weapons.. their gov't spent all the money on the military instead of balancing it out and helping out their economy, people, etc..

but Boroda is right.. they defiantely had some great hardware.
scared the hell out of us for a while ..specially the mobile stuff

The whole economics was working for military-industrial compex... more then 60% of budget... More then 90% of industry was producing non-consumer goods...

Balancing was impossible, since late-40s it was clear that we will be attacked as soon as the "possible enemy" will find any weakness

Only the Bomb costed us almost as much as War. Post-war development was unbelievable. 12 years after the Victory we were in space. In late-50s/early-60s we have beaten "possible enemy" in almost any technological field. But such tension couldn't be sustained any longer.