If you have something you need to say to me, that isn't about a topic say it in PM's this topic isn;t for you to attack people who say things you do not like even if it about russia okay. Because your attacking is reaaaaaalllly getting annoying.
The only problem I have with you is that much like the other people complaining about the performance of the Russian MIC in terms of the Navy, is that you ignore anyone elses comments or explainiations for the delays and problems revealed, and insisting you are all seeing and all knowing... the Ivan Gren will be delayed from entering service till next year because a problem has been found and a solution must be implimented and then tests to make sure the solution fixes the problem satisfactorily and does not create any further problems... but no... in you opinion... and the opinion of others... problems must be fixed instantly... or never should occur in the first place... obviously you clearly have extensive experience in management and realise problems only ever occur with people who don't know what they are doing... as long as they are Russian.
When several in service UK ships are found to be useless in warm water operational areas because of engine cooling problems... well that is just different... at least they were only slightly late into service despite serious flaws... how did they not pick that up during testing?
Perhaps the real difference is proper testing... the Russians get better tested equipment and systems and F-35 pilots just get suffocation highs...
1. The failures of the US and UK are hardly brought up when I do visit here, the problem here is you guys also like to compare faults of a new supercarrier to ones of a frigate, this aren't comparable, I think the Lirroral ships are junk btw and have said that.
Why should western issues be brought up when the rod you use to beat the Russians with is that a frigate should be built in x number of years... otherwise the maker is incompetent... ignoring the electronics and systems on these Frigates is more like AEGIS cruisers than the systems they were fitted with in the 1980s.
I have shared my view on the F-35 which frankly I think is a subpar aircraft and The brits, the only post I ever recall seeing about their failures was that fiasco with their destroyer that went dead in the water due to the temp of the water shutting it down.
Yet you don't complain that American and British heads should roll, and the manufacturers and navies are incompetent... I mean a whole class of destroyer gets into service with such a serious fault... do they even test them at all?
Now I post in sections about the russian's not the Brit or US.
The irony is that in the US and Brit sections, Russia is rarely mentioned, yet as I mention above... Russia forces and production are continuously compared with western and chinese examples... funny how a country that spends less than 60 billion a year is not up to scratch compared with the 700 billion the US spends and the 200 odd billion the rest of the EU spends or the 150 plus billion the Chinese are spending... how incompetent are these Russians... perhaps what they manage to get done with what they spend is actually a minor miracle... and certainly not critical... they are getting what they need... not what you want.
Would you like a list of what I think they are doing wrong I can provide that.
You often do, but the problem will be that when I pump out some reasons why are can't or wont do what you suggest you ignore it and call me a fanboy.
You remind me of the CNN interviewers who ask Putin questions and then when they don't get the answers that fit their view they just ask the same questions again... tell me again why are you supporting that butcher Assad... yes... you say he is the only leader that could create unity in the country and maintain stability while new elections are organised and that if the rag tag group of foreign supported terrorists actually won there would be chaos like in Libya today, but why are you supporting a man we allegedly kills with chemical weapons despite no independent evidence to prove it...
I don't know don't know what in your head bias means honestly, if it means "if you say anything negative about russia" then I guess that makes sense.
I think a big part of the problem is that you are part of a tag team and that some times I forget that some of the stupid things said don't all come from you, for which I apologise.
The sky is falling tag team you are part of and the members know who they are, don't take reasonable explanations regarding issues for the Russian Navy MIC... new sanctions now pretty much mean all electronics in Russian military equipment must come from Russia or Asia... this can only create further problems but then in the past there were conditional bans on such sales anyway so in the past that could cause delays and issues and price hikes too... none of which effect ship building in the west which you so like to compare...
I have said 60-70k carriers are good for them.
I have said they will not produce more than eight liders and they don't need that many.
I have never said they need a Us sized navy, I HAVE said they do need a decent navy to protect their interests overseas
On this we agree, but there is no way they could build up such a fleet in 5 or even 10 years... this is a 20-30 year plan at least...
Bigger surface vessels are still to prove their merits.
The problem is that the Russian Navy is not totally sure what it wants... given the components and the money there is no reason to think the Russian shipyards could not build what they want... they build Kilos and Mistral hulls fast enough... but no... some here claim they are incompetent and don't know what they are doing... which is very frustrating to hear every time a delay is announced.
It is true, but Russia has sufficient scientific and production resources to overcome these difficulties.
But the question the naysayers are not asking on this forum is what sort of pace would actually suit them... if there is going to be no new carrier until 2030, then where is the hurry to have enormous numbers of large ships now.
Money is being spent on upgrading shipyards and of course port infrastructure needs to be addressed too... they are not building hundreds of frigates right now but they are building support ships of all types.
But Russia is not a superpoweer like USSR , the half of population a quarter of armed forces and much less influence arround the world because USSR was the head of a ideological block and today there are only bussines and economical interests
I agree with most of what you are saying, but to be a global power you need a decent navy... in terms of mobility you would not create a mobile ground force and then not include air defence capability. The best air defence capability includes surface based radar and sensors and SAMs, but also airborne radar and sensors and AAMs... that is true for an Army and a Navy.
Russia does not need an enormous navy fleet but with even a corvette being comparable to a destroyer in firepower and performance then you wont need four cruisers and eight destroyers of several different types to operate with a carrier group... especially when the carrier itself has S-400 and S-500 missiles too.
Who knows what technology they are cooking up... they might ditch EMAL cats and just use nuclear powered airships with enormous radar antenna arrays tethered to corvette or destroyer sized ships... or that operate freely around the world following Russian ships of all types offering support and defence performance.
This is not a case of the USN has big carriers so Russia needs big carriers... this is about providing Russian ships with air support and protection anywhere they might operate... it wont be cheap but it will be protecting some of the most expensive vehicles the Russians possess.
Countries don't become rich and powerful and then develop a navy... it was a strong navy that made Britain Great and the US the global power it is today.
Having a strong navy to support its dealings means it can secure its own trade with other countries rather than relying on western powers to do the right thing and allow passage/commerce.