Project 885: Yasen class #2

PapaDragon wrote:

Singular_Transform wrote:

PapaDragon wrote:

mnztr wrote:

Singular_Transform wrote:

And again, the only reason why the USA havent got loss of life submarine accident is sheer luck....

Never heard of USS Thresher or USS Scorpion?

Those happened back when Elvis was still around

Like the last Soviet / Russian loss of life space accident.

Columbia: 7 dead

Kursk: 118 dead

Russians are in the lead but if you think it's a good thing you are in for a surprise

Singular_Transform wrote:What you try to proove ?

The superiority of the USA systems ? That is more of a myth, if you put the target armreach then it is easy to hit it.

PapaDragon wrote:

Singular_Transform wrote:What you try to proove ?

The superiority of the USA systems ? That is more of a myth, if you put the target armreach then it is easy to hit it.

Nothing, no need for proving

What I am saying is that Russians and pro-Russians have no right to criticize USN subs and to even mention USS Thresher or USS Scorpion because those two events are anomalies in US naval history while Russians were routinely losing subs by the dozens

PapaDragon wrote:

Singular_Transform wrote:What you try to proove ?

The superiority of the USA systems ? That is more of a myth, if you put the target armreach then it is easy to hit it.

Nothing, no need for proving

What I am saying is that Russians and pro-Russians have no right to criticize USN subs and to even mention USS Thresher or USS Scorpion because those two events are anomalies in US naval history while Russians were routinely losing subs by the dozens

SeigSoloyvov wrote:Oh fanboys trying to bring up US Sub accidents? Lol.

I don't even neeeeeeeeeeeeeeed to argue this.

Just go look at US losses in sub accidents vs Russians, that's all the facts you need.

Sheer luck lol, no it's not sheer luck. What propaganda. True we lost two boats but USSR losses before 1990 are just god awful in the amount

Since 2000

Russia: 161

US: 4

I am not counting submarine accidents such as S-80, K-129, B-37

Sorry but "luck" doesn't work like that when it comes to submarines, this isn't some video game of RNG generator.

SeigSoloyvov wrote:You might not like it but the facts don't give a **** about your feelings.

The USSR has also lost more than 161 men in sub accidents A LOT MORE.

limb wrote:Outside of the kursk and komsomolets, what russian/soviet SSNs were sunk in the last 40 years? Both here utterly freak accidents too

kvs wrote:Infantile fanboi dick stroking over accidents.   As if there is some sort of inverse model that can be constructed from any of these submarine
accidents about the level of submarine tech.    Moron fanbois have no clue since they are too busy stroking their insecure egos via their
dicks.   As with rocket accidents, there are corrective measures and not total flushing of systems down the toilet.   And there are not
just submarines involved since the accidents have been caused by torpedoes and missiles on board those subs.   If Soviet subs, and hence
the wanker fantasy Russian ones, are such garbage then the accident rate would be through the roof.  

Insecure losers cannot even handle the notion that no US war on Russia is going to be a cakewalk.   So they spend their time trolling
fora about how inferior Russian intellects are and how Russia "does not make anything" and if it somehow manages to nail together a
a system, then it is self-evidently garbage.

This forum should adopt the same zero tolerance approach as the NATzO fanboi fora.   If you spend all your time on this board pissing
on Russia and Russians, without even making factual arguments with citations, then you deserve a permaban for being the troll that you
are.

And to the poster who smugly claimed that the serious members of this forum engage in such activity, GTFO.

limb wrote:Outside of the kursk and komsomolets, what russian/soviet SSNs were sunk in the last 40 years? Both here utterly freak accidents too

lancelot wrote:The Losharik fire was just a couple years ago in 2019. Did you people already forget that one.
But I would have to agree that considering the large amount of submarines Russia operates and all the different classes in use the accident rate could be worse.

PapaDragon wrote:

limb wrote:Outside of the kursk and komsomolets, what russian/soviet SSNs were sunk in the last 40 years? Both here utterly freak accidents too

Freak accidents? More like a regular occurrences:

1982 - K-27

1985 - K-429

1986 - K-219

2000 - Kursk

Bonus point for K-8 in 1970, good they didn’t have too many nuke subs before then because oh boy...

It's a good thing Soviets don’t bother to name their subs otherwise there would have been a lot of jinxed names (almost as if they knew something others didn't    )



Meanwhile in USA we had:

1963 - Thresher

1968 - Scorpion

And that was it, half century later still nothing ...



You can criticize American tanks, IFVs, airplanes, helicopters, even some surface ships or other stuff, you can most definitely criticize their AA systems and missiles but what you can't do is criticize their submarines because they are head and shoulders above others in that department

It's not even up for debate

PapaDragon wrote:

limb wrote:Outside of the kursk and komsomolets, what russian/soviet SSNs were sunk in the last 40 years? Both here utterly freak accidents too

Freak accidents? More like a regular occurrences:

1982 - K-27

1985 - K-429

1986 - K-219

2000 - Kursk

Bonus point for K-8 in 1970, good they didn’t have too many nuke subs before then because oh boy...

It's a good thing Soviets don’t bother to name their subs otherwise there would have been a lot of jinxed names (almost as if they knew something others didn't    )



Meanwhile in USA we had:

1963 - Thresher

1968 - Scorpion

And that was it, half century later still nothing ...



You can criticize American tanks, IFVs, airplanes, helicopters, even some surface ships or other stuff, you can most definitely criticize their AA systems and missiles but what you can't do is criticize their submarines because they are head and shoulders above others in that department

It's not even up for debate

Singular_Transform wrote:Five from the six CCCP/Russian accidents happened with subs or with weapon systems that doesn't exist in the USA navy.

It has the same takeway, if you use the same, slightly improved 50+ years old design without basic improvement, avoid any high capability but inheritently dangerous weapons then you are safe.

Don't try new weapons, and you are safe : )

So, only thing that left is to use broomstick instead of guns, and all unintentional discharge accident can be elminated.

lancelot wrote:Shkval supercavitating torpedo, Oniks supersonic missile, etc.
No US equivalents.

SeigSoloyvov wrote:

lancelot wrote:Shkval supercavitating torpedo, Oniks supersonic missile, etc.
No US equivalents.

None of the said accidents took place with those....