Russia could destroy NATO ships in 20 mins: Admiral

Originally posted by manson_322
Mig-31 will become a formidable rival to all fifth-generation fighters, due to enhanced radar detection and tracking capabilities
P.s the current fifth gen aircraft is F-22 and F-35

I like the quotes/sources provided ( they have been catalogued ) but it may be unfair to go as far as to suggest that they will be 'formidable'. The Mig's will still very likely to be first seen but their new and even more powerful radars and data linking for signal processing may allow them to still spot the Raptors far enough out to employ their longer ranging and faster moving R-77/R-33/R-37 ( of which ten can be carried in the most modern MiG-31M/BM types) missiles before the Raptors can fire and guide too many 'free' shots.

I think the most dangerous aspect about the Mig-31's is basically that they can fly at far higher sustained speeds ( over far longer distances) and that they will outnumber the maybe 100 F-22's deployed to Europe and Japan three to one allowing them to not only sustain casualties but employ their speed to close the distance and 'take name's or disengage when the sitution isn't favorable. The main advantage of the F-22's will likely be their LPI ( if somewhat ambigously named) radar and very high forward aspect stealth which , if maintained, by proper employment of the aircraft should allow it to defeat the Mig-31's in proverbial aerial jousts the USAF seems so to be so taken with.

The Mig-31's should 'win' in similar numbers if the Russians can gain a sufficiently accurate idea of what is happening in their skies ( thousands of radars deployed and sometimes data linked) and are thus enabled to route Mig-31's for 'side' engagements where the Raptor's large size and lack of a more all aspect stealth configuration should swing the odds back in favor of the MIg-31's large radar, higher speeds, faster and more numerous missiles.

Stellar

[edit on 9-9-2008 by StellarX]

reply to post by manson_322


The few times MIG-31's came close to the SR-71, skirting Russian Airspace, it was flying at lower speeds and lower altitudes than it is capable of cruising. Odds are that they were just trying to see what the MIG capabiliies were.

Neither of us knows whether or not SR-71's flew missions into Russian air space, and if we did, we certainly wouldn't say, neither would the US or Russia openly admit such missions did take place. Most likely they did.

The SR-71 was retired in what, 1992, and still was in use until 1998. Doesn't look like it was as vulnerable as you claim. Chances are that its mach 6 predessesor flys missions where ever it chooses to this day.

By the way, even the web site, about Cuban technology, is DEVELOPING these weapons, they don't claim to actually have them yet.

The narrowband HPM weapons, that Cuba is developing with China and North Korea,

Here the article mentions the true reality.

This contact point can allow the electromagnetic field to enter the cage, which ultimately renders the enclosure useless. There are ways to protect against these Faraday cage flaws, but the fact remains that this is a dangerous weakpoint.

The contact point CAN allow, but not necessarily. All critical military electronics, and most commercial for that matter, protect against these cage flaws. When the equipment is built from the beginning to protect against EMF attacks, it doesn't add that much more weight, or cost, especially now days, because digital information is so compressed, it has to be highly protected to prevent noise interference.

The problem with tube technology, which is why is has been mainly abandoned, is that it is inefficient, takes up a great deal of space, and is very suceptable to vibration. These problems far out weight the possible failures due to any possible EMF blast.

Russian technology lags behind U.S. technology by decades. When was the SR-71 designed and first built?

Here is an article with the associated press it sheds some light on the geordian conflict. It also discusses some of the topics that have been discussed in this thread. It is from a Russian journalist with the ap.

War reveals Russia's military might and weakness

Some Western experts believe that Russia spent months preparing for the invasion, and provoked the confrontation that led to Georgia's attack on the South Ossetian capital, Tskhinvali. They pointed to military exercises the Russian military conducted just across the border in July, the lingering presence of extra Russian troops in the region in August and the speed and efficiency of Moscow's response.

reply to post by poet1b

The few times MIG-31's came close to the SR-71, skirting Russian Airspace, it was flying at lower speeds and lower altitudes than it is capable of cruising. Odds are that they were just trying to see what the MIG capabiliies were

the migs capabilites were known to the West thanks to spy who worked in Phazatron for the CIA , his name was Adolf Tolkachev, in fact when he was being tried by the soviet military tribunal , he stated that CIA wanted information of Zaslon radar of mig-31 and R-33 because zaslon abilities made SR-71 very vulnerable ,
after this incident ,soviets upgraded Zaslon radar to Zaslon-M standard...

The few times MIG-31's came close to the SR-71

it did not mostly come near and intercepted the SR-71 in international waters, which was very vulnerable to Mach 4.5+ R-33 Vympel ......
refer page 283 again ....
most intercpets of SR-71 occurrred in BVR , and there were only two
incidents in WVR

Neither of us knows whether or not SR-71's flew missions into Russian air space, and if we did, we certainly wouldn't say, neither would the US or Russia openly admit such missions did take place. Most likely they did.

Sr-71 violated soviet airspace several times in 70's but the deployment of mig-31 with R-33 misile combined with zaslon PESA and deployment of S-300V ,S-300P and Sa-5B increased the vulnerability of Sr-71 by a great factor , so Sr-71 stopped violating soviet airspace ....

The SR-71 was retired in what, 1992, and still was in use until 1998. Doesn't look like it was as vulnerable as you claim. Chances are that its mach 6 predessesor flys missions where ever it chooses to this day.

facts speak for themsleves and are louder than words ,and the military historians like Paul Crickmore , the expert on the history of military jet fighters has a much different opinion than yours

Chances are that its mach 6 predessesor flys missions where ever it chooses to this day.

wheres the proof for this claim ..... I want proof from official american DoD military sources confirming that aurora is a spyplane for US military , not some flimsy conspiracy website o ....

By the way, even the web site, about Cuban technology, is DEVELOPING these weapons, they don't claim to actually have them yet.

and clearly , the article mentions the russian lead on HPM(another term HERF is used)

by the way read on Soviet narrowband HPM weapon Sinus-6 ,

The Sinus-6 can fire a several-gigawatt pulsed beam 200 times a second in 10-nanosecond bursts. "It has to be pulsed power because what you're after is high peak power," says Schamiloglu. "The power in the microwaves is going to depend on the electric field squared, so if you generate very large power, then the electric field is going to be big."

How big? To drive the Sinus-6's beam continuously for an entire second, you'd need to supply about 25 gigajoules—"the entire output of a typical coal-fired electrical plant for 10 full seconds," Schamiloglu says. Another reason for pulsed rather than continuous power is to avoid a problem at the output end: the air around the antenna would heat to a plasma that in turn would interfere with a continuous beam at these power levels.

The key to reaching gigawatts of power is dumping all the energy in one gigantic, nearly instantaneous pulse. A pressurized gas switch prevents the Tesla transformer from prematurely dumping as it builds up for the next pulse. The switch is filled with highly compressed and nonconducting nitrogen gas. When the transformer coils reach 700 kV, the nitrogen gas breaks down, and the pulse leaps through to the electron-beam diode.

"Once you've fired the switch, it conducts, it generates a pulse," says Schamiloglu. "It conducts because you've made a plasma channel out of the gas. Then you have to wait for that plasma to recombine and form a neutral gas again. A typical time scale for this thing to recombine and fizzle out and be a neutral gas again is probably on the order of milliseconds."

Among the best candidates for supplying microwaves is the backward wave oscillator; it has the advantage of being tunable (plus or minus 20 percent) and producing output in the 4-10-GHz range. To turn the kinetic energy from the Sinus-6's electron beam into high-power microwaves, the oscillator uses a rippled-wall waveguide, also called a slow-wave structure [see photo

The structure sets up standing electromagnetic waves in such a way that energy is rapidly transferred to them from the incoming beam of relativistic electrons from the Sinus-6. This growing energy initially propagates in the opposite direction of the beam's movement—hence the device's name—and is then reflected forward and radiated in the form of high-power microwaves. Backward wave oscillators, by the way, are also being tested as a way to push giant sails into outer space, to detect space debris, and to clear minefields.

Being able to tune an HPM weapon comes in handy when a particular target proves invulnerable to a particular frequency. "Experience has shown that if the frequency is slightly altered, measurable effects are discerned," Schamiloglu notes. People used to believe that varying the frequency of HPMs wasn't practical, but Schamiloglu and his students proved them wrong.

Coincidence and curiosity led to their discovery. Schamiloglu first acquired the Sinus-6 from Russian researchers in the early 1990s. (The Soviet Union once boasted a sophisticated program to develop microwave weapons; after its collapse, parts of that legacy were put up for sale, to the delight of researchers like Schamiloglu.) But once the apparatus was assembled in his New Mexico lab, he couldn't get it to operate as promised, so Russian colleagues flew over to help.

"One of them took the RF structure [the rippled-wall waveguide] and started hammering on the thing," Schamiloglu recalls. When they tried it again, everything worked. "I was baffled why manhandling this RF structure—ramming it in—could affect the power so much," says Schamiloglu. So he started a series of experiments in which he slightly displaced the backward wave oscillator by increments. With a little experimentation assisted by computer simulations, his team found that the frequency could be adjusted by changing the distance between the diode and the microwave source. The result is that the backward wave oscillator is now one of the few pulsed-power HPM sources that can be tuned.

Smaller is better

One disadvantage of this oscillator, however, is that it needs an external magnetic field to create the microwave beam, a major hurdle to making the whole system smaller. The size of the Sinus-6 and attendant equipment in Schamiloglu's basement suggests that the U.S. military is nowhere near fielding a narrowband HPM weapon. "When I first started working on high-power narrowband sources, we joked that you can do more damage dropping this equipment on someone than you can by using it," he recalls. "People know how to make microwave sources in the laboratory. The challenge is to take this and package it into an autonomous platform and have it function at the same parameter levels."
www.spectrum.ieee.org...

The size of the Sinus-6 and attendant equipment in Schamiloglu's basement suggests that the U.S. military is nowhere near fielding a narrowband HPM weapon.
----
the soviet had a massive program that led to development of narrowband HPM weapons like one of them Sinus-6 a narrowband HPM device

continued....






[edit on 9-9-2008 by manson_322]

[edit on 9-9-2008 by manson_322]

The contact point CAN allow, but not necessarily. All critical military electronics, and most commercial for that matter, protect against these cage flaws. When the equipment is built from the beginning to protect against EMF attacks, it doesn't add that much more weight, or cost, especially now days, because digital information is so compressed, it has to be highly protected to prevent noise interference.

and yes , even extremely minute entrances in the magnitude of micrometers , can enable narrowband HPM weapon to penetrATE shielded electronics and even Faraday cages and yes Rf and communications antenna would not be useless if kept in inside a faraday cage

secondly....

All critical military electronics, and most commercial for that matter, protect against these cage flaws.

civilian and commercial equipment is unshielded is very vulnerable to broadband EMP weapons , while military systems are shielded to broadband EMP , but then they are vulnerable to narrowband HPM EMP weapons...
and according to american scientists , american equipment is not adequately hardened against a basic EMP ....

"One of the things that happened during the last 10 years—as the Pentagon fell in love with network-centered warfare—is that we purchased a lot of very fragile digital systems off the shelf from commercial sources," Thompson notes. Such moves were taken in the name of cost and efficiency, but the resulting equipment is almost certainly more vulnerable to electromagnetic attack than the vacuum tubes and heavy metal-encased electronics of yesteryear.

"Computers become more vulnerable as the voltage at which they operate becomes smaller," says Victor Granatstein, professor of electrical engineering at the University of Maryland in College Park, who is studying the effects of microwave pulses on integrated electronics. "When our opponent was the Soviet Union, the electronics were much more robust because they weren't miniaturized. Now they have very thin oxide layers that can easily break down." Wireless networking makes matters worse. Computers and other communications devices now have antennas attached, giving an electromagnetic pulse a direct pathway to its guts.

Meanwhile, the U.S. Navy no longer requires that all its hardware be hardened against nuclear electromagnetic pulses. It deemed that maintaining those standards was too costly and slowed down the integration of new technology. The presumption was that after the Cold War, nobody would be using nuclear bombs, says the Lexington Institute's Thompson. "Whenever I ask the admirals, 'Well, what if someone did use a nuclear bomb?,' I just get this kind of blank I-don't-have-an-answer-for-that sort of look."
www.spectrum.ieee.org...

seems US military weapons and communications are much more vulnerable to EMP attack , than what you claim

. The Soviet union was considered the world leader in HPM at the time of its disintegration. The Russians have concentrated on development of HPRF generators such as various types of gyrotrons and klystron amplifiers.
www.fas.org...

Former Soviet Union was the first who successfully. developed HPM weapon, and was far ahead of other countries. on the research of narrowband and broadband HPM source
ieeexplore.ieee.org...

STOCKHOLM (AFP) - The Swedish military has bought and tested a Russian electronic bomb using high-power microwave signals to knock out the computers of jet fighters and nuclear power plants, the Swedish daily Svenska Dagbladet reported Wednesday.

"Russia is among the best in the world when it comes to manufacturing this type of electronic weapon," said Anders Kallenaas of the Swedish National Defence's Research Institute (FOA).

The high-power microwave (HPM) bomb is stored in a briefcase and emits short, high-energy pulses reaching 10 gigawatts -- equal to 10 nuclear reactors.
--
The bomb presents a threat to the Swedish military, in particular to the JAS 39 Gripen jet fighter that it is trying to export. It can also knock out the electronic systems of nuclear or electric power plants, banks, trains, or even a simple telephone switchboard.

The bomb has also been developed into a pistol which can be used to knock out a single computer or vehicle.
www.geocities.com...

the above is a example of a russian narrowband HPM generator developed during the soviet era
in fact the test against JAS Gripen fighter exposed the fact that the electronics on JAS Gripen was not adequately shielded ,

and nuclear plants electrical equipment is much as much or even more shielded than various type of military equipment , with the exception of ICBM's







[edit on 9-9-2008 by manson_322]

[edit on 9-9-2008 by manson_322]

Your arguing unproved untested weapons whos capabilities are classified by both the United States and Russia so bottom line you dont know what directed energy weopons they have and how they did in tests.
HPM is cool and all that but cant compare to the new weapon system for the United States Airforce

directed energy weapon

So now if you wish to come back to the real world and discuss what this thread was about we can continue.

Sorry folks get tired of certain people here who have problems with the united states and apparently will go to any means to prove it.

reply to post by dragonridr


That was an interesting article, thanks for the link.

It's hard to disagree with its conclusions.

Some Western experts believe that Russia spent months preparing for the invasion, and provoked the confrontation that led to Georgia's attack on the South Ossetian capital, Tskhinvali. They pointed to military exercises the Russian military conducted just across the border in July, the lingering presence of extra Russian troops in the region in August and the speed and efficiency of Moscow's response.

Russian military officials insist, however, that they were surprised by the attack and organized their response in a matter of hours.

I suspect this is true - the Russian response seemed to suffer from a certain degree of ad-hoc-ness - massive, each unit fighting hard with lots of firepower, but poorly coordinated and largely unplanned.

It would be interesting to know what their blue-on-blue casualty figures are, but I suspect they won't be advertising them

[edit on 9/9/08 by xmotex]

Russia could destroy the ships in 20 min... and the USA could destroy Russia 20 min after that. Obviously, the ships are there to get the Russians to take a shot at them so the USA can have a "justifiable cause" for war. If attacked, the USA has what they need to go to war in Georgia.

Arguing about whether or not EMF can be stopped is a waste of time. Every article you have posted admits EMF pulses can be stopped by proper shielding, and that is the bottom line.

As I have already stated more than once, To prevent pin hole leaks for EMF penatration, all is needed is testing, and that is how pinhole leaks are stopped.

As far as claims that the tubes were used on purpose for EMF hardening, I'll take the word of the scientist who looked at the MIG-25's electronics.

www.history.com...

U.S. officials were in for a surprise. After a thorough check of the MIG-25, the Americans experts came away less than impressed. The plane was quite fast, but also unwieldy and almost completely incapable of close-quarters combat. In addition, the electronic technology of the plane was deemed to be far behind comparable U.S. aircraft. As one U.S. expert joked, "I guess it could be worse; it might have been made out of wood." The MIG-25 incident suggested that U.S. officials may have overestimated the Soviet threat in order to push for even higher American defense spending.

The only people who know how many SR-71 missions were flown over Russia or and during what era, aren't going to make the information public, and all claims otherwise are not to be believed. Considering the Russians eventually sent 5 MIG-31's after the SR-71 at once, looks like the Russians were still looking for a way to stop the famous spy plane. This is a plane designed in the fifties.

As I have pointed out, and provided links to back up the claim, Russian computer hardware is far, far behind U.S. computer systems, and that makes all the difference in the world. The fact pretty much destroys Russian claims of superior military hardware.

i imagine the Russian Admirals/Generals, are thinking of locating and targeting NATO ships in those 20 minutes.

the Russians have a next generation anti-ship missile
which travels at supersonic speed... unlike the USAs 'cruise missiles'...

if i recall correctly, the Russians have 2 systems....
Onyx & Sunburn supersonic missiles ->
both evade detection and are just too fast for anti-missile procedures to protect the fleet.
So, i don't think they are unrealistic braggerts with the 20 minute challenge

reply to post by poet1b

Arguing about whether or not EMF can be stopped is a waste of time. Every article you have posted admits EMF pulses can be stopped by proper shielding, and that is the bottom line.

and also it has been admitted that the so called adequate shielding is not adequate at all....

As I have already stated more than once, To prevent pin hole leaks for EMF penatration, all is needed is testing, and that is how pinhole leaks are stopped

you did not, It was my sources that stated , that to in relation to broadband EMP weapon, but in case of narrowband HPM , many military scientists seem to disagree ...

As far as claims that the tubes were used on purpose for EMF hardening, I'll take the word of the scientist who looked at the MIG-25's electronics.

Its a known fact that mig-25 with vaccuum electronics would have sustained survival in conditions of nuclear EMP environment ...

The only people who know how many SR-71 missions were flown over Russia or and during what era, aren't going to make the information public, and all claims otherwise are not to be believed. Considering the Russians eventually sent 5 MIG-31's after the SR-71 at once, looks like the Russians were still looking for a way to stop the famous spy plane. This is a plane designed in the fifties.

the Russians were not looking they had the R-33 missile and Zaslon to do that ...

Russian computer hardware is far, far behind U.S. computer systems, and that makes all the difference in the world.

can partially agree with you on this as Russia used superior logic and superscalar CPU architecture based processor, to compensate for chip density and yes your statement is somewhat funny , because all capabilities of military hardware is not determined by abilities of computers ,,,, it is also determined by sensor abilites, metallic/ceramic structure , and the senor fusion of systems

The fact pretty much destroys Russian claims of superior military hardware.

it does not ..... superiority is not always on computers and computers and network centric warfare are the Achilles Heel of the West

One of the things that happened during the last 10 years—as the Pentagon fell in love with network-centered warfare—is that we purchased a lot of very fragile digital systems off the shelf from commercial sources," Thompson notes.
Such moves were taken in the name of cost and efficiency, but the resulting equipment is almost certainly more vulnerable to electromagnetic attack than the vacuum tubes and heavy metal-encased electronics of yesteryear.

"Computers become more vulnerable as the voltage at which they operate becomes smaller," says Victor Granatstein, professor of electrical engineering at the University of Maryland in College Park, who is studying the effects of microwave pulses on integrated electronics. "When our opponent was the Soviet Union, the electronics were much more robust because they weren't miniaturized. Now they have very thin oxide layers that can easily break down." Wireless networking makes matters worse. Computers and other communications devices now have antennas attached, giving an electromagnetic pulse a direct pathway to its guts.

Meanwhile, the U.S. Navy no longer requires that all its hardware be hardened against nuclear electromagnetic pulses. It deemed that maintaining those standards was too costly and slowed down the integration of new technology. The presumption was that after the Cold War, nobody would be using nuclear bombs,
www.spectrum.ieee.org...

US military hardware is much more vulnerable to EMP attack than what you claim

as i said before , superiority is not always on computers and computers and network centric warfare are the Achilles Heel of the West

[edit on 10-9-2008 by manson_322]

[edit on 10-9-2008 by manson_322]

[edit on 10-9-2008 by manson_322]

reply to post by StellarX


This article you like to keep refering to is not talking about battlefield equipment it is talking about command and control equipment here in the states .The Big monitors that the brass is using to monitor the battlefield in 2005 congress approved appropriations to harden these systems and is under way most defense department networks are being moved over to fiber optics for this exact reason. And by the way the russians are in far worse shape in this department since they purchased commercial pcs for there command and control granted it brought them out of the dark ages, But they bought alot of compaqs so as soon as the warranty expires there in trouble!

To say that Russian tech is anything close to what the United States has is iinsane. And quite frankly shows you know very little about computers heres one more for ya did you know the us military has its own programming language to prevent hacking do you know what the russians use? They use llinux which is why they have problems scaling software to other systems the US uses ADA which is designed to do just that.

reply to post by manson_322


No, the article you claim that states that electronics can not be shielded from EMP, deos not state this, they only claim that the U.S. has slacked off on shielding and hardening their electronics.

All this talk about EMP doesn't detract from the fact that when U.S. engineers and scientists got a look at Russian electronics on their MIG-25 back in the mid seventies, it was a joke how far behind U.S. technology the Russians were. In the mid seventies the USSR was literally twenty years behind U.S. technology. Spin all you want, but this is the reality.

As far as MIG-31 superior microwave systems and radar, it was proven long ago that passive enemy detection is a far superior method. We don't need super advanced fighters to take long range shots at enemey aircraft. With U.S.'s far superior detection systems, we can use far less expensive aircraft to take long range shots at approaching enemy aircraft, and our accuracy and guidance are FAR, FAR superior to anything the Russians have. What few advanced Russian fighters and Attack aircraft make it through our long range attack will then have to deal with our far more advanced fighter aircraft.

Claims that Russian logic and software on their far inferior computers systems are so superior to the west to make up the difference is more than wishful thinking, it is pure fantasy. You really make yourself look bad with these claims.

Computers allow not only better control, but better instrumentation, therefore better sensors, better development of metalic/ceramic structures, and fusion of systems. Advanced computers allow integration of systems to a far greater degree. Not only do computers give us an advantage in operating our advance miltary technology, they allow us to build far superior equipment, by given us far, far superior analysis of testing results, greatly enhanced control over production and manufacturing processes, and advance analysis for design possibilities in the first place.

Advances in U.S. computing science put the U.S. so far ahead of the Russians, it will take the Russians several decades to begin to catch up, if that will ever be possible. Because of our open society and economic success, the U.S. attracts the best talent from around the world.

Claims that the Russians have made large leaps in technology, enabling them to compete with the U.S. in military capabilities once agian are a complete joke.

Sunburn missile defense? No worries. Already got that covered:

"Instead, the headlines stated that Raytheon rolled out the SeaRAM anti-ship missle defense system.

What is significant about this anti-missile defense system is that it can defeat the Mach 2.5 Russian "Sunburn" anti-ship missle. Until the rollout of the SeaRAM, the Russians have enjoyed a very dangerous advantage in anti-ship missile technology. In order to destablize the power of the United States, the Russians have been selling the Sunburn missles to China. The Russians have refused to sell them to the West, and despite the best efforts of it's spies, the west has very little information on them."

www.freerepublic.com...

Incase anyone is worried: Nuclear strike, what will happen

Dod officials agree that the first major Nuclear attack to trigger a nuclear war will be detonated 200MILES ABOVE a major city and will be no more than one Megaton, causing the resulting EMP to distrupt all electronic in the radius.

All computor chips/cellphoes/ bits in cars/life support machines/electriciy grids, will be wiped out, but the blst will not be close enough to earth to cause any death, by radiation/heat/ explosion/fragmentation. nor will it cause any injury to persons.

So just so you know if you see a blinding flash in the sky, and your cellphone craps out, just get on a plane to switzerland the neutral country

Originally posted by poet1b
reply to post by manson_322

 

No, the article you claim that states that electronics can not be shielded from EMP, deos not state this, they only claim that the U.S. has slacked off on shielding and hardening their electronics.

All this talk about EMP doesn't detract from the fact that when U.S. engineers and scientists got a look at Russian electronics on their MIG-25 back in the mid seventies, it was a joke how far behind U.S. technology the Russians were. In the mid seventies the USSR was literally twenty years behind U.S. technology. Spin all you want, but this is the reality.

As far as MIG-31 superior microwave systems and radar, it was proven long ago that passive enemy detection is a far superior method. We don't need super advanced fighters to take long range shots at enemey aircraft. With U.S.'s far superior detection systems, we can use far less expensive aircraft to take long range shots at approaching enemy aircraft, and our accuracy and guidance are FAR, FAR superior to anything the Russians have. What few advanced Russian fighters and Attack aircraft make it through our long range attack will then have to deal with our far more advanced fighter aircraft.

Claims that Russian logic and software on their far inferior computers systems are so superior to the west to make up the difference is more than wishful thinking, it is pure fantasy. You really make yourself look bad with these claims.

Computers allow not only better control, but better instrumentation, therefore better sensors, better development of metalic/ceramic structures, and fusion of systems. Advanced computers allow integration of systems to a far greater degree. Not only do computers give us an advantage in operating our advance miltary technology, they allow us to build far superior equipment, by given us far, far superior analysis of testing results, greatly enhanced control over production and manufacturing processes, and advance analysis for design possibilities in the first place.

Advances in U.S. computing science put the U.S. so far ahead of the Russians, it will take the Russians several decades to begin to catch up, if that will ever be possible. Because of our open society and economic success, the U.S. attracts the best talent from around the world.

Claims that the Russians have made large leaps in technology, enabling them to compete with the U.S. in military capabilities once again are a complete joke.

No, the article you claim that states that electronics can not be shielded from EMP, deos not state this, they only claim that the U.S. has slacked off on shielding and hardening their electronics.

it states that US has slacked off on shielding and hardening of electronics and also the military scientist on capabilites of narrowband weapons , and its capabilites to penetrate shielding also ..

All this talk about EMP doesn't detract from the fact that when U.S. engineers and scientists got a look at Russian electronics on their MIG-25 back in the mid seventies, it was a joke how far behind U.S. technology the Russians were. In the mid seventies the USSR was literally twenty years behind U.S. technology. Spin all you want, but this is the reality.

claim whatever you like Russian electronics was deliberately made of vaccuum tubes so that mig-25 could be as rugged as possible and remain operational in a nuclear war

Claims that Russian logic and software on their far inferior computers systems are so superior to the west to make up the difference is more than wishful thinking, it is pure fantasy. You really make yourself look bad with these claims.

clearly, you have no understanding of superscalar processors , and their capbilites and even western analysts admit that superscalar processor and superior logic design , helped soviet weapons compensate for the lack of chip density

Computers allow not only better control, but better instrumentation, therefore better sensors, better development of metalic/ceramic structures, and fusion of systems. Advanced computers allow integration of systems to a far greater degree. Not only do computers give us an advantage in operating our advance miltary technology, they allow us to build far superior equipment, by given us far, far superior analysis of testing results, greatly enhanced control over production and manufacturing processes, and advance analysis for design possibilities in the first place.

computers firstly have zero IQ , secondly DARPA recently started using supercomputers

better development of metalic/ceramic structures, and fusion of systems. Advanced computers allow integration of systems to a far greater degree.

for this DARPA , particularly better development of metallic structures , DARPA statred with a AI system

Advances in U.S. computing science put the U.S. so far ahead of the Russians, it will take the Russians several decades to begin to catch up, if that will ever be possible.

Russia can purchase the manufacturing tech from Japan ,Germany or India ... Japan is the leader in robotics and supercomputers ... no problem

Because of our open society and economic success, the U.S. attracts the best talent from around the world.

and USA is alrady suffering from a brain drain

economic success

USA is economic failing currently , USA has 9 trillion public debt and 10 trillion external debt
if you want to talk about economic success , then talk China and India , these are extremely successful and also Brazil and Russian economies are growing by leaps and bounds

passive enemy detection i

the russians are using vega, kochuga-m passive detection systems with the kolchuga-m reportly capble of detecting B-2 and F-22

Claims that the Russians have made large leaps in technology, enabling them to compete with the U.S. in military capabilities once agian are a complete joke.

the claim in itself is flawed and a waste of words

[edit on 11-9-2008 by manson_322]

[edit on 11-9-2008 by manson_322]

reply to post by princeofpeace


searam is a sidewinder with a stinger seeker , range is about 4 miles , and is not quite as good as the maker wants you to believe.

[edit on 11/9/08 by Harlequin]

This is a defensive weapon so range isnt really a factor. Being able to hit a sunburn 4 miles out is plenty enough.

Originally posted by Harlequin
reply to post by princeofpeace

 

searam is a sidewinder with a stinger seeker , range is about 4 miles , and is not quite as good as the maker wants you to believe.

[edit on 11/9/08 by Harlequin]

there was , a year or 2 back a very detailed breakdown on the limitations of the RIM-116 block 1 missile , that included the problems with the acutal engagement ability of the seeker - all this on ats , from someone who actually works with the damn things - and whilst you say `4 miles is enough` , the CIWS has a range of 1500m , and yet the real world tests show engagement at 500m or less - which for a supersonic sea skimmer is still a direct hit.

edit: all this is a moot point as if the carrier or other large ship with this fitted actually has to use it , then its as good as dead anyway since the entire layered defences have been breached

[edit on 11/9/08 by Harlequin]

reply to post by StellarX


AMRAAM-D just entered serial production with a range slated at 180km. R-77M does not exist much like the K-172. Mig-31 is like a flying barn door with a flashlight for a radar. Of course it will be seen first, infact, when it turns on its radar it will be detected and identified from 400km+ away - that's what PESA brings.

I'd love to see a R-33 or R-37 handle a Raptor. It's perhaps twice as long as my bed and just as wide. AESA means you split the beam and get launch warning from a few hundred km out. F-22 now only needs to disengage and the missile will wizz past...

I'd love to see a Mig-31 attempt to outmaneuver a (dual pulse) AMRAAM-D. I'd love to see it pull 5g's when supersonic too.

and that they will outnumber the maybe 100 F-22's deployed to Europe and Japan three to one allowing them to not only sustain casualties but employ their speed to close the distance and 'take name's or disengage when the sitution isn't favorable.

Not really.

Globalsecurity quotes 188 Mig-31 in service, & another source quotes 122+ Raptors... Oh yeah, add to that a few hundred F-15s, maybe a few thousand F-16s, few hundred Super Hornets... and half of Europes air power combined.

and Japan three to one allowing them to not only sustain casualties but employ their speed to close the distance and 'take name's or disengage when the sitution isn't favorable.

Ok... Well, while they're busy 'disengage'ing, we'll take out there missile defense and push further. Numerical / technological advantage - that's what it brings.

[edit on 11/9/2008 by C0bzz]