Super Missile Cruiser "Moskva" with Destroyers And Frigates heads for Syria

Putin spoke on the subject of the abilities of the Russian Navy...

"aces up their sleeve"

www.liveleak.com...

The Med assets won't be launching anything but decoys, at least in the first round or two.

Originally posted by johncarter
In , what must be direct orders from Putin, the naval pride and lethal missile cruiser, Slava (Glory) Moskva, is now steaming on full speed (32 knots) towards Syria. Slava Moskva, is the lead ship of the Project 1164 Atlant class of guided missile cruisers in the Russian Navy

It is accompanied by Destroyers, Fregats and a couple of nuclear Typhoon class subs . It seems Putin means business and is determined to face Obamas cards on the middle east poker table.

UK has already dispatched 6 RAF Typhoon jet fighters to Cyprus which means Cameron wants to fight despite the massive Nay vote in Parliament.

This can end very badly, folks. One slight accidental fired missile, lets say from the Israelis or even a drunk russian can start WW3 in a flash.

It seems we are steaming towards a 21st century cuba crisis here and it aint JFK behind the commander in chief desk this time...

more info here


and here

edit on 4-9-2013 by johncarter because: (no reason given)

edit on 4-9-2013 by johncarter because: (no reason given)

A couple Typhoon class submarines?

Too bad for the source website that the Russian Navy only has ONE Typhoon in service.

Hello!! I'm new here so I can't open new thread!!
Read this:

www.ansa.it...

This morning Piccinin and Quirico were released by Syria and they hear that the rebel used gasd

reply to post by Karletto87


Would be good if it was in English though

Russia cannot challenge USA in mediterranean.

Russian strategy has never been a direct naval confrontation with USA. It did not happen in cold war, it is unlikely to happen now.

Russian armada is for security of strategic weapons aboard subs and to respond to emergencies in neighborhood. Russian strategy is to launch nukes from protected waters. There are several areas around Russia where Russian subs can operate unchallenged from Western ships and subs.

If a challenge comes in future, it will be combined China/Russia navy against USA in the Pacific.

double post.

I just found the news item confirming that Yakhont can cover a distance of 500km. A version of Yakhont exists with this range.

However problem is always guidance as ships are moving. A ship or aircraft has to provide terminal guidance for the missile.

If enough Russian ships/aircrafts are in the area, we can assume that a shore battery can fire on a ship up to 500 km away.

As I stated earlier in this thread the Cruiser Moskva was a long way off. Moskva was returning from the Caribbean after a good will trip. Moskva won't be in position near Syria until the 17th September.

Russian Moskva cruiser enters Mediterranean through Strait of Gibraltar

RUSSIA-MEDITERRANEAN-CRUISER CEUTA, Spain. Sept 11 (Interfax-AVN) – The missile-carrying cruiser Moskva, the flagship of Russia’s Black Sea Fleet, has entered the Mediterranean from the Atlantic through the Strait …

Link

Google Translation from Russian

The flagship of the Black Sea Fleet missile cruiser "Moskva" will arrive in the Eastern Mediterranean on September 17, said Wednesday a senior General Staff of the Russian Armed Forces.

Link

GargIndia
Russia cannot challenge USA in mediterranean.

Russian strategy has never been a direct naval confrontation with USA. It did not happen in cold war, it is unlikely to happen now.

Russian armada is for security of strategic weapons aboard subs and to respond to emergencies in neighborhood. Russian strategy is to launch nukes from protected waters. There are several areas around Russia where Russian subs can operate unchallenged from Western ships and subs.

If a challenge comes in future, it will be combined China/Russia navy against USA in the Pacific.

You REALY believe that any country can go offensive it's only a matter of offensive/defensive capabilities and leadership will, Rus Navy before jewish communisim, went offensive many times, cold waris only one period, just wait and see what's about to happen.

GargIndia
I just found the news item confirming that Yakhont can cover a distance of 500km. A version of Yakhont exists with this range.

However problem is always guidance as ships are moving. A ship or aircraft has to provide terminal guidance for the missile.

If enough Russian ships/aircrafts are in the area, we can assume that a shore battery can fire on a ship up to 500 km away.

With the newer guidance (active/passive radars) ships can move all they want it's just a matter of seconds before BBBOOOMMM!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

reply to post by ATSWATCHER


Can you explain how, a missile can attack an object over the horizon, without updates mid-course. The active radar may help 'lock on' to the object once missile can use its own sensor to see the target ship. But the question is - what is the detection range of inbuilt sensor?

It is possible that a missile receives updates via satellites, but missile will still need updates, when the target is moving.

rock427

Originally posted by ATSWATCHER
That system is only good for tagets moving ina straight line, and not for very fast zigzagging missiles, Ageis will NOT stop old school SS-19/22/27.

Actually, missiles that "zig-zag" have to slow down at a tremendous rate in order to make that maneuver. I'm sure that Aegis systems are more than capable of countering this threat. Let's not forget that the Aegis system is continually upgraded to protect AC carriers which cost billions to build and billions more just to maintain over the years. They do not make a habit of sending these carriers out without adequate protection against any and all threats...I have a bit more faith in the USN than you do when it comes to their countermeasures.

Aegis is also not the only defense a carrier strike group has. Their are various naval assets, such as subs, as well as various assets in the air (electronic warfare, even an airborne laser platform specially designed to shoot down ICBMs, strategic bombers, etc.). A good defense is also a good offense. The US has UCAV's B-1Bs (a better, updated version of the Tupolev "blackjack" equivalent) B2's, etc. The American strategic bomber force and overall air-force is far more superior to what Russia currently is fielding. People seem to be under the mistaken impression that it will be the USN on its heels trying to defend itself. If a naval war were to break out, Russia will not be the one sitting back and allowed to take pop-shots off at the USN. It will come at a heavy cost to them...likely the total destruction of their naval assets in the region...

The Tomahawk bloc IV for instance will be Russias (and Syrais if it comes to it) worst nightmare.

The SS-N-22 (Moskits) and 3M-54s, P-800s DON'T "Slowdown" go look on YouTube, there's only like 5--60 B1Bs left, they'll get taken care of by S-300PMU-2s, S-400 is not need for those OLD THANGZ.

You should keep browsing the net, Russia has exotic weapons for it's self, and U.S. Lasers are just like Phalanx, "if they can't detect/track in time, missiles go BBOOOMMMMBBB in a U.S. Carrier Group.

Technological progress does not stand still. Like it or not, lasers are the future for defense. And What we see today will be greatly expanded on over the coming years.

edit on 6-9-2013 by rock427 because: (no reason given)

edit on 6-9-2013 by rock427 because: (no reason given)

edit on 6-9-2013 by rock427 because: (no reason given)

reply to post by ATSWATCHER


The reality is no Yakhont have been fired at a USN ship. So we don't know beyond theory if it will work or not.

There is no doubt that USN has anti-missile technology on its ships. However this tech has not been tested in a real battlefield. Nobody has challenged USN in a long time.

My point is that a. Russia will not act alone against USA, b. Wont happen in the Med. Med is a small sea, as is heavily dominated by Western powers.

dashen
If Obama and Putin want to fight so freaking bad let them settle it in the ring. SIck murderous bastards

I sure would pay to see that fight...although the fight would only last 10 seconds with a Putin win...Heck I wouldn't fight him even with a baseball bat.

rock427

Originally posted by peck420
Incorrect on many counts.

Never under estimate your enemy.

The Russian ships are very capable and should be treated as such. In fact, I would go in so far as to treat them just as capable as any of my ships, which I'm sure the Navy brass is actually doing.

Complete side, lasers, like any weapon have pluses and minuses. They also have counter measures. There is a reason the Navy is not relying on them to be any more then just another layer in a very layered defence.

I would hope that any commander worth his weight in brass would not underestimate his or her enemy. That isn't my point... I'm simply pointing out the strengths that many here seem to be underestimating. If anything, the largest most advanced Navy on the planet is somehow being relegated to second best by many on this forum.

Until very recently, most of the Russian navy was rotting away in dry docks while the US kept up its qualitative edge by spending countless billions maintaining that qualitative competitive edge and in many cases EXTENDING it. I'm simply pointing out this clear advantage that the USN has over pretty much EVERY navy in the world.

Russia is in the process of rebuilding its Navy. By comparison to the US today, I'd say the Soviet Navy was better equipped to deal with the US navy than the current Russian Navy is...

Originally posted by squarehead666
reply to post by rock427

 

And how pray, do future developments of that puny little laser defend US ships from Moskit missiles right now?

The US is leading in the development of lasers. They already have a chemical based airborne laser mounted to a 747 capable of shooting down multiple ICBM's. They very recently successfully tested another airborne laser onboard a C130 that was capable of melting a tanks armor from 5 miles out. And THEL; which is a ground based laser -- recently has shown an ability to destroy anything from a rockets/missiles all the way down to artillery shells in mid flight. These advances like all technological advances are accelerating and exponential. My point is that future ABMD systems will make pretty much all conventional rockets/ICBMs/missiles, etc obsolete on the future battlefield.

The Russian ships are just as obsolete as the US ships.....It's all about the anti-ship missile swarms, which can be surface, submarine or air launched.

It would likely take more missiles than the very small Russian navy has (logistical reasons) to overrun an Aegis let alone SIX of them...And Submarines are probably one of the best assets a carrier strike group has. Again, a good defense is a good offense.

Originally posted by ATSWATCHER

I don't The Serbs did a fine job at making AGM88 "think" they were going towards radar when in reality the were flying into home microwave ovens, that were "tweaked" to operate with their doors open.
That's one of the MAIN reasons the S-300PMU-2's/S-300PMU-3's (aka S-400's) WERE fielded to counter.

Its funny that you say that, because the US did not have this problem with the AGM88 in Iraq...This is one of the biggest bunk propaganda stories going around. The Serbs did not use microwave ovens to decoy anti-radiation missiles...

Russia Scalars are waiting, you can choose to wish/believe other wise, but were are headed for a major U.S.upset in the next BIG war, I'm convinced U.S.A./U.K. are in the last days of being anything of a super-economical/military powers.

Of course you think that way...Why wouldn't someone who ascribes to Serbian propaganda? I'll bet you $5,000 (in 2013 dollars) right now that in twenty years time, the US will still remain as the worlds preeminent world power.

The USSR HAD Airborne Laser: www.wired.com...

Although this doesn't go into detail it still talks about "shot-down" Cruise-missile over Serbia: en.wikipedia.org...(missile)#Variant

GargIndia
reply to post by ATSWATCHER

 

The reality is no Yakhont have been fired at a USN ship. So we don't know beyond theory if it will work or not.

So let me get this straight, what your saying is the B.A./M.A./P.H.D. having employees of Russia weapons companies are too stupid to test these new weapons for long period of times , before they sell them to The Rus Mil is what your saying right?

There is no doubt that USN has anti-missile technology on its ships. However this tech has not been tested in a real battlefield. Nobody has challenged USN in a long time.

My point is that a. Russia will not act alone against USA, b. Wont happen in the Med. Med is a small sea, as is heavily dominated by Western powers.

edit on 12-9-2013 by GargIndia because: (no reason given)

Based upon the U.S. Militaries past performances I seriously doubt they will have ANY defeance agaisnt ANY of Rus's ASMs, Western Powers have been no match from 78-91 and STILL from 91- 2013 NOW, Rus will use Scalar Weps against them in a real war, this is for real mate, the beginning stages of WW3 is coming, it's not going to happen today, but it's coming, and for conventional weapons sake, if one has 500 M1A1/2 Bradley Tanks (they arecrappy tanks, but just for arguments sake I'll use them for this example.) vs. 1000/1500 T-54/55s with the the M1's will win all day long. So even if there is 20-30 Western war ships in the Med, as long as there's at least 12-15 Rusians war-ships with the Newer Radar/Sonars and Yakhont/3M-54s those 20-30 western ships are going bye bye bye bye You can put your money on NATO, I'm putting mine on MIGHTY RRRUUUUSSSSSIIIIIAAAAAAAA!!! in WWIII





Here's why the M1A1/2's are crappy, this is by an American himself: This is a 12 Part series WATCH ALL of it and you'll understand, from The U.S.Army's own mouth, here's part 1, the links to part 2-16 are on the right side: The REAL M1 Abrams! Chapter 1: Overview: www.youtube.com...

reply to post by ATSWATCHER


I do not think we shall have a US/Russia confrontation due to Syria.

Putin is trying for a deal on chemical weapons (which seems difficult). The end result may be air strikes by US.

Most Russia can do is try to shoot down some planes and ships.

Post strike, Russia can rearm Assad if Assad is still in power. It looks likely that Assad will continue to control a part of Syria no matter what (Alawite base / Christians). So airstrikes will change little on the ground.

reply to post by GargIndia


The "LINK" at the bottom I posted about the M1's is good, it's my post right about yours.