[Closed] Are the Russians expecting trouble

compare to the Yanks first before you panic

They're probbly planning to invade Britain now they know we've got no aircraft carriers and that.

Oh Whell.

Look on the bright side, this means....

...EKRANOPLAN!!!!!!! 😀 Yay!

[img] [/img]

And we cannot afford 2 poxy aircraft carriers. What would Putin do? He'd take those RBS bankers bonuses to pay for it.

And the thought of the yanks getting tooled up is supposed to reassure us?

And we cannot afford 2 poxy aircraft carriers

Which is just as well, seeing as how 'we' don't actually [i]need[/i] them.

35 new corvettes

[img] [/img]

Well cool!

[img] [/img]

Possibly true Fred. But what does he need 8 nuclear subs, 15 frigates and 2 assault ships for?

Controlling the Arctic I reckon. So we might those carriers after all.

Which is just as well, seeing as how 'we' don't actually need them.

The people in the Malvenas might disagree with that - hippy 😉

Controlling the Arctic I reckon.

Lucky we have these then eh?

[img] [/img]

[img] [/img]

Oh... err...

[img] [/img]

8 new nuclear subs

Good job the Government haven't just scrapped the RAF's maritime patrol capability (which was mainly for ASW). Oh. Hang on...

Andy

Russia vs China arms race.

[i]Russia has already ordered two French-built Mistral helicopter carriers, allowing it to rapidly deploy hundreds of troops and dozens of armoured vehicles on foreign soil.

[/i]

At least they've bought French ones. They'll be back at the dry dock with miltiple electrical faults within a couple of years.

I've seen Shopping lists from the Russian military before...I'll believe it when I see it.

Which is just as well, seeing as how 'we' don't actually need them.

If you believe the RAF.

Russia vs China arms race.

don't think so, Chinese are to busy spending money in the first and third world to secure resources to waste cash on an arms race

China is building up its navy.......including quite a few new aircraft carriers.

PMSL @ Harry_the_Spider.

🙂

PMSL @ Harry_the_Spider.

Our Boys weren't pissing themselves laughing at the sight of a Super Etendards armed with Exocets ........... I believe their electrics worked just fine

[img] [/img]

El-bent - Member

I've seen Shopping lists from the Russian military before...I'll believe it when I see it.

Huge oil reserves. Arctic sea free of ice.

Boy with the most toys gets the oil.

Russians are spending $650 billion on this up to 2020, American [u]annual[/u] defence budget $750 billion+.

I think America will have the most toys 😉

Agreed!

The Septics are spending and developing like you would never believe....

The Russians spending a few bob on "traditional" munitions is fine, the Yanks will always be ahead of the game.

They have some crazy and no doubt crazier sh*t!!!

The Americans have a military budget that dwarves the UK, China and Russia combined.

The very best we can do is to take 10 years to muster one conventionally powered aircraft carrier whilst we flog it's sister ship to Indonesia or someone with aspirations of dominating the Pacific.

We're minor players these days, the sooner we get used to the fact, the better.

the Yanks will always be ahead of the game.

Well, so Western Propaganda would have you think. They're just better on PR, is all...

Truth is, both sides are pretty evenly matched. The Yanks enjoy better coverage globally though; undoubtedly a result of their Capitalist dealings with various nations in strategic locations.

But to believe that the Russians are somehow 'behind' the USA in terms of military technology, is daft. US military experts know about the reality of Russian military capability, and loads of stuff we don't. Most of this military acquisition and development is sabre rattling; who's got the biggest gun...

As for the money involved; Russia has loads of raw materials at it's disposal, and it's labour costs are far cheaper.

Both sides are no strangers to having their mighty arses kicked by a bunch of poorly equipped guerrillas, though...

Anyone notice the chinless wonder sucking up in the middle east while apologising to our nationals in Libya that frankly we no longer have the ability to get them home. Mind you we've mind ****ed Gadaffi by mobilising a SAS patrol in readiness. Must be double shitting himself about 4 double hard bastards without a plane to get them there!

It's not about being minor players though because ultimately if you have nuclear weapons you can dine at the top table, for obvious reasons.

So in that respect we are not minor players.

Being a superpower though is different. Manpower, arms, munitions, technology, volume, innovation and guile all contribute to being a superpower.

In this respect we struggle, although pound for pound our servicemen are among the best in the world, it's just the money that is chucked at it that is lacking.

Given our size we punch beyond our weight and always have, but there are bigger boys out there who more than respect us, superpower or not.

if you have nuclear weapons you can dine at the top table

Who wants to dine with the ****stanis, Israelis, and North Koreans then ?

I think America will have the most toys

And toys are effectively what most military hardware is; it never gets used. The less 'toys' this country has, the better.

We're minor players these days, the sooner we get used to the fact, the better.

Because of this, mainly. Plenty of other nations get by perfectly well without having enormous military forces and spending. As for 'defence'; who in their right mind would want to ever invade Britain any more? It's got nowt worth invading for!

Which is perhaps quite reassuring...

Just have a look at US 2009 expenditure compared to the rest of the world: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_military_expenditures

Who wants to dine with the ****stanis, Israelis, and North Koreans then ?

I wouldn't mind, as long as the ****stanis did the main course, the Koreans did the starter and the Israelis did the soup.

I'm so proud of this forum that it only took three posts to get to Ekranoplan! 😀

[img] http://t1.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcR-h0g7ztIZbJkVstCsC972dwdRSSQ3IPcWFzih4sXpzu4DSiRS [/img]

Well done, Elfin.

😀

Thank you!

You can't have a thread about the Russian military, without involving an Ekranoplan, if you ask me.

You can't have a thread about the Russian military, without [s]involving[/s] invoking an Ekranoplan

FTFY, as surely they are mystical creations to be summoned from the Netherworld™.

Fair point, and one well made.

I stand corrected, and hang my head in shame. 🙁

As a penance, I shall post another pic of an Ekranoplan, in the hope that it may absolve me of my sins.

[img] [/img]

All Hail the Ekranoplan! Bow down ye worthless mangy dogs for ye are not worthy...

They werent very good at VTOL though were they?!

Introducing the Russians secret weapon!!!

Eh? The Russkis had their own VTOL aircraft. And space shuttle, although that wasn't very successful. Neither was Concordski. 🙁

They did create one of the most destructive weapons ever made, though.

[img] [/img]

I always wanted an Ekranoplan. Do you think they've got any going cheap? Maybe the stw massive could club together and get one? Turn a few heads in the carpark: -)

(Wanders off to start a 'What mud tyres for a 1950s Russian VTOL?' thread)

You can [url= http://www.wigetworks.com/products.html ]buy your own[/url]

[img] [/img]

AK 47 designs by Germans towards end 2nd WW stolen by advancing Russians.

Anyone figure out why we didn'tt just buy AK47's and RPG's for our forces? Cheap as chips and seem to work really well and are battle proven worldwide.

mt - Member
AK 47 designs by Germans towards end 2nd WW stolen by advancing Russians.

[i]Generally accepted as the world's first assault rifle, the StG44's effect on post-war arms design was wide-ranging, as evidenced by Mikhail Kalashnikov's AK-47, and later in the U.S. M16 and its variants. The Soviet Union was quick to adopt the assault rifle concept. The AK-47 used a similar-sized intermediate round and followed the design concept, but was mechanically different.[/i]

Same article I pasted from also has this:

[i]StG44s have been confiscated from militia groups by U.S. forces in Iraq.[/i]

Quite long lasting then

Berm Bandit - Member

Anyone figure out why we didn'tt just buy AK47's

1) Relatively inaccurate
2) 7.62 not NATO standard so no interchangeability with allies. Additionally, heavier round than 5.56 so ability to carry large quantities of ammunition reduced. Plus, NATO doctrine believed it to be more advantageous to injure (at least 1/2 soldiers to look after every injured man), 7.62 more likely to result in an outright kill in the event of a hit.
3) Would make us look like two bit narco-guerilla hoods. I don't suppose we'll be swapping Land Rover Defender for Toyota Hi-Lux anytime soon either.
4) Was/is (original and variants) the principle assault rifle of our enemy (former now, but possibly future again).