 |
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
Serb
|
|
Siberia, Communist party of Apolyton
Nov 2001
time: 11:29
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by panag
hi ,
sure , 192 days in all since it was build , ...... 
thats loads of active duty aint it , ......
|
You think that for example American or Brtish warships spend 365 day a year in open sea?
What an .
quote:
you where wrong to say it was there , it was transfered eve, to the pacific fleet in 96 , they did not want it , they returned it to the north fleet , and there it still is since 99 , not a single active day since then , ...... not a single , ....... |
Lonestar, as US Navy intellegence guy, could you please say to mr. Panag that during 1999-2003 period, Petr Veliky was on active duty. I guess it's not a secret information, considering that it was shown many times on TV (during maneuvres and during Kursk's resque operation)
quote:
lets face it , you know absolutely nothing about this ship , its whereabouts , its accidents , so why on earth do you post what you have posted , ..... |
And who said this? A moron who belives that Kirov is air carrier?
Last edited by Serb on 08-07-2003 at 08:19
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Serb
|
|
Siberia, Communist party of Apolyton
Nov 2001
time: 11:29
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by panag
hi ,
today , in todays active status , it aint my article neither , ...... read again and you see dates , ......
tu-95 is a different story
there are only eight and any country that has signed the open skies agreement can tell you that , ......
they cant afford any more neither , there are no more nuclear missiles for it neither , scrapped with us taxpayers money btw , .....
bye |
And what the hell could you know about Russian nuclear missiles? You, a moron who said that Russians steal rocket fuel from their ICBMs and then sell it on markets.
Last edited by Serb on 08-07-2003 at 09:33
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Serb
|
|
Siberia, Communist party of Apolyton
Nov 2001
time: 11:29
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by panag
hi ,
they aint the largest , ......
|
Listen mister 'fancy pants', go to any respectable source of information, like Janes for example and made a basic research about this. All experts says that ships of Kirov class currently are the largest surface warships in service on this planet. Only such as you still whinning- "no, no, no, they are not."
quote:
missiles removed , ...... |
Petr Veliky have more missiles and more firepower than any other ship on this planet.
quote:
one harpoon or two and its gone , simple as that , ...... |
You are an , simple as that. Harpoons will be destroyed by Kirov's S-300 complexes when they will be 150 km away from ship.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Serb
|
|
Siberia, Communist party of Apolyton
Nov 2001
time: 11:29
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by GP
The Kirov is a heavy cruiser. I wouldn't be a bit worried about it. A US CVBG would take it out no problem. The Ruskis might have a chance against a CVBG with a submarine if they got lucky. |
And who said that Kirov would attack American battle group alone?
quote:
But overall we would wax their azzes. WE have the blue ocean Navy. They have a coastal defense fleet. They're nobody. |
Thanks for the lecture. Try something in our waters. We are more then able to defend our coast. Currently we don't need anything else.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
David Floyd
|
|
The bottom of a large bottle of beer
Jan 1970
time: 05:29
|
|
Kirov class warship:
25,860-26,396 tons (fully loaded)
As opposed to this, the Kuznetsov class carrier, of which Russia has one in service, displaces 67,000 tons fully loaded.
However, both of these are dwarfed by the US Nimitz class carrier, which displaces 101,000-104,000 tons fully loaded.
Sorry, serb, you're wrong.
quote:
Petr Veliky have more missiles and more firepower than any other ship on this planet. |
Actually a SSBN has far more firepower than any Kirov 
But in any case, a Nimitz class carrier also carries more firepower, even excluding nuclear weapons. But if it comes down to it, the US can just load up aircraft with nuclear tipped cruise missiles - one hit would be enough, and the S-300 is good, but not THAT good.
quote:
Harpoons will be destroyed by Kirov's S-300 complexes when they will be 150 km away from ship. |
Why would a sub launch from 150 km away? I'd rather suspect that the sub would launch Harpoons from a few km away, inside the Kirov's protective screen. But in any case, why not just use torpedos?
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
Serb
|
|
Siberia, Communist party of Apolyton
Nov 2001
time: 11:29
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by panag
hi ,
now that is a big fat piece that is lied , ......
here are the facts ;
On the eve of the Yom Kippur War, ...blah...blah...blah...
so , where is that cruiser , ....
facts cant be changed , ......
bye |
It's rusting underwater of course.
Israeils warship "Eilat" destroyed by two Russian missile boats of "Komar" class at October 21 1967. Eilat entered territorial waters of Egypt and after four missile hits ship sunk. In accordance with Russian classification, it was "Eskadrenny minonosez or Esminez". In accordance with western classification...actually I made a mistake, it was lesser then cruiser.
Armament of "Eilat" four 114mm guns, six anti-aircraft guns, mines, torpedoes.
Armament of Komar class: two P-15 missiles.
Last edited by Serb on 08-07-2003 at 12:08
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Serb
|
|
Siberia, Communist party of Apolyton
Nov 2001
time: 11:29
|
|
It was build by British in 1944, "Z" class (or it is "zet"?). In 1944 Germans already have primitive missiles. Still, it was 2500 tonns destroyer with a lot of heavy armament and it was destroyed by two tiny boats whose only armaments were two Russian missiles.
Give me a hour. I don't have time now.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
David Floyd
|
|
The bottom of a large bottle of beer
Jan 1970
time: 05:29
|
|
quote:
In 1944 Germans already have primitive missiles. |
But not primitive anti-ship missiles. Yes, they did have radio controlled bombs, such as the one that sunk the Italian battleship Roma, but that is not the same thing. There were also primitive SAMs and AAMs.
The Eilat was originally laid down on May 5, 1943, and launched on Feb 28, 1944, so upon review, we are both sorta right. It was indeed a former Z class destroyer, the HMS Zealous.
But no matter what it was, it was not designed to fight anti-ship missiles, and certainly not anti-ship missiles with late 1960s technology. Hence, no matter what equipment was carried on it, it's no surprise that it was sunk.
If you take the Yamato or the Bismarck, and put them up against a missile armed craft, and the battleship is sunk by the missile boat, it doesn't mean that the nation that built the missile boat has superior technology, it just means that the technology of the time is superior to the technology of the early 1940s.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Serb
|
|
Siberia, Communist party of Apolyton
Nov 2001
time: 11:29
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by panag
hi ,
okay GP , you are the one who can confirm this , what do you say about one , maybe two harpoons launched from a sub , ..... would that not sink a 25 000 weight cruiser that has nearly 40 of its waterproof inerpanels take out during last " update ", ..... not to mention the entire weight concept is also unbalanced , ......
|
Now I know this for sure- Israelis education system completely sucks.
Tell me, do you have a course of theoretic physic in school where are you studdying? I think not. Not only you have no idea about EMP, but also you have no idea about mechanics as well. If you'll remove inner panels out of such huge ship as Kirov, the ship will colapse due its own weight.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
David Floyd
|
|
The bottom of a large bottle of beer
Jan 1970
time: 05:29
|
|
Further, that might work very nice in trials, but I rather suspect a surprise attack with a spread of 4 torpedos from only a few km away would be a little different. Combat always is.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Serb
|
|
Siberia, Communist party of Apolyton
Nov 2001
time: 11:29
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by panag
and btw , read again about the ammo on the M-16 , .....
|
Why should I read your crap like- " M-16 don't use 5.56 ammo, it use Remington ammo instead" again?
quote:
and where is it written that the kirov class are aircraft carriers , before you post stupid insults , please read before you post and mix things up yourself , ..... |
Your post on page five of this thread:
hi ,
huh , the kirov holds how many planes , .....
a us large carrier holds how many , ..... a difference of 50+ aircraft , .....
Do you need a link or you are able to find it by yourself?
It could mean only two things:
1) You have no idea how many planes holds large American air carrier. If you think that difference between large US aircraft carrier and Russian battlecruiser is 50 aircrafts. (This is less likely)
2) You thought that Kirov is Russian air carrier. (This is more likely.)
In any case it means that you are an who engage in debates about subject you know nothing about.
Have a nice day.
Last edited by Serb on 08-07-2003 at 12:38
|
|
| |
|
|
|
David Floyd
|
|
The bottom of a large bottle of beer
Jan 1970
time: 05:29
|
|
He was making the point that air power is a vital element in naval combat, and that Nimitz-class carriers provide dozens of aircraft, while the Kirov class provides none.
|
|
| |
All times are GMT. The time now is 05:29.
Apolyton Time is 00:29. |
top of page
|
| archivepost |
|
Forum Rules:
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
|
HTML code is ON
vB code is ON
Smilies are ON
[IMG] code is ON
|
|
|
|
|
|
08-07-2003 00:32
, is that why there is till this day still a travel warning , ..... updated every day , ..... 
|