China WS-2 MLRS with 200km range is based on Russian FROG missile .. nothing new there.
Can Russia regain it's Military Might?
- Thread starter scarey1989
- Start date
- Status
scarey1989
New Member
- Thread Starter Thread Starter
- #82
The 9K58 Smerch 300mm Multiple Launch Rocket System (MLRS) is designed to defeat soft and hard skin targets, artillery and missile systems. It is produced by the Splav State Research and Production Association, Tula, Russia, which also manufactures the Uragan, Grad and Prima rocket launchers. Smerch was developed in the early 1980s and entered service with the Russian Army in 1988.Smerch fires the 300 mm 9M55K rocket. This has a solid propellant rocket motor. Firing range is from 20 km to 70 km. Not 90KM. Sorry to be a little picky!
wittmanace
Active Member
viktor, do you have your sources for your last big post, on the russian naval assets (particularly anti shipping missiles)? im not disputing anything, i'm just interested in some of the info you posted.
I have tons of pdf and text files all in total caos on my comp and no time to search for it closely so If I find anything I will send it to you you can send me you e-mail or something.
@scarey1989 take a look picky one at official page .....
http://www.splav.org/en/arms/smerch/index.asp
and this missile .....
9M528
http://www.splav.org/en/arms/smerch/m528.asp
@scarey1989 take a look picky one at official page .....
http://www.splav.org/en/arms/smerch/index.asp
and this missile .....
9M528
http://www.splav.org/en/arms/smerch/m528.asp
scarey1989
New Member
- Thread Starter Thread Starter
- #85
I must agree with some of the other people commenting on this thread. For Russia to be the super power that Xander so wants it to be it msut sell the majority of its 3rd and 4th generation aircarft to develop less but more effective hardware. ie carrying on developmet of the mig 1.44 etc. to comepte with western fifth generation aircarft. Russia connot go on upgrading old platforms to sucsefully compete with europe and america and must generate the money before sustaining seriouse development program. Russia has incredibly good engineers and it is clear that the nation can produce some very good hardwear, however, until the coluntry gains some much needed money, you cannot keep bigging them up so much Xander.
scarey1989
New Member
- Thread Starter Thread Starter
- #86
Thanks Victor fo the information. That must be a fairly recent upgrade as the my source of data is from JAnes book of armour which is quite old.
Except that the fighter is not very maneuverable, has poor loiter and has a very low sortie rate. Anytime it slows down its a sitting duck. Lets not forget how many Syrian and Iraqi MiG-25s were shot down, either by Israeli, American and Iranian air forces.
Yup and they bought most of the latest ones, which the RuAF cannot afford to buy.
And China was making small missile boats right about the same time too. None of the current Russian missile boats, unless you consider the Streregeuschy to be one, can be considered modern with radar cross section reduction. In fact, no Russian vessel except for the new corvette, features any radar cross section reduction.
Yes the Borei is new, although there is nothing state of the art with its technology. Don't talk about future subs and other stuff like that, the Russians have a horrible record when it comes to trying to fulfill schedules of new generation ships, planes and tanks. So all in all, I take only what is strictly achieved, not what is planned. And don't think the PLAN has its own new plans either, though they don't mention even at all, until the things are fully operational.
Now lets see what subs are waiting to be dismantled or not.
And what about the subs? So only a handful of ships are out of mothballs what about the rest?
I am not surprised that the crown jewels would be the first to be restored, but the most important part here are the supporting ships.
Yup, a plane that is both rejected by the Indian Air Force and by the PLAAF.
I don't see how the phase array systems on the 052C to be copied from the Russians, More like the Americans. In fact a lot of stuff the Chinese has are more or less inspired more from the West than from Russia. Look at the Song class, a single hulled sub with German engines, French inspired sonars, and a faint outline that resembles more of the Agosta or Type 209. The 093 looks much closer to an LA class than a Victor III. Right from the start, Chinese nuclear subs are fitted with single shaft designs rather than the double that frequent Soviet subs. The Jiangkai class frigates have a stealthy design that looks more like a Lafayette and sports even the same engines.
Yes I do think the Akula is a bit overrated. The Oscar might be more interesting but then it has a bad safety record too (Kursk).
Frankly, the use of big missiles (which means big radar, big gyroscope and atomic clock in the INS, big speed and mass which means less error in flight probabilities, and big warhead) are also meant to cover technological deficiencies in terms of electronics, radar guidance, midphase and inertial guidance systems. In other words, you are using brute force to replace 'smarts'.
Supersonic missiles have problems doing evasive maneuvers near the surface of the water anyway, because its likely to hit the water.
Kashtans have only been retrofitted on the largest ships and the Neutrashimmys, not all the other ships. Amur class does not have VLS launchers. Its way too small, and Sizzlers don't need VLS launchers since they're meant to be launched from tubes. This is a sub smaller than a Kilo; you're talking very coastal. Indian and Chinese navies are heading out to the blue sea and don't fit those requirements anymore. Maybe you can sell it to Venenzuela or Indonesia or Iran.
An anecdotal quote is not proof of operational service. When you see the missile on an operational plane with operational unit markings on an operational air force base that is not an air show, then its a good bet its operational.
The R-37 is not for antifighter but anti-bomber and anti-AWACS. Even the USAF got rid of large AA missiles because they're not that suited for anti fighter combat. There is a sweet spot in the design of these missiles, and the AMRAAM-R77-PL12 size is about right.
The PLAAF appears happy enough about their PL-12 that there is no additional contracts for R-77s. Furthermore, they're trying to get it on everyone of their aircraft, including a deeply redesigned J-11B with indigenous electronics.
Brahmos is also an Indian missile, and apparently, the Yakhont had software and computer issues that took the Indians to correct properly. The CLUB has a record of problems and not fulfilling its tests. The ones in the Talwar had problems, the ones in the Kilos had problems.This again is one big LOL... what are you talking... have you seen coastal Sizzler missile, have you seen 3E-54E, Yakhont, Brahmos, Sunburn ... new (1000km brahmos is in development as well as new HYPERSONIC universal missile (joint Indo-Russia development)) and there you go brabing about uran ---- LOL
Brahmos witch is based on Yakhont missile can in any weather day or night perform supersonic evasive manuevre and is universal missile able to be fired from any lounch pad and atack sea and land targets ...
3E-54M missile of CLUB-S system flys 4m abouve water line ....
LOL, and suddenly Xander acts like its on service. That's the problem of the way you people like to argue. You take something in development---which nowadays in Russia means it needs money---then assume in arguments that its already operational. For that reason, why don't we just consider US and Chinese scramjet projects to be operational too.Of course Skhval is not in production...because Skhval-2 is in development ...
I think no one here is impressed with supersonic missiles anymore, considering the electronic speeds defensive measures like SAMs, CIWS, decoys can all operate.
If a missile flies at 20km altitude looking for targets, it would be detected by the targets in the first place.
Probably only because the missiles are offered at fire sale prices.
The 3M80MBE with the 240km range is actually designed for the PLAN, and the only two vessels that can equip this are with the PLAN.
The words "can be" means it is not. So this is more or less a projection wish list.
No big deal either, since China does have its own independent cruise missiles like the DH-10 that are modeled after the Tomahawk. You're looking at least 1500km.
And unfortunately for you, the PLAAF also has the R-27ER, hundreds of them in fact, you can go check the Swiss SIPRI that tracks arms shipments. So the PLAAF knows R-77 and all R-27 signal intelligence, but the Russians don't know squat on the PL-12. Guess who is going to have the edge in EW.
We will see, considering you still have an economy not any larger than Mexico's.
You have a resource based economy, not a finished goods economy. The problem of being a resource based economy is that resources eventually run out. Any economy that is based on this invests in the future in anticipation of this, so what they should do is invest to steer themselves in the direction of being a finished goods economy.
Which is not what Russia is doing.
Yes, plans and more plans, and more mouth service.
I don't think it is,. and none of the major defense periodicals think either. If you have a better anecdote or evidence, you are welcome to show it.
No, the 200 numbers is not based on the Su-30MKK but a fantasy. Come back to us when all 200 is actually built and in service.
No need for another wish list, we have seen enough.
Really and how? The Type 99 is heavier, which is a good indication that it has more armor, and it has a 1500hp engine to back that up. All the T-90s are in the weight range of the Type 96. And how many T-90s are using squared welded turrets, which is superior for ERA placement, ceramic laminated and perforated armor designs. You are just starting to build such turrets. At least the Chinese knew about this quite early enough to implement this in great numbers for both their Type 99 and 96 tanks.
And Xander, the new Chinese WS-2 is up to 300km and is already being offered for export. The Chinese does not export something unless its already in service, and the export versions cannot go past the 300km range so not to beat the MTCR set limit.
because it shows Russian incompetence, yes.
Sov is no where close to being the most potent surface ship we got. Kilo is not the best diesel sub we got. Gorshkov is for IN. Why is it terrible? They can't build on ship schedule. They have fire accidents while building ships. And when we get them, they are not up to the specs advertised. The Russian navy barely even leave their yard. You can check rickusn's posts to see which Russian ships are still semi-operational. Their entire pacific fleet has one decently working ship.
Do you have any proof for what you are saying other than your stubborn beliefs? They barely even fly, how can they be well manned and trained. Do you have any idea how many Mig-29s are upgraded to the standard that can fire R-77, do you have an idea how many su-27SMs they have? Do you know how many su-34 they have in service? Do you realize su-35 (aka su-27sm2) is only making the first flight this year? plaaf has far more platforms capable of firing active radar AAMs than RuAF. The only thing plaaf lacks is strategic air force. But then again, why is that important in this argument?
As for mature EW capability, if you mean second rated, I'm okay with that. It might help you understand the superiority of the Chinese surveillence platforms if you look through this page.
http://cnair.top81.cn/y-8x_sh-5_a-50i.htm
compared to what we are building right now in 054A and 052C, Sov is simply not in the same league. You know, plan sailors like using Sov over 052B/C because they find the less advanced combat system on Sov to be easier to use. If all USN uses is OHP, that would make USN outdated. But obviously that's not the case.
plaaf doesn't use J-6 anymore, lol. How many Mig-29s and su-27s do you think are actually in active use? There are about 150 J-10s, 300 flankers, 150 JH-7A and a healthy number of J-8F that are PL-12 capable in plaaf. As for your statement about Mig-35 being more capable than J-10/J-11B, do you mind showing some proofs? As for the 5th generation plane, there is a reason China is not participating in that project. Their own programs are going pretty well. If you care to know, I can give you some of their developments.
you obviously have no idea how good J-10 is. And btw, Mig-35 is no where in service. By the time it actually achieves IOC, J-10 will be better than it is right now.
Air to surface missiles (ie: kh-29, kh-59, do you know any?) are used by air forces, not by navies. Yes, the reason why JH-7A is considered a better strike unit than su-30 is because the superiority in KD-88, YJ-91, LT-2 ... over the Russian ones equipping su-30.
Club are only sold to PLAN/IN (Russians are not even using it) and both navies can't even launch the thing + it has serious accuracy issues. Not exactly the super weapon that China threat people would let you believe.And because PLAN is having problems with the launch systems for a missile system than the russians whole ASM capability must be crap then?? That sounds familiar, you know the USAF is having some real problems with JASSM, so that somehow sheds light on both USAF's standoff capability and the capability of the weapons system itself??? (which will be one of the most capable standoff and anti shipping systmes ever deployed) That makes heaps of sence!!! And your right sunburn must be crap, mach 2.5 sea skimming missile, useless!
sunburn is the most overrated missile in plan by far. YJ-12, YJ-62, YJ-83 and Club are all in many ways superior to it. Speed is not the only factor, it has a 120 km range (less than the other ones), it's huge (large radar signature), flies at a relatively high altitude compared to other sea-skimmers, accuracy is an issue (low compared to the 98.5% for YJ-83).
care to point out which ones? And even the ones they are copying, they are only doing so because it's improved on original design. Things like ka-28/29, Mi-17 and IL-76, they did not buy license production or try to copy, because they are just simply cheaper to buy from the Russians.
There is at least 9 KJ-2000s. Then, there are still probably 3 KJ-200 and the other Y-8 surveillence platforms.
search the news, they tried to offer it in 2005 and even showcased it in peace mission 2005, no interest by pla.Really???? See thats not what i read. My understanding was that PLAAF outlined, publicly i might add, a clear intention to buy the platform, and (partially due to diplomatic pressure from th US) the russians refused the sale. Maybe the PLA's propaganda bureau says different? Ofcource the fact that the chinese "decided" to build H6's instead indicateds that an upgraded badger (but most importantly one that is upgraded by the chinese) is more capable than a Tu 22M...
http://www.strategycenter.net/research/pubID.78/pub_detail.asp
there are other sources, but the gist is that unless it's tu-160, China is not interested.
if it is better than what China will build in the near future, then it would be purchased, as simple as that.
[/quote]
More of this "logic" of yours. Just because a nation decides not to aquire a sertain platform or missile system does not somehow make it crap. There are plenty of reasons why a certain nation may chose one missile over the other. MBDA are continuing with the METEOR project and will phase out all AMRAAMs in (IIRC) its arsenal. So according to your logic AIM120D is worthless??? Thats total crap! Its clearly just a tactic you are using to discredit the russians and discredit what i'm saying and i'm afraid it just doesnt hold water in reality. Perhaps there is a realistic (and justified) desire to move away from dependance on foregin arms imports and designs towards an indigenous arms industry? Maybe thats why PLAAF are continuing to increase the numbers of "indigenous" systems in their arsenall, not because they are soooo much better than anything anyone else can design.
[/quote]
just mainly that the Russian missiles + torpedoes are really overrated.
glonass does not have the accuracy that is planned on beidou 2 unless it's going for 0.5 m.
Russian AEW platforms are simply outclassed by Chinese ones.
The only thing you mentionned where the Russians have clear advantage to is in strategic force, which I haven't tried to argue against.
I don't see why Mig-31 needs to be mentionned since it should be compared against fighters in plaaf like J-10/J-11B.
I simply don't have the time to go through every facet of PLAN modernization with you to explain which ones Russians can't provide that well, so China developed ones that matched its own requirements. If you want to know, go read my blog at
http://china-pla.blogspot.com
I don't go into ground force, since my concentration is on air force and navy.
As for answering you queries, the point of my reply originally was not to respond to it, but rather to object to your views and turn the conversation back to the futility of Russian MilInd.
I have never said the weapons were badly designed. I have never said the Beidou satellites were badly designed. I have also never said Chinese weapons do not work without Beidou. Show me where I said these things. How do you read this into what I say?
I have said that constellation of the original three Beidou does not suggest they were intended to support nav of air launched weapons. This is not bad design - this is design with a different objective.
The signal exists without proxy data, but is certainly not weapons delivery grade - it would probably do better with INS alone. This is a consequence of the layout of the three sat constellation.
I have said that it is a regional system. I.e. border to Russia not supported. Again geometry.
I have noted that with the launch of the fourth satellite, they will have windows of true sat nav in a specific region.
Hence not an operational capability. China will have that when they launch more sats. This is what I am saying. They are moving towards a real, multipurpose sat nav system - Beidou 2.
And yes, as I have said all the time, Beidou can work without the use of a diff systems or a pseudolite - because it uses proxy data as a substitute - but sorry, I mistook one of the places where you used Beidou for satellite guided bombs in general. As for satellites, there are actually 5 right now, not 4. They launched 2 this year + 3 from previously. But considering plaaf's possible usage, that should be enough for the near future.
it's 400 km. sinodefence is wrong. They've even offered export versions with 400 km range.
oh, more fans of supersonic missile. Yes, when you have a missile travelling at high altitude, they get detected and engaged very fast. All recent PLAN ships are equipped with sensors + AD to handle anti-ship missiles up to mach 3.
R-77D is not ready, it's not in service anywhere. Russians have been working on it forever, it's still not ready. R-37 have long range but not that effective vs 4th generation fighters.
why do you bring up these systems not in service anywhere? talk about it when they are actually going into service. I already explained the weakness of club + sunburn. And no, Club doesn't fly at 4 m altitude at any time.
http://www.defense-update.com/products/c/club-s.htm
missiles like exocet and YJ-83 are at about 3-5 m for the terminal stage.
The entire problem is that you keep on bringing up these new platforms in development and get excited about them. The reality as any pla follower would tell you is that the Russians promise a lot of stuff early, but don't deliver on them. We don't get excited by these promises anymore. You can simply look at zhuk-mse and see how long that took to get developed.
Even for dowing Mig-25 extensive preparations had to be done to shoot it down. It is a fighter that can supercruise at MACH 1.8 (with afterburners of course) and there has bein more than one ocasion wheneven 4-5 F-15 could not catch him or even its missiles.
I can tell you MIG-31 is the KING of all BVR fight and as one MIG-31M is armed with 4 R-77 and 6 R-37M nothing comes close and no one (except Raptor) stand a chanche to catch him.
Not anymore.... clapse of SU carried economic dissaster for Russia but now is a different thing. ALL RuAF will be modernizet by 2020 and priority heads to who other than MIG-31M2
Wrong. Kirov class cruisers where designed with extensive RCS reduction measurments. And with Tu-95MS in the air and Tu-22M3 roaming throw the sky with Kh-22 do you thing those RCS will do any help ... dont think so.
And tell me smart one what do you know about Borei sonar and other systems, what do you know about Russian sub systems whitch have recive upgrade thow out time but where same name..... until something is published we can only speculate or do you think that same old systems from 80s where instaled on new Borei and will be instaled on every other Russian vesel.... dont think so... secrecy as Chinese is also Russian thing.
Russia plans to dismentle some 140 subs most of whitch are nuclear and that proces is nearing its end... those where old class subs with old equipment and with expensive maintenence and with no benefits from it... its the only logical thing they could do.... Eventualy all Typhoon and Delta-4 class will be desmenteled as new Borei class enters service ...same thing will hapen to Akula and Oscar-2 class with new Graney atack sub....
Since you are talking about Russian subs take a look at Chinas sub .... designing even Delta-4 standard of 80s pose a great chalange to China engineers even with Russian Rubin design buiro.
So you came to some reasunable conslusion about ships... do you want to see some pics of Russian subs to have same conclusion about subs!
i agree.... but Im not fan of suport ships (althrow logistic is most important thing when conducting war) ...but dont have any ilusion Russian Navy chifs will overestimate such important question ... because I know nothing about it does not mena nothing is being done.
LOL what a mean delusive argument....and jet you fly at old soviet Tu-16 LOL LOL suce me ... litle modernised called H-6K .... well suit yourself but I rather fly superconic MACH 2... bomber with grater range and payload passing modernization with 3 Kh-22 400km range MACH 4 antiship missiles.
besides India operates or will operate 4 Tu-22M3 ... I read the document but can not remember it exactly...
True that China has designed by itself some capable ships I dont intend to question but there are many china project in witch Russia provided theirs tehnical skils and weapons ... specialy in terms of constructing SSBM ( Type 094 = Delta-x) , SSK (YUAN CLASS = Kilo/Amour class) besides lool majority of China SSK makes Kilo class Russian subs. And you dont want me to start writing about Russian air-defence missiles and Chinas copies of them .....
And why do you consider Akula overated when even USA admirals have great deal of respect towards them and some say its batter than Los Angeles class (improved one - I know it might be propaganda , alarm thing but STILL)
Safety record of the Kursk is something to talk about .... there was an intervju with some retired British armiral who said USA Los Angeles class sink it with MK48 ADCAP because they thought Kurs is baout to fire at them Skhval when it opened torpedo tubes duriang the excercise... acording to same admiral USA (during the Clinton) paide sum of 50 Bin to cover things up ... and if you see pics of the Kurs recovered you can see round hole by the section that was blown up... so this may not be true or perhaps can but thing is that there it lot we dont know and can only speculate.
Thats your view of the point. Granit has active and pasive guidance at therminal phase, flight paths of it is closely guided secret and besides do you realy thing Russian will produce missile that will hit the water as it prepares to atack ship????
nfloorl: if you look Brahmos missile its HUUUDGE but still most advanced in the face of the EARTH.
You are again catching by the strow!
I dont know where you get that crazy idea about AMOURS dont have VLS .... yes they have it and they have 10 of them..... and guess what in the near future they will be able to accomodate Brahmos missile besides CLUB-S.
Check out official Rubin design buiro page
http://www.ckb-rubin.ru/eng/index.htm
and check out AMOUR 1650 10 VLS
True China has no plans to aquire any new Russian subs but will extensivly pay for tehnical assistance.
Its a good enought prof... Sergej Ivanov said it more than once and same 200km missile has mentioned on few more articles about Su-35Bm and MIG-31M2.
R-33 and R-33S SARH is not anti-fighter missiles and is intended for shooting down bombers/AWACS/areal tanker ... but R-37 (and newer R-37M) as aerodynamicly unstable have great manervability thus providing HUDGE range and anti-fighter capability.
Than K-100 Russia-Indo project (previos known on KS-172) based on 3M83 missile from S-300V system is done and operational as you can see and look at requarement for that missile with 400KM range
Get it .... and look at the pics of it
R-73 / R-77 / R-27 / K-100 / Kh-31P / R-37
( ALL this under half of plane SU-35BM - imagine firepower )
http://i13.tinypic.com/4lglsuc.jpg
and here is missile on MAKS 2007
http://i17.tinypic.com/5y0iijo.jpg
http://i9.tinypic.com/53p7x2d.jpg
So stop talking about crapy PL-12 ... China has no means even to down enemy AWACS/areal tankers etc I guess you would be happy even with R-33S SARH not to meantion thiese BEASTS!
And agains J-11B is fighter based on Russian Su-27 airframe but with China avionics ... big deal
Yea all Russian missiles have problems but none Chinese ... so what if little problems occured now they are corrected and missile is DEADLY as hell .... as you can see China/India/Iran (i belive not sure) and Venezuela will have it or has it already ... thats how bad they are ... LOL
Skhval has no guidance .... Shval-2 will have it ...and thats a big diference ... money is another ... besides its not like Skval is the only Russian capable torpedo they have whole array of them.
Yes i agree no one is impresed by supersonic missile anymore ... thas why Russia-India is building HYPERSONIC missaile to impres the world one more ...
And tell me whats the range of RIF-M Russian systems on your destroyers .... 150km perhaps ...and the range of the GRANIT ...700km ... so what if you detect it .. what are you going to do about it???? with tvelwe 7 Ton missiles flying supersonicly while performing evasive manuevres ..... I dont know about you but i give you small chanches of success...
Never the less of the price PLAN bought 500 120km range Sunburns ... its a good and bad thing at the same time ...
Besides those Sunburns are outdated for Russian navy and is carried only by small missile crafts only. Yakhont/Brahmos is the thing.
Dont play with words ... i have pictures of it on my comp but because of mess can not afford at the moment few hours to find it for you .... have a patiente a little.
I tought abou antiship missile... huh and Im glad , truly I am because China introducing DH-10 ... it is a very potent missile that will complicate things for the planers in Washinghton and Tokio.... but to compare it to Russian has no sence because of Kh-55 3000km range Russia is now introducing 3500km range Meteorit missile .... witch speeds up to 3000km/h
Meteorit missile at MAKS 2007
http://i17.tinypic.com/681cu2e.jpg
http://i17.tinypic.com/4mrxzqt.jpg
Well good for you and you can keep those crapy signals for yourself couse you dont have signals of R-33 / R-33S SARH / R-37 / R-37M / new 200km range missile / K-100
Well underestimation is your thing ... keep on rolling
Im not Russian but Croatian for that thing to be cleared.
Witch is exactly what Russia is douing ... but you pay little attention Russian news unlike China so you sound little outdated ... no ofence ...
Nothing without plans .... and there is not a greather thing but plans working smothly ...
Starting from 2009.. RuAF will produce 200 brand new Su-35BM marked Su-35M2 for itself. besides there is great potential that China will by this fighter as none of its fighter in its inventory can not matched it performance , missiles ..etc
All China has is Russian missiles + PL-12 ... wow .... LOL
Last edited by a moderator:
Gripenator
Banned Member
I can tell you MIG-31 is the KING of all BVR fight and as one MIG-31M is armed with 4 R-77 and 6 R-37M nothing comes close and no one (except Raptor) stand a chanche to catch him.
Cut the crap, try an F-15E with the new AIM-120C7, I believe even the EF-2000 can do it with the MBDA Meteor when it achieves IOC in 2010 when cued with the CAESAR radar. "Catch" is a relative term, especially when it is done with modern BVR AAMs.
Not anymore.... clapse of SU carried economic dissaster for Russia but now is a different thing. ALL RuAF will be modernizet by 2020 and priority heads to who other than MIG-31M2
That is just your prerogative.
Wrong. Kirov class cruisers where designed with extensive RCS reduction measurments. And with Tu-95MS in the air and Tu-22M3 roaming throw the sky with Kh-22 do you thing those RCS will do any help ... dont think so.
Proof? Sounds like bulldust to me. I've been monitoring the Kirov for years before its decommission and I can tell you that its RCS is similar to that of the iceberg that sank the Titanic (figure of speech)-unmistakablenfloorl:
And tell me smart one what do you know about Borei sonar and other systems, what do you know about Russian sub systems whitch have recive upgrade thow out time but where same name..... until something is published we can only speculate or do you think that same old systems from 80s where instaled on new Borei and will be instaled on every other Russian vesel.... dont think so... secrecy as Chinese is also Russian thing.
And human for that matter.
Russia plans to dismentle some 140 subs most of whitch are nuclear and that proces is nearing its end... those where old class subs with old equipment and with expensive maintenence and with no benefits from it... its the only logical thing they could do.... Eventualy all Typhoon and Delta-4 class will be desmenteled as new Borei class enters service ...same thing will hapen to Akula and Oscar-2 class with new Graney atack sub....
Since you are talking about Russian subs take a look at Chinas sub .... designing even Delta-4 standard of 80s pose a great chalange to China engineers even with Russian Rubin design buiro.
Depends on the help Rubin is willing to provide-and how much the Chinese are willing to pay for Russian 'know how' from Russian engineers who are only too willing to give them this sort of stuff in return for cold hard cash. Take the recent case of the engineer sentenced to 13yrs for transferring BM technology (guidance systems) to the PLA No.27 Institute (Rocketry).
LOL what a mean delusive argument....and jet you fly at old soviet Tu-16 LOL LOL suce me ... litle modernised called H-6K .... well suit yourself but I rather fly superconic MACH 2... bomber with grater range and payload passing modernization with 3 Kh-22 400km range MACH 4 antiship missiles.
besides India operates or will operate 4 Tu-22M3 ... I read the document but can not remember it exactly...
In this slugging match the bomber doesn't matter-it's the cruise missiles-think 1500+ land based improved DH-10=the GLCM problem that bankrupted the USSR appearing again.
I shall leave the rest of the rebutting regarding the PLA to TP, who knows much more about the PLA than I do.
Cut the crap, try an F-15E with the new AIM-120C7, I believe even the EF-2000 can do it with the MBDA Meteor when it achieves IOC in 2010 when cued with the CAESAR radar. "Catch" is a relative term, especially when it is done with modern BVR AAMs.
Not anymore.... clapse of SU carried economic dissaster for Russia but now is a different thing. ALL RuAF will be modernizet by 2020 and priority heads to who other than MIG-31M2
That is just your prerogative.
Wrong. Kirov class cruisers where designed with extensive RCS reduction measurments. And with Tu-95MS in the air and Tu-22M3 roaming throw the sky with Kh-22 do you thing those RCS will do any help ... dont think so.
Proof? Sounds like bulldust to me. I've been monitoring the Kirov for years before its decommission and I can tell you that its RCS is similar to that of the iceberg that sank the Titanic (figure of speech)-unmistakable
nfloorl: And tell me smart one what do you know about Borei sonar and other systems, what do you know about Russian sub systems whitch have recive upgrade thow out time but where same name..... until something is published we can only speculate or do you think that same old systems from 80s where instaled on new Borei and will be instaled on every other Russian vesel.... dont think so... secrecy as Chinese is also Russian thing.
And human for that matter.
Russia plans to dismentle some 140 subs most of whitch are nuclear and that proces is nearing its end... those where old class subs with old equipment and with expensive maintenence and with no benefits from it... its the only logical thing they could do.... Eventualy all Typhoon and Delta-4 class will be desmenteled as new Borei class enters service ...same thing will hapen to Akula and Oscar-2 class with new Graney atack sub....
Since you are talking about Russian subs take a look at Chinas sub .... designing even Delta-4 standard of 80s pose a great chalange to China engineers even with Russian Rubin design buiro.
Depends on the help Rubin is willing to provide-and how much the Chinese are willing to pay for Russian 'know how' from Russian engineers who are only too willing to give them this sort of stuff in return for cold hard cash. Take the recent case of the engineer sentenced to 13yrs for transferring BM technology (guidance systems) to the PLA No.27 Institute (Rocketry).
LOL what a mean delusive argument....and jet you fly at old soviet Tu-16 LOL LOL suce me ... litle modernised called H-6K .... well suit yourself but I rather fly superconic MACH 2... bomber with grater range and payload passing modernization with 3 Kh-22 400km range MACH 4 antiship missiles.
besides India operates or will operate 4 Tu-22M3 ... I read the document but can not remember it exactly...
In this slugging match the bomber doesn't matter-it's the cruise missiles-think 1500+ land based improved DH-10=the GLCM problem that bankrupted the USSR appearing again.
I shall leave the rest of the rebutting regarding the PLA to TP, who knows much more about the PLA than I do.
Oh so your comparing Mig-25’s and with Syrian pilots and inferior tehnology because Soviet Union sold monkey models , to new Mig-31M2 upgraded with the
advanced radars , ARE YOU JOKING????
First of all it wasnt easy to shot down the Mig-25 , it took alot of time to prepare..
Besides they didn't know on How to treat Interceptor aircraft..and that's not fighter....
Care to tell me how PLAAF will INTECEPT MIG-31 BEFORE IT SHOTS AWACS FROM 400KM+ and 20km + height WITH ALMOST 3 MACH SPEED , after AWACS IS DESTROYED ,THEN PLAAF IS SITTING
DUCK FOR RUAF FIGHTERS AND A-50 , even though the RuAF missiles are more capable than PLAAF as prooven already before , China has basic inferior R-77 , and
from the facts the R-77D is already in production allthough not in huge numbers AND IT CAN be mounted on any fighter capable of carry the R-77..
Stop living in the 90's
I know you gonna start bullshiting about those shit 120km range missiles from this little boat , so il be short and effective..
That little boat would get bombed with Backfire’s or sunk from Oscar’s , it has no defence against air or ASW at all , MANPAD has no chance of shooting
anything like that.
Don't forget Tu-142's.
You seriusly have no clue do you?
The Borei is claimed to represent the state of the art in submarine design, incorporating characteristics that make it superior to any submarine currently
in service, such as the ability to cruise silently and be less detectable to sonar. Advancements include a compact and Integrated hydrodynamically
efficient hull for reduced broad band noise the first ever use of pump jet propulsion on a Russian nuclear submarine.
And if nothing else its certainly better than Jin class , thats a fact..
Thats old news , and besides look at China sub fleet , most of those scrapy old 70's diesel subs are a shame..
9 Akula’s , 3 Sierra , 4 Viktor’s , 1 Alfa , makes 17 SSN.
Vs
1 Shang and 5 old Han’s ..
OK , I know where I wanna be
I think you have no perseption and understanding for weapon systems , Tu-22M is capable of destroying every single ship from PLAN and there is ABSOLUTELY
NOTHING that PLAN can do because Kh-22 is fired from 400km , but it wouldn’t be fired from that long , but rather beyond PLAN ships anti air defence , and
PLAN has no carrier with fighters to intercept the Backfire’s so WHAT DO YOU THINK THEY WILL DO ???
Akula , especialy Akula II is 1 of the most silent submarines in the world , and there is nothing that PLAN has that can match it in every aspect its
better lmao...
The best SHANG class submarine ( 1 in service btw ) was launched in 2002 ?--- SEE
And the specifications and amarment make it comparable to no more than Viktor III which was introduced by Soviet Union in 70’s LOOOL...
So don’t even try comparing Akula or Akula II to any PLAN submarines because they are not anywhere NEAR..
What are you talking about dude , ICBM?
Russian missiles are 5-11m big , some of them fit in torpedo tubes..
Btw what Chinese missile has digital computer on board??
It seems that you know nothing about Granits or Yakhonts
I repeat again , salvo's of Granits or Yakhonts will sink even a carrier , there is nothing that any PLAN ship can do nubcake , its
against all logic....
1 Missile leads other if he got shot down another one will climbs and replace his role
and few kilometers from Target Granit will shot its Radar Seeker..so Jammer=Obsolete
This is a ROTFLMAO
No ship in PLAN is NEARLY CAPABLE of Kirov or Slava , especialy with the S-400 that they will have equiped , the PLAN ships can just say bye bye because
They are on large surface ship what do you expect coastal boats to go vs a fleet in a open sea..
YOu seem to miss alot of logic in naval warfare , coastal ships and missile boats are for shore defence.
not even US CSG would survive a barriage of volleys of Granits from Oscar SSGN’s yet alone some PLAN ships that are equiped with Russian systems btw lol..
R-37M will be EFFECTIVE against fighters.
And PL-12 DOESNT stand a chance , and its not even in serius production.
And bye bye Chinese AWACS , like I told earlyer..
Without AWACS even if PLAAF has same range missiles A-50 will detect them and guide the missiles , PLAAF has no chance .
PL-12 is not even in service yet , or in really low numbers and its nothing spectacular .. PLAAF has no missile that has bigger range than any RUAF missile and no AWACS they can use since they will get shot down by Mig-31.
How do you like that odds?
Granit , Yakhont , Club , Brahamos , all are much more capable than those PLAN anti ship missiles.
And so what if the Brahmos is a joint project , China doesnt have anything EVEN LIGHTSPEEDS close ..
Oh , cry me a river , who cry’d that Ws-2 is in service? LoL
And I never said its in service , I said PLAN has nothing to compare to Shkval II..
Or even Shkval for that matter..
Well Other Missile in the Salvo will climb up and replace his Role...Granit Salvo usually consist with 120 Missiles....
and Granit Have ECM and ECCM suite on her own.....
and i wanna know how that Chinese warship's CIWS can do against Armoured Missile that can choose target on its own
Volleys of Yakhonts or Granits are capable of sinking a Carrier , yet here you are claiming that PLAN ship can miraciusly defend against that kind of
attack ,thats not only ignoring the truth is also insulting to anti ship missiles lol..
Im not impresed with 240km , such missiles were made 40-50 years ago
They are actualy upgraded or beeing upgraded with those systems .
THIS IS ONE BIG LMFAO...
Did China have any plans for "delivery method" ?GLCM,SLCM or ALCM
Meteorit M Cruise Missile ranged 3000Km with Supersonic +plasma Stealth
DH-10 may work against "third world" country who doesn't have TOR-M1 or adequate SAM system..but when facing Russia...
besides DH-10 IS LACM , its a LAND ATTACK CRUISE MISSILE with a low speed lol...
With your logic so will China run out of coal.
Wish list? Those are all missiles in service ?
Its not in service , its planned to start production , don't mix that up , every source claims the same , get me some proof of otherwise till i belive it , Iskander i still better..
China is THE MOST OVERRATED Military in the world , but mostly in Chinese people heads , because of propaganda , you need to wake up and face the truth ..
We have seen Chinese performance countless times and it has been far from effective..
In Korean war , they managed to push US back but at what cost , look at their casualties , the vast amount of casualties involved to defeat a little US force was incredible...
Also remember Sino-Soviet clash , Chinese lost 10 times more soldiers , so far for effectivness..
on 2005 Peace mission Russians were unimpresed with China's performance ..
Face the fact
Russia is the 2nd most powerfull country in the world
And China might be the 3rd in size , but CERTAINLY NOT IN EFFECTIVNESS ...
There are other country's as UK and France , not to mention some more that are far more effective than China ..
http://youtube.com/watch?v=85ohJxlR2LU
Last edited:
You should check out range of AIM-120C7 for fighter in chase flying 5km abouve your head ..... I bet its not even 10 km.
Besides F-15 can not be compared to MIG-31 since it has higher fly atitude and mutch greater speed but the most crutial thing is that MIG-31 has 1500 km range at MACH 2.35 and no F-15 stands a chance to even try to folow it. So cut the crap about F-15.
Meteor is a different story and will make things a bit dificult but is in development jet.
Perhaps Putins prerogative but not mines.... and with the amount of money pouring in to it I have no doubts ... It is however differnt story for you beliving Russia will always be in 90ies.
Kirov has smaler RCS than 9000 ton Spurance class ... for you being slapy whily monitoring Kirov is not my problem .... rather yours ...
nfloorl: about other things .... did not said mutch
Last edited:
I will prove you wrong only here, because I don't want to spend my day responding to your pointless remarks about Russia. China's economy is based on manufacturing... anyone would know that. China doesn't rely on coal to provide it with income. On the other hand, what would happen to Russia if there was no natural gas or oil in it? Russia would have no money to spend on anything. Russia would have no real source of growth and income.
If China ran out of coal... so what??? China still has billions and billions of dollars in exports of manufactered goods to use as income.
Xander, THINK about what you are saying. You claim many things about Russia's military that just aren't true. Learn from what Crobato is saying.
crobato was prooven wrong , and you can think what you wan't , I already have a opinion about you because you never analyse and write anything comprehensive , you only think and claim , and thats why I think that you don't know very much about anything in the military , and until you proove me wrong I will continue to think that.
MiG-31 king of BVR fight? How can that be? It has *enormous* RCS. When it uses its radar, its going to scream "I'm here, shoot me".
You want to know how to shoot down one of those things? Simple. Go head on. At Mach 3, it will have so little time to respond against a head shot by a BVRAAM. The combination of head on speeds means that a missile with a nominal range of 70km, can be launched as far as 100km because you are anticipating the incoming target velocity.
Mach 3? Who fights at Mach 3? All you can do at Mach 3 is *overshoot* everyone around you. The collective data by the USAF indicates that the most common speeds for air combat is actually below transonic.
200km missile? Well, all it does is give the target an enormous time warning to evade, and evasion will not be hard due to the size of the missile which makes easier to evade.
Higher altitudes do not mean anything. The majority of air combat is statistically proven to be in the low to medium altitudes. You want fly 60,000 fleet, while fighter bombers are going past you at less than 600 feet from the surface in a low altitude interdiction? *Ahem*.
Kirov has RCS lower than the Spruance class? Want to repeat that to all the members in this board who has at least some Basic Lesson 101 in Radar Cross Section reduction?
Where is the proof that the R-77D is in production?
How will an Oscar torpedo a wave piercing catamaran that runs on top of the water as fast as any torpedo?
How is the Borei state of the art in sub design? One of the measures for the next generation of submarines is to have a pump jet. The Sea Wolf has it. The Virginia class has it. The Barracuda has it. The Astute class has it.
The Borei doesn't use a pump jet. The shrouds covering the propeller is indicative of a skewed propeller, and all the art work I've seen so far on the Borei by Russian artists have a skewed propeller. Furthermore, its not proven and its not seen if the Borei uses much quieter natural circulation pressure water reactors like the Ohio Class. Funny thing is, the Borei is the first time ever for a Russian SSBN to use a single shaft design when the US has this for decades. Russian SSBNs and SSGNs like the Deltas and Oscars have been running on dual shafts and propellers which means obviously double the noise of one shaft and propeller.
PL-12 not in production? Then why do you have a lot of J-10, J-8 and J-11B pictures carrying it? PLAAF official journals describe exercises with active guided BVRAAM and they have been doing for some years now. PL-12 was first observed in photographs in 2004 with a PLAAF tactical and evaluation unit using J-10s.
Granit and Yakhont are not launched in torpedo tubes. Its odd for a guy like Xander accusing someone of not doing their homework when he in fact needs to read up a lot. Granit is in fact, launched from Oscar class subs through special angled tubes mounted flush on the back of the sub.
And you really need to know more about China's AshMs. Unlike Russia and the Soviet Union, where a myriad of designs means logistical nightmares and incompatibilities, China choose to follow the Western pattern by determining first the "sweet spot" size for a missile, then implement it as a standard so this one missile is the same for surface ship, shore based, aircraft and sub marine launched.
And you think PLAN ships are vulnerable now? The latest shows RCS reduction measures. In addition, they are fitted with at least two Type 730 CIWS, even with the Jiangkai frigates. The Jiangkai II frigates, which we now have four and counting, use the HH-16 which is inspired from the Shtil-1 through a hot launched Mk-41 style VLS launchers. That means in addition to the RIF-M and HQ-9 systems, the PLAN now has three VLS systems in operation.
Kh-22? Its not a sea skimmer, which means easy interception, and given that the PLA has bought the missile, they know its flight characteristics and electronics. Which means countermeasures.
China's sub numbers projected to 2010:
3 Hans 091 upgraded (flank sonar, asynchronous screw)
1 Xia class 092 upgraded
1 or 2 Jin class 094
4 093 Shang class SSN
12 Kilo SSK upgraded to SSG.
16 to 20 Song class SSG
4 to 8 Yuan class SSG
17 Ming class for training and mine laying.
The amazing thing about China's nuclear subs, while they're not certainly the best or aspiring to be, is that they're not floating Chernobyls and at least they have the conscience to contain the problem by not building and forcing sailors into dangerous subs. When problems arose in Han 401 and 402, they choose not to build lots of them, but rather try to fix the problems for the later subs even if it means refitting them as often as possible. Russia, the Soviet Union, despite knowing all the problems with their nuclear subs, still decided to build lots of them and willingly sacrificed sailor's lives in them. When they leased a Charlie class to India, even that sub (also called the Chakra) cost lives and irradiated sailors.
At least when China retired its first two Hans, they were not asking Japan or the US for money to scrap them.
The Chinese own noise numbers for the Shang class is not anywhere like the Viktor III but more lilke the early 688 class. People were expecting that the Shang would look like the Viktor III but when the pictures finally came out, it looks a lot closer to the 688 class. It has an asynchronous screw which the Russians only had with the Akula, and a turbine electric hybrid drive that is similar to the French Rubis. Even with noise levels approaching the 688 or 688I, this standard is obsolete however, so if the latest Akula reaches this standard, no big deal either which is why Type 95 is now being developed.
Sino-Soviet clash in the Amur? China never lost 10X more soldiers. That's all made up. PLA actually regards that as a victory with war trophies to show. The PLA border force in fact managed to capture T-62s, which the Russians tried to determinedly recover but were all pushed back. The T-62, which gave the PLA valuable inside look at Russian tank technology, is now at a Beijing museum.
Oh and Shkval? China bought that from a former Soviet Republic. I think that was Uzbekistan? And besides I would be surprised if they are actually working on it, because hydrogen peroxide torpedoes are banned in the current Russian fleet, and are also banned now in the USN, when that was determined to be the cause of the Kursk sub disaster.
You want to know how to shoot down one of those things? Simple. Go head on. At Mach 3, it will have so little time to respond against a head shot by a BVRAAM. The combination of head on speeds means that a missile with a nominal range of 70km, can be launched as far as 100km because you are anticipating the incoming target velocity.
Mach 3? Who fights at Mach 3? All you can do at Mach 3 is *overshoot* everyone around you. The collective data by the USAF indicates that the most common speeds for air combat is actually below transonic.
200km missile? Well, all it does is give the target an enormous time warning to evade, and evasion will not be hard due to the size of the missile which makes easier to evade.
Higher altitudes do not mean anything. The majority of air combat is statistically proven to be in the low to medium altitudes. You want fly 60,000 fleet, while fighter bombers are going past you at less than 600 feet from the surface in a low altitude interdiction? *Ahem*.
Kirov has RCS lower than the Spruance class? Want to repeat that to all the members in this board who has at least some Basic Lesson 101 in Radar Cross Section reduction?
Where is the proof that the R-77D is in production?
How will an Oscar torpedo a wave piercing catamaran that runs on top of the water as fast as any torpedo?
How is the Borei state of the art in sub design? One of the measures for the next generation of submarines is to have a pump jet. The Sea Wolf has it. The Virginia class has it. The Barracuda has it. The Astute class has it.
The Borei doesn't use a pump jet. The shrouds covering the propeller is indicative of a skewed propeller, and all the art work I've seen so far on the Borei by Russian artists have a skewed propeller. Furthermore, its not proven and its not seen if the Borei uses much quieter natural circulation pressure water reactors like the Ohio Class. Funny thing is, the Borei is the first time ever for a Russian SSBN to use a single shaft design when the US has this for decades. Russian SSBNs and SSGNs like the Deltas and Oscars have been running on dual shafts and propellers which means obviously double the noise of one shaft and propeller.
PL-12 not in production? Then why do you have a lot of J-10, J-8 and J-11B pictures carrying it? PLAAF official journals describe exercises with active guided BVRAAM and they have been doing for some years now. PL-12 was first observed in photographs in 2004 with a PLAAF tactical and evaluation unit using J-10s.
Granit and Yakhont are not launched in torpedo tubes. Its odd for a guy like Xander accusing someone of not doing their homework when he in fact needs to read up a lot. Granit is in fact, launched from Oscar class subs through special angled tubes mounted flush on the back of the sub.
And you really need to know more about China's AshMs. Unlike Russia and the Soviet Union, where a myriad of designs means logistical nightmares and incompatibilities, China choose to follow the Western pattern by determining first the "sweet spot" size for a missile, then implement it as a standard so this one missile is the same for surface ship, shore based, aircraft and sub marine launched.
And you think PLAN ships are vulnerable now? The latest shows RCS reduction measures. In addition, they are fitted with at least two Type 730 CIWS, even with the Jiangkai frigates. The Jiangkai II frigates, which we now have four and counting, use the HH-16 which is inspired from the Shtil-1 through a hot launched Mk-41 style VLS launchers. That means in addition to the RIF-M and HQ-9 systems, the PLAN now has three VLS systems in operation.
Kh-22? Its not a sea skimmer, which means easy interception, and given that the PLA has bought the missile, they know its flight characteristics and electronics. Which means countermeasures.
China's sub numbers projected to 2010:
3 Hans 091 upgraded (flank sonar, asynchronous screw)
1 Xia class 092 upgraded
1 or 2 Jin class 094
4 093 Shang class SSN
12 Kilo SSK upgraded to SSG.
16 to 20 Song class SSG
4 to 8 Yuan class SSG
17 Ming class for training and mine laying.
The amazing thing about China's nuclear subs, while they're not certainly the best or aspiring to be, is that they're not floating Chernobyls and at least they have the conscience to contain the problem by not building and forcing sailors into dangerous subs. When problems arose in Han 401 and 402, they choose not to build lots of them, but rather try to fix the problems for the later subs even if it means refitting them as often as possible. Russia, the Soviet Union, despite knowing all the problems with their nuclear subs, still decided to build lots of them and willingly sacrificed sailor's lives in them. When they leased a Charlie class to India, even that sub (also called the Chakra) cost lives and irradiated sailors.
At least when China retired its first two Hans, they were not asking Japan or the US for money to scrap them.
The Chinese own noise numbers for the Shang class is not anywhere like the Viktor III but more lilke the early 688 class. People were expecting that the Shang would look like the Viktor III but when the pictures finally came out, it looks a lot closer to the 688 class. It has an asynchronous screw which the Russians only had with the Akula, and a turbine electric hybrid drive that is similar to the French Rubis. Even with noise levels approaching the 688 or 688I, this standard is obsolete however, so if the latest Akula reaches this standard, no big deal either which is why Type 95 is now being developed.
Sino-Soviet clash in the Amur? China never lost 10X more soldiers. That's all made up. PLA actually regards that as a victory with war trophies to show. The PLA border force in fact managed to capture T-62s, which the Russians tried to determinedly recover but were all pushed back. The T-62, which gave the PLA valuable inside look at Russian tank technology, is now at a Beijing museum.
Oh and Shkval? China bought that from a former Soviet Republic. I think that was Uzbekistan? And besides I would be surprised if they are actually working on it, because hydrogen peroxide torpedoes are banned in the current Russian fleet, and are also banned now in the USN, when that was determined to be the cause of the Kursk sub disaster.
And he burned his engines that the engines would never be usable anymore in the process.
Iranian F-4s managed to nail Iraqi MiG-25s.
We have had all sorts of big talk for years and years now that don't live up. Trying to modernize a Seventies design actually underlines another problem. The constant need to refurbish old fighters is an indication that you have problems designing new ones.
Oh please. RCS measures are easy to be seen with the eye if you have some basic understanding of it. What you're saying is like claiming a B747 can be stealthy.
The Kh-22 is not a stealthy missile and the Tu-22s, well, both India and China has rejected them after they were offered.
That was only speculated but never shown, given how Chinese subs are so much more Western in orientation except for the double hulls. Delta 4 has double screws and double shafts, why would Chinese designers choose that layout? At least they went and tried directly to a single shaft design like in the Xia, rather than a technological dead end with multiple screws and shafts.
LOL. A bomber with 3 Kh-22 cannot fly at Mach 2. In fact, what you are describing is nonsense since the bombers you pertain can only carry one of them. Check the pictures here.
http://www.globalsecurity.org/wmd/world/russia/as-4.htm
They are not and that has been rejected.
People think simple so you think they're copies.
094 has a single shaft design with skewed 7 bladed propeller. Delta-X uses twin screws and shafts with conventional 4 or six bladed propellers. The propulsion nature already means that the two subs are greatly different from the inside.
The only thing the Yuan and the Kilo has in common is a double hull concept. The Yuan uses a German licensed engine, has diving planes in the sail not in the hull, has flank sonars which the Kilos does not, and a standard cross shaped tail while the Kilo has a T shaped tail.
I've seen picture of HQ-9 and it does not look like any of the S-300. Despite the superficial similarity in layout of Sea Eagle radars to Fregat, and the HH-16 illuminators to the Orehks, the electronics are quite different (Orekhs don't use an RCS reduced housing, nor does the Shtil-1 VLS proposal used hot launched MK-41 style VLS.
The Russians have been talking of making the Su-35 for over a decade now and the plane has gone through multiple iterations. That's what I mean by talk that is not matched in action.
They also have PL-11 which is based on Aspide and approximately equivalent to AIM-7M, and the PL-8 which is based on the Python 3 but has been upgraded with wide off boresight seekers and HMS. And don't give that the PLAAF does not know about R-33, R-37 and other Russian missile signal intelligence, given their espionage efforts.
- Status