Wow, I'm from Spain, not precisely an ex-Soviet country. Even more, we have had a dictator for 40 years supported by USA on exchage of naval bases and airports.

The believe of the all-powerfull USA tech is growed by books and films.
If you read Clancy's books (specially the last ones), the Americans are the best in all and the rest are poor countries that can't do anything by themselves.

So, the rocked that launched the Apolo missions were designed for Germans, the ICBMs also.
The Atomic bomb too.
Norwegians (is correct the spell?) are the best country about oceanography, and that includes study of underwater sound propagation, ocean salinity and temperature and so on...
A lot of scientific discoveries in America are made by European an Asian people that works for the Americas.

That's because the U.S. have the money and the will. I agree that the overall of all radar, sonar, missiles, communications, vehicles... are the best on the world. But I can't see why not that country can be better in that kind of sensor, and that other country be better in avionics...
And there's another thing: the objetive. You can not have all things on the same sensor and can not put all kind of sensors on the same ship.
As an example, the cats have great night vission and can see objets in movement with great accuracy. On exange, they have not very good periferical sight.

Same thing happens with sonar. The Americans needed a specific kind of sonar, that can receive data on determinate range and frequency becuase their doctrine and the enemy (the Soviet Union).
Maybe the Americans have the best capacity for tracking nuclear boomers, but not diesels on shallow waters because that was not the priority.

Amazing. What a history lesson. All of us remember that famous battle when a lone US sub defeated the entire Soviet Navy...

Sorry Fre de Boer, your post is just too over-simplified. At this point, I find Hollywood or Clancy's books more believable.

And about cats...you do realise they don't have sonar? :yep:

You are walking on VERY thin ice here... Have you problems with geography, history, or both ?

Biased people. Yes, I have a problem with them. :yep: Do you know one? ;)

I'm just answering one. Personally, I don't bother where are you from. I'm answering to your arguments. You seem to do otherwise.

Unfortunately, reading in hurry then I didn't notice this:

Actually the thin ice you walked, already cracked.

Figured out who can pee farther yet guys?

PD

You might want to remember that sonar(originally asdic) and radar were both invented here in Britain

Active sonar, yes. Passive... is hard to say who invented it, but Leonardo Da Vinci already described that if you introduce a tube on the water and put your ear on one side, you can hear a boat from far distance.

Wonder what Dan Brown think about it :hmm: :rotfl:

Yes, I know they have also an excelent ear :yep: , but that will turn the topic to a "National Geographic" one :up:

Cats also clean their arse with their tongue. :rock:

I'ld say that all those navies mentioned are probably more or less capable of creating comparable sonar systems. Its probably safe to say that most of their systems are roughly on even par, with minor hedging and optimizations. The actual physics knowledge, mathematical algorithsm, and hardware needed to create those systems possessed by all.

If there are performance differences then they are most likely due to differences in program timelines and development budgets. Countries with smaller fleets have an advantage in that they can oftentimes implement new technology more quickly into their systems simply due to the fact that they have less of a fleet to upgrade. At the same time, altough a larger navy could update its tech, it may choose to hold off on upgrades because of the large number of platforms in service, and may even wait until a new more significant technology improvement has finished development until it fields the systems.

A good example of this is the evolution of Phased Array Radar Technology over the last thirty years: http://www.harpoonhq.com/waypoint/ar...rticle_044.pdf Many of the systems of the next generation european ships are as good or better than the original Aegis system, however, the US will hold off on upgrading its own systems until its ready to deploy its next generation of destroyers currently under development. Each side has temporary moments where its on top of the other.

*IF* a large budget power (i.e. the US) decides that it *MUST* have a superior system then it will bring its large $400+ billion dollar defense budget to bare, fielding the system when its ready. The obvious example of this is the VA and SW sub which has bested most (if not all) of the other subs in the world, but at double and triple the cost (3billion per sub).

All and all, like what has already been said, each side will claim a better system than the other.

Kurushio it is the arrogance to believe point blank that no can be better than you is what leads to the downfall of nations, companies, sports teams etc.

Sure overall the US leads but there are many areas in defence where the US might not have the lead and maybe lagged behind.

During the 80's and early 90's the Soviet Union/Russia was ahead in A2A missile technology. They had an operation ASRAAM equivalent a decade before anyone else.

How about the IRST, have been deployed on Russian aircraft starting I think with the MiG-23. Their missile tech is still good and I'd wager that in terms of microcircuit tech and processors they are up there now since they can get more open access to high end COTs stuff, no need to produce their own.

Torpedoes, take a look at the Spearfish the RN uses, speaking to a couple of guys who know the weapon, they'd take it over an ADCAP.

Sun Tzu would have a few words for you. Never believe that no one can be better that you. It will come back and bite you in the backside. It's the main reason the UK has slipped in standing.

Hm...that's interesting. What do you mean? Yes I myself have noticed that it many regards British pride and arrogance is more pronounced and more deeply intrenched than even American arrogance a lot of the tme...:hmm: :yep: ... but I never considered it a source of UK "slipping"... unless of course you mean starting back from the American Revolutionary War...:doh:

Actually, as someone who had family in Poland and Romania before the Nazis and the Stalinists did their best to make sure this wasn't the case, I think Kurushio needs to get his facts straight before he starts insulting people who lived through this personally.

Cheers,
David

http://www.subsim.com/radioroom/show...t=94484&page=3

2nd to last post...

I read it after I posted this.

Understood.

Cheers,
David

You are still living in a myth. Wake up and look at the realities.

thanks for reminding me why i havent read these forums lately !

:doh:

Quite a myth cosidering the Soviets lost the war...:rock:

Sorry, but what war? The cold war was mostly political. I doubt that you will ever know, except in you Clancy book, what would be a real confrontation between the Soviet army and the US/NATO. I can only believe that we would have seen more than one guy getting killed (like it is usually with this author). I think the Iraqi exemple is quite clear. At least, Clancy was correct on one thing, on how to destroy a federal building with an airplane.