I was skeptical as well. That's the problem with " false news ." There were reports of landing ships hit as well as patrol boats. I'm not sure on those reports either.



I understand EMCON as well. The question is how wise it was to observe EMCON when you are in a state of war with an enemy that has abilities such as the Ukraine. Yes, I know, Russia never declared war on the Ukraine.



You make valid points, Kapitan. As always, it's good to have you Kapitan to clarify points that have been made. :Kaleun_Thumbs_Up:

Personally if I was in command and that close to shore knowing that the enemy is likely going to know my location anyway I wouldn't bother with EMCON

So far we know of 3 ships hit which does include two small craft and Moskva

That was precisely my point. Being that close to shore, a competent ship commander would have taken the appropriate precautions consistent with the safety of his command. Unless the ship commander wasn't briefed, he would have known the Ukrainians had access to the anti ship missiles and again, taken precautions.

China realistically can win a war without firing a shot, and simply just use trade and this looks like the angle they are going for right now.

Like the soviets they know they cant compete platform for platform on the world stage or deploy globally like the USA, but what they do have is a network where by a lot of economies are reliant on them.
This includes European and American economies, how has the cost of living and prices done since sanctions on Russia?
Now imagine we put the same sanctions on China or China embargos us that cost of living will double if not triple, inflation will go through the roof.

Take a look at what happened when the OPEC countries cut off oil to the west in the 70s.

With so much now being produced in China it makes you wonder if the USA would be able to claw everything back in a short space of time, Id doubt it.

If you look at the list I put up of their naval units you can see the type of navy they are creating, its what we would call sea denial, they are focusing on the regional area right now.
Taiwan will be in that mix, they have enough landing ships and amphibs to go for it now and overwhelm the forces on Taiwan.

But I think they are stopping and looking at just what's going on in Ukraine, western weapons are performing well and soviet / Russian equipment with its man power and also tactics are not.
And don't forget China is largely based on a quasi soviet model.

Chinese can be corrupt probably no where near the scale of the soviet union or Russia, and to be frank the USA can also be corrupt.
The USA logistical network isn't exactly efficient, its no where near many European countries and that can stifle an economy, China is also not near the top of the list they have a lot of inefficiencies too.

but while that is said if you build a lot of ships at roughly the same time you come to a big problem, those ships are going to have to be maintained and if you launch 10 ships the same year there going to need maintenance at the same time it causes a shipyard problem especially if your still building.
Guess which country is already suffering from that problem.

Overall training and experience I have to hand that to the west like Russia Chinas military is predominantly conscript, yes you may have 2.2million in the army however as has been shown a small group of professional soldiers who are skilled and combat hardened can over come the numbers issue.
The Falkland's showed that one clearly, so when Whang Doe sees a dozen of his friends killed is he going to want to carry on? I don't think so.

Having been to China they grow fast they have started adopting a westernized mentality, Shenzhen is an area that made my jaw drop in 5 years the city went from nothing to 3 million with major high rise buildings and is now one of the tech centers of China.
If they lost it due to missile or bombing attacks then I think the will of the people would eventually come forward in overthrowing Xi Ping.

The average Chinese person doesn't want war just like the average Russian, so even with surpression of news and control of the media would the Chinese stomach heavy losses? I would say yes more than the west but eventually it would outrage them, whats more the key would be who started it, the mood would be different if the USA started it and not China.

Times have changed and in some ways for the better.

For me it raises a lot of questions, Moskva from what I can deduce her position was mainly to provide air defense......well in this case total failure as we saw.

There seems to be no logic to their operation, their logistical supply chain is well non existent.
Their knowledge of what weapons Ukraine has should have given them a major advantage.

However now what were seeing is a "professional" :haha: army fighting a gorilla war.
That doesnt end well for any standing army they should have known that from their escapade in Afghanistan and also the US involvement in Afghanistan and Vietnam.

A co worker said to me its as if Putin is playing chess and Zelinsky is playing go.

I don't know how exact this is, 'cause it's taken from a book by Tom Clancy.
(Can't remember the title though)

In the book the author says that a SAM needs some sec after launch before being active-That's why Ships has CIWS or 40 mm anti air guns because the SM 2 need some sec or distance before getting active.

Can have remembered wrong though.

Markus

The rotary SA-N-9 system (S300) can only fire 1 missile from each rotary VLS at one time, the onboard system can manage up to 6 missiles at once but, the system needs an active air search radar and also the targeting radar to be switched on.

The rotary VLS is not as clean as the MK41 which can launch multiple missiles in one go and the aegis system can handle a decent number of missiles in one go too.
The same is for the type 996 and sea ceptor missiles on the type 23 and the Sampson S1850 system on the type 45 with its Viper missiles.

They all do need to be a distance away from the ship before they activate that's more for safety reasons, and I wont confirm to you the actual ranges on that.

CIWS such as goal keeper or Phalanx are a great tool they are point defence weapons systems, this will include sea ram as well.

Imagine an onion

The outer layer and for this lets say 30nm is covered by your best SAMs these being something like Aster 30 or SM2 for example.

The next layer is your Aster 15 or ESSM these have a shorter range lets just say 15nm

The next layer is your CIWS these are the goal keeper Phalanx and sea ram

Obvious reasons I have just pulled numbers from my backside but I am sure you get the picture


when you look at detection its pretty much the same as the missile defense its a layered defense.
If you were going platform v platform it might look something like this:

beyond that outer layer your likely going to have a submarine which will pick up and track major units and contacts subsurface and surface this can be 600nm away from a carrier group

AWACS or an AEW capable aircraft be the next layer operating anywhere between 300-400nm from the group

Long range air and surface search radars they are out to 200nm

Short range search radar 75nm

Targeting radar 50nm

Its all layered defense it gives you multiple chances to detect an incoming threat, if my memory serves me right the type 45 has 8 radar operators on the surface and air search radars, the burkes have 8-10.

Again I have just pulled some numbers out the backside here as I don't want to give anything away.

Just done a quick tally on the list this is what is realistically ocean capable IE able to deploy anywhere on any ocean and having a range beyond 3,000nm now its a rough guide but it gives you some idea on rough numbers that China can deploy globally if their operational tempo went up.

Large warships
2 CV
8 LPD / LHD / LHA
40 DDG
42 FFG
72 FFL (corvette)
68 SSN / SSK (Haven't included SSBN)

Auxiliaries
13 Oilers
7 Equipment carrying ships (RORO or PCTC)
4 Troop ships

In Build
2 CV
2 LPD / LHA / LHD
10 DDG
1 FFG
4 SSK / SSN

Using the 1/3 rotation meaning at any one time only 2/3 of the fleet are available for use that brings the numbers too this for ocean going warships and auxiliaries.

1CV
3 LHA / LHD / LPD
14 DDG
14 FFG
24 FFL
23 SSN / SSK
2 RoRo / PCTC
3 Troop carriers
5 Oilers

Quite frankly given the size of the oilers 5 of them wont be keeping that lot going for very long.

Again, you are very right. Traditionally, cruisers provide air support defenses within battle groups but their respective weaponry has a number of applications and the cruisers themselves can perform a number and variety of roles.

With regards to knowing what weaponry the Ukrainians can field, this is a good reason why I have my doubts as to how effective Ukraine receiving MiG- 29 fighters would have been. If Russia maintains records and I'm sure they do, they would know the block and lot number of the MiG-29's Poland has in their possession. With that knowledge, Russia would know how those MiG's were built including the algorithms on which their radar's and fire control suites were based and operating. Russia could jam those radars and those aircraft would be essentially flying and fighting blind. The Ukrainians have been doing fine with drones and anti aircraft and anti tank missiles. What they really need are cruise missiles.

I noticed you mentioned a " professional " army. A professional fighting force doesn't rape, murder and pillage. I know you and I'm sure everyone else feels the same way. However, the actions taken by Russian forces may well have been sanctioned by Russia itself. This may explain why there is such dissent within the rank and file members of the Russian military forces.




The U.S refers to that as phased array systems with interlocking components. Your information as usual has been informative and concise. Great breakdowns.

While the Russian air force will know what the capability and flight envelope of the Mig 29 will be and know the block numbers etc, they cant account for the upgrades put into them by the west.

A lot of Poland's Mig 29s came from Germany, these have had avionics upgrades as well as system and engine upgrades, they very likely use different radars and sensors to the original soviet fit.
The US did a lot of upgrading of soviet equipment when former Warsaw pact countries joined NATO probably the best example was the Bulgarian Mig 21s

As for cruise missiles you would need land launched cruise missiles and realistically the only ones that can offer that is the US with the land launched tomahawk.
It would be good but it might cause Russia to go potty and target NATO countries and right now with the way Putin is in his alleged ill health do we tempt it, if it is true he is dying then do we give the man who has absolutely nothing to loose that carrot?


Cruisers do perform many roles, predominantly AAW but they have command and control functions the Slava was no exception, like the US cruisers they also have a ASUW ASW capability too.

Personally I do think the cruiser is at the end of its life, if you look at the modern DDGs they can do nearly everything a cruiser can do so is it worth the expense of having 2 classes of ships doing the same thing.

Indeed which is why i put the "" around Professional with the laughing emoji because quite frankly no professional army does this sort of thing.
Unfortunately the USA and UK have engaged in some undesirable practices as well but id say they are isolated incidents and absolutely no where near the level of what were seeing.

They don't call the Russian red army the Romping Stomping red army for nothing :03:

Yep phased array layered air and surface defense, it is incredibly effective, the only warship that currently can beat the US Aegis systems are the type 45 DDG sampson S1850 combo when it comes to detection range and tracking, problem is we don't have the missiles for the range :haha: so thats where the US has the UK.

@kapitan.

I didn't want to assume the Fulcrum MiG-29's had their avionics and weapon control suites upgraded. Israel has upgraded the MiG's of various countries and has a great reputation with regards to those upgrades.

If the Polish MiG's have been upgraded to NATO standards, then I am at a loss as to why they haven't been made available to the Ukraine.


With regards to the " professional " army comment, this is why I also put the "" in as well. They are hardly professional.

Only a few weeks ago the Polish government offered the USA all of their Mig 29s in exchange for similar aircraft (something like the F16 C/D) so that the USA could pass on the Migs to Ukraine

Poland has been using updated Mig 29s with upgraded western avionics and systems I certainly know the IFF system was installed along with some other systems
Not 100% sure but I do believe their Klimov engines were replaced with GE ones

I certainly remember the plan a few weeks ago and it fell apart at the last minute. I hope the U.S reconsiders it's position on the MiG's.

They need to but also id argue provide some training too and rope the Europeans in on it as well.

I agree. Not sure about the other European countries although I'm sure they have competent pilots but the U.K and Germany have always had exceptional pilots. Perhaps training from U.S pilots as well.