The B-52's and B-1's wouldn't need to fly anywhere near Russia's coastline. Those LACM's have an extremely long range. And there are alot of em'. In the context of numbers, you're probably right that some may get through.....possibly. AEGIS's strength lie in connectivity, sensor coverage, fast response, missile quality, and electronic warfare/ECM. These Russian systems have alot against them in that regard. But I gotta tell you, on the same note, I understand Russia could do some damage of their own as well. I don't deny that. I just think the quality of these AEGIS ships, and capabilities of their systems might make anybody think twice before launching any kind of attack. WW3 would stink for both the USA and Russia if they were to be on opposing sides.

I'm not so sure about this. The only thing I can say is that subs are difficult to detect for any nation. I actually believe that these ships (AEGIS) would perform pretty well if on a war-footing in ASW. Also depends on the environments thay are dealing with them. From what I remember, there were a few times where USN ships were surprised by diesel subs. But I'm not quite certain what the circumstances were. Based upon the evidence that the USN has leased a Swedish AIP sub to begin looking at tactics and sensors to deal with the threat, Im would agree that the USN probably has difficulties in this area. At this point, pretty much every nation does.

USN has neglected submarines since the end of cold war and thier navy has gone to dissoray both in strength and finacialy.

buget went down 12.3% in 5 years for the USN and at the moment that just enough to cover what they have hence why they decomissioning loads of ships and submarines early

russian navy buget went up 11.77% in the last 8 years and can now afford to maintain what they got and build smaller numbers of new ships.

as for the uk buget increased in the last 5 years by 3%

germany decreased by 4.2%

All I can say is that there is alot of speculation there. And no, the SM-2 is pretty high in quality. Where and When did the USN test against training Exocets. This last summer, they were fielded against low flying supersonic drones and intercepted every last one of them.

Right now, Russia has 9 Oscars, not 12. And I'm certain that they're all not operational right now. Oscars only carry 24 ASuW missiles. If the battle group has just 2 AEGIS ships they can handle a measly 24 missiles. That's not enough to get through. Even in Soviet times, the Soviets understood that 1 Oscar was not enough to repel a USN battle group with missiles. And if the Oscar launched, the Battle group now has datum to begin a search.

Opps. Sorry mods. Double post. Please delete. :-?

according to ship data and ship list russia oparates 12 oscar class submarines if kursk was still around it be 13

SM2 wastested this year during a thursday war (RN weekly training exercise) multinational

the SM2 failed to hit 3 of the 12 targets (drones) with the british system failing to intercept only one

(might be mission thing dont know) but they did miss or were told to miss or something

SA-N-9 is also very high quality can shoot down very fast sea skimming missiles there gets a point though where it cant as with all missiles

You talk about budget cuts. The USN is still building Virginia SSN's, DD(X) is still being developed, OHIO's are going through a conversion for 4 SSGN, And we're still adding Burke hulls into service. Regardless of what you say, nobody is going to challenge the USN for sea supremacy in the near term. I don't know where you get your facts but the USN is actually getting more money in the budget and it's overall capabilities are expanding.

Bottom line, nobody can project naval power anywhere near the USN.

Most of Russia's surface fleet is still in disarrray we still haven't seen Borei. From what I understand the Russians don't go to sea very often either. I am very impressed with the UK's efforts however with their Type 45 and Germany with their 214 subs.

According to Janes and Globalsecurity the number is 9. And that's current for this year.

When did this test happen, and can you provide some kind of link? What type of drones were they? What ships were involved? What month?

navy news think it was for mission damaged simulated they do that often was watching something on HMS richmond where they were told to miss and let the "missile hit" so they could practice a hull rupture

exercises are rigged :nope:
9 active 12 availible janes is a good source but they have in the past missed alot out ! global security isnt realy a good source i found half thier infomation totaly wrong it contradicted everything else

when i get my my folders out (not even going to attempt it today) il name every oscar class that is availible for active duty

(oh boy i dred this gunna be like hiroshima on a good day :o )

ummm? guys?? the battleships! focus on the battleships!!!

we are and thier eqivilents

oscar SSGN equivelent to under water battle ship

Kirov is in its own right a battle cruiser / ship

It looks like the battleships won't be joining the fleet...new link on subsim's homepage states that a new bill was passed sending the Iowa to California and the Wisconsin to stay in Norfolk...both as museums. :nope: :down: :cry:

I think that could be too expensive modernise the battleships .

Whit this money is possible built a new ship class and more adapted to the modern warfare.

A battleship is very strong but a single missile that pass the antimissile screen can destroy it or damage enough to return to port.

it´s like a magnet for the missiles or torpedos, too big and heavy, not very maneuverable.and his huge siluette could be detected by radars a lot of miles of distance.

The Bismarck battleship was mortally wounded by a swordfish biplane with a torpedo, despite the heavy AA barrier.

The hood destroyed by a single shell .

The yamato sunk by planes and torpedos.

General belgrano despite the antitorpedo belt , was sunk by a british submarine.

They can put a modern weapons system but the enemies has this sistems too and the forces are very balanced.

wasn't actually referring to missiles.

Missiles can be shot down.

Torpedoes can't.
Indeed, a study of Soviet doctrine vs a US CVBG is quite enlightening.

Basically, it amounted to two SSGNs moving into position ahead of the US CVBG, and receiving telemetry from satellites or an SSN in the vicinity of the task force. The SSN (or satellite) would be providing firing solutions for both the SSGNs and the Kirov/Slava/etc battlegroup sent to intercept.

Anyway, Soviet theory held that a Kirov battlegroup letting fly ALL its SSMs, and two or three SSGNs unloading ALL their SSMs, and a FULL REGIMENT(yes, regiment) of Tu-22ms would be involved in the attack.

They figured that would be enough to sink a carrier.

'Course, that was back in the SM-1 days, with the twin dual launches on the Ticos and no Burkes (IE., no VLS in the fleet). I doubt, with SM-2s in VLS launchers, even THAT would get through.

Torpedoes, though, torpedoes. THAT is the answer!

Russians have difficulties putting their subs including Oscars out to sea. Quality control is suspect. Pretty recently a Russian Admiral said that the Kirov was on the verge of "blowing up". Can't say that about any Ticonderoga, Type 42 Destroyer, Kongo, or Arleigh Burke. Kirov wouldn't last very long in any type of war situation. All it is is a nice big juicy target for 688(I). 2-3 Mark 48's under the hull would do the trick. :cool: :rock:

Sea Demon