the Soviets put missiles on just about everything that could float... the Soviets put missiles on just about everything that could float...Of COURSE it’s heavily armed... it’s Russian!!!
They put a gun on EVERYTHING, and then put another gun on each of the other guns.
It’s what they do...
In our leaders psychopathic minds, they are just another Libya.
“In the 1950s and 1960s, aircraft carriers were seen by Soviet military elites as imperialist tools of aggression, and any initiative by the USSR to build one of their own was shot down by the powers that be. “
I don’t think that was the reason. They aren’t stupid, and they weren’t following a non-aggressive course based on such a principle. They simply didn’t have the vital need to control sea lanes that we did. They are not and never have been a seafaring nation as a result of geography. Our problem was protecting far flung interests and trade, and lines of communication with Europe. We have two giant coastlines. That all screams for a powerful navy.
The Russians had an entirely different problem. Either a roll through Europe attack, or a defense of their massive homeland. Their lines of communication between the front and the homeland were on land. The red Army didn’t get their food, fuel, ammo, and tanks sent by sea.
So they developed what they needed, a tremendous SAM capability, mobile missiles, a very large and heavy mechanized army. Most of all, they developed all the nukes they could. If anyone tries a Barbarossa repeat, their home will be vaporized.
As a result, the Red Navy had two main goals, ICBMs from boomer subs close to our coasts, and attack subs to try to repeat the German success in hurting our lines to Europe and to watch our moves.
That’s why they didn’t build carriers and why we were never that big on SAMS. That’s why we had an enormous navy and world beating fighters, while they built a million tanks and artillery tubes.
Different needs gives different answers.
With an eye on the market...the express purpose of putting down the Arab Spring...the Russians did roll out this bad boy AND you can retrofit your older tanks with this turret:
https://i.ytimg.com/vi/J_pA0Or0Cqg/maxresdefault.jpg
The simple explanation of the Granit should be enlightening for most.
Actually this is not a new concept but old concert going back to the start of carriers
The Lexington and Saratoga CV2 and CV3 of the US Navy were based on battle cruiser hulls and they weren’t just carriers
They carried 8 8inch guns in 4 2 gun turrets ...they’re intended to basically be armed equal to a cruiser
These 8 inch gun turrets were pulled off during World War II but their initial idea was to have them far more heavily armed
Because its air wing was Sh#t.
And the flight deck missile launcher is a cool idea. But I would expect the Japanese Navy to have some sage advice about how keeping 20,000 pounds of explosives and god only knows how much rocket fuel 3 feet below a flight deck might be a bad idea.
Great article for a lay person like me. Keep posting Sukhoi-30mki.
Russia is as likely to shoot their own Carrier as they are shoot anything else.
Just look back at the Kursk.
I still believe that despite all the latest and greatest technology floating around out there, there is still a simple thing that can sink any ship. This thread is beginning to verge upon it. Our parents knew all about it.
