Do you support or oppose the Iran nuclear deal?

Do you support or oppose the Iran nuclear deal?

  • I support the deal

    Votes: 6 35.3%
  • I oppose the deal

    Votes: 9 52.9%
  • Other

    Votes: 2 11.8%

  • Total voters
    17

Harrekin

Well-Known Member
Yeah, I know an Iowa now has 32 tomahawks on board, but the unfortunate thing is that the Russian's CIWS is probably one of the best CIWS out there. That's why we're going towards overwhelming them.
HAD.

"Costly to maintain, the battleships were decommissioned during the post-Cold Wardraw down in the early 1990s. All four were initially removed from the Naval Vessel Register; however, the United States Congresscompelled the Navy to reinstate two of them on the grounds that existing naval gunfire support would be inadequate for amphibious operations.

This resulted in a lengthy debateover whether battleships should have a role in the modern navy. Ultimately, all four ships were stricken from the Naval Vessel Register and released for donation to non-profit organizations.

With the transfer of Iowa in 2012, all four are part of various non-profit maritime museums across the U.S."
 

OddBall1st

Well-Known Member
Yeah, I know an Iowa now has 32 tomahawks on board, but the unfortunate thing is that the Russian's CIWS is probably one of the best CIWS out there. That's why we're going towards overwhelming them.

No, draw it into the ice, Iowa`s do better in the packice. or, keep them busy by air, plus you can just keep coming til you cut it in half with the bow....those rockets don`t go in armor,...none of them.
 

pnwmystery

Well-Known Member
@OddBall1st There's actually a lot of debate right now in the US Navy about how we should upgrade our fleet. We're currently out-ranged by Russia's, China's, and India's anti-ship missiles. 18 of our Aegis' are used for defense purposes too, not offensive purposes. The BrahMos doesn't need to be armor piercing if it has a shaped charge and goes over Mach 3. The kinetic energy alone would be nuuuuuts.

@Harrekin oops, yeah, HAD since they're now museum ships

@Darth Vapour rofl "will “mostly” use nuclear warheads because these can destroy “the entire cloud of incoming warheads with no need to determine true threats from dummies.”" While effective, if they're going to blow those up over Russia if it ever comes down to it, they're going to have a really bad time.
 

OddBall1st

Well-Known Member
lol tomohawks
Russia is currently developing the S-500 mobile surface-to-air missile system, which was announced to be deployed in 2013. The S-500 will be an upgraded version of the S-400. It will fulfill air defense and ballistic missile defense missions.

It is currently being developed to have the capability of destroying supersonic aircraft, cruise missiles, and ballistic missiles. While the S-400 is designed to defend against short and medium range missiles, the S-500 will be designed to combat intercontinental ballistic missiles (ICBM). What remains a source of conjecture, however, is the kind of interception the S-500 missiles will use. In 2011, General Director of the Almaz-Antey corporation Igor Ashurbeili said that for the interception of ballistic missiles, the S-500 will “mostly” use nuclear warheads because these can destroy “the entire cloud of incoming warheads with no need to determine true threats from dummies.” 1 At the same time, reports about the new interceptors, the 77N6-N and 77N6-N1, suggest that system will employ hit-to-kill.


Line drawing of 9M82 and 9M83 missiles, which are used with the S-400 system.

Since it is still in development, little is known about the S-500 system. The system is expected to be capable of simultaneous engagement with up to 10 targets at a maximum range of 600 km. The S-400 can only handle a maximum of six targets up to a range of 400 km.2 The S-500’s interceptors will operate at an altitude higher than 185km. The system will have a response time of about three to four seconds, which is considerably shorter than the S-400 which is rated at nine to ten seconds. 3

Two new missiles have been designed for the S-500 (and the S-400): the 77N6-N and the 77N6-N1. They were reported to be capable of direct engagement with targets flying at hypersonic speeds (seven kilometers per second). However, it is not clear when the 77N6-N and the 77N6-N1 enter service given that facilities for their production have yet to be built. The agreed timeframe for the missiles’ delivery was reported to be early 2014. According to Izvestia, the new plants in Kirov and Nizhniy Novgorod will cost 41.6 and 39.5 billion rubles respectively.4

The S-500 is expected to use the following radars: the 91N6A(M) acquisition and battle
management radar, the revised 96L6-TsP acquisition radar, and the new 76T6 multimode
engagement and 77T6 ABM engagement radars.5

T-hawlk is slow but can loiter.
 

OddBall1st

Well-Known Member
@OddBall1st There's actually a lot of debate right now in the US Navy about how we should upgrade our fleet. We're currently out-ranged by Russia's, China's, and India's anti-ship missiles. 18 of our Aegis' are used for defense purposes too, not offensive purposes. The BrahMos doesn't need to be armor piercing if it has a shaped charge and goes over Mach 3. The kinetic energy alone would be nuuuuuts.

@Harrekin oops, yeah, HAD since they're now museum ships

@Darth Vapour rofl "will “mostly” use nuclear warheads because these can destroy “the entire cloud of incoming warheads with no need to determine true threats from dummies.”" While effective, if they're going to blow those up over Russia if it ever comes down to it, they're going to have a really bad time.

The corrupt SOB`s tried that Zumwalt rip off shit,...til me and a couple others ripped it apart to some interested readers.

32 went to four,..one is complete.
 

Harrekin

Well-Known Member
@OddBall1st There's actually a lot of debate right now in the US Navy about how we should upgrade our fleet. We're currently out-ranged by Russia's, China's, and India's anti-ship missiles. 18 of our Aegis' are used for defense purposes too, not offensive purposes. The BrahMos doesn't need to be armor piercing if it has a shaped charge and goes over Mach 3. The kinetic energy alone would be nuuuuuts.

@Harrekin oops, yeah, HAD since they're now museum ships

@Darth Vapour rofl "will “mostly” use nuclear warheads because these can destroy “the entire cloud of incoming warheads with no need to determine true threats from dummies.”" While effective, if they're going to blow those up over Russia if it ever comes down to it, they're going to have a really bad time.
I am so high right now...

Blazed a fat one while I wrote my last message...fucking blown away now.

Pretty impressive show of force, the broadside from an Iowa.
 
Top