Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you:
No adverts like this in the forums anymore.
Times and dates in your local timezone.
Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance.
Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely.
Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net.
If you are already a member then feel free to login now.
Aye two of those.
They were slotted to go into (Putin/Russia) Black Sea Fleet I believe.
Proud Member of the Infidels of OIF/OEF
No longer defending the US Military or US Gov't. Just going to ""**feed into your fears**"" with Duffel Blog Did not fight my way up on top the food chain to become a Vegan...
Warning: Stupid Allergy
Once you pull the pin, Mr. Grenade is no longer your friend
DE 6700
Harlequin 2500
RIP Muhammad Ali.
Jihadin, Scorched Earth 791. Leader of the Pork Eating Crusader. Alpha
So I also have to wonder if Egypt, which has very good trade relations with Russia is buying them to resell to Russia with the French being blind to the possibility of the trade. Certainly there is nothing anyone can do if Egypt takes possession of hem and flogs them to the Russians. Frankly the whole trade look dodgy. If I can see pitfalls in his in five minutes the French government can, and I have to wonder if this is just a means by which the French sell carriers to Russia from within NATO and get away with it.
Pretty sure there's going to be a "no reselling" clause in the contract.
And things like that mean exactly what when it comes to buying carriers.
A no resale clause might work to prevent you from selling Windows 7 second hand as a private user. Its not going to stop Putin forking out for the carriers, or the Egyptians from selling it.
What can anyone do about it? Write him a letter and tell Putin he is naughty.
It'd mean Egypt would torpedo their relationship with France for quite a while, and piss off Egypt's allies in the rest of the West.
Grey Templar wrote: I was under the impression these were relatively small ships.
Small in comparison to a full-sized Carrier. Still plenty big enough to ruin someone's day.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2015/11/15 22:41:20
For thirteen years I had a dog with fur the darkest black. For thirteen years he was my friend, oh how I want him back.
Yes, Egypt bought them for 950 million, which is really cheap. Russia was going to buy them for 1.53 billion. It seems the French needed to get rid of them as fast as possible.
Grey Templar wrote: I was under the impression these were relatively small ships.
Small in comparison to a full-sized Carrier. Still plenty big enough to ruin someone's day.
They have different roles to fleet carriers. Vessels like this either have an ASW role or are invasion barges. Egypt needs neither. Russia could do with the latter in its Black Sea fleet. They could land 80 tanks anywhere along the Ukrainian coast.
The only actual use Egypt will get from them is either prestige or anti-piracy, which is a reason to buy, albeit a bad one, Saudi Arabia probably wanted them for that reason and put a bid down and were rejected. Despite that fact that Saudis could pay for two carriers with spare cash and could almost certainly outbid the Egyptians.
Anti-piracy is a good reason, but the Gulf of Aden is pretty well covered from elsewhere.
Egypt doesn't need a navy for anything beyond coastal patrol, ships come to them.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2015/11/15 23:32:08
n'oublie jamais - It appears I now have to highlight this again.
It is by tea alone I set my mind in motion. By the juice of the brew my thoughts aquire speed, my mind becomes strained, the strain becomes a warning. It is by tea alone I set my mind in motion.
Waiting for my shill money from Spiral Arm Studios
Just saying, they got a pretty good deal. Sure its a little more than they need but better to have and not need than need and not have. They might not be used to their full and original purpose but its better than them not getting used at all.
Self-proclaimed evil Cat-person. Dues Ex Felines
Cato Sicarius, after force feeding Captain Ventris a copy of the Codex Astartes for having the audacity to play Deathwatch, chokes to death on his own D-baggery after finding Calgar assembling his new Eldar army.
Grey Templar wrote: Just saying, they got a pretty good deal. Sure its a little more than they need but better to have and not need than need and not have. They might not be used to their full and original purpose but its better than them not getting used at all.
With warships that is not really true. Warships require a huge load of money just to be maintained. If you don't need them, they become enourmous money wasters and you are better off scrapping them. That is also why France needed to get rid of them so fast. Just to have them sit there in port being useless was costing France a lot each day, on top of the huge sum they had to repay to Russia.
I also have to wonder what Russia needed those helicopter carriers for in the first place. The Russian Navy, excepting the submarines, is a defensive force. It is not like Russia really needs carriers to defend its shores. Russia does have an aircraft carrier, but apart from the prestige, I don't recall it ever being actually useful.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2015/11/16 14:37:27
Grey Templar wrote: Just saying, they got a pretty good deal. Sure its a little more than they need but better to have and not need than need and not have. They might not be used to their full and original purpose but its better than them not getting used at all.
With warships that is not really true. Warships require a huge load of money just to be maintained. If you don't need them, they become enourmous money wasters and you are better off scrapping them. That is also why France needed to get rid of them so fast. Just to have them sit there in port being useless was costing France a lot each day, on top of the huge sum they had to repay to Russia.
I also have to wonder what Russia needed those helicopter carriers for in the first place. The Russian Navy, excepting the submarines, is a defensive force. It is not like Russia really needs carriers to defend its shores. Russia does have an aircraft carrier, but apart from the prestige, I don't recall it ever being actually useful.
A strong navy is necessary for every serious world power. The Soviets initially started with a defensive fleet but later evolved towards a global fleet. The Soviet Union fell before the revised vision of Soviet naval power could be established. Russia inherited that position but at the time was bankrupt, and under Yeltsin, so nothing was done. Russia sold the fleet carriers they were building. Now Putin's Russia again wants a global navy, and is frankly correct to do so.
Russia is planning the construction of four fleet carriers, but currently doesn't have the yard capabilities to do so. The first hull is scheduled to be laid down in 2018.
n'oublie jamais - It appears I now have to highlight this again.
It is by tea alone I set my mind in motion. By the juice of the brew my thoughts aquire speed, my mind becomes strained, the strain becomes a warning. It is by tea alone I set my mind in motion.
Grey Templar wrote: Just saying, they got a pretty good deal. Sure its a little more than they need but better to have and not need than need and not have. They might not be used to their full and original purpose but its better than them not getting used at all.
With warships that is not really true. Warships require a huge load of money just to be maintained. If you don't need them, they become enourmous money wasters and you are better off scrapping them. That is also why France needed to get rid of them so fast. Just to have them sit there in port being useless was costing France a lot each day, on top of the huge sum they had to repay to Russia.
I also have to wonder what Russia needed those helicopter carriers for in the first place. The Russian Navy, excepting the submarines, is a defensive force. It is not like Russia really needs carriers to defend its shores. Russia does have an aircraft carrier, but apart from the prestige, I don't recall it ever being actually useful.
A strong navy is necessary for every serious world power. The Soviets initially started with a defensive fleet but later evolved towards a global fleet. The Soviet Union fell before the revised vision of Soviet naval power could be established. Russia inherited that position but at the time was bankrupt, and under Yeltsin, so nothing was done. Russia sold the fleet carriers they were building. Now Putin's Russia again wants a global navy, and is frankly correct to do so.
Russia is planning the construction of four fleet carriers, but currently doesn't have the yard capabilities to do so. The first hull is scheduled to be laid down in 2018.
They are mad. Russia is no naval power. Never has been. We should build more tanks instead. Tanks are fun.
-"Wait a minute.....who is that Frazz is talking to in the gallery? Hmmm something is going on here.....Oh.... it seems there is some dispute over video taping of some sort......Frazz is really upset now..........wait a minute......whats he go there.......is it? Can it be?....Frazz has just unleashed his hidden weiner dog from his mini bag, while quoting shakespeares "Let slip the dogs the war!!" GG
-"Don't mind Frazzled. He's just Dakka's crazy old dude locked in the attic. He's harmless. Mostly."
-TBone the Magnificent 1999-2014, Long Live the King!
Grey Templar wrote: Just saying, they got a pretty good deal. Sure its a little more than they need but better to have and not need than need and not have. They might not be used to their full and original purpose but its better than them not getting used at all.
With warships that is not really true. Warships require a huge load of money just to be maintained. If you don't need them, they become enourmous money wasters and you are better off scrapping them. That is also why France needed to get rid of them so fast. Just to have them sit there in port being useless was costing France a lot each day, on top of the huge sum they had to repay to Russia.
I also have to wonder what Russia needed those helicopter carriers for in the first place. The Russian Navy, excepting the submarines, is a defensive force. It is not like Russia really needs carriers to defend its shores. Russia does have an aircraft carrier, but apart from the prestige, I don't recall it ever being actually useful.
A strong navy is necessary for every serious world power. The Soviets initially started with a defensive fleet but later evolved towards a global fleet. The Soviet Union fell before the revised vision of Soviet naval power could be established. Russia inherited that position but at the time was bankrupt, and under Yeltsin, so nothing was done. Russia sold the fleet carriers they were building. Now Putin's Russia again wants a global navy, and is frankly correct to do so.
Russia is planning the construction of four fleet carriers, but currently doesn't have the yard capabilities to do so. The first hull is scheduled to be laid down in 2018.
They are mad. Russia is no naval power. Never has been. We should build more tanks instead. Tanks are fun.
That was the prevailing thinking at the Frunze for most of the life of the Soviet Union, heavily army centric. Gorshkov worked hard to overcome that thinking, fit to give the Soviet Navy power projection through a large submarine fleet and Naval Aviation branch and eventually the initial stages of construction of a carrier fleet. Existing and previous Soviet/Russian carriers work on a limit role. The Moskva class were there to defend the bastion fleet, the Kuznetsov class had a similar role but is capable of limited power projection.
Tanks cant swim, and those that can cant swim far. The lack of a fleet for global carrier based operations hurt the Soviets, it prevented them from properly securing Cuba or supporting Soviet client states interests in Africa. Capabilities most western fleets take forgranted.
China has learned these lessons and is starting on a major global fleet. Russia is following suit.
n'oublie jamais - It appears I now have to highlight this again.
It is by tea alone I set my mind in motion. By the juice of the brew my thoughts aquire speed, my mind becomes strained, the strain becomes a warning. It is by tea alone I set my mind in motion.
Grey Templar wrote: Just saying, they got a pretty good deal. Sure its a little more than they need but better to have and not need than need and not have. They might not be used to their full and original purpose but its better than them not getting used at all.
With warships that is not really true. Warships require a huge load of money just to be maintained. If you don't need them, they become enourmous money wasters and you are better off scrapping them. That is also why France needed to get rid of them so fast. Just to have them sit there in port being useless was costing France a lot each day, on top of the huge sum they had to repay to Russia.
I also have to wonder what Russia needed those helicopter carriers for in the first place. The Russian Navy, excepting the submarines, is a defensive force. It is not like Russia really needs carriers to defend its shores. Russia does have an aircraft carrier, but apart from the prestige, I don't recall it ever being actually useful.
A strong navy is necessary for every serious world power. The Soviets initially started with a defensive fleet but later evolved towards a global fleet. The Soviet Union fell before the revised vision of Soviet naval power could be established. Russia inherited that position but at the time was bankrupt, and under Yeltsin, so nothing was done. Russia sold the fleet carriers they were building. Now Putin's Russia again wants a global navy, and is frankly correct to do so.
Russia is planning the construction of four fleet carriers, but currently doesn't have the yard capabilities to do so. The first hull is scheduled to be laid down in 2018.
They are mad. Russia is no naval power. Never has been. We should build more tanks instead. Tanks are fun.
That was the prevailing thinking at the Frunze for most of the life of the Soviet Union, heavily army centric. Gorshkov worked hard to overcome that thinking, fit to give the Soviet Navy power projection through a large submarine fleet and Naval Aviation branch and eventually the initial stages of construction of a carrier fleet. Existing and previous Soviet/Russian carriers work on a limit role. The Moskva class were there to defend the bastion fleet, the Kuznetsov class had a similar role but is capable of limited power projection.
Tanks cant swim, and those that can cant swim far. The lack of a fleet for global carrier based operations hurt the Soviets, it prevented them from properly securing Cuba or supporting Soviet client states interests in Africa. Capabilities most western fleets take forgranted.
China has learned these lessons and is starting on a major global fleet. Russia is following suit.
True, but I still don't think it is a good idea. Support for Cuba and other client states destroyed the Soviet economy, it was something they did not have the resources for. And I am not sure the Russian Federation has the resources for global power projection either. Sometimes I think that in the Kremlin, they spend more time singing patriotic songs and drinking vodka to get drunk on Russian glory, than actually making realistic, good plans. Ah well, it'll probably work out someway.
LordofHats wrote:I actually agree with Iron Captain (surprise right?). Tanks are fun!
And just because its a tank don't mean it can't be used at sea either;
Goes with this image to show there is nothing tanks can't do!
LordofHats wrote: I actually agree with Iron Captain (surprise right?). Tanks are fun!
Yes they are, and they are important too, but aren't everything. For modern conventional power, you need airpower first (which can mean carriers), good quality infantry, then massed armour/artillery hammer in that order.
True, but I still don't think it is a good idea. Support for Cuba and other client states destroyed the Soviet economy, it was something they did not have the resources for. And I am not sure the Russian Federation has the resources for global power projection either. Sometimes I think that in the Kremlin, they spend more time singing patriotic songs and drinking vodka to get drunk on Russian glory, than actually making realistic, good plans. Ah well, it'll probably work out someway.
Communist ideology destroyed the Soviet economy, it was never doctrinally able to evolve socialism as China has. Ultimately the BS had to stop. For which I credit Nixon in 1974 for getting the pebbles rolling into an economic avalanche.
Soviet Union had the resources, so does Russia, and Putin is wise to the need for global power projection. Yes its expensive but it also pays for itself. Socialism is strong in central and South America, but the Soviets could never properly back it beyond the doctrine of an AK-47 for every comrade. Which admittedly does work in securing territory but doesn't build worthy allies.
If they sing songs in the Kremlin is because they feel they deserve to. Yeltsins Russia was a joke, Putin's Russia is not. Putin has come a long way to restoring Russia to the status the Soviets enjoyed, and his plans are 'realistic and good', from a Russian point of view. I have more respect for Vladimir Putin than any elected leader in the west that I could name, including, in fact especially including, our own in the UK.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2015/11/16 22:28:37
n'oublie jamais - It appears I now have to highlight this again.
It is by tea alone I set my mind in motion. By the juice of the brew my thoughts aquire speed, my mind becomes strained, the strain becomes a warning. It is by tea alone I set my mind in motion.
What no poo flinging monkeys? Every first rate power has a poo flinging monkey regiment. For all the really dirty jobs.
-"Wait a minute.....who is that Frazz is talking to in the gallery? Hmmm something is going on here.....Oh.... it seems there is some dispute over video taping of some sort......Frazz is really upset now..........wait a minute......whats he go there.......is it? Can it be?....Frazz has just unleashed his hidden weiner dog from his mini bag, while quoting shakespeares "Let slip the dogs the war!!" GG
-"Don't mind Frazzled. He's just Dakka's crazy old dude locked in the attic. He's harmless. Mostly."
-TBone the Magnificent 1999-2014, Long Live the King!
n'oublie jamais - It appears I now have to highlight this again.
It is by tea alone I set my mind in motion. By the juice of the brew my thoughts aquire speed, my mind becomes strained, the strain becomes a warning. It is by tea alone I set my mind in motion.
They have different roles to fleet carriers. Vessels like this either have an ASW role or are invasion barges. Egypt needs neither.
Never underestimate the need to measure the proverbial military member. Having aircraft carriers, even if they're not fleet carriers, is a lot cooler than not having them, after all.
For thirteen years I had a dog with fur the darkest black. For thirteen years he was my friend, oh how I want him back.
They have different roles to fleet carriers. Vessels like this either have an ASW role or are invasion barges. Egypt needs neither.
Never underestimate the need to measure the proverbial military member. Having aircraft carriers, even if they're not fleet carriers, is a lot cooler than not having them, after all.
Was mentioned.
Prestige is a very big factor, but I think the Egyptian government is better rounded than that. If we were talking about one of the Club Dictator states then yeah, buy the carriers for extra dictator chic, and let them rust in a dock somewhere.
Egypt ought to know better.
n'oublie jamais - It appears I now have to highlight this again.
It is by tea alone I set my mind in motion. By the juice of the brew my thoughts aquire speed, my mind becomes strained, the strain becomes a warning. It is by tea alone I set my mind in motion.
President Vladimir Putin vowed to hunt down those responsible for blowing up a Russian airliner over Egypt and intensify air strikes against Islamists in Syria, after the Kremlin concluded a bomb had destroyed the plane last month, killing 224 people.
"We will find them anywhere on the planet and punish them," Putin said at a somber Kremlin meeting broadcast on Tuesday. The FSB security service swiftly announced a $50 million bounty on the bombers.
Until now, Russia had played down assertions from Western countries that the Oct. 31 crash was the work of terrorists, saying it was important to let the official investigation run its course.
But four days after Islamist gunmen and bombers killed at least 129 people in Paris, Alexander Bortnikov, the head of the FSB, told a late night meeting that traces of foreign-made explosive had been found on fragments of the downed plane and on passengers' personal belongings.
"According to an analysis by our specialists, a homemade bomb containing up to 1 kilogram of TNT detonated during the flight, causing the plane to break up in mid air, which explains why parts of the fuselage were spread over such a large distance," said Bortnikov at the meeting in footage released by the Kremlin.
"We can unequivocally say it was a terrorist act," he said.
Egyptian authorities have detained two employees of Sharm al-Sheikh airport for questioning in connection with the downing of the Russian jet, two security officials and an airport employee said on Tuesday.
"Seventeen people are being held, two of them are suspected of helping whoever planted the bomb on the plane at Sharm al-Sheikh airport," said one of the security officials who both declined to be named.
The Airbus A321, operated by Metrojet, had been returning Russian holiday makers from Sharm al-Sheikh in Egypt to St Petersburg when it broke up over the Sinai Peninsula, killing all on board. A group affiliated with Islamic State claimed responsibility, but until Tuesday Russia had said terrorism was just one possible scenario.
RETRIBUTION
Putin, wearing a dark suit, presided over a minute of silence in memory of the victims at the Kremlin meeting, before telling security and military chiefs the incident was one of the bloodiest crimes in modern Russian history and ordering the air force to intensify its air strikes in Syria in response.
"Our air force's military work in Syria must not simply be continued," he said. "It must be intensified in such a way that the criminals understand that retribution is inevitable."
Putin said he expected military chiefs to present him with specific proposals on how Russia could ramp up its campaign. His spokesman, Dmitry Peskov, told reporters Putin was expected to visit the defense ministry later on Tuesday.
A senior French government source said Russia had already launched air strikes against the Islamic State stronghold of Raqqa in northern Syria on Tuesday, a sign, the source said, that Russia was becoming more concerned about the threat posed by IS.
Russia began air strikes in Syria at the end of September. It has always said its main target is Islamic State, but most of its bombs in the past hit territory held by other groups opposed to its ally, President Bashar al-Assad.
Putin, in language reminiscent of how he talked about Chechen militants during a war when he came to power 15 years ago, ordered the secret services to hunt down those responsible.
"We must do this without any statute of limitations and we must find out all their names," he said, invoking Russia's right to self defense under the United Nations charter.
"Anyone who tries to help the criminals should know that the consequences for trying to shelter them will lie completely on their shoulders."
Also: $50 MILLION REWARD FOR INFO ABOUT WHO SPECIFICALLY BROUGHT THE BOMB ABOARD. Which one of you bad ass gun-toting Dakkans gonna head to the Middle-East to scour the desert for the info?
(CNN)The Russian passenger jet that crashed over Sinai, Egypt, was brought down by a bomb estimated to contain 1 kilogram (2.2 pounds) of explosives, the head of the Russian Federal Security Service said Tuesday, and the Russian government is offering a $50 million reward for information about those who brought it down.
This message was edited 4 times. Last update was at 2015/11/17 14:59:57
Egypt was not happy that the UK broke news of this, and blamed us for trying to sabotage their tourist economy.
Not been happy the way Egypt pissed about with extraction flights from the UK.
I suspect the Foreign Office will not lift travel restrictions for some time to come. Oh, what a pity.
n'oublie jamais - It appears I now have to highlight this again.
It is by tea alone I set my mind in motion. By the juice of the brew my thoughts aquire speed, my mind becomes strained, the strain becomes a warning. It is by tea alone I set my mind in motion.
Russia now apparently using white phosphorus on these goons. The video was posted a few days ago, and though the location isn't confirmed it's being credited as Russia-on-ISIS action:
The assumption that white phosphorus is considered a chemical weapon, and thus constitutes a violation of the Chemical Weapons Convention, is false.
Protocol I demands proportionality and 'feasible measures' in order to minimize or eliminate damage to civilian lives or property, stating "It [white phosphorus] is not strictly prohibited, but it[s use] has to be done carefully, and tightly controlled and on the basis of a very detailed targeting analysis
So basically a military target is fair game, from how I interpret that. Sorry ISIS, hot white stuff is extremely hot.
This message was edited 6 times. Last update was at 2015/11/17 18:38:02
-"Wait a minute.....who is that Frazz is talking to in the gallery? Hmmm something is going on here.....Oh.... it seems there is some dispute over video taping of some sort......Frazz is really upset now..........wait a minute......whats he go there.......is it? Can it be?....Frazz has just unleashed his hidden weiner dog from his mini bag, while quoting shakespeares "Let slip the dogs the war!!" GG
-"Don't mind Frazzled. He's just Dakka's crazy old dude locked in the attic. He's harmless. Mostly."
-TBone the Magnificent 1999-2014, Long Live the King!
Couldn't happen to a nicer bunch of Jihadist fethheads.
n'oublie jamais - It appears I now have to highlight this again.
It is by tea alone I set my mind in motion. By the juice of the brew my thoughts aquire speed, my mind becomes strained, the strain becomes a warning. It is by tea alone I set my mind in motion.
T-22M NATO code Backfire different from the older T-22 NATO code Blinder.
There was no T-25 that I'm aware of but I might be missing an experimental design.
And looking at earlier developments probably ISIS will be lucky to be on the receiving end of some trial by fire from the T-160s (NATO Blackjack) It seems it might be toy testing time by the Russian armed forces.
M.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2015/11/18 08:15:19
Jenkins: You don't have jurisdiction here!
Smith Jamison: We aren't here, which means when we open up on you and shred your bodies with automatic fire then this will never have happened.
About the Clans: "Those brief outbursts of sense can't hold back the wave of sibko bred, over hormoned sociopaths that they crank out though."
Mordant 92nd 'Acid Dogs'
The Lost and Damned
Inquisition