Kuznetsov was mocked by UK Defence Minister, Russians on Suicide

File: 1373589322070.gif (319KB, 314x314px) Image search: [Google]

319KB, 314x314px

>politicians acting like schoolyard children

In B4 something to do with ramp or cuck

>>34405387
They're just angry that their aircraft are so shit that they have to make up with it by having to actually arm their ''''''''''''''''aircraft carrier''''''''''''''''. Or slavs simply don't understand the role of a carrier, one of the two.

>>34405387

This is like watching two retarded kids fling their poo at each other.

>>34405396
>ramplets trying to say one is taller than the other so is better

When will they learn?

>>34405387

>QE can't deploy solo

But it can. It just has escorts because it's a logical reason to have them in the region as support.

We could easily just plop the QE where ever in range against EVERY current military target we need to face and be untouchable aside from subterfuge from Chinks or vatniks.

We just deploy our fleets because it's good practice.

Meanwhile the Kuznetsov crashed half its airfleet and had to be tugged to and from it's deployment area because its a piece of shit, and even if it wasnt it'd still be shit at it's job because it was designed as a counter carrier to US fleets, not as a dedicated naval deployment centre for an airfleet.

Russians are literally getting mad at some politicians saying 'your vessel looked rusty lol'.

>>34405390
>Tuesday

>Sir Michael has repeatedly insulted the Kuznetsov and earlier this year branded it a “ship of shame” for supplying aircraft in the air campaign against rebels in Aleppo.
This is embarrassing. I mean, hes right that the Kuznetsov is old and busted and that the Russians cant afford to field an equivalent sized escort, but hes talking shit from a position of asshurt which is weak af. The Russians would have been better off if they had just ignored him, but as if that would happen.

>"At the outset, Britain planned to put 36 F-35s on each carrier. So stupendous is their cost that this has shrunk to 12. An unhappy naval officer muttered a year or two back: ‘Just so long as we can have enough to cover the flight deck in photos.’ The empty hangar space will be filled with helicopters, commandos, snooker tables — no, I am teasing about the last bit.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-4645434/Pride-Britain-HMS-Queen-Elizabeth-6bn-blunder.html

>Just so long as we can have enough to cover the flight deck in photos
No escort ships, no full-fledged air group, no AA or armaments of its own, and no money left. But at least you can post cool photos in instagram and damage control threads on cambodian rock throwing forums.

>>34405450
in all honesty it's fault of f-35, not the ship. USA cucked it's clients big time. Less planes for same amount of money

File: rusty russian ship.jpg (226KB, 1432x964px) Image search: [Google]

226KB, 1432x964px

>>34405387
He's right that all other carriers are simple that - carriers. They're just glorified container ships with airfield on desk and hardly can defend themselves, much less attacking, without planes or their escorts.

>>34405422
This. S-Ship of shame. M-muh r-rebels. Fuck off no one pitties them. The SDF is alright but they weren't bombing the SDF. You gonna cry because your regime change ain't working. Don't care who wins unless it isn't Islamic fundies but this is pathetic.

>>34405410
>had to be tugged to and from it's deployment area

source?

>>34405387
>I think the Russians will look at this ship [HMS Queen Elizabeth] with a little bit of envy.
True.

>>34405490
Fewer. Fewer planes..

>>34405490
No it isn't the Brits could afford more but they always cheap out, their government is horrifically short sighted and unambitious. The British people are defeatist by default and mediocrity and failure have become their modus operandi. For example the fact that they fail to improve their traffic, fail to improve their air ports, fail to improve their military. The Brits and the rest of Europe should roll over and accept their status an U.S. vandals and completely integrate their militaries with that of the U.S. with Americans at the top Europeans at the bottom as it should be.

File: Kuznetsov-class aircraft carrier viewd from orbit.jpg (53KB, 960x635px) Image search: [Google]

53KB, 960x635px

>>34405540

>>34405450
>Daily mail
>An angry Naval Officer muttered a year or two ago

Ok anon

>>34405387
>for supplying aircraft in the air campaign against rebels in Aleppo.
They didn't really supply aircraft to the air campaign against rebels in Aleppo so much as they supplied aircraft to the water

>>34405387
>Sir Michael has repeatedly insulted the Kuznetsov and earlier this year branded it a “ship of shame” for supplying aircraft in the air campaign against rebels in Aleppo
Yeah, this is typical. Functionaries from NATO countries will waste a lot of hot air on strongly-worded denunciations of ISIS, but as soon as anyone actually tries to go fight them in a meaningful way, those same officials shriek: "No! Wait! You can't do that!!!" Gee, I wonder why.

>>34405583
on second though. They could always fill their carrier with harriers

>>34405632
Harriers are Shit and Obsolete for today's Navy

>>34405618
But, US and NATO always bomb the Shit out of ISIS through Airstrikes.

>>34405583
>No it isn't the Brits could afford more but they always cheap out
>F-35 was supposed to be a cheap version of F-22
>"And now you can pay 3 times more and get exactly the same number of planes! Isn't it great?! What, you want to buy 3 times less planes for the old price? Cheapskate."

File: 1268405361381.jpg (210KB, 572x507px) Image search: [Google]

210KB, 572x507px

>>34405387
>Brits are arrogant beyond belief to the point of being provocatively obnoxious and basically tempting fate every single time they run their mouths
>Vatniks are autistic as all fuck and couldn't detect banter or irony or respond in kind if they devoted an entire intelligence division for that purpose alone

Having a hard time figuring out who's in the right here.

>>34405641
>shit

Any airframe capable of launching from a naval platform is still a usable asset.

>obsolete

You don't understand the word. If naval harriers are obsolete then so is every single helicopter.

>>34405641
good enough to bomb sand niggers

>>34405659
But the Harrier is literally 50 yrs.old. Engine is Unupgradable which means less weapons to and limited range.

>>34405659
>defending a carrier aircraft on the basis that it's no worse than a helicopter

I think it's time for you to admit that this debate is over, and that you've lost it.

>>34405659
Also the Royal Navy and the Indian Navy Retired their Harriers. The US are now slowly retiring their Harriers in favor for the F-35. And also, Harriers are no longer in production and no new spare parts.

>>34405618
>Functionaries from NATO countries will waste a lot of hot air on strongly-worded denunciations of ISIS, but as soon as anyone actually tries to go fight them in a meaningful way,
Bullshit. Russia and Syria hasnt done shit against ISIS, beside losing Palmyra over and over again, while bombing the shit out of everyone else and accounting the victories through bombings of others on ISIS for themself.

>>34405387
Well with the fact the russian sailors are more likely to board and steal ships rather than sail them. It's understandable that they feel jealous of such marvels.

>>34405659
If Harriers are Obsolete
and Helicopters are Harriers

Then Helicopters are Obsolete

You see the problem is though, Harriers aren't helicopters.

>>34405387
>russia crying like a bitch when getting some banter back for a change
You also can see how they automatically switched from starting with stupid banter to demanding a real discussion a second later like the typical vatnik.

File: smitherens.jpg (7KB, 225x225px) Image search: [Google]

7KB, 225x225px

>>34405813
how can harriers be obsolete if our eyes are not helicopters ?

>>34405655
The F-22 is an air superiority fighter, the F-35 is a stealth bomb truck.

>>34405585
>Da tovarishch; if you can't see enemy, enemy can't see you. Is of ultimate stealth.

>>34405833
I laughed like a retard over this and I have no idea why

>>34405657
>Brits are arrogant beyond belief
>Mocking the Kuznetsov is now "arrogant", despite everyone and their fucking dog doing it because its a rusting piece of shit

lel, fuck off

>>34405842
>The F-22 is an air superiority fighter, the F-35 is a money laundering scheme to put cash in the pockets of politically-connected defense contractors.
ftfy

>>34405657
>>Russia is arrogant beyond belief to the point of being provocatively obnoxious and basically tempting fate every single time they run their mouths
>>Vatniks are autistic as all fuck and couldn't detect banter or irony or respond in kind if they devoted an entire intelligence division for that purpose alone
ftfy

File: 1466446860243.jpg (60KB, 540x700px) Image search: [Google]

60KB, 540x700px

>>34405387
>the reviving Royal Navy

>>34405968
For a money laundering scheme it sure flys like a son of a bitch, and has top of the line avionics.

Man, what a great result of corporate welfare. This is what Lockhart gives the US when they are not trying?

Bah, we all know we can ignore the paris air show and actual pilots reviews.

>>34405605
Underrated.

>>34405505
But that's the point of a carrier- the planes carried ARE the offense and defense. And the more other crap that is installed, the less capable the air wing is.

>>34405387
Russia is a fucking joke. I don't understand how our politicians can call them a threat with a straight face. That shithole is going to self-implode in a few years.

File: 264kepu.jpg (75KB, 900x1154px) Image search: [Google]

75KB, 900x1154px

>>34405387
Stay mad CIWSless britcuck
Kuz would easily take down even without planes your overpriced cardboard bucket

>>34406128
>sink it's tugboat
>that floating shithouse left helplessly adrift in open sea

>>34406142
*Sends winlock
>that floating shithouse left helplessly adrift in open sea
heh nothing personal

>>34406128
>keel cracks in half from an unseen Mk 48 ADCAP

>>34406128
>Doesnt have enough money to protect carrier with other ships
>slap some more stuff on the carrier instead
>oh look, when you ignore the carrier fleet it looks like the russian carrier has more defense, lets fire up photoshop!

File: keXZhrsaQlc.jpg (1MB, 2560x1707px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 2560x1707px

>British mighty fleet
Laughable. Pjotr veliki would BTFO all these ships without taking any damage

>>34406201
>Russia sends Pjotr Veliki
>expenses are severe enough, they announce default the very next day

RIDF BTFO

>>34406212
>british banter

>>34406243
>russian damage control
not even that guy

>>34405387
>right about the QE's capabilities or are they afraid of the reviving Royal Navy?

Yes and no

As many things russian these days, the kuznetsov is part of the old soviet dead shell onto which the russian federation feeds like a vulture.

Yes the Kuznetsov was designed to be more independent than other carriers, but thats because is more like a destroyer that can deploy airplanes, so it carries missiles around for ships and planes with funny ideas.

The underlying principle of this is not so retarded if its in its actual context: Defense of the Black sea and naval denial, thats it defense and obviously some force projection but Russia had an entirely mechanized airborne troops(VdV) and a shit load of planes for that, but they clearly acknowledged that their focus was land power.

So their navy was and is smaller, but every ship was designed to operate as independently as possible stuffing as many things as they could on their ships and they even had plans on expanding this idea of "armored aircraft carrier"(I think the correct term is more like aircraft capable destroyer but you get the idea) to other two ships but then they realized they didn't had the money for them and stuck with what they had.

Right now, the russian military is acknowledging, while grinding their teeth and pride to dust, that they were wrong and are adopting more and more western doctrinal postures, for which they are very ill prepared(and even if they applied their own old doctrines they neglected so much during and after the fall that you could say that they are ill prepared for anything)

File: SAVX0287-2.jpg (548KB, 1200x800px) Image search: [Google]

548KB, 1200x800px

>>34406288
>while grinding their teeth and pride to dust, that they were wrong and are adopting more and more western doctrinal postures
pic related is just one of the many examples.

Even their new armored vehicles like Armata, Bumerang and etc are basically their novel take on widely accepted Western design principles.

>>34406201
Pjotr veliki's missiles don't have the range to be a serious threat to the royal navy.

>>34406334
With a few novelties for novelty's sake with the Armata. Gotta have something for the propaganda to point at that you're the first with.

>>34406334

I have heard that they even toned down the whole conscription thing and started treating their soldiers and NCOs a bit better, although the lack of ability to pay and maintain them must also help.

>>34405583
> vassals

Fixed that for you, you damn vandal!

File: Kirov-class_battlecruiser.jpg (1MB, 2660x1780px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 2660x1780px

>>34406178
>Doesnt have enough money to protect carrier with other ships
m8....

>>34405387
>Like a bee, the British aircraft carrier is only capable of independently releasing planes from its belly
Jesus man, what kind of bees do they have in russia

File: Wow.png (113KB, 316x492px) Image search: [Google]

113KB, 316x492px

>>34406526

Let's check out how many of them have some use.

The answer? Barely one.

>>34406632
alright but they still got plenty of submarines

File: Kursk_wreck.jpg (84KB, 600x386px) Image search: [Google]

84KB, 600x386px

>>34406645
Like that?

>>34406645

That I will concede.

Although, funnily enough Germany did that in WW1 and WW2, seems like a constant for warring countries that neglect their navy side and compensate with submarines.

Although I will also give that the Russians did it to have 2º and 3º strike capabilities than for actual naval power.

File: Submarine_Vepr_by_Ilya_Kurganov_crop.jpg (90KB, 800x373px) Image search: [Google]

90KB, 800x373px

>>34406658
no
Akulas would be more effective as Carrier protection

>>34406663
Submarines are better nowadays than ships
>can stay undetected
>carrys Cruise Missiles and torpedos
>is fast and can keep up
>hard to destroy

but I think Kuznetsov was build for coastal protection thats why it runs on old oil and dumpster fires

at least slav puffer is full of missiles and guns and shit.

brits just made a very big flat barge. ruuule the wayvs.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0w1Baz5Y2u4

File: russian party.jpg (362KB, 640x821px) Image search: [Google]

362KB, 640x821px

>>34406721

>cyka blyat davai

>>34406334

>"armata an acceptance of western design principles"
>doesn't even have a robotic turret in an MBT
>still uses a niggerloader

>>34405547
http://www.popularmechanics.com/military/navy-ships/a18141/towing-admiral-kuznetsov-video-tugboat/
It also had a tugboat ready when it crossed the channel in 2016.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2016/10/21/russian-carrier-plagued-by-technical-problems/
The russian navy is made to submerge.

>>34405585

You do know its a picture of a volcano, right?

>>34406844
>still uses a niggerloader
It's a genius idea.You remove nigger from street(reduces crime),the extra crewman is useful if the tank is tracked or you have to guard the vehicle and the nigger takes their girl when you win war,increasing their humiliation tenfold..

>>34406844
>doesn't even have a robotic turret in an MBT

What? The whole armata is based around the advantages of an unmanned turret.
>still uses a niggerloader

You have France, and South Korea and Japan if you count the East and allies.

The armata basically accepted from western design:

>Silouette is not that important
>Crew survival and armor are king
>Supossedly, it has a very good reverse speed.
>Abandonment of slav technophobia to anything more than gears, levers and FM radio.
>Less quantity but more quality and better trained(again suposedly)

And I don't know if I'm leaving something.

File: BT-7 infrared nvg 1939.jpg (66KB, 500x371px) Image search: [Google]

66KB, 500x371px

>>34406910

You want to take credit for what is basically natural development of military science due to new technology.

You don't need small silhouette if you rely on hard countermeasures. Instead, you want your turret with better depression angles, larger gun and easier shots over clutter.
You can now put everyone in a capsule thanks to digital observation and drive by wire.
And "technophobia" and "zergrushing" is just k memeing. There are certain technological capabilities, which can be outdated or not, and that's it.

>>34406910
Armata is far less western then some of the previous FST designs. The armor profile is pure Russia.

>drunk nations full of muslims that used to rule over other peoples countries IRL shitpost

>>34406910
You sure triggered the vatniks.

>>34406128
>Stay mad CIWSless britcuck

Both QE's will have three (3) Phalanx CIWS

>>34407052
>t. 56%

>>34406969
>technophobia
>memeing

The ZSU-23-4 and mig-25 used void tubes, they depended, and still do, out of double prop engines in their Tu-95, they didn't start to use laser guided systems until 1985, and lets not forget the Mig-21 and Mi-4 perfect for their day but pushed forward beyond their death.

>You want to take credit for what is basically natural development of military science due to "new" technology.

There fixed, APS, electronics and unmanned things have been know for decades is just that now Russia had the idea of actually putting them and with, suposedly, real logistics.

>You don't need small silhouette if you rely on hard countermeasures

Maybe yes, maybe not, but for decades the whole soviet army used low siluette tanks for their advantage and suddenly the T-14 appears and breaks the mold getting closer or more to a western design.

>>34407040

>The armor profile is pure Russia.

You are surely referring to the glacis and the turret shaped in V which by itself doesn't prove that much.

But when you account that now a Russian designed tank has an actual armor that is not relying on ERA blocks for protection things become much more westernized.

>>34405410
>We could easily just plop the QE where ever in range against EVERY current military target we need to face
try it against the french. You're gonna be "For Queen n' Country"ing at the bottom of the pond.

>>34407418
>glacis
Yes.

>turret shaped in V
Turret doesn't really have armor.

>not relying on ERA blocks for protection
It DOES rely on ERA though. Look at the armor geometry, that is all optimized for ERA, not Western style NERA. Unless you are buying into the APS idea, which has hardly featured on any western tanks at all.

>>34406128
>Stay mad CIWSless britcuck
QE has three CIWS, and they're probably going to add the classified laser weapon to it too

File: 1478284827280.jpg (24KB, 321x322px) Image search: [Google]

24KB, 321x322px

>>34407514
>Turret doesn't really have armor.

>>34405387
Am I the only one that thinks this is fucking hilarious?

>The ministry said the Kuznetsov was bristling with anti-ship and anti-submarine missiles, while HMS Queen Elizabeth will have to rely on the weapons of its F-35B aircraft and escort of frigates, destroyers and submarines

The HMS Queen Elizabeth has little to no defensive/offensive weapons except planes, while the Kuznetsov has many defensive/offensive weapons but can't launch planes Lmao

File: tinfoil.jpg (220KB, 1600x1066px) Image search: [Google]

220KB, 1600x1066px

>>34407537

>>34407550
You know its a sad state of affairs when you have to put destroyer armamants on your carrier because your air wing is shit, making you're air wing even worse

>>34407563
are they fucking weld marks?

>>34407514

I was referring to the turret, that was shaped somewhat like the T-90.

Sadly, I went looking for the data about the armor and I could only find information about effective armour which would take into account slope and ERA. But I do know that they added mass for the armor to better protect the crew that is already encapsulated inside, which is totally a western idea that contrasted on the soviet side like night over light.

Not to say that the soviet didn't protect their crew, but they surely considered them much more expendable than we do.

>>34407563

Are... are those welds as crude as I'm thinking they are?

>>34407661
Yes. If I did that shit as a welding student I'd fucking fail. I zoomed to check and they don't look any better closer up.

>>34407656
>900mm equivilent,
thats about 1600 maybe 1700m from nearly all NATO tanks.

File: 0_17e944_1aa4b9e0_XL1.jpg (58KB, 591x800px) Image search: [Google]

58KB, 591x800px

>>34405387
i wouldnt say the bongs have much room to talk, what with their carrier being a ramplet and all, but international autism is fun to watch

>>34407579
Zoom in on the welds and you'll see the welder didn't even make straight passes, left large voids between them, and generally gave less than zero fucks. It's awful. First week welding students do better than that shit.

>>34407656
T-14 is not that much heavier then previous Russian/Soviet tanks.They still kept the weight down by switch to an unmanned turret, the upper weight limit is still restricted due to logistical factors (tank transporters ect).

They had a few Obj designs that were rather western in design; NERA rather then ERA which allows for a more efficient glacis, manned (autoloader) turret, that sort of stuff.

T-14 is just a FST-2 turret stuck onto a enlarged T-72 hull. Rather disappointing really.

>USA's lapdop vs former Soviet superpower

Funny how Americans who fought exactly 0 serious wars in history (by serious I mean total war, life or death situation) so casually shit on Russian military philosophy, and everything Russian for that matter.
I mean what American idea worked in real life against a serious, not semi-crippled opponent (in strategic or tactical sense)? In WW2 you didn't really fight Germans that well given your enormous numerical and qualitative advantage.
Perhaps you should approach these things with less arrogance? Just look how arrogance and complacency worked throught military history.

>>34407803
>Superpower
>Soviet
HAHAHAHAHAAHAHAHAJAHA

File: _MG_6473.jpg (68KB, 700x467px) Image search: [Google]

68KB, 700x467px

>>34407803
keyword being former
now its just a shithole

>>34407832
God damn Europoors

File: b9.jpg (22KB, 651x575px) Image search: [Google]

22KB, 651x575px

>34407832
no (you) for you

>>34407866
>>34407883
Okay name 1 (one) conflict where USA faced superior or equivalent opponent. Closest thing would be your civil war and even there a bunch of rednecks embarassed your superior forces for a few years.

>>34407832

Im going to tell you, being a slav myself, why

Easily half of russian military shit was designed to operate under cold war doctrine, taking into account nuclear war and in fact, the post-nuclear war scenario

ALL russian vehicles were cheap as fuck, but ABC proofed, flying shit was built around vacuum tubes so it could operate with EMP's exploding in the ionosphere over europe and not give a shit

The idea was that you built cheap while america built smart and still win over by sheer numbers. Take into account the vast chaos of nuclear war and you will easily see why when americans always depend on communication and technology so much. Even without that russians bet on easy solutions like building a fuckton of cruise missile carrying planes to fire a metric fuckload of them at a carrier and count on some getting through - and they would.

It was only since the late nineties that russians have begun to step away from this mode of thinking but they aren't even there yet.

Again, I stress nukes. This is kinda weird from a westerner's perspective but russian military doctrine was built around nuclear strikes, they were always at the heart of its doctrine.

Like you know about Poland? They had a bunch of nukes they would drop on Denmark and Sweden to swiftly force surrender and knock them out so that the main russian steamroller could pour west through the Fulda Gap and not worry about them. That was the key task of the polish air force as revealed by cold war plans their defense minister made public ten years ago. This is what they planned for.


In modern conventional combat russia gets utterly, fucking, demolished by the US in under a couple weeks if they dont decide to start using nukes. Simply because they only recently started planning for war that doesnt require them.

>>34407952

Part of the reason for that is that the quantity over quality approach is still expensive as hell. Sure, you can field massive amounts of stuff, but all of it needs maintainance and upkeep, troops need feeding and training, vehicles their fuel and a huge top-heavy organisational body etc. It comes with a massive, vulnerable and above all costly logistics tail, whereas the quality over quantity approach is somewhat less exerting in that regard. When budget is limited, it is more efficient to concentrate on smaller numbers of higher quality that will stave off obsolescence for longer and have better overall readiness.

It could be argued that this is a large part of why the US won the Cold War. By the late 80s the flaws were really starting to show domestically. The pressure on the budget caused by upkeep of massive numbers of troops with a whole load of equipment freshly turning obsolescent, thus needing more maintainance and R&D for replacement broke the bank.

>>34406865
You do realize everyone here is shitposting, right?

>closely flanked by a swarm of warships, support ships and submarines to protect it.

retard here, isn't this just standard operating procedure for carriers? why is it such a big deal?

File: DDc7_7XVoAAw3WF.jpg (143KB, 1200x801px) Image search: [Google]

143KB, 1200x801px

China and Russia should join hands in ending the Eternal Anglo. The Kirovs and Akulas can sink one part of the RN, the Type 055 and 052Ds can sink the other part.

The Russians can get satisfaction for that insult and China can punish Brits for intefering with HongKong and take revenge for Opium Wars.

>>34408310
try it you silly little cunt we'll put you in the fucking ground

>>34408310
>satisfaction for that insult
ruskies cannot into banter

>>34408310
>China and Russia should join hands in ending the Eternal Anglo. The Kirovs and Akulas can sink one part of the RN, the Type 055 and 052Ds can sink the other part.
> Implying akulas & kirovs can actually get out of port when its not frozen solid.

>>34407906
Gulf war.
Korean War.
Vietnam.

>>34408461
> superior or equivalent
> Iraq
> Vietnam
Korea until the chineses got involved

>>34407526
>they're probably going to add the classified laser weapon to it
Powered by what? QE doesn't have the power gen to use laser point defense.

>>34408590
they found the power to utilise them on RN ships back in '82, you could always keep them powered by capacitor or battery pack (which would probably be likely anyway.)

>>34408614
>they found the power to utilise them on RN ships back in '82
what the flying fuck?

File: Type 45 Phalanx CIWS UK-Laser.png (1MB, 1011x728px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 1011x728px

>>34408590

You do realise that laser point defense doesn't take that much, right? Aside from that it patently does.

They're developing it as a CIWS, that may even fit onto the existing phalanx. Alkhough there is a standalone one too, not too dissimilar to what other countries are doing.

>>34408623
Oh yeah they utilised Type DEC Laser Dazzlers on carriers and T22s.

Its not widely publicised, but there are sources out there. http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-23518592

>>34405387
>>"Like a bee, the British aircraft carrier is only capable of independently releasing planes from its belly closely flanked by a swarm of warships, support ships and submarines to protect it. That is why ... the British aircraft carrier is merely a large convenient naval target." "It is in the interests of the British Royal Navy not to show off the 'beauty' of its aircraft carrier on the high seas any closer than a few hundred miles from its Russian 'distant relative'," the ministry said.

Gosh, it's almost like carrier battle groups have been conventional doctrine for over half a century. FUCKING RETARDED BONGS AMARITE

>>34407563
>those welds

.............I'll just assume that this is merely a demo version and not full-fledged IOC tank.

File: Type 26 Dragonfire.jpg (678KB, 3508x1254px) Image search: [Google]

678KB, 3508x1254px

>>34408636

The " Aside from that it patently does." was in reference to the ship having enough power, I wrote that poorly.

Project is known as Dragonfire. They intend if for Type 26 and the Darings, which generate less power than the QE, so of course QE can use it.

>>34406243
His banter was a lot more sophisticated (and objectively funny) than the post he was responding to, so I'd say it was a success. In advanced cultures (aka not Russia or the Amerilads), banter isn't a 0-100 game, it's one of slow escalation.

>>34405387
That's a sweet ramp!

>>34408310
let's be honest, it would go more like this:

>Baltic Fleet sinks near Denmark
>Black Sea Fleet mutinies and goes on a lad's holiday to Turkey instead of fighting the war
>China freezes some British assets and has their pacific fleet gang up on whatever UK destroyer is unfortunately enough to visit Japan or Singapore but can't be bothered to cross the globe to fight them
>Spends the rest of the war giving increasingly large loans to Russia as Russia attempts to convince its navy to fight
>UK doesn't want to risk its ships attacking Russia or China so just mills around the North Sea for the entirety of the war

Conclusion: War ends in white peace. Russia becomes China's bitch for the remainder of the millenium

File: Magnificent Euphoria.webm (3MB, 580x326px) Image search: [Google]

3MB, 580x326px

>>34408692
This has to be the most cringe-inducingly pretentious post on /sp/ this week

>>34408766
>mocking a system of wit refined to near-perfection over literal millennia by the polite society of Western Europe
can't handle the bantz tbqh senpai

File: laughter.jpg (21KB, 383x351px) Image search: [Google]

21KB, 383x351px

>>34408783
m8 im from Oz so trust me i a banter master. Western Euros aren't by any stretch of the imagination funny or imaginative with their banter and have to the most thin-skinned and overly politically correct cunts in existence.

>>34408758

I think more like

>China cannot into fighting on the other side of the world at all, will not go west of Suez
>Give materials and technical help
>Russian assets in Tartus well within range of RAF Akatori
>Have to run a gauntlet of RAF air and naval bases just to get out of the Med. Probably a non-starter
>Assets in Murmansk more likely, but will be operating in the RN's home turf, within range of RAF bases
>Sotries in force are pretty much suicidal for either side
>Turns into mostly a submarine war with occasional TLAM and long-range drone strikes at naval infrastructure
>Result militarily inconclusive, likely favouring UK since they have a surprisingly strong sub and ASW game. Probably none of the Russian objectives met.

>>34409010
>>34408758
>all of these western fantasizing scenarios

Russia will destroyed the UK with ease in any battle, both conventional or nuclear. There are too many delusioned british on /k/ acting as if they will have Amerifat support in every war they wage, not knowing just how helpless they are when American army isn't there.

>>34409060
i agree with him
the UK is too small to bring the fight to russia,
Russian amphibious & airborne forces don't have the capabilities to invade the UK, the only landing sites are either too shallow to use or in bumfuck nowhere, that britain would be willing to loose in the short term in order to reorganise & react.

Lets also not forget the state of the russian military with shit motivation due to conscription, shit training, and equipment either so old or so bad its laughable.

You know its bad when russia drops 15billion dollars on tanks and suddenly there's no money left for anyones pensions

>>34409166
....Yikes, how fucking poor is Russia today? The Yanks down south probably lose that much in monthly administrative waste and they don't even notice it

>>34405387

britanistan is a gay country that really shouldn't be mocking anyone

>>34409218
Russia isn't poor, at least not as a nation. The Russian people are poor, because the Putin regime essentially uses the country like an ATM. It's a mafia state. Putin's allies extract wealth from Russia and invest it and spend it elsewhere. Putin stops any government intervention into these practices and in return the elites gladly support him.

File: kCutc8O.jpg (17KB, 260x273px) Image search: [Google]

17KB, 260x273px

>>34409060
>Russia will destroyed the UK

>>34409166
didn't realize russian military got pensions. Figured it was only senior officers that got it

>>34407724
That huge black smog cloud is just hilarious.

File: Carlos.png (138KB, 350x350px) Image search: [Google]

138KB, 350x350px

>>34405387
>>34405387

>“When you saw that old, dilapidated Kuznetsov sailing through the Channel, a few months ago, I think the Russians will look at this ship [HMS Queen Elizabeth] with a little bit of envy."

Wow, I guess you could say the Brits are really.....ramping things up.

>>34405833
how can my shit be real, when it's all over my face

>>34409060

How do you propose to even get to the UK to enact this supposed beatdown? I hate to break it to you, but there is no way Russia could land the ground forces needed to take the UK, let alone keep them supplied long enough to do the job.

The very first problem is that the North Sea is one of the roughest ones around- that means the sea state is going to be too nasty to launch aircraft, helicopters or even missiles a lot of the time. Fixed/rotary wing AWACS and ASW will have big periods of downtime, where the UK can use land based facilities for constant coverage. This also means limited radar effectiveness with surface clutter, so sea skimming aircraft and missiles get all the more deadly.

Secondly is the hydrographics. Underwater maps and fluid conditions that govern the effectiveness of submarine use to a huge degree. The UK can be safely assumed to have excellent surveys since its their back yard and training ground. Their research ships are also comparatively modern, compared to the 40-odd year old ones in use with the Russian Navy. They're going to dominate the submarine game, at least until attrition kicks in. So long as there is a single sub still kicking it would be incredibly stupid to move surface assets.

Third challenge would be neutralising the RAF, and how the fuck do you plan to do that? Even assuming other countries didn't mind you overflying their airspace to attack an ally, there are only a handful of platforms in Russian service with legs that long. They'd need in flight refuelling there and back, and be working on limited payloads.

Third problem is ground forces. 1) they need to get there and 2) they need supplied long enough to do the job and 3) You need to win uncontested sea and air supremacy to land at all, or they get bombed/shelled to death on the beaches.

>>34409454
no its worse its the state pension
but hey have a nice day!

>>34409552
>day 1
>russian forces claim the UK is being racist
>russian forces demand entry into the country
>UK capitulates and makes russia promise not to invade
>russia begins invading
>UK reminds them to bin that knife
>british residents raped by both muslim and russian invaders
>single detachment of brit police decide to strike back and are slaughtered
>they are buried as racists and their actions are admonished by the british PM as he's replaced by putin
>10 years later the kremlin realizes invading the UK was a mistake
>salty russian vets recognize more muslims in the UK than their grandfathers did in afghanistan
>france surrenders

>>34409609
>>france surrenders
> italy switches sides
> america joins after losing

>>34409635
>australia claims they fought the entire war solo
>sweden declares itself a caliphate
>canada swears loyalty to the new caliphate (but only the women)

>>34409609
>>34409635
>>34409651
>Germany somehow gets punished for all of this

>>34407579
>>34407661
>>34408650
I take it that you have not seen the horror that is the export T-72B welds for Venezuela(? might be wrong on the country).

They were even worse. On the armor. Not areas that don't matter like smoke projectors.

>>34410541
And at the same time we got like 4 threads per every single crack in ukrainian BMPs exported to iraq.

File: 1495566214426.jpg (88KB, 853x480px) Image search: [Google]

88KB, 853x480px

>>34409658
germans deserve to be wiped out for holding humanity back for 1000 years

>>34407455
>current military target we need to face
not the sharpest tool in the shed are ya m8?

>>34405387
>Royal Navy
>reviving
What universe are you posting from?

>>34407661
>>34407579

Why does everyone always go on about welds?

As long as it holds on what it needs to hold on - is their a problem?

>>34405387
>Sir Michael has repeatedly insulted the Kuznetsov and earlier this year branded it a “ship of shame” for supplying aircraft in the air campaign against rebels in Aleppo.
Oh so thats where the shaming began.

>>34408183
>Somewhat less exerting in that regard
Only when conducted in pure fantasy. The real result of the U.S. approach is the DOD getting fucked in the ass by nearly every supplier from Eotech to Lockheed on a regular basis. Our quality equipment is a bunch of hangar queen meme machines. While I trust them in a greater capacity than slavshit, it's really overconfident to argue that the US has a shorter logistics trail than the Soviets, who could give fuck all about logistics.

File: 20170116_181149.jpg (23KB, 224x200px) Image search: [Google]

23KB, 224x200px

>>34413756
>not the sharpest tool in the shed are ya m8?
brits were lookin kinda dumb with their fingers and their thumbs in the shape of a ramp on their foreheads

>>34413928
What's funny is that vatniks had to try and twist it into a performance contest, where they just can't win. Shot themselves in the foot.

>>34405387
>Ramp vs Ramp

SAD

>>34405399.

More or less like Donald Trump tweets.

>>34407832
Vitaly is butthurt

>>34408871
I 2nd this. Compare a V8 Supercar driver to an F1 driver.

The F1 drivers are precious beyond redemption.

File: 1464531230205.jpg (52KB, 1280x720px) Image search: [Google]

52KB, 1280x720px

>>34414275

>>34407832
All the Russians who took part in that one single total war are either 70+years old or dead, yet it's always the younger ones on the internet telling everyone how we should respect them and how tough they are because of a war they weren't even alive to witness.

Maybe the lards aren't the only ones who should tone down on the arrogance.

>>34414681
>they weren't even alive to witness

kind of like the US, since WWII they never had to do any serious combat against a non weakened enemy or already weaker enemy(Nam, Korea) and now is only a superpower through their network of debts and bully attitude around the world.

But yet, talk to anyone and the world belongs to the US of A.

>>34405657
>bllllyaaaaTTTTT echoes softly in the east followed by ICBMs
>human race goes extinct because of British banter

>>34412012
>destroyng europe
It's the Brits, Germans are just fucking dense enough to always fall for their masterplan and serve as covenient continental shit stirrer.

>>34413988
lel

File: cute CVNs doing cute things.jpg (298KB, 1050x750px) Image search: [Google]

298KB, 1050x750px

>>34405390
my thoughts exactly.

>>34405777
>Russians are letting ISIS beat the ever living fuck out of the enemies of the Syrian state
>Implying this is a bad thing from a political point of view
Come on anon.

>>34406844
Correct me if I am wrong but doesn't the USA eschew autoloaders in favor of personnel instead?

>>34413850
They are terrible fucking welds anon, that's why.

File: 000.png (569KB, 648x838px) Image search: [Google]

569KB, 648x838px

Can britain beat this? I doubt!

>>34409658
2016
>1 1/4 Million Jews in Europe
2018
>6 Million Jews in Europe killed by Germany after starting WW3
>3 Million survivors report in for gibs

>>34414848

If by network of debts you mean rebuilding all of Western Europe and protecting free trade for the past 80 years then yes, that's the only reason.

>>34415265

>kill a leader
>does fuck all

Because it's pointless to kill a leader in a chaotic force. All that'll happen is the next loudest guy will take over.

>>34414955
Yeah the Bongs are really spearheading the EU, aren't they

oh wait lmao

>>34405387

It has two brigdes to reenact the 9/11 on the high seas. Right?

>>34407952
>Vacuum tube EMP meme
They used vacuum tubes because their transistors were miles behind the US. EMPs are nowhere near as powerful or as devastating as movies and vidya would have you think.