Does Russia lack tankers that can do Replenishment At Sea? Given RASing is a key part of task group operations, do we really want to encourage them to acquire more?
If nothing else this should allow NATO have a good visual look up close.
How old is the ustinov? Wasn't he launched in the '80s?
Close up imagery is available anytime we want in international waters from helicopters and MPA while the hull design is old so probably not much to be gained from a Buster Crabb type adventure.
Because a slow moving A-10 would last a long time against SA-N-6, SA-N-4, AK-130 and CIWS!
Regards,
MM
Spanish doing it to piss us off over Gib
...Re Buster Crabb type stuff. No need now as boats have a capability known as 'an underwater look'...
Close up imagery is available anytime we want in international waters from helicopters and MPA while the hull design is old so probably not much to be gained from a Buster Crabb type adventure.
Because a slow moving A-10 would last a long time against SA-N-6, SA-N-4, AK-130 and CIWS!
Regards,
MM
So there are no int benefits in allowing a bunch of Russian matelots out on a regular run ashore in a warm climate?
Their N2 mob must really be enjoying this...
Beat me to it! Yes, Ceuta (and Melilla) - Spanish enclaves on the Moroccan mainland - the Moroccans want their land back. As a run ashore (I was there a few weeks ago) it is marginally better than Brest! There are beggars everwhere, but marginally less than in Tangiers. Top tip? Don't bother!Not actually in Spain but in Ceuta which is the Spanish enclave at the top of Tangiers. Might not be much even for Russian sailors for a decent run ashore.
Close up imagery is available anytime we want in international waters from helicopters and MPA while the hull design is old so probably not much to be gained from a Buster Crabb type adventure.
Because a slow moving A-10 would last a long time against SA-N-6, SA-N-4, AK-130 and CIWS!
Regards,
MM
As opposed to our/the RN’s Type 22, which started out with no guns (bigger than 30mm!!), and ONLY four Exocet . . . NOT even any reloadsLooks to me like some kid drew it on the back page of a school book and kept adding guns and missiles to make it look hard . . . .
As opposed to our/the RN’s Type 22, which started out with no guns (bigger than 30mm!!), and ONLY four Exocet . . . NOT even any reloads
THAT is embarrassing .
"Weapons fit was determined by the primary ASW role combined with a perceived need for a general purpose capability. The principal ASW weapons systems were the ship's Lynx helicopter and triple torpedo tubes (STWS), with 2087 towed array sonar a key part of the sensors fit ( . . The larger hull also improved sea keeping, but never achieved the expected quietness with towed arrays, according to Captain Doug Littlejohns of the Type 22, HMS London . . due to failure to raft mount the diesel generators).
Air defence was provided in the form of two 'six-pack' launchers for the Seawolf (GWS 25) point-defence missile system. Surface warfare requirements were met by the provision of four Exocet SSM launchers, the standard RN fit at that time. A pair of L/60 Bofors were fitted in the first batch for patrol and junk busting on summer Indian Ocean deployments, but proved expedient in the Falkland were T22 captains considered they interfered with concentrating on Seawolf setup".
+ + + + + + + + + +
One might even imagine that naval ship designers had been recruited from Cambridge University?!
"The first Type 22 order was placed in 1972 with Yarrow Shipbuilders; Yarrow undertook much of the detailed design work whilst overall responsibility remained with the Ship Department at Bath".
Type 22 frigate - Wikipedia
+ + + + + + + + + +
photo Type 22 Broadsword class - Google Search: