What do you think is the baddest ass piece of military hardware?

[Verto]

Just for TCO:

[Serb]

Originally posted by Colon


Tiny guns then.

2 automatic 130mm. Don't remeber rate of fire. But Kirov it's a heavy nuclear missile cruiser. Its main armament is cruise missiles.

[Serb]

Re: Re: Tu-160

Originally posted by Verto
First post to make sense, Serb. A bit antiquated, but still the biggest bomber in the world, IIRC.

Antiquated? I heard here, that Yanks want to use their B-52 for next 40 years or so.
You remeber correctly, it is the biggest bomber.

[Colon™]

I can't see them on that picture, unlike those of the Yamato. So they're tiny.

[Verto]

Re: Re: Re: Tu-160

Originally posted by Serb

Antiquated? I heard here, that Yanks want to use their B-52 for next 40 years or so.
You remeber correctly, it is the biggest bomber.

I said a 'bit', meaning it is already twenty years old.

[Patroklos]

Munitions, propellent, warheads, accuracy, etc.. make big guns no longer needed.

Because of the fact that most current warships are designed around the weapon system, instead of before where the weapons were designed around the ship, one hit from a 5 inch will remove most warships from combat if not sink it. The current weapon systems pretty much require everything to work or they are useless.

[Colon™]

That may be, but modern guns look dull. Back then they were nifty.

[Verto]

I heard here, that Yanks want to use their B-52 for next 40 years or so.

And yes, it is expected the B-52 will be able to remain in active service until about 2040, with the bombers being upgraded, re-engined, etc around 2020.

[Patroklos]

see one fire on automatic, something like 30 5inch rounds a minite, and tell me that.

I do think big guns are cool.

[Serb]

Originally posted by Colon
I can't see them on that picture, unlike those of the Yamato. So they're tiny.

And? Kirov would disable/destroy Yamato with its cruise missiles from absolutely safe distance of 600 km. Guns sucks, missiles rulezzz
Kirov fires SS-N-19 "Shipwreck"

[Patroklos]

600km? Not by iteself, would need the target illuminated by something else. Is that even possible with a Shipwreck missile.

I love some of the NATO designators for Russian equipment. My favorite was "Nuclear Kitchen."

[Serb]

The target illuminated from satellite.

[Serb]

Another "bye-bye uncle Sam's boat" babe.

SS-N-22 "SunBurn"

[Patroklos]

Is that why they still used Bear's to fing the Atlantic convoys? Russian satelites were not advanced enough to transmit target data like that, and ours have only been able to for about 10 years.

Sunburns are cool but unpractical. It takes an entire destroyer sized ship to carry one and has no range, burns all its fuel trying to go so fast. So basically the ship carrying it would be dead long before the weapon became useful. However, if hidden along coast lines good bye whoever is on the recieving end.

The official countermeasure listed for this is "No countermeasure" just too fast. Supposed to be a carrier buster, though would be interesting to see it hit a destroyer. As far as I know only China has these deployed as sea going assets.

[Mordoch]

Originally posted by Serb
2) Does your regulations allow you to use untested/just modified equipment in rescue missions that already extremly dangerous?

Absolutely in life or death situations. For example in 1939 with a rather similar situation involving the US.

Each one of the crewmembers was aware that the general attitude was if a submarine went down, the crew was as good as lost. In the entire history of the submarines, no rescue attempts over 20 feet had been successful. At 243 it would be virtually impossible.

Thankfully for the members of the Squalus, a naval officer (who was an ex-submarine commander) Charles “Swede” Momsen had thought up, designed and built a “rescue chamber” that had never been tested during an actual emergency.

It would seem that Momsen and the crew of the Squalus were to be plagued by bad luck. After the buoy marker had been found and a telephone connection made to the Squalus, the line broke leaving the only link to the boat gone. The loss of telecommunications was bad enough but the buoy had been the only marker showing exactly where the Squalus was located. As a storm built up and the submarine’s location lost, the navy sent in other boats to use grappler and drag the bottom. It was at this time the rescuers found out just how full of debris and boulders the area around the Squalus was...

For the survivors, the hours were spent in complete darkness; bone chilling cold, soggy blankets and the knowledge that there had never been a successful rescue of any seamen from a sunken submarine. They were also aware that the devise that everyone was depending on to bring them to the surface had only been tested under controlled circumstances and had never been used in an actual rescue.

A reporter on the scene who described Momsen’s rescue chamber compared it to an oversized tumbler that had been turned upside down. A tumbler that would have to make four trips down to the Squalus before all 33 men could be brought up. During each trip two divers would have to go down with the rescue chamber, seal it to the escape hatch of the sub and then transfer 9 men into it for the long trip to the surface.

http://ny.essortment.com/sinkingresueus_rjqy.htm

All of the 33 surviving members of the Squalus were succesfully rescued. The Squalus was eventually salvaged, recommissioned as the Sailfish, and had a successful career during WW2.