Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Russia to deploy new hypersonic missile systems
RIA Novosti ^ | 16:46 | 27/ 09/ 2005

Posted on 09/27/2005 9:21:27 PM PDT by eks41

MOSCOW, September 27 (RIA Novosti) - President Vladimir Putin said Tuesday that Russia would deploy new hypersonic missile systems that would be virtually invulnerable to enemy defenses.

"We are developing and will deploy new strategic high-precision systems that have no rivals across the globe. These hypersonic systems will be capable of changing the course and altitude. They will be practically invulnerable, including to air defense systems," the president said speaking on live television and radio.

Commenting on the president's statement, an air defense expert, speaking on condition of anonymity, said that Putin must have meant state-of-the-art air defense systems, or "weapons of the future" that specialists and researchers had been working on for a long time.

The expert added that the new system would combine the functions of air defense, missile defense and space defense.

The expert said the Russian army already had sea- and land-based missile complexes such as Bulava and Topol-M.

Putin also said that Russia would continue providing its army with mobile missile systems, state-of-the-art tanks, new and modernized air defense systems.

He added that last year Russia overcame an important psychological barrier when "allocations for army re-equipment topped the $5-billion profits from arms exports," while only a few years ago, Russia did not buy anything for the army.

"A great deal has been done in the past few years to restore the defense industry's financial health," Putin said, adding this included debt settlements and jobs.

He also said that expansion to foreign markets was a way to support Russia's defense sector financially. "If our specialists make it to foreign markets and uphold our interests there, it will be a very good job," the president said.


TOPICS: Foreign Affairs; News/Current Events; Russia; Technical
KEYWORDS: arms; bulava; dictatorship; missiles; putin; rasputin2; russia; topol
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-80 next last
To: RunningWolf

No,

In a T72 vs. a M1 you end up like in Iraq- a bloodbath, TWICE. An example that our Russian friends MUST downplay. A T72 is "junk". A BTR70 is "junk". A BMP1 and 2 is "junk".

When 762x51 M80 ball tears through the armor on a BTR70 at 200 meters, when 25mm M919 tears through a T72 at ranges over 1500 meters you got "junk".

The Russians had and still have an Army of "mass" not quality. Take a look at Russian NVG's. They call them Generation 3 or 3+ but they are WAY behind some of the stuff we issue our truck drivers after the Infantry phases them out.

Yes, their Army is equipped with what we would describe as "junk".

The people who tend to buy their stuff often have NO OTHER CHOICE because the US, Germany, France, GB, S. Korea, Italy, or Israel won't sell them what they want. I gave examples: Syria, Iran, Libya........ REAL WORLD examples I can back. If given a choice, few will prefer a T-80 over a M1, Leo2, Chally, LeClerk. Those buying the T80 have no other CHOICES. Iran is interested in advanced SAMs from Russia, do you think the US will offer any to Iran? Israel? The Russians are bottom feeders in defense. They make their deals where others are unwilling to sell. Coincidence that N. Korea fly’s new MIG29s?

Red6


41 posted on 09/28/2005 5:19:49 AM PDT by Red6
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

To: Red6
Take a look at how many launches are from the USAF space command
Talking about lanches I can say that Russian Plesetsk Cosmodrome is the busiest in the world. Over 1250 launches have taken place since 1966. This total is greater than the combined totals from all other nations.

And answer this, hoiw many times did you COPY of our space shuttle fly? :)
You mean Buran? It's not a full copy of american shuttle, it's better but too expensive. The main purpose was "to maintain strategic parity with the West".

42 posted on 09/28/2005 5:52:59 AM PDT by eks41
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 39 | View Replies]

To: eks41

Don't forget that NASA just inked a deal to buy russian rockets for launch vehicles.


43 posted on 09/28/2005 5:56:27 AM PDT by Rebelbase ("We're going to take things away from you on behalf of the common good." --Hillary Clinton)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: Red6
Red6,

Okay you like the word 'junk' lol, it does not bother me.
I think the Iraq battlefield is not the best place to make these determinations because we had so much superiority there in every way. Also another opponent would not have just sat there and let us bomb the s*** out of them.

The Sherman was junk against the Panzer and the Tiger, but like one German WWII combatant pointed out, for every 10 Shermans they blew up, another 20 Shermans popped up. Most everyone I knew thought the M113 was junk, the Sheridan was definitely junk.
The US turned its nose up at the Mig17 too, but the Mig17 took on and knocked out of the sky much US equipment, including the Phantom.

BTW they they ever determine what knocked out that M1 in Iraq with a hole the diameter of a pencil burned halfway thru it?

BTW why are you including Israel with Iran?

Wolf

44 posted on 09/28/2005 6:00:42 AM PDT by RunningWolf (U.S. Army Veteran.....75-78)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 41 | View Replies]

To: eks41

" You mean Buran? It's not a full copy of american shuttle, it's better but too expensive"

All I see is a copy of what looks like an American Shuttle. How can you claim it's "better" if it was never even launched?


45 posted on 09/28/2005 6:01:16 AM PDT by Rebelbase ("We're going to take things away from you on behalf of the common good." --Hillary Clinton)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 42 | View Replies]

To: Rebelbase
It was launched in 1989. Read here.
46 posted on 09/28/2005 6:03:15 AM PDT by eks41
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 45 | View Replies]

To: eks41
I don't see any lift-off photos in that link. I do see what appears to be a firing of an engine on the launch pad but it's nowhere near being a launch.

Please understand my skepticism is based on years of listening to Radio Moscow English language broadcasts and comparing those with Western News accounts of the same stories and actual film footage of the events.

If there were a photograph for propaganda in the dictionary, The Hammer and Sickle would be there, right beside the Swastika.
47 posted on 09/28/2005 6:12:04 AM PDT by Rebelbase ("We're going to take things away from you on behalf of the common good." --Hillary Clinton)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 46 | View Replies]

To: Rebelbase
How can you claim it's "better" if it was never even launched?


I don't know if its better but they saved a whole lot of money for one thing. Did we, do we really need the Shuttle?

Wolf
48 posted on 09/28/2005 6:15:44 AM PDT by RunningWolf (U.S. Army Veteran.....75-78)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 45 | View Replies]

To: eks41
They will be practically invulnerable, including to air defense systems

Strong statement. I've heard this before about many obsolete weapon systems.

Good for building national pride. The Russians are a proud people, they earned that right.
I’ve said this before, we blew it in the 90’s. The Russian people removed a corrupt stale government and wanted help from us. We turned our backs and jumped in bed with China.

Welcome to FR.

Jammer
49 posted on 09/28/2005 6:23:53 AM PDT by JamminJAY (This space for rent)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Rebelbase
Well, you are mistrustful guy :)
Do you trust NASA? The Russian Shuttle Buran
And here is much info about Buran with photogallery and videogallery.
50 posted on 09/28/2005 6:26:24 AM PDT by eks41
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 47 | View Replies]

To: eks41

The Russians couldn't even defeat the Taliban in Afghanistan. Now, they try to turn defeat into victory. Putin is good, Russia is good, but neither are that good.
Without the Nazi help, they like the U.S. wouldn't have any missile systems.


51 posted on 09/28/2005 6:27:25 AM PDT by hgro (ews)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: eks41
Yeah, that's why our (Russian) old rockets "Soyuz" fly to ISS without any problem and your "Shuttles" stand somewhere in the ass.

Didn't you guys try to copy our Shuttle a few times?

On one of my visits to Moskva, I believe I saw the decaying relic of that attempt. The Buran, you called it? Pity you couldn't get it working.

52 posted on 09/28/2005 6:30:56 AM PDT by Lazamataz (Islam is merely Nazism without the snappy fashion sense.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: JamminJAY
The Russian people removed a corrupt stale government and wanted help from us. We turned our backs and jumped in bed with China.

And we know where to lay that at the feet of, Clinton Gore.


Wolf
53 posted on 09/28/2005 6:32:18 AM PDT by RunningWolf (U.S. Army Veteran.....75-78)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 49 | View Replies]

To: eks41

You even put the jet's wings on backwards!

54 posted on 09/28/2005 6:32:35 AM PDT by Lazamataz (Islam is merely Nazism without the snappy fashion sense.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 30 | View Replies]

To: eks41

Very good. I'll take that source.

I'm still doubtful that Buran "was better" than the shuttle when it's only orbital flight was unmanned and was restricted to 2 orbits only due to "computer memory limitations".

But I will give credit to your country's space agency for recognizing they could get the same thing done cheaper using disposable launch vehicles.

We are only now realizing that 24 years later.


55 posted on 09/28/2005 6:33:29 AM PDT by Rebelbase ("We're going to take things away from you on behalf of the common good." --Hillary Clinton)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 50 | View Replies]

To: eks41
You mean Buran? It's not a full copy of american shuttle, it's better but too expensive

If you define 'better' as smaller and heated up to 700 degrees in the interior during re-entry, then I will concede Buran was 'better'.

56 posted on 09/28/2005 6:34:35 AM PDT by Lazamataz (Islam is merely Nazism without the snappy fashion sense.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 42 | View Replies]

To: Lazamataz
You even put the jet's wings on backwards!

They can't get anything right can they LOL ;)

Wolf
57 posted on 09/28/2005 6:39:22 AM PDT by RunningWolf (U.S. Army Veteran.....75-78)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 54 | View Replies]

To: eks41

Russian women are smart and beautiful. Just thought I'd let you know :-)


58 posted on 09/28/2005 6:39:37 AM PDT by Extremely Extreme Extremist
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 50 | View Replies]

To: eks41

RUSSIA- CHINA- IRAN- VENEZUELA the new quadruple alliance. It's based on long term oil contracts, military equipment sales and transfer of nuke and missile technology


59 posted on 09/28/2005 6:40:32 AM PDT by dennisw (You shouldn't have other people get your kicks for you - Bob Dylan)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: RunningWolf
Yes.

We are just starting to pay the dues for the two terms of the “gang that couldn't shoot straight”.
60 posted on 09/28/2005 6:41:20 AM PDT by JamminJAY (This space for rent)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 53 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-80 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson