This is russia's primary naval helicopter

>cold war relics
>buys two carriers that have no planes and leaks like a pussy
The absolute state of Britain.

Attached: Absolutely part and parcel.jpg (378x593, 53K)

ye right dude, they can barely keep this shit functioning in peace time.
it will be falling to pieces in actual combat situation.

That's actually a good chopper. What the fuck do you think it needs to look like?

Its entire purpose is reconissance and finding subs underwater, it's not going to beauty pageants you cuckold

You think Russia is WEAK? HAH!

Attached: 1517756919401.png (1218x715, 607K)

They play in volumes. Just look at talvisota.

Attached: FinnishHumour.jpg (712x967, 83K)

they do have planes and they don't leak
and we didn't buy them, we built them
we actually have a competent ship building industry, unlike russia.

Numbers don’t matter anymore, it’s all about the air war and that’s just a fact. Modern armies in the next big war are going to need anti air in every unit and even then that’s not going to be enough when dealing with high altitude bombers and fighters, not to mention attack helicopters and dedicated CAS air craft. Look at the last big US Russian engagement in Syria, 300 Russians tried to take on a small force of US/Kurds and got their shit stomped, tanks, APCs, and other vehicles got completely destroyed by US air power and artillery

But China literally just buys and/or copies Russian tech

>That's actually a good chopper.
not really.
it's very underpowered and notoriously unreliable.

mmmm GAU
the only Russian equivalent would be the Hind Mi-24 but the GAU would rip it apart from miles away

National Socialist Germany was superior to every nation they fought, Russians still defeated them because they were underestimated. People who underestimate Russia are supremely retarded.

>how am I supposed to consider russia a credible military threat
You don't

Jealous you don't have counter rotating props Muhammed?
It's okay we don't even have attack helicopters

>That shit will kill you. That is how you respect it.
This pretty much, and they are pretty cheap, so even wasting a missile on downing one is kind of
a loss economically.

>300 Russians

You're a retard if you actually believe this. It was maybe a dozen Russian mercs at most and the rest were Syrian regulars

yes, im referring to the gun, i love it more than the A-10 itself

>Russians still defeated them

more like the whole group of developed nations were against nazi germany

Meh, they could wipe out our shitty military in the blink of an eye. We should be pals.

We dont exactly need a lot of them so it is pointless to repace a very small number of those heli

That didn't stopped Pakistani from colonising your country. Rot with them, you British scums

Attached: 1525406072296.png (400x400, 9K)

>Meh, they could wipe out our shitty military in the blink of an eye.
what???
don't know why you think that but it's nonsense.
their navy is barely bigger and is extremely dated.

>just quibbles
Sure sure the thing has planes on paper maybe in 2020, if they manage to find the money to buy them that is.

Attached: 1953 Review.jpg (1024x767, 320K)

>We dont exactly need a lot of them
rotary ASW is one of the most important forms of anti-submarine counter-measure.
of course you need a lot of them.

Nukes.

remember when the admiral kuznetsov was steaming throught the channel and the british government asked if it needed assistance because it was belching black smoke and the ruskies got super offended

that was some pretty top tier trolling on your part, good show bongs

They're state of the art. Our military might not be as big as it once was, but the soldiers are well-trained and our equipment is high-quality. This is what really matters when it comes to war.

Attached: royal navy.jpg (1037x1042, 305K)

Make sure to dust your nukes regularly.

Attached: B83.jpg (450x360, 138K)

We have nukes too.

we've already bought them and already have them.
the ship is still undergoing sea trials that's why it doesn't have jets on it's deck.

Attached: 38gppo-official-20160629-086-043[1].jpg (3600x2145, 1.27M)

They're not the main force though. They won't have to penetrate through radar like a Tu-95 would need to because we have other planes for that.

These things are just going to be used as networked standoff cruise missile platforms using targeting data collected by F-35s/AWACS, a role it fills quite well thanks to the large payload and endurance. They're not just going to through the however many hundreds we have left at China and hope a few get through like literally everyone else will have to do.

Attached: 3_25_20Flag_original.jpg (2502x1890, 184K)

Those are some really small nukes.

A few hundred at best, and all submarine-based. Russia has thousands of Nukes, many of them ICBMs.

>This is what really matters when it comes to war.
The Germans said this when they invaded Russia.

America has black budget shit from the 60's that could take out Russia

Attached: 1524974851080.jpg (360x356, 16K)

I can see the rust

we have nukes too

Attached: 1200px-Vanguard_at_Faslane_03[1].jpg (1200x852, 190K)

Mate, with their manpower we wouldn't stand a chance. Besides, their politicians are far more based than our cucked Zioslaves. We should be backing up the Ruskies against Israel. They backed us up in WW2. We'd have been fucked otherwise. Way I see it we're comrades in arms. Our politicians dont see it that way though, Russia got all dem tasty oil pipelines.

forces.net/news/british-armed-forces-significantly-understaffed-report-reveals

Russia's 4300 Nukes do not matter? Plus s-400 beats anything America has, not to mention of the s-500

You're right, just fire them towards the East, then shit a brick when they head towards Florida instead

Most of the military hardware in NATO arsenals is 30-50 years old as well.

The Soviet military was at the cutting edge of rocket and aircraft science until the 1960's. In the 50's-60's their submarines were the equal of anything in the US Navy's fleet. Their main battle tanks were far superior to NATO models until the early 1980's. They had fully transitioned to a modern assault rifle a good 30 years before NATO. And lest we forget, to this day they maintain a larger arsenal of nuclear weapons than NATO with bigger bombs and unlike the West, they maintain a full scale chemical and biological warfare program.

The Russians have a whole new generation of AT missiles and SAMs developed in the last few years to close the gap between Russian and NATO armor and aircraft. The SAMS have been reserved for protecting Russian assets in Syria. They don't want a bunch of NATO planes shit down by Russian missiles at this stage. The AT weapons ironically are being used against Assad, not for him. His enemies have no armor anyway. The latest Russian ATGM's were looted by the CIA out of Qadaffi's arsenals and given to "rebels" inside Syria.

why are you wasting time on threat assessment? they're not your enemy.

now shut up and do what america and israel tell you to do.
sends your weapons to the Saudis and make some tea.

Those are B83 "City Killers" with nearly a half a Megaton each.

The B61 "Dial A Yield" Mod 12s can be varied from 0.5 kt 175 kt, "laid down" with a parachute and set with a timer.

Attached: B61sInAnWS3.jpg (1200x806, 135K)

If something is old, cheap to maintain, and performs the tasks it needs to perform, why not use it?

Why try to come up with something new, which rarely is better than the old variant? Example? F22 vs F35...

>all that shiny plastic
So you'll be the third after Napoleon and Hitler

This user gets it

>state of the art
It doesnt matter how many bells and whistles you have, you're not stopping an enemy who has enough missiles and nukes to blot the sun out.

>F22 vs F35
>imuckingplying those two aircraft are designed for the same purpose

Either way you'd never sell F22's and its impossible to buy them either since you stopped making them.

We don't really have a fleet to protect.

most are cgi
lel

BRRRRRRRAAAAAAAAAPPPPPTTT

>land regional power
>relies on navy

Pick one, Achmed.

real war is not like it is portrayed in games.
the cold war relics will still kill you.

>A fucking ramp
>Soldiers are being court marshalled for saying mean things to women
>No longer allowed to enlist if you're a straight, white male unless you have debilitating mental illness

Attached: 1516575885218.gif (400x300, 1.55M)

Member in Desert Storm when the Americans were shooting depleted uranium tank shells through the sanddunes and blowing up Iraqi tanks from the 60's?
I 'member..

Yeah, the shit could still kill you if you were blind and deaf, facing in the wrong direction with your hands fisting your asshole but youd need so much of that old bullshit to make a dent in a modern military.

Those helicopters are actually really good. I read somewhere that they have really good ecm and speed. Don't sell your countries military short.

Will Russia ever join NATO?

Attached: politics.jpg (661x457, 81K)

That thing is more moders than anything you might oen helicopterwise. It literally had a double helix. Like DNA. Beat that snaggie bong.

But...but muh Vox Gay says they are formidable. And he has stated he is never wrong and has no blind spots so he must be right.

Attached: untitled (2).png (332x188, 121K)

Then why you post cgi?

Hope not. I hope NATO falls apart. It's (((theirs))) anyway. That's all its there for. To protect (((their))) interests. Not freedom. Will probs be replaced with EU army soon anyway. (((They'd))) like that very much.

actually only 2 of them don't exist. but they will soon.

>state of the art
>carriers with ramps

Half a megaton is not a "city buster" , 20Mt is but I know how you mistook it for a B41, they look the same.

Attached: 9061071626_7792245201_b[1].jpg (1024x536, 289K)

Says the only country with a nuclear carrier that has a FUCKING RAMP.

>I'm sorry, but the russian military is a joke.
OK. Sure.

>he thinks launching and catching aircraft using wires and steam powered catapults is high tech

Attached: 1505924021437.jpg (235x215, 5K)

>Half a megaton is not a "city buster" , 20Mt is

"guys I'm a nuclear armament expert you know"

What wrong with a FUCKING RAMP?

Because it is.

>Kamov twin rotor design
>a joke
Wow look at that Ameriturd

Attached: 1516703587379.png (720x707, 871K)

CATOBAR allows the launch of heavier planes with a heavier payload. Ramps don't allow that, they're the extremely cheap alternative

They also require frequent refits, which requires dry-dock. Have no redundancy if they break (which they do regularly do, without any enemy fire), and weaken airframes of aircraft.
The US navy only had one carrier at sea for almost an entire year because of their CATs.
And that was in peace-time.

Early on the Germans literally had nothing that could stop the t-34.
One tank on a bridge held up an entire army, they had to disable them with infantry satchel charges.

Russian cold war helicopters are shi-
m.youtube.com/watch?v=bwNvRZAKCSY

>and weaken airframes of aircraft.

That's why you make naval versions of your planes, faggy boy, and why you have multiple carriers, not only one.

How would naval versions of planes differ from normal ones?

Don't B-52s get upgraded fairly regularly though? Compare them to the original ones and they're noticeably different.

strengthened airframe, they usually weigh a few hundred kilograms more.

>A excuse

Burger education

Isn't India also infested with Muslims?

Still a trustworthy workhorse and still going stronk thanks to modernizations.

Still one of the most manueverable rotorwing airframes in use today.
Not to mention the only one in existence you can flipslip any known aam or gam.

it's an AEW aircraft, that's all its job is.
scout for the fleet.

lol thats not a B-29
sly devil you

Yesh, I write the articles on Wikipoo

Yes very different, they have crazy electronics and sick ejection seats, And the entire coating/structure of the plane has been upgraded.

So you know 500 kt is enough :^)

Attached: 4639472_640px.jpg (640x427, 35K)

What if a Yakhont exocets that?