Which is better

t. buttmad brit from the new caliphate

Russia Navy has a leg to cling to. And that is People's Liberation Army's Navy of China! Royal Navy cannot beat China no matter what they do.

Top bantz.

Weak bantz is weak.

#1 male name in UK is mohammed. Stay mad.

>water is too warm
Why does this matter

>Navy destroyer can't go into the Middle East because the water is too warm

sorry but why?

if you don't understand how weather, sea state, and water temperature among other things affect the operating theaters of warships, you shouldn't be in a thread debating navies
There's a really long list of reasons why a lot of vessels on both sides are restricted to certain seas for a shitload of very good reasons

>t. 56% shilling for russia out of insecurity

That's actually pretty interesting, why do all of those things affect warship performamce?

Royal Navy

underrated post

The Russians would probably lose to the North Korean Navy, if they faced a near-peer they'd be butchered

gonna have to hand it to the brits on this one, They may use a ramp, but at least their carriers arnt going to explode if you lightly tap it. That and alliances and etc, etc.

Brits obviously but in a longer war the Russians might have an edge because of their industry

>Totalenkrieg
Russian Navy due its its larger SSBN fleet.
>Major conventional war.
Russians as the RN cant afford to buy reloads while the Russians still have Soviet leftovers.
>Expeditionary action.
Royal Navy as their ships don't randomly sink.

Attached: Kara Class.jpg (1800x1641, 328K)

Six Type 45 destroyers have repeatedly experienced power outages because of the temperatures, leaving servicemen in complete darkness.

During the Defence Committee hearing on Tuesday, MPs questioned company executives about the warship failures.
"The equipment is having to operate in far more arduous conditions that were initially required," Rolls-Royce director Tomas Leahy said.
Managing director of BAE Systems Maritime, John Hudson, supported Leahy's comments, adding: "The operating profile at the time was that there would not be repeated or continuous operations in the Gulf."
Waters in the Persian Gulf can get as hot as 90 degrees F (32 degrees C).

edition.cnn.com/2016/06/09/europe/britain-royal-navy-warships/index.html

the russians cause the deep sea horizon ?

good to know

>anyone unironically saying royal navy
Mentally handicapped or british, most likely both

Russians only have 2 functional SSBN, UK has the advantage there.

>Russians only have 2 functional SSBN
British retard cope

Russian, hands down, cz they now understand that future naval warfare is based on numbers, a lot of small, light, inexpensive ships, instead of a few, big, overpriced floating traps.

>greater Chechnya
Kek

Please head on back to plebbit where you belong

Carriers are overrated. They are vulnerable because missile tech has advanced very fast but missile defence is hard and lags behind.
I doubt it. For one thing Russia is still a Christian nation.

Russian Navy:
>Slight edge in numbers
>Latest in Vacuum tube tech
>Manned by drunks
>A single, coal fired carrier defeated by a drydock
>Submarines that have random reactor meltdowns

UK Navy:
>All of 70 ships, which in ww2 would be barely a single force
>Proud tradition sullied by criminal underfunding
>Old experienced officers being replaced by wymen, niggers and muslims
>Decent tech
>Actual, functioning carrier with a fucking ramp but it works
>Can call for Daddy Trump rescue worse case scenario

Royal Navy 8/10

>Christian nation
Nah, to many muslims

You sound like a angry yank

>Can call for Daddy Trump rescue worse case scenario

Lol, you wish, England is not Israel, to whom the US runs to kiss their ass. In a real war, they would let you burn...

>Actual, functioning carrier with a fucking ramp but it works

With no planes, unless they bring back their Harriers...that is, if they haven't shredded them, like the US did with their Tomcats...

lol like, nigga, get some air conditioning. just turn on the A/C lmao

Attached: honk honk1.jpg (1062x680, 491K)

>For one thing Russia is still a Christian nation.

That's why they have such a high rate of rape in their military? The lengths Jow Forums will go to to defend the disaster that is the modern Russian military is genuinely baffling to me.

>it's another bong hate thread posted while they're all asleep

What is the cause of these?

>Russia is still a Christian nation

Their church was literally rebuilt by the KGB

Can the royal navy handle 7 ton supersonic titanium slav dildos coming in packs at sea level from 500km away? They make exocets look like something out of the latest british police weapons seizure.

Attached: p700.jpg (800x321, 35K)

These have been obsolete for some time now, scarcely harder than shooting down an aircraft.

Russia has quantity, UK has quality.

Well the Royal navy certainly has lost less nuclear submarines and aircraft carriers in accidents and is not ridiculously comedy obsolete so we'll give it to the royal navy

A certain South American country.

And yet the Brits are stuck with subsonic Harpoons which are easier to shoot down.

>Hey lets put the two most easy baits into one thread, brits and Russians
>941 replies and 350 images omitted. Click here to view.
It's all so tiresome.

Attached: alarmed faucet.jpg (650x623, 23K)

They 'scrapped' their harriers, but conveniently the marines got a load of new harrier parts a short while after

>Russia
>Christian
topkek
The official state census puts them at less than 50% Christians. They're the world leaders in abortion and alcoholism. Maybe you can argue that they follow the teachings of Jesus by abandoning physical luxuries like running water and toilets.

>muh anti-ship missiles

>Russia has quantity, UK has quality.

Same thing happened in the Eastern front in WW2. Russia had quantity, Germany had quality...and look how that turned out. Germany got it's ass handed to him...

Besides, I wouldn't even say that germans had a quality advantage over the russians.

Today, Russia has the quantity and the quality as their missiles and missile defences are WAY better then anything the UK has.

[insert something off topic about "China stronker" by the usual seething Viet/Pajeet shitposters]

>Germany
>Quality

France had quality and quantity yet still got steamrolled. Stop trying to extrapolate information out of cherry picked historical events.

Cats and traps are gay though.

> Crashes into a tanker

Sold harriers to USMC to be used for spare parts

>These have been obsolete for some time now, scarcely harder than shooting down an aircraft.
How would they handle the volume though? Looking at the active Russian navy vessels, they could fire off over 300 supersonic anti-ship missiles outside of harpoon range. These are huge 4000kg to 7000kg missiles that sea skim and operate as a swarm with one missile popping up to track the target and providing the others with data.

The royal navy if it combines everything they have has 6 modern destroyers each with 48 modern SAMs. Even with 1 SAM per anti-ship missile they likely come up short against the initial barrage of long range supersonic missiles. This leaves them with CIWS, ECM and older frigates with falklands war era SAMs to shoot down missiles. Assuming the Russian fleet still insists on closing they can still hurl a substantial amount of subsonic anti-ship missiles. The royal navy can fire off a little under 200 harpoons but they're going to have trouble getting through the masses of anti-aircraft weapons older SAMs and CIWS still have a reasonable chance against harpoons. Even hits from harpoons are not going to reliably disable the Kirovs and larger ships every time. In contrast the british ships can't even risk one of the missiles they shoot down crashing into them, even with the warhead failing to explode the 7 ton missile is going to destroy anything in it's path, once they get close enough just shooting them down isn't enough you would have to completely obliterate them.

It's the same issue the US navy faced with kamikaze attacks, doing enough damage that would normally kill a plane wasn't enough you would still end up getting hit by a severely damaged plane that mostly remained on it's trajectory.

Russia having better air defence than T45 and PAAMS/Sea Viper. No.

t. Admiral Gorshkov

Russians have less then a hundred of those ramjet powered missiles in inventory and the majority of them are more then thirty years old. It would take legitimate witchcraft to get the failure rate under 30%

Anything is possible with the combined forces of Gork and Mork

>Russia having better air defence than T45 and PAAMS/Sea Viper. No.
The problem is they're limited to 48 missiles per ship and only 6 ships. How many are they going to burn through shooting down each wave of P-700s? The Russians have a much easier situation, harpoons are slow and only weigh 700kg. Even if some slip through their SAMs they can safely kill them with 30mm CIWS when it's as close as 500m or so.

Waves of p700? It is currently found on active one battle cruiser (carries 20) and maybe an aircraft carrier that will probably break down before it becomes close to becoming a threat (also subs). In all likelihood the aircraft carrier lost this capability. So where are these "waves" that yo speak of coming from?

As for Russian defense, they have more than harpoon to contend with, and their radar tracking capabilities are probably like most Russian technologies - shit.

>Russians have less then a hundred of those ramjet powered missiles in inventory and the majority of them are more then thirty years old. It would take legitimate witchcraft to get the failure rate under 30%
Even if you assume they had 100 of them, 30 of them crash before being in range of SAMs, The destroyers can only afford to expend 4 missiles per p-700. 4 missiles is not a lot to take care of misses, mechanical failures and multiple missiles being sent after the same target. The risk/reward is too favorable for the Russians, the worst scenario is all P-700s are intercepted and the kirov class + oscars go home. The british gain nothing while expending most if not all the SAMs on their destroyers leaving them to face the other Russian ships without proper defenses against anti-ship missiles.

If anything goes in the Russians favor the british fleet will suffer terrible losses. If they under estimate the number of P-700s or automated fire control fires something like 20 SAMs per P-700 the situation is very bad. In the worst case scenario all SAMs are expended shooting down perhaps the first 20 P-700s, the remainder destroy every british destroyer and frigate while the Russians did not have to risk a single naval vessel.

>repainted soviet leftovers they bought from ukraine
Something tells me that Kuzya is the best case scenario here.

>Waves of p700? It is currently found on active one battle cruiser (carries 20) and maybe an aircraft carrier that will probably break down before it becomes close to becoming a threat (also subs).
Each oscar carries 24 P-700, 6 are in active service and 4 have had overhauls in the last 10 years. Assuming they can manage to send 1 kirov and 4 oscars they would have a maximum of 116 they could possibly fire. These things were designed to fight entire carrier battle groups, even though they're outdated and in poor condition, they aren't something the british navy has an easy solution for.

1 battle cruiser with 20. 6 submarines with 24 each, divided between the nothern and pacific fleets. You're assuming quite a lot in the Russian's favour, and negating that Royal Navy is very good at ASW and the T45 is top tier if not the best at AAW. Cope harder, vlad.

>power projection is overrated
k

This.

please stop using photoshopped memes

They are doing fine in Syria

And suicide

This phases out P-700 everywhere. It proliferated into coastal defenses over past 15 years and they even used it in Syria from coast, shooting inland. It sold well to India as PJ-10, Indonesia and Vietnam.

Attached: w1056h594fill.jpg (1056x594, 64K)

Came here just to post this

Attached: 1557090150810.jpg (3124x1480, 741K)

Fuck you. Read a book nigger

>These are huge 4000kg to 7000kg missiles that sea skim and operate as a swarm with one missile popping up to track the target and providing the others with data.
It's 40 to 30 year cold war tech with analogue electronics, spare us RT propaganda. And stop using buzzwords like the "swarm" before You embarass Yourself even more Dima, ok?

Attached: 5be.jpg (1333x1000, 135K)

Just 1 kirov battlecruiser can fuck up the whole Uk navy....also..

>kirov reporting

Britain is lucky they are on the opposite side of the planet from Chinkyland

Attached: We+gotta+go+back+to+before+anime+infected+dnd_e4dbbc_7049242.gif (450x255, 2.95M)

So you don’t know? Even though he’s asked twice now only to be insulted twice.

>over past 15 years
4 years, user. 4.

what, like some kind of environmental disaster or something?

And yet, here's one of them operating in the Gulf... really makes you think.

Attached: efa79806bf3b93640b48e245317b4f5b.jpg (1024x512, 85K)

its a typical "1 feather into 10 chickens"-story, but it makes for good bantz

I'm the guy who you first replied to, not the "read a book" dickhead.
A lot of it deals with certain cooling systems for computer techs and other shit, ordnance can overheat and cook off, etc. It heavily depends on the intentions of the class before it was even built. For every class that can't there's solid reasons why and it differs for each one of them

Even the Italian navy is better than the Russian one.

>Russians as the RN cant afford to buy reloads while the Russians still have Soviet leftovers.
You do realise the UK is a richer country than Russia, right? In a major war they'll buy the shit out of the munitions they need. Just because their peacetime budget is lower means nothing in this regard for keepung munitions purchases up.

Massively overreported. Only a single Daring class has missed a deployment, and that was for an issue completely unrelated to this. It occurs only when the intercooler goes out in economy mode without the second WR-21 running. This mode is only run for casual loitering in peacetime scenarios, and thus irrelevant to the matter at hand.

Also, they commonly operate in the area with no problems, and have a fix for it in progress at the moment anyway.

it's literally a non issue in a war scenario.

>is based on numbers, a lot of small, light, inexpensive ships
What is operational range and endurance?

>With no planes

Uh huh. Pic related.

Gotta love the "MUH MISSILES" delusions trying to imply naval wars are just ships lining up in known locations and firing missiles until one side is dead. Do you think musket lines still exist too? Not to mention Russia's awful ability to actually coordinate such a strike, even if they could locate, pin point, target, organise, and then execute.

>4 missiles is not a lot to take care of misses
Given Aster's firing record, 4 is overkill.

Attached: QE Westland18.jpg (1200x800, 210K)

This was a witty comeback and you all know it.

Attached: 123409823.jpg (395x401, 59K)

>Pakistan vs Dagestan thread #28002378402

we have this fucking thread every day

It's just the mutts trying to distract people from commenting on the state of their Navy. A Navy that is currently sitting at 0:3 versus container ships.

And in every thread it is proven that the Royal Navy is superior. The Russian Navy is nothing more than tonnes upon tonnes of rust glorified by soviet revivalists.

>0:3
shit, i thought it was only 0:2

Attached: USNavalPower.jpg (3000x2000, 608K)

Woah man you must be a hit at parties

The US Navy.

In an honest comparison though the Russians have a much better sub fleet 6 times the size of the Brits but the Brits have a more modern surface fleet. The Russians also actually possess more tonnage in amphibious transport ships as well but they don't have the logistics to deploy them all at any given time.

>Royal Navy
Do they have DESIGNATED SHITTING DECKS and Allahu prayer areas on their ships?

it was in development waaaaaaay longer than that.

sounds more like a Russian problem, with all the muslims and bad sanitation that they have

The P-700 isn't capable of sea skimming and is much easier to detect at far longer ranges.