Quake3World

Posted: **Thu Mar 18, 2010 6:10 pm**

http://englishrussia.com/index.php/2010 ... kranoplan/

1987 was the year when the first 350 tons ground effect “ship” from the series of Soviet battle missile carriers was produced. It was called Lun after the Russian name for a bird of prey - hen harrier. Another name for this vehicle was Project 903. It carried 6 Moskit cruise missiles (SS-N-22 Sunburn in NATO classification). Hitting four of them causes inevitable sinking of a vessel of any know type and size.

Posted: **Thu Mar 18, 2010 7:09 pm**

old....

Posted: **Thu Mar 18, 2010 7:52 pm**

is it normal that i would like to drive that thing?

Posted: **Thu Mar 18, 2010 8:00 pm**

the russians didn't fuck about.

Posted: **Thu Mar 18, 2010 9:03 pm**

in soviet russia, thunderbirds aren't go

Posted: **Thu Mar 18, 2010 9:12 pm**

Leave it to the Ruskis to build a shipkiller that's not seaworthy

Kinda like the hoovercraft come to think of it... cool design and cool tech, but ultimately quite useless as a military machine.

Posted: **Thu Mar 18, 2010 9:51 pm**

hoovercrafts were combat effective against dust bunnies

Posted: **Thu Mar 18, 2010 10:11 pm**

Posted: **Thu Mar 18, 2010 10:17 pm**

Ryoki wrote:Leave it to the Ruskis to build a shipkiller that's not seaworthy

Kinda like the hoovercraft come to think of it... cool design and cool tech, but ultimately quite useless as a military machine.

MURRRRR

Posted: **Thu Mar 18, 2010 10:23 pm**

seremtan wrote:hoovercrafts were combat effective against dust bunnies

lol, damnit

Also, what are you murring about doombrain? Any particular part of that you don't agree with or do you just want some attention..?

Posted: **Thu Mar 18, 2010 10:28 pm**

just seeing if you're still upset with me.

Posted: **Thu Mar 18, 2010 10:29 pm**

always my friend

Posted: **Thu Mar 18, 2010 11:40 pm**

Ryoki wrote:Leave it to the Ruskis to build a shipkiller that's not seaworthy

Kinda like the hoovercraft come to think of it... cool design and cool tech, but ultimately quite useless as a military machine.

Actually, wing-in-ground effect craft are very effective, but they don't do too well on rougher seas. Plus, one rogue wave and it's fucked if the pilot's not paying attention.

Posted: **Thu Mar 18, 2010 11:45 pm**

So if you're behind the wheel of one of those things, are you simultaneously a pilot and a captain? Or does your title change once the thing becomes airborne or lands?

Posted: **Fri Mar 19, 2010 8:20 am**

Pretty cool.
Saw a link to this on that same site:

http://www.dalimunthe.com/2010/02/rp-fl ... ip-in.html

It's a ship that floats horizontally but can flip to stand in a stable upright position.

Posted: **Fri Mar 19, 2010 8:26 am**

Heh, and this could come straight out of a James Bond movie. A russian underground submarine base:

http://englishrussia.com/index.php/2008 ... rine-base/

Posted: **Fri Mar 19, 2010 12:53 pm**

Nightshade wrote:Actually, wing-in-ground effect craft are very effective, but they don't do too well on rougher seas. Plus, one rogue wave and it's fucked if the pilot's not paying attention.

Does flying so low mean you're under the radar..?

That underground submarine base is awesome cool

Posted: **Fri Mar 19, 2010 2:27 pm**

lol. Play Harpoon II enough and them damn Sunburns will wreck your shit on a regular basis.

Posted: **Fri Mar 19, 2010 4:32 pm**

Gotta love this shit.
I like how the Russian tech seems awkward and clunky, but effective and menacing at the same time.

[socialist hippie]
Such a shame all this time, energy, intellectual resource and money went/goes into these ridiculous projects, where the money could so much better be spent raising the general standard of living.
[/socialist hippie]

Posted: **Fri Mar 19, 2010 6:17 pm**

Ryoki wrote:
Does flying so low mean you're under the radar..?

Absolutely, you're lost in the backscatter from the ocean's surface. Low-rent stealth technology.

Posted: **Fri Mar 19, 2010 9:18 pm**

it looks similar to the antinov 225

Posted: **Fri Mar 19, 2010 9:58 pm**

Nightshade wrote:
Ryoki wrote:
Does flying so low mean you're under the radar..?

Absolutely, you're lost in the backscatter from the ocean's surface. Low-rent stealth technology.

depends... radar equipped vessels will detect it, so if it's going after ships what's the point?

Posted: **Sat Mar 20, 2010 3:41 am**

Tsakali wrote: depends... radar equipped vessels will detect it, so if it's going after ships what's the point?

Well it's not dropping torpedoes so that flying turd doesn't have to get very close. It just needs to be a stable delivery platform. The sunburn's range is 120km and it skims the wavetops at mach 2.5ish before popping up at the last second to deliver the payload.

Posted: **Sat Mar 20, 2010 8:03 am**

Eraser wrote:Heh, and this could come straight out of a James Bond movie. A russian underground submarine base:

http://englishrussia.com/index.php/2008 ... rine-base/

Amazing game level right there!

Posted: **Sat Mar 20, 2010 12:18 pm**

Tsakali wrote: depends... radar equipped vessels will detect it, so if it's going after ships what's the point?

I doubt anything less than an Aegis class cruiser-type vessel would see it.

Quake3World

lol@ russian cold war tech

lol@ russian cold war tech

Re: lol@ russian cold war tech

Re: lol@ russian cold war tech

Re: lol@ russian cold war tech

Re: lol@ russian cold war tech

Re: lol@ russian cold war tech

Re: lol@ russian cold war tech

Re: lol@ russian cold war tech

Re: lol@ russian cold war tech

Re: lol@ russian cold war tech

Re: lol@ russian cold war tech

Re: lol@ russian cold war tech

Re: lol@ russian cold war tech

Re: lol@ russian cold war tech

Re: lol@ russian cold war tech

Re: lol@ russian cold war tech

Re: lol@ russian cold war tech

Re: lol@ russian cold war tech

Re: lol@ russian cold war tech

Re: lol@ russian cold war tech

Re: lol@ russian cold war tech

Re: lol@ russian cold war tech

Re: lol@ russian cold war tech

Re: lol@ russian cold war tech

Re: lol@ russian cold war tech