Military Forum for Russian and Global Defence Issues


    Russian Navy: Status & News #1

    Share

    GarryB
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 15470
    Points : 16177
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    Re: Russian Navy: Status & News #1

    Post  GarryB on Mon Mar 21, 2011 8:41 am

    Rosonboronexport says 32 km for naval BUKs.

    No such thing as Naval BUK.

    Uragan is the Russian model of the exported Shtil, and Ezh is the vertical launched Russian version of the for export Shtil-1. The BUK-M3 which is the land based missile I was referring to has a reported range of up to 70km, though that has not been confirmed from multiple sources.

    It would not be talked about by Rosonboronexport because it is for Russian use like Oniks as opposed to Yakhont which is for export and has reduced performance parameters. The Russian military have said they don't want old stuff so I think it is fair to assume they will want the latest model in the Uragan/Buk family for their vessels.

    IronsightSniper
    Junior Lieutenant
    Junior Lieutenant

    Posts : 496
    Points : 520
    Join date : 2010-09-25
    Location : California, USA

    Re: Russian Navy: Status & News #1

    Post  IronsightSniper on Mon Mar 21, 2011 11:38 pm

    GarryB wrote:
    Rosonboronexport says 32 km for naval BUKs.

    No such thing as Naval BUK.

    Uragan is the Russian model of the exported Shtil, and Ezh is the vertical launched Russian version of the for export Shtil-1. The BUK-M3 which is the land based missile I was referring to has a reported range of up to 70km, though that has not been confirmed from multiple sources.

    It would not be talked about by Rosonboronexport because it is for Russian use like Oniks as opposed to Yakhont which is for export and has reduced performance parameters. The Russian military have said they don't want old stuff so I think it is fair to assume they will want the latest model in the Uragan/Buk family for their vessels.

    Naval Buks are called Uragan/Shtil, I just don't like using multiple names for basically the same system.

    I knew you were referring to the BUK-M3, but there's no confirmation that it's been deployed for Naval Defense.

    Ever wonder if new James Webb space telescope with massive mirrors could be used to cook Slava Class Cruisers like bugs with a magnifying glass?

    Nazi's dreamed of making space based weapon to be used on Earth. Cheap to make. Maybe telescopes in space also have military use if used to magnify sun and direct energy to Earth? If so air defense ships would be worthless. Be like the slapping Kadafi is getting right now. Over in minutes.

    Maybe such weapons are already in space. Not controlled by Russia.

    Why can't giant mirrors in space just be used for space surveying?

    GarryB
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 15470
    Points : 16177
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    Re: Russian Navy: Status & News #1

    Post  GarryB on Tue Mar 22, 2011 1:38 am

    I knew you were referring to the BUK-M3, but there's no confirmation that it's been deployed for Naval Defense.

    They are only buying new stuff now...

    Nazi's dreamed of making space based weapon to be used on Earth. Cheap
    to make.

    You mean cheap to dream. Enormously expensive to make and put up and incredibly vulnerable once in place.

    Maybe telescopes in space also have military use if used to
    magnify sun and direct energy to Earth?

    The focal length of hundreds of kms would make them useless for anything else. Take a magnifying glass and focus the sunlight onto a piece of paper. The distance the sun is concentrated into its smallest size is called the focal length... where the paper burns the most readily. The problem is that the shape (curve) of the magnifying glass determines its focal length so as a space telescope to use a focal length to concentrate the suns rays on something on the ground would mean the sensor used to take photos of deep space would need to be at ground level too because that is where the image is focussed.

    A more likely use for such telescopes is to locate and carefully examine the satellites of other nations... especially the top secret ones.

    By looking at the type and size of the antennas and equipment it will make it possible to work out potential performance and capabilities of enemy satellites. It might also reveal potential defence mechanisms too.

    runaway
    Master Sergeant
    Master Sergeant

    Posts : 351
    Points : 372
    Join date : 2010-11-12
    Location : Sweden

    Re: Russian Navy: Status & News #1

    Post  runaway on Mon Mar 28, 2011 9:08 pm

    Great news, i guess Japan is getting a headache. First Ustinov, now soon Nakhimov will join the pacific fleet.
    :

    In 2011 Russian Navy will launch modernization program of Program 1144 Orlan nuclear-powered missile cruiser Admiral Nakhimov, reports Interfax referring to a source in Navy Main HQ. This ship was laid up for repairs in 1999, although works have not started so far. The cruiser has been staying idle at moorage wall of Sevmash shipyard for 12 years. When repairs and modernization of Admiral Nakhimov are completed, the ship will join Pacific Fleet.

    Other two ships of Project 1144 – Admiral Ushakov and Admiral Lazarev – will undergo repair and upgrade right after Admiral Nakhimov. It is planned to replace obsolete analog radio-electronics with digital ones, and rearm the cruisers with new weapons. According to a source in United Shipbuilding Corporation, dismantling of arms and equipment has been already started on Admiral Nakhimov.

    As was previously declared by Sevmash shipyard, modernization of the missile cruisers will be carried out in the manner of Petr Veliky which is the only operable Orlan-class ship in Russian Navy. Funds for repairs of Admiral Nakhimov have been already appropriated, but exact sum is still uncertain. Earlier on, director general of Sevmash shipyard Nikolai Kalistratov stated the works were not sufficiently financed.

    Russian Navy Main HQ reported in July 2010 that Orlan class missile cruisers would return to the Navy within the nearest 10 years. Admiral Nakhimov was built under Project 1144.2 by Baltiysky Zavod shipyard in 1988 and had a name of Kalinin till 1992. In all, four ships were built under Project 1144. Admiral Lazarev and Admiral Ushakov were decommissioned in 2002 and 2005 respectively. Admiral Nakhimov is still in inventory of Northern Fleet.

    Displacement of Admiral Nakhimov is 26,200 tons; max speed is 32 knots. The cruiser is armed with Granit antiship missiles, ASW systems Vodopad-NK, antisubmarine rocket launchers Smerch-3 and Udav-1, gun mount AK-130, air defense systems Fort and Osa-MA, 533-mm torpedo tubes. Air wing includes three Ka-27PL helicopters.

    GarryB
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 15470
    Points : 16177
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    Re: Russian Navy: Status & News #1

    Post  GarryB on Tue Mar 29, 2011 12:34 am

    Excellent news.

    Imagine how many USUK bins you could fit in an Orlan class vessel!!!

    I wonder if the new 152mm guns the navy is working on will be ready to fit to these vessels?

    Austin
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 5675
    Points : 6081
    Join date : 2010-05-08
    Age : 40
    Location : India

    Re: Russian Navy: Status & News #1

    Post  Austin on Tue Mar 29, 2011 5:29 am

    I personally think they should dump those cruiser and put money in building Pr 20350 Gorshkov class Frigate and a 60K T Carrier ,that would do lot good then refurbishing old ship.

    GarryB
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 15470
    Points : 16177
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    Re: Russian Navy: Status & News #1

    Post  GarryB on Tue Mar 29, 2011 7:29 am

    It will be decades before they will be able to make Kirov sized vessels again... very simply because vessels this size tie up the limited number of ship yards that can handle this size vessel.
    Now these shipyards will also want to build other vessels as well like large gas carriers and oil tankers so by greatly reducing the amount of effort to get big ships you ease pressure in other production areas.
    Frigates and destroyers are simply not good enough to support a carrier... you need a cruiser... in the US case that is an AEGIS class cruiser, and for Russia that is either Slava or Kirov... or both.

    It is easier and cheaper to rip the guts out of a Kirov and upgrade it than to build it from scratch... very simply to upgrade all you need is space to sit it for a few years while workers work on it. Building from scratch requires bigger cranes and larger facilities.

    Very simply if you scrap the Kirovs and Slavas now there is no point in looking at carriers. And if you are not thinking about carriers then you don't even need frigates because they will be dead meat.
    Ships are vulnerable to air attack and the only solution that is worth a damn is to have your own air power with your ships at all times.

    There is nothing fundamentally wrong with the Kirov or Slava designs... they were excellent vessels and still are.

    The perfection of wide scale use of vertical launch missiles... which the Kirov pioneered BTW, will make it a much more potent vessel.

    It will be able to operate as an anti carrier vessel with Brahmos and Oniks, or become a long range danger with 5,000km range cruise missiles. Its air defences will likely be formidable with the potential for enormous numbers and types of SAM including sea based versions of SAM systems based on the S-400, S-500, Vityaz, Morfei, and Verba.

    ... there is no point in building a 60 ton carrier right now without a navy big enough to support its operations. New support network needs to be built to enable the full capability of a carrier force to be realised and part of that support network will include foreign bases and also more capable large support vessels.

    runaway
    Master Sergeant
    Master Sergeant

    Posts : 351
    Points : 372
    Join date : 2010-11-12
    Location : Sweden

    Re: Russian Navy: Status & News #1

    Post  runaway on Tue Mar 29, 2011 4:52 pm

    GarryB wrote:There is nothing fundamentally wrong with the Kirov or Slava designs... they were excellent vessels and still are.

    The perfection of wide scale use of vertical launch missiles... which the Kirov pioneered BTW, will make it a much more potent vessel.

    It will be able to operate as an anti carrier vessel with Brahmos and Oniks, or become a long range danger with 5,000km range cruise missiles. Its air defences will likely be formidable with the potential for enormous numbers and types of SAM including sea based versions of SAM systems based on the S-400, S-500, Vityaz, Morfei, and Verba.

    I agree, with the Mistrals on the way, you really need these support ships. And as the slipbuilders are already busy with Corvettes, Frigates and subs, theres no way to build new cruisers. Also it would take a looong time, too long.

    Now, my only wish is that the Lazarev is renamed back to Frunze, a really cool name. And they say that both Ushakov and Lazarev is to be brought back to the fleet. Now where will they serve, one to PF and one to NF? That would make two Kirovs in each of the PF and NF. Wow!

    GarryB
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 15470
    Points : 16177
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    Re: Russian Navy: Status & News #1

    Post  GarryB on Wed Mar 30, 2011 4:33 am

    On paper the Mistrals are just helicopter carriers, but in the Russian fleet their command and communications suite actually makes them good solutions as flag ships to lead battle groups.

    How sad is that...

    It will be much better to have Kirov and Slava class vessels tooled up for that role because their size and capacity makes them better suited to the role.

    If the US simply decided to spend the money needed to start a little insurrection in Venezuela to get another puppet into power that will spend money on US military products instead of Chinese and Russian stuff... right now... apart from a little verbal complaining there is actually little the Russians could do about it.

    Being able to send a carrier group on the other hand for an impromptu visit sends a message... the important thing is that it sends a message to the US, but also to Hugo himself that there was extra value in buying products from Russia. It is like offering better after sales support. It means he knows that if there is an earthquake or tsunami in Venezuela that he wont have to rely on the embarrassment (for him) to accept US help... a couple of Mistrals arriving offshore with trucks to distribute aide and Helos to search for the missing etc will make a greater difference than all the positive media releases of talk about support.

    Austin
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 5675
    Points : 6081
    Join date : 2010-05-08
    Age : 40
    Location : India

    Re: Russian Navy: Status & News #1

    Post  Austin on Thu Mar 31, 2011 10:12 am

    The problem with old hulls specially rusty hulls is that they tend to be less sea worthy as time passes by , metal takes its wear and tear and a 15-20 years old ship over the period of next 15-20 years would be spending a lot of time in maintenance in the yards then out at sea compared to a new ship build today.

    They will spend massive huge amounts in making these ships sea worthy by adding new weapons , sensors , perhaps refueling its core and changing its machinery and spending billions of dollars and as she ages he hull will wear and tear much faster making it less sea worthy.

    I think they should spend money in buying capital ships like more Gorshkov , 6-8 mistral and build new aircraft carrier , buying old ships like Ukraina or spending billions in resurrecting is not worth the money if you compare the investement made versus its sea worthy capability in next 20 years


    runaway
    Master Sergeant
    Master Sergeant

    Posts : 351
    Points : 372
    Join date : 2010-11-12
    Location : Sweden

    Re: Russian Navy: Status & News #1

    Post  runaway on Thu Mar 31, 2011 7:03 pm

    Austin wrote:The problem with old hulls specially rusty hulls is that they tend to be less sea worthy as time passes by , metal takes its wear and tear and a 15-20 years old ship over the period of next 15-20 years would be spending a lot of time in maintenance in the yards then out at sea compared to a new ship build today.

    They will spend massive huge amounts in making these ships sea worthy by adding new weapons , sensors , perhaps refueling its core and changing its machinery and spending billions of dollars and as she ages he hull will wear and tear much faster making it less sea worthy.

    Totaly wrong. Surface ships hulls can get very old, they do not get less seaworthy. Look at the old soviet icebreaker who was in service for 60 years. Look at the US Iowa battleships, they were in service from 1944-1992!

    Only problem with old ships is that they demand a very large crew, as they are little automated.

    Austin
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 5675
    Points : 6081
    Join date : 2010-05-08
    Age : 40
    Location : India

    Re: Russian Navy: Status & News #1

    Post  Austin on Thu Mar 31, 2011 7:07 pm

    runaway wrote:Totaly wrong. Surface ships hulls can get very old, they do not get less seaworthy. Look at the old soviet icebreaker who was in service for 60 years. Look at the US Iowa battleships, they were in service from 1944-1992!

    Only problem with old ships is that they demand a very large crew, as they are little automated.

    The real question to ask is how many times do they spend at sea in a year and how many months at the docks , if you look at old ships around you will see at the year passes by they would spend more time in the dock then at sea , hence practically they tend to be less useful for operation purpose and have more maintenance issues.

    GarryB
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 15470
    Points : 16177
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    Re: Russian Navy: Status & News #1

    Post  GarryB on Fri Apr 01, 2011 4:38 am

    The problem with old hulls specially rusty hulls is that they tend to be
    less sea worthy as time passes by , metal takes its wear and tear and a
    15-20 years old ship over the period of next 15-20 years would be
    spending a lot of time in maintenance in the yards then out at sea
    compared to a new ship build today.

    The wear and tear is on systems not hulls.
    The Kirov and Slava class vessels were well designed, capable and popular vessels.
    Much of the older systems required relatively large crews, so a significant upgrade will greatly improve performance.
    These are not Iowa class battleships we are talking about where 50 men are required to operate each gun turret. The gun turrets of the Kirov were largely automated modern guns and any new guns will be even more automated. The old vertical launch systems on the Kirov had rotating magazines that allowed below deck access and maintainence on the missiles, but the new USUK launch cells will store and monitor the missiles automatically so they will be sealed systems... which will greatly reduce the maintainence work of the crew.

    There were actually 5 Kirov class hulls laid down, with the last vessel completed as a command ship, but with very little money making it to the armed forces it was laid up to save on operating costs.

    They will spend massive huge amounts in making these ships sea worthy by
    adding new weapons , sensors , perhaps refueling its core and changing
    its machinery and spending billions of dollars and as she ages he hull
    will wear and tear much faster making it less sea worthy.

    The money they spend will make the Kirovs in many ways much more similar to other vessels that will enter service in the next few years and that commonality will actually reduce costs for all the vessels.
    Any new propulsion system to be fitted to the Kirovs will likely also be fitted to the Kuznetsov when it gets its upgrade/overhaul, and also likely will be used in Russias future carriers after about 2020-2025.
    Again commonality within the fleet is a good thing.

    The main difference will be in numbers of weapons and types of weapons used and also propulsion, but being able to fit a standard vertical launch system from most naval SAMs and a vertical launch system for pretty much all other weapons on every Russian vessel and the minimising of types of sensors that can launch and control the entire range of weapons is a huge step forward for the Russian navy that will lead to much cheaper operation, simpler maintainence... because spares and support for a destroyers systems will be the same as for a frigates systems for example. It will also make Russian vessels much more flexible with a wide range of choices for load outs for different missions.

    I think they should spend money in buying capital ships like more
    Gorshkov , 6-8 mistral and build new aircraft carrier , buying old ships
    like Ukraina or spending billions in resurrecting is not worth the
    money if you compare the investement made versus its sea worthy
    capability in next 20 years

    The Gorshkov is not a capital ship... it is a Frigate!
    They don't need more than about 4 Mistrals. Mistrals are too big for the Black Sea and the Baltic Sea, and would really only be of use in the Pacific to protect the Kuril Islands and support operations in the Pacific, and in the Northern Fleet to support arctic operations.
    They are not able to perform a carrier role in the sense that they offer air cover for a naval force... they are good for what they were designed for.
    There is no point building a new carrier or class of carriers till you have the ships they will need to support them... and to be honest the shipyards making the new carrier would the the shipyard making the new large ships to support the carrier. Which comes first the chicken or the egg. Well it is not rocket science. A large ship is useful on its own... a Carrier on its own is vulnerable. A carrier with large ship support is the full tool set... not invincible, but far more powerful than any of its parts on their own.

    A full upgrade and overhaul of the Kirovs and Slavas will mean they will be able to operate fine for the next 40 years... as long as they are looked after and like any other system gets regular upgrades and overhauls.
    Brand new scratch build vessels would need a lot more testing and fitting out to make sure there are no design flaws and even when proven they will also need to be looked after and get regular upgrades and overhauls.

    Only problem with old ships is that they demand a very large crew, as they are little automated.

    The problem with the Iowa class vessels is that they were WWII designed battleships with enormous guns with little or no automation in their operation. This meant huge numbers of sailors were needed just to man each gun turret. The upgrades applied to them were largely cosmetic like some SAMs, CIWS, and some tomahawk launchers and new comms etc. Overall it was basically kept as a gunfire support vessel so they really just wanted those guns so a major upgrade was not warranted.

    The Kirov and Slava class vessels were already modern vessels and upgrades and overhauls for these ships could automate most systems to the point where their crews are a small fraction of what they were, which at about 700 was not exactly enormous for a ship this size. During Korea and Vietnam the Iowa class vessels had 2,000 more sailors than the Kirov and even after an upgrade it had 1,100 more sailors.

    The difference of course is that the Kirovs and Slavas are getting complete changes from relatively large and bulky old systems and sensors with new much more modern compact systems and sensors and equipment.

    The real question to ask is how many times do they spend at sea in a
    year and how many months at the docks , if you look at old ships around
    you will see at the year passes by they would spend more time in the
    dock then at sea , hence practically they tend to be less useful for
    operation purpose and have more maintenance issues.

    It is like the Mig-29. If you don't upgrade it you will find the parts for the old systems are hard to find because no one makes them any more. Upgrade to new systems and you can use modern parts which are easier to get and cheaper. I would agree the old Kirov would be difficult to put into service now because for a start the Granit is no longer made in Russia AFAIK. They would have to substitute the Vulkan instead... or if there is a replacement in the works whatever that might be.
    The point is that the upgrade for the Kirov will likely include weapons and sensors that will be used by most other new Russian navy vessels so maintaining the Kirov will only be more expensive because instead of 2 USUK vertical launch bins fitted to frigates the Kirov vessels might have 50 or 100.
    Go to your local electrical appliance shop and ask for a VCR so you can watch video tapes. You might be surprised how hard it is to still find such things.
    The upgrade and overhaul of the Kirov and Slava and for that matter the Kuznetsov should deal with the problems of supporting old out of production systems.

    GarryB
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 15470
    Points : 16177
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    Re: Russian Navy: Status & News #1

    Post  GarryB on Fri Apr 01, 2011 4:43 am

    Another thing I didn't cover is that even US carriers are high maintainence and operate on a three role schedule.
    Operational, training, and overhaul. 6 Carriers for Russia would enable 3 in the Northern Fleet, and 3 in the Pacific Fleet, and of each of those three one carrier will be at sea, one will be in training and one will be in overhaul. Their support ships will operate in the same cycle.
    This will mean that for each carrier you will need a big ship... so it is not a case of banging out 2 large new ships and then banging out 2 carriers and problem solved... you will need rather more big ships to support each carrier. When you have Kirovs and Slavas available... that were designed for the battle group role in the first place... no disrespect meant Austin, but you would be a fool to just scrap them and throw them away.
    They might cost 5 billion to upgrade them all in the next 10 years, but in 20 years time that is probably how much each new big ship will cost to build with no guarantee they will get the new design right first time.

    nightcrawler
    Lieutenant
    Lieutenant

    Posts : 559
    Points : 687
    Join date : 2010-08-20
    Age : 27
    Location : Pakistan

    Re: Russian Navy: Status & News #1

    Post  nightcrawler on Fri Apr 01, 2011 7:10 am

    @Garry
    The wear and tear is on systems not hulls.
    Why you said that sir.. I believe that hulls do suffer two types of.. say deformations:
    1] ordinary wear & tear [we know that already]
    2] latent defect [hard to detect;much deadly metallurgical fatigue/cracks..leading to full-scale rupture]

    GarryB
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 15470
    Points : 16177
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    Re: Russian Navy: Status & News #1

    Post  GarryB on Fri Apr 01, 2011 7:40 am

    Unless the hull has been damaged by running aground or a collision or it has suffered damage by being hit by a torpedo then it is generally fine for the lifetime of the ship.

    The hull of a ship is generally designed to be fairly strong and take a long service life in rough water.

    These vessels however have spent most of their lives sitting at piers doing very little.

    Austin
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 5675
    Points : 6081
    Join date : 2010-05-08
    Age : 40
    Location : India

    Re: Russian Navy: Status & News #1

    Post  Austin on Fri Apr 01, 2011 7:46 am

    GarryB wrote:These vessels however have spent most of their lives sitting at piers doing very little.

    Yeah and it will corrode the hulls and metal fatigue will creep in.

    Generally older ships have problem with machinery , boilers . The Hull itself does not cost much but the machinary , propulsion and electronic takes most of the cost of the ship like 80 % plus.

    Now with older ships if you replace the machinery,boilers , refuel it and replace the entire electronic and weapons , you might well replace the hull itself or just build a new ships.

    from what I have read they are replacing the electronics and weapons and will refuell the reactor , which IMHO is a bad deal since the older machinery will just give you more and more problem during its life and these are really old like 20 years or so.

    Its really a bad deal , they could have rather put that money in building new Gorshkov class Aircraft Carrier or build couple of new destroyers which would have lasted for 35-40 years.

    GarryB
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 15470
    Points : 16177
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    Re: Russian Navy: Status & News #1

    Post  GarryB on Fri Apr 01, 2011 8:07 am

    I am no expert in ship design, but my understanding is that the ship hull is first put together and then it is floated out and sailed to another area to have propulsion and other material installed.

    The really big shipyards needed are needed to put the hull together... mounting or removing the propulsion can be done in smaller yards.

    If it was up to me I would remove the Kirov class complicated combined propulsion system and replace it with a more powerful and more modern and compact nuclear power unit that I would standardise and also put in the Slava class vessels I upgraded and also any carriers I was making or upgrading (including the Kuznetsov).
    The final carrier group we are creating will only operate as fast as its slowest vessel so its big ships all need to be fast and not limited by the speed of the refuelling ships.
    Edit: I would add that I would redesign all the ships... Kirovs and Slavas and any new carrier designs and the Kuznetsov, to modern smaller more powerful nuclear reactors, but I would also change them all to electric drive vessels with the nuclear reactors simply providing electrical power so they can be located in the centre of the vessels. The electric drive system should mean that the propellers could be fitted as pods at the front or the rear or both and make the vessels highly manoeuvrable. It will also make the design simpler and cheaper with less machinery and gearing... with no drive shaft or transmission.
    In practical terms it means also no rudders as the propeller pods can be used to precisely steer the ships... and of course the props can be run forward or in reverse instantly... a diesel will run backwards but normally has to be stopped first so reverse is normally handled by gearing and the transmission... electric drive eliminates this.
    Its really a bad deal , they could have rather put that money in
    building new Gorshkov class Aircraft Carrier or build couple of new
    destroyers which would have lasted for 35-40 years.

    Do you mean the modified Kiev class that was altered for the Indian Navy?
    It was modified because it was available... there are no other Kiev class carriers to modify so scratch building a new carrier modelled on it makes little sense.

    The Kirovs will be in service for another 30-40 years... this upgrade wont be their last and it wont be their most expensive upgrade either.

    The Slavas are in the same situation.


    Last edited by GarryB on Wed Apr 06, 2011 2:00 am; edited 1 time in total

    Russian Patriot
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 1168
    Points : 2062
    Join date : 2009-07-21
    Age : 25
    Location : USA- although I am Russian

    Russia to move Navy HQ to St. Petersburg by 2012

    Post  Russian Patriot on Sat Apr 02, 2011 11:58 pm

    The transfer of Russia's Navy Main Headquarters from Moscow to St. Petersburg will be completed in early 2012, the Defense Ministry said on Tuesday.

    "The Navy Main Headquarters will be moved from Moscow to St. Petersburg by the end of 2011- the first quarter of 2012," Deputy Defense Minister Grigory Naginsky said.

    The official said the issue was under review by Russian Navy Commander Adm. Vladimir Vysotsky.

    In 2007, Boris Gryzlov, the speaker of the lower house of parliament, proposed transferring the Navy headquarters from Moscow to St. Petersburg as part of an ongoing military reform.

    Several top Russian military commanders were against the idea, saying it would be too costly and ineffective.

    MOSCOW, March 29 (RIA Novosti)

    http://en.rian.ru/mlitary_news/20110329/163265474.html

    GarryB
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 15470
    Points : 16177
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    Re: Russian Navy: Status & News #1

    Post  GarryB on Sun Apr 03, 2011 1:06 am

    I have read suggestions to move the Russian capital to another city based on the logic that making another Russian city the capital city will result in large scale investment in that city in its infrastructure and buildings so Russia will have two cities in good condition.

    The unnecessary costs and the waste would be a problem, but I think moving the navy from Moscow will likely move the Navy command closer to the Russian Navy which will be a good thing.

    Unfortunately this will also mean moving the Navy command away from the Russian government which might end up being bad for the Navy too.

    Austin
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 5675
    Points : 6081
    Join date : 2010-05-08
    Age : 40
    Location : India

    Re: Russian Navy: Status & News #1

    Post  Austin on Tue Apr 05, 2011 6:54 pm

    Pictures of Northern Fleet

    Austin
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 5675
    Points : 6081
    Join date : 2010-05-08
    Age : 40
    Location : India

    Re: Russian Navy: Status & News #1

    Post  Austin on Tue May 31, 2011 8:50 pm

    Warship Technology: Russian Naval Programs

    Austin
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 5675
    Points : 6081
    Join date : 2010-05-08
    Age : 40
    Location : India

    Re: Russian Navy: Status & News #1

    Post  Austin on Tue Jun 21, 2011 10:32 am

    Reform of the Russian Navy in 2008-2011
    Moscow Defense Brief 2/2011
    Dmitry Boltenkov

    The Russian Army and Air Force underwent a radical reform in 2008-2011, with sweeping changes in the structure of their units, a revamped command and control system and a new support and logistics setup. By contrast, the reform of the Russian Navy has proceeded at a much more deliberate pace.

    The reshaping of the Navy into the New Look model has followed what has now become a traditional path. The MoD has aimed to bolster the Navy’s fighting ability by bringing its various units to 100 per cent of their full wartime strength in terms of manpower; entering into service new ships and submarines; offloading non-military assets, such as housing, to municipal authorities; outsourcing some jobs to civilian contractors, reducing the numbers of non-combat officers, and merging the existing units to save costs.

    Navy command structure

    The status of the Navy’s Commander and Main Staff remains uncertain since it is still unclear which of their current functions they will retain. It is very likely that the MoD will follow the model already used for the Army and the Air Force, i.e. limit the Navy Commander’s remit to strategic planning and development, monitoring of the shipbuilding programs, cooperation with research institutions, etc. It is not clear though who will command the Navy groups in the oceans, especially if said groups are put together from ships belonging to more than one Navy Fleet. In Soviet times such groups were commanded directly by the Main Navy Command. But that is probably the only argument in favor of leaving the command and control remit with the Main Navy Command. One proposal is to set up a separate Command for overseas operations.1 Be that as it may, the Navy’s main operational command body, the Central Navy Command Post, has already become part of the General Staff’s united Central Command Post, along with the central command posts of all the other armed services.2

    At this stage the structural reform of the Navy has consisted of subordinating the Navy Fleets to the newly created Operational Strategic Commands (i.e. the new Military Districts). The Northern and Baltic Fleets are now part of the Western Military District, the Black Sea Fleet and the Caspian Flotilla are part of the Southern Military District, and the Eastern Military District has taken over the Pacific Fleet. The HQs of these districts now have Navy departments, which provide coordination between the fleets and the other forces commanded by the respective districts. As a result, there is now closer horizontal cohesion between the Army and Navy forces. But very little has changed for the structures subordinated to the fleet commands3; they still take their orders from the commanders of the fleets.

    Reform of the Navy fleet formations

    When the reform began, the size of the Russian Navy’s command bodies was not proportionate to the number of ships and submarines in service. The support and logistics services were also bloated.

    The ongoing restructuring has aimed to reduce the headcount at the HQs (in the Northern Fleet, 15 per cent of officers and 17 per cent of civilian personnel have been made redundant4). The service in charge of upholding morale (the former political propaganda bodies inherited from Soviet times) also saw very serious cuts. The axe has fallen on the departments that do not directly contribute to the Navy’s fighting ability.5 Many non-combat servicemen have become civilian contractors. In the support and logistics services, many officers who have reached retirement age have been let go.

    Overall, the ongoing reform of the Russian Navy has spared the ships and the frontline services (there is simply no room for cuts there), but slashed the oversized command structures and rear services.

    Nevertheless, there has been some optimization of the Navy’s frontline units.

    The 11th and 12th Submarine Squadrons of the Northern Fleet have become the new Submarine Command6.

    The former detachments (Russian ‘divisions’, not ‘diviziya’) that hosted decommissioned nuclear-powered submarines awaiting their turn at the scrapyard (the 366th in Sovetskaya Gavan, the 304th in Vilyuchinsk and the 346th in Vidyaevo) have been disbanded because almost all those submarines have already been scrapped.

    Following the bankruptcy of the Avangard Shipyard in Petrozavodsk, which used to build and repair minesweepers, the 94th ‘Division’ that hosted ships awaiting repairs at the plant has been disbanded.7

    The Vydyaevo base area has been downsized to become a coastal base of the 7th Submarine Division.

    In late 2010 Aurora cruiser, which became a floating museum in St Petersburg in the early 20th century for its prominent role in the 1917 Bolshevik Revolution, was formally decommissioned from the Russian Navy. All its crew, apart from the captain, are now civilians.

    The 74th Submarine Division, which was made of boats awaiting repairs at the Nerpa Shipyard, has been disbanded.8 There have been cuts in the Navy engineering units.

    The 269th Naval Aviation Communications Station has been reformatted to become part of the 301st Central Navy Communications Station.9

    The HQ of the Leningrad Naval Base was relocated to Kronstadt in November 2008.

    There have been a series of big cuts in the naval support and hydrographic fleets. A number of divisions have been downsized to become naval support groups, etc.

    Reform of the support and logistics system

    The support and logistics units of the individual Fleets and the units taking orders directly from the Navy Command have also undergone substantial reforms. The primary objective was to rid the Navy of responsibilities that should by rights lie elsewhere, so that the central command could devote all its energies to bolstering the Navy’s fighting ability.

    Each naval Fleet now has supply and logistics bases (SLBs) which provide the Russian Navy units with fuel, food, various equipment and hardware, and other supplies. These bases have subsumed all the former supply and logistics units of the Navy. There are now five SLBs: in St Petersburg, Astrakhan, Krymsk, Murmansk and Vladivostok.

    Several arms and munitions bases have been merged.

    As part of the effort to rid the MoD of non-military assets, the government has set up the JSC Oboronservis holding company, which has taken over the housing and utility assets and the heating and power plants which used to be on the Russian Navy’s balance books. Oboronservis has also assumed ownership of the naval communications equipment repair plants, munitions warehouses, and rocket and artillery equipment repair plants.

    In late 2009 the 6th Arsenal of the Northern Fleet in Burmakovo was restructured and split into two parts: the No 81269 military unit and the JSC Repairs Center company. The military unit was left in charge of munitions, and the company took over maintenance, repairs and disposal of decommissioned weapons. The Northern Arsenal unit of the MoD (the former 2708th Torpedo Weapons and Ammunition Base) was restructured in March 2010 to become JSC Severnyy Arsenal company, and then incorporated into JSC Oboronservis. Several construction units have been taken over by JSC Oboronstroy; the farms that previously belonged to the Navy by JSC Agroprom; the local electricity grids by Oboronenergo; the wholesale and retail trade departments of the fleets by Voentorg; the aircraft repair plants by JSC Aviaremont; and the car and truck repair plants by Spetsremont.

    All these measures are expected to improve the Navy’s fighting ability and enable its combat units to focus on training. Nevertheless, such large-scale reorganizations always result in some early problems.

    The reform has also affected the medical provision system. For example, the Baltic Fleet’s hospitals in Kaliningrad Region have been reorganized into a single medical center, the 1409th Navy Clinical Hospital. It includes the Main Hospital of the Baltic Fleet in Kaliningrad and its branches in Baltiysk and Chernyakhovsk.10

    Another typical example is the former 412th Plant of the White Sea Naval Base, which was used for refueling nuclear propulsion reactors. The plant was disbanded on December 1, 2009; its nuclear activities have been taken over by the civilian Zvezdochka Ship Repair Center.11

    The Navy’s training and education system has also undergone a radical reorganization. Its research institutes and schools have been merged into a territorially distributed Naval Academy Research and Training Center, which includes the Naval Academy itself, the Higher Special Officer Courses, five naval research institutes, three MoD research institutes (the 1st, the 24th and the 40th), the Nakhimov Naval School and the Kronstadt Naval Cadet Corps. The new center is now subordinated to the education and training department of the MoD rather than the Navy Command.12 The plan is to relocate the center’s HQ to Kronstadt at some point in the future.13

    Plans for the naval Fleets

    Prospects for further reform of the Russian Navy can be illustrated by the Black Sea and Pacific fleets.

    In 2008 Russia adopted a special program to prioritize the development of the Black Sea Fleet. The decision was made in view of the general military-political situation in the Mediterranean and the Black Sea, tense relations with Georgia, the need to provide security during the 2014 Winter Olympics in Sochi,14 the ongoing operation against piracy in the Indian Ocean, and other foreign policy considerations.

    The bulk of the Black Sea Fleet ships are still seaworthy, but most belong in a museum and need to be replaced as a matter of priority. In October 2010 the government announced that the fleet will receive up to 18 new ships and boats by 2020, including nine frigates and six diesel-electric submarines.

    Meanwhile, the Pacific Fleet needs to be strengthened because of the growing global importance of the Asia Pacific region, continuing territorial claims against Russia by Japan, and the need to combat piracy in the Indian Ocean. The first in line for a refresh is the strategic component of the Pacific Fleet; several new Project 955 (Yuriy Dolgorukiy class) nuclear-powered missile submarines will enter service. It is also quite likely that the Mistral class amphibious assault ships for which the Russian MoD has placed an order in France will be assigned to the Pacific Fleet. It has been announced that Marshal Ustinov15 and Admiral Nakhimov16 guided missile cruisers, which currently serve with the Northern Fleet, will be transferred to the Pacific Fleet after repairs. As part of the overall effort to strengthen the Russian forces in the Southern Kuril Islands the MoD also plans to deploy a Bastion-P mobile coastal defense missiles battery there.17

    Marines and Coastal Troops

    The Russian Navy’s Coastal Troops have been reformed and the remaining units brought to their full wartime strength. Several units have changed their status, including the former 61st (Northern Fleet) and 22nd (Kamchatka) Marines Brigades, which have become regiments but retained all of their manpower. The reason for the decision was the state of these units’ barracks and living quarters. At some point in the future the two regiments will become brigades once again.18 Meanwhile, the 810th Marines Regiment of the Black Sea Fleet has been brought up in size to a full brigade, gaining a lot of manpower in the process. Under the terms of the 1997 agreement with Ukraine on the stationing of the Russian armed forces on Ukrainian territory, the strength of the Black Sea Fleet’s marines and naval aviation units is limited to 1,987 people. But according to several recent reports, the number of the Black Sea Fleet’s marines stationed in Sevastopol is as high as 2,473 people.19

    The Russian Navy’s only remaining marines division, the 55th, based in Vladivostok, has been formally downsized to become the 155th Marines Brigade – but its manpower has actually gone up.

    The 77th Marines Brigade of the Caspian Flotilla has been disbanded (the brigade was created to take part in the counter-terrorism operation in the North Caucasus), but the bulk of it – two marines battalions in Astrakhan and Kaspiysk – have escaped cuts.

    The Baltic Fleet’s Coastal Troops and Ground Forces in Kaliningrad Region have also undergone restructuring. All the skeleton-strength formations have been either disbanded or reorganized. The arms depots have ceased to exist; the weaponry they held has been used to equip the remaining units. As part of the program to create larger garrisons by 2012 the 336th Marines Brigade will be relocated to a new base now being built in Baltiysk.20 The numerical strength of the brigade will increase from the current 2,500 servicemen to 4,000 by 2012.21

    There have been serious changes in the personnel structure of the Navy’s marine and coastal troops. The units previously manned only by professional soldiers serving under contract now use conscripts as privates; only junior officer and sergeant positions are filled with professional soldiers. A case in point is the assault battalion of the Northern Fleet’s marines, which was manned only by professional soldiers. Now conscripts account for 70 per cent of its manpower.22

    Many units have also received some new weapons. Several have taken delivery of new or upgraded BTR-80M and BTR-70M APCs, new trucks, small arms, communication instruments, and 120mm 2S9 Nona-S artillery systems. The MoD has also begun to rearm the Navy’s coastal defense missile and artillery units.23,24

    Naval aviation

    Early on during the reform the naval aviation and support units were reorganized into 13 airbases. Only the 279th Independent Ship-based Fighter Regiment (Su-33 aircraft) has retained its former status. Most of the new airbases were formed through merger within a single chain of command of all the units stationed at the same airfield.

    During the second stage of the reform the airbases of each Fleet were merged into territorially integrated structures (“greater” airbases). To illustrate, all the naval aviation units of the Baltic Fleet have been merged into a single airbase with an HQ at the Chkalovskiy airfield.25 The former airbases now have the status of air groups. All the air defense units of the Baltic Fleet have been merged under the 3rd Aerospace Defense Brigade.

    The MoD has formed a new naval aviation training center in Yeysk on the Azov Sea. The center has incorporated the former 859th Training Center and the 444th Combat Training Center in Ostrov. There are plans to build in Yeysk a analog of an aircraft carrier deck for naval pilots to practice take-offs and landings; the simulator will be similar to the NITKA training range in the Crimea.26

    The initial plan of the reform included the transfer of several naval aviation and air defense units to the Air Force – but so far that has not been implemented. The idea was resurrected in the spring of 2011. It was said that naval missile-carrying long-range aviation units (Tu-22M3 aircraft), as well as naval attack (Su-24) and fighter aviation (Su-27 and MiG-31) units, apart from a single attack aviation unit stationed in the Crimea, will become part of the Air Force by the end of 2011.27 The MoD has even considered the feasibility of transferring the 279th Independent Ship-based Fighter Aviation Regiment to the Russian Air Force.

    One of the top priorities for the naval aviation fleet refresh program is the Black Sea Fleet.28 But due to political reasons (i.e. the need to secure Ukraine’s consent) the implementation of these plans is likely to see long delays.

    The naval aviation fleet refresh program includes the delivery over the coming decade of the first batch of the MiG 29K carrier-based fighters, as well as the Ka-27M, Ka-29M, Ka-31 and Ka-52 helicopters. The MoD has also launched the development of a new carrier-based helicopter, the Ka-65. But the current status of the programs to develop new patrol and submarine hunter aircraft is unclear. Meanwhile, the MoD has stepped up the Navy aircraft repair programs (for the Su-33, MiG-31 and Su-27 fighters and the Su-24M attack aircraft).

    Shipbuilding and ship repairs

    The bulk of the Russian Navy fleet is made of old Soviet ships built in the late 1980s and early 1990s. There is only a handful of ships in service that were built after the fall of the former Soviet Union. The Russian Navy has essentially “skipped” a whole generation of warships.

    The main problem now is to maintain the existing ships, most of which have already been in service for more than half of their allotted lifespan, until the new generation begins to arrive en masse. With timely upgrades and proper maintenance, the existing Soviet-designed ships still have many years of service left in them.

    In late 2010 the government unveiled the new State Armament Program for 2011-2020 (GPV-2020). A very impressive 19 trillion roubles will be spent on buying new weaponry and hardware for the MoD, of which the Navy will account for 4.7 trillion.29 It has been announced that about 100 new warships and submarines of various classes will be built by 2020, including 20 subs, 15 frigates and 35 corvettes.30

    Based on media reports, this is what it known about the program:

    The core of the strategic naval forces will be made of eight new nuclear-powered missile subs Yuriy Dolgorukiy class (Project 955 and its modifications) armed with the Bulava SLBM.31

    Up to 10 Project 855 (Severodvinsk class and modifications) nuclear-powered attack submarines should enter service by 2020.32 They will be the last fourth-generation nuclear-powered submarines to be built for the Russian Navy. The development of the future fifth-generation attack subs has already been announced.33

    Six Project 06363 (Novorossiysk class) diesel-electric submarines will be built for the Black Sea Fleet. The last two Project 677 (St. Petersburg class) subs that have already been laid down will be completed. Once that is done, the Russian shipbuilders will launch production of new non-nuclear subs with AIP power plants (based on Project 677).34

    Two series of frigates will be built; six Project 22350 ships (Admiral Flota Sovetskogo Soyuza Gorshkov class) to be built at the Severnaya Verf shipyards35, and six modified Project 11356 (Admiral Grigorovich class) frigates to be built at the Yantar shipyards. After that the MoD will probably launch an entirely new class of frigates.

    Twelve Project 20381 and 20385 (Steregushchiy class) corvettes are to be built at the Severnaya Verf shipyards36 or the Amur Shipyards. The MoD is also expected to launch the development of a new corvette series; up to 22 are to be built by 2020.37 The contract is likely to be awarded to the Zelenodolskiy shipyards (which will also complete the Project 11611K Dagestan corvette now being built).

    The MoD is likely to continue building Project 11711 (Admiral Gren class) large tank landing ships. Some kind of decision is also expected on the proposal to build two to four French-designed Mistral class amphibious assault ships; negotiations between Russia and France are still under way.

    The repair and upgrade component of the GPV-2020 includes the refurbishment of the existing Project 1144 nuclear-powered guided missile battlecruisers; the Admiral Nakhimov is the first in line for refurbishment.38 The MoD will also upgrade its fleet of third-generation Project 971, 949A and 945 nuclear-powered submarines.

    One interesting change is that each Fleet will now be assigned an individual shipyard to be in sole charge of that Fleet’s ship repair program. The ships belonging to the Northern Fleet, the Caspian Flotilla and the Novorossiysk Naval Base will be handled by the Zvezdochka Ship Repair Center company.39 The Baltic Fleet’s ships have been assigned to the Yantar Shipyard.40 In addition, there is now a special department within the central MoD that oversees these contracts, whereas previously that was the remit of the Navy’s technical department.

    Conclusion

    The reform of the Russian Navy is still a work in progress. It appears that the early reform plans have undergone a substantial transformation, and new changes are sure to be announced. But given the MoD’s gyrations over the transfer of the Navy HQ from Moscow to St Petersburg and the continuing uncertainty over the handover of naval aviation to the Air Force, it is safe to conclude that the government has no clear unanimous vision of the Navy reform. The reason for that is that the government is still trying to decide what kind of Navy Russia actually needs.

    1 http://www.flot.com/news/navy/?ELEMENT_ID=65995

    2 http://www.otvazhnyy.ru/

    3 http://www.redstar.ru/2011/03/23_03/3_03.html

    4 http://twower.livejournal.com/520535.html

    5 It must be remembered, however, that efficiency is not everything; there are also long-standing Navy traditions that need to be taken into consideration.

    6 murman.rfn.ru/rnews.html?id=849491

    7 http://www.ryadovoy.ru/forum/index.php?action=printpage;topic=1973.0

    8 http://www.mbnews.ru/content/view/22586/

    9 http://www.esosedi.ru/onmap/us_vmf_mo_rf_v_ch_49383/5768796/index.html#lat=55738837&lng=37888337&z=17&v=3&mt=0

    10 http://www.newkaliningrad.ru/news/community/k1194720.html

    11 http://www.proatom.ru/modules.php?name=News&file=article&sid=1959

    12 http://www.navy.ru/news/navy/?ELEMENT_ID=65047

    13 http://nvo.ng.ru/forces/2009-06-26/4_Kronshtadt.html

    14 http://www.navy.ru/news/navy/?ELEMENT_ID=66969

    15 http://www.lenta.ru/news/2011/03/23/atlant/

    16 http://lenta.ru/news/2011/03/25/cruiser/

    17 http://lenta.ru/news/2011/03/01/bastion/

    18 http://www.echo.msk.ru/programs/voensovet/729189-echo/

    19 http://sannews.com.ua/2010/09/drugoj-chernomorskij-flot.html

    20 http://www.redstar.ru/2011/03/22_03/2_02.html

    21 http://www.klops.ru/news/Obschestvo/37376/V-2012-godu-morskie-pexotincy-Baltflota-pereedut-iz-kazarm-v-novye-doma.html

    22 http://www.redstar.ru/2010/11/24_11/5_03.html

    23 http://www.gostorgi.ru/2010/91/2010-10-14/91-46055.xml

    24 http://www.redstar.ru/2010/05/27_05/2_01.html

    25 http://www.redstar.ru/2010/10/13_10/2_02.html

    26 http://www.livekuban.ru/content/news/palubnaja-aviacija-prizemlitsja-v-ejske

    27 http://www.rian.ru/defense_safety/20110323/356933280.html

    28 Black Sea Fleet to receive 18 new ships // Interfax, October 26, 2010

    29 http://www.redstar.ru/2010/12/15_12/1_01.html

    30 http://lenta.ru/news/2011/02/24/ships/

    31 http://www.redstar.ru/2011/03/17_03/1_04.html

    32 http://www.redstar.ru/2011/03/17_03/1_04.html

    33 http://www.arms-tass.su/?page=article&aid=93156&cid=25

    34 http://lenta.ru/news/2011/03/18/submarine/

    35 http://www.spbgid.ru/index.php?news=213130

    36 http://flotprom.ru/news/index.php?ELEMENT_ID=65497

    37 http://shipbuilding.ru/rus/news/russian/2011/03/10/Trosenko_dizain_100311/

    38 http://vpk.name/news/51959_modernizaciya_tyazhelogo_atomnogo_raketnogo_kreisera_admiral_nahimov_poka_ne_nachalas__sevmash.html

    39 http://flotprom.ru/news/?ELEMENT_ID=64393

    40 http://www.shipyard-yantar.ru/docs/G_vpered/2011/06%2811%29.pdf


    Austin
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 5675
    Points : 6081
    Join date : 2010-05-08
    Age : 40
    Location : India

    Re: Russian Navy: Status & News #1

    Post  Austin on Wed Jun 29, 2011 7:38 pm

    United Shipbuilding Corporation will join the Russian Navy, three frigates of Project 11356

    According to a press conference today in St. Petersburg, the president of USC Roman Trotsenko, on July 12, 2011 the second ship is scheduled bookmark series called "The Admiral Essen.The lead ship of this project, "Admiral Grigorovich," was laid out earlier and is expected to enter the Navy in 2014, the third frigate will be named "Admiral Makarov".

    Each ship has a displacement of this project, 3.6 thousand tons, speed 14 knots, range 4800 miles.

    According Trotsenko, speaking to reporters as part of the 5th International Maritime Defence Show, is being developed by long-term program of development of military shipbuilding surface. Among the future projects - the destroyers with nuclear power plants. The project is scheduled for completion in 2013, Talking to journalists, the president of the corporation informed about the work on designing an aircraft carrier for the Russian Navy, ITAR-TASS.

    Surface ships shipwrights build of "Severnaya Verf" (part of the USC). It will be a series of corvettes type "Guarding" and frigates such as "Admiral Gorshkov".

    GarryB
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 15470
    Points : 16177
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    Re: Russian Navy: Status & News #1

    Post  GarryB on Thu Jun 30, 2011 4:30 am

    Makes sense.

    The more vessels in a carrier group that don't need refuelling the shorter the logistics train.

    A carrier group is only as fast as its slowest vessels too.

    The future Russian fleet will be reduced in size so they can afford to spend a little more on each vessel.

    Sponsored content

    Re: Russian Navy: Status & News #1

    Post  Sponsored content Today at 6:55 am


      Current date/time is Thu Dec 08, 2016 6:55 am