Military Forum for Russian and Global Defence Issues


    Russian Navy: Status & News #1

    Share

    collegeboy16
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 1207
    Points : 1234
    Join date : 2012-10-05
    Age : 20
    Location : Roanapur

    Re: Russian Navy: Status & News #1

    Post  collegeboy16 on Thu Sep 12, 2013 3:02 pm

    Austin wrote:Mindstorm I will read those article but two quick points to be made.

    1 ) Since the late 90's the advent of C4ISR and Revolution in Information Warfare in the USN has made it possible to have real time information from all asset integrated into one ...... the quantum leap in communication has helped integration of on board and off board submarine from all asset Ships, Air and Submarine into one single picture , this makes USN very capable in detecting missile as soon as it gets launched .......giving it a very big window to intercept with all asset it has.

    So what Admiral Elmo Zumwalt mentioned in 70's is not really valid now ...h....due to quantum jump in capabilities and supersonic missile has been the same since 70 except it got smaller and perhaps a bit faster.
    If i may rudely interrupt, But IMO , regarding reaction time, while the carrier groups' sensors, communications and computers have evolved significantly, the men bhind them are very much the same, human and there is bound to be some disconnect with these two components of the network that a more sophisticated missile can use.
    Austin wrote:
    2 ) Regarding Oscar its very valid , so USN wont wait for Oscar to launch its missile but would pro-actively go and hunt for it and destroy as much of those asset as possible ....so goes with Russian SSBN.
    How much time would it take for an oscar to salvo all its missiles?
    Austin wrote:
    May be 15 years from now with planned sustained funding Russian Navy will be at a qualatitively different level then it is today but if you talk of today , the RuN is much outclassed by USN this is due to lack of funding in past two decades.

    IMO because these guys have been at the forefront behind the offensive agains the AC, they should have a much better idea of what to do and not what to do.

    Austin
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 5774
    Points : 6182
    Join date : 2010-05-08
    Age : 40
    Location : India

    Re: Russian Navy: Status & News #1

    Post  Austin on Thu Sep 12, 2013 4:44 pm

    Viktor wrote:
    Austin wrote:2 ) Regarding Oscar its very valid , so USN wont wait for Oscar to launch its missile but would pro-actively go and hunt for it and destroy as much of those asset as possible ....so goes with Russian SSBN.
    Go hunt where? Across the oceans? Very Happy 
    Yes aided by Naval Intelligence , ASW Assets of which USN possess formidable array , Satellites based Detection system just to name a few Wink

    Austin
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 5774
    Points : 6182
    Join date : 2010-05-08
    Age : 40
    Location : India

    Re: Russian Navy: Status & News #1

    Post  Austin on Thu Sep 12, 2013 4:45 pm

    Just a question , how much is Tartus port important to Russian Navy ....should they loose it if rebels take over Damasucs at some point in time how badly will it be affected without Tartus ?

    TR1
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 5834
    Points : 5886
    Join date : 2011-12-06

    Re: Russian Navy: Status & News #1

    Post  TR1 on Thu Sep 12, 2013 6:52 pm

    The Runavy will be outclassed in our lifetimes, always.

    But that doesn't matter because it has a stronger anti-carrier punch than any other Navy the US faces, by far. And that has always been the case.
    Really, Russian navy doesn't need anything else as far as the US goes.

    Mindstorm
    Captain
    Captain

    Posts : 740
    Points : 923
    Join date : 2011-07-20

    Re: Russian Navy: Status & News #1

    Post  Mindstorm on Thu Sep 12, 2013 7:42 pm

    Austin wrote:1 ) Since the late 90's the advent of C4ISR and Revolution in Information Warfare in the USN has made it possible to have real time information from all asset integrated into one ...... the quantum leap in communication has helped integration of on board and off board submarine from all asset Ships, Air and Submarine into one single picture , this makes USN very capable in detecting missile as soon as it gets launched .......giving it a very big window to intercept with all asset it has.
    All the networking, information's processing and data sharing capabilities of this world would matter very very low in this question Austin.

    All what would matter would be simply the order of magnitude of IR emission within a finited spectrum part -with relatively higher atmospheric penetration index- at launch instant of those missiles (admitting even that an available EW space based asset of the type would ,for sheer luck, be present at covering this part of ocean in that instant Smile ) and we know that this threshold is several order of magnitude lower than that of the ICBM/SLBMs in theirs boost-phase that those space based assets are constructed to detect.


    Outside this very remote chance ,anyhow useful only establish at maximum a launch warning alert, you wouldn't have any type of early information to share about a saturating AShMs attack executed from similar enormous range from a CvBG for sheer metrical limits  Wink  

    When our Institutes ,capable to realize the first and unique space based constellation capable to achieve continue active/passive detection and tracking of enemy surface units in plain Oceans and OTH missile correction toward target area (when US Navy could achieve similar positional data only with direct local E-2/P-3 air reconnaissance ! ) have declared to work to achieve ,in future, the revolutionary capability to detect and track cruise missiles through space based sensors , the notion accounted as wonderwaffe over-ocean....
    This say something Wink 


    In reality the attack previously described would see, very likely detected, at early, one of the groups of the multi-stage 3M54s at middle altitude in a sector still at subsonic speed by an E-2 followed some dozen of seconds after by one of the groups of Granit incoming at higher altitude at Mach 2,6 .



    At this point any other airborne sensor of the CvBG....if available....would attempt to achieve early detection of other Group of missiles incoming from different vectors in other peripherical sectors of coverage.

    Chances of theirs neutralization before the Mach 2.9 sea skimming stage of Kaliber groups and final swarm approach at Mach 1,6 of Granit groups would be completed (all from different vectors of attack, at very low altitude ,violently maneuvering and withing active ECM ) in this very compressed time ?

    Well the prayers  previously cited would surely be more appropriate for the very unlucky circumstance. Very Happy

    Department Of Defense
    Private
    Private

    Posts : 32
    Points : 27
    Join date : 2013-05-07
    Location : In The Neighborhood

    Re: Russian Navy: Status & News #1

    Post  Department Of Defense on Thu Sep 12, 2013 8:05 pm

    Viktor wrote:Go hunt where? Across the oceans? Very Happy 
    The US Navy has already created choke points at strategic junctures in the Pacific, Atlantic and Indian Oceans . These choke points have state of the art sensors that can detect any type of submarine if they cross the line .

    TR1
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 5834
    Points : 5886
    Join date : 2011-12-06

    Re: Russian Navy: Status & News #1

    Post  TR1 on Thu Sep 12, 2013 8:13 pm

    Department Of Defense wrote:
    Viktor wrote:Go hunt where? Across the oceans? Very Happy 
    The US Navy has already created choke points at strategic junctures in the Pacific, Atlantic and Indian Oceans . These choke points have state of the art sensors that can detect any type of submarine if they cross the line .
    These sensors have always been claimed as capable of detecting "anything" and Soviet boats slipped past them on numerous occasions.

    Department Of Defense
    Private
    Private

    Posts : 32
    Points : 27
    Join date : 2013-05-07
    Location : In The Neighborhood

    Re: Russian Navy: Status & News #1

    Post  Department Of Defense on Thu Sep 12, 2013 8:32 pm

    TR1 wrote:and Soviet boats slipped past them on numerous occasions.
    That too would be a claim .

    But think about it logically . It is far easier to develop sensors that can detect submarines than it is the other way round.

    Viktor
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 5639
    Points : 6288
    Join date : 2009-08-25
    Age : 36
    Location : Croatia

    Re: Russian Navy: Status & News #1

    Post  Viktor on Thu Sep 12, 2013 9:00 pm

    Department Of Defense wrote:
    Viktor wrote:Go hunt where? Across the oceans? Very Happy 
    The US Navy has already created choke points at strategic junctures in the Pacific, Atlantic and Indian Oceans . These choke points have state of the art sensors that can detect any type of submarine if they cross the line .

    Russia has sensors and choke points on its own so whats the point?

    Vann7
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 3270
    Points : 3394
    Join date : 2012-05-16

    Alternative designs for the new Russian destroyer?

    Post  Vann7 on Fri Sep 13, 2013 4:43 am

    Found this information ,sorry if was posted already..

    http://russiamil.wordpress.com/2013/07/15/alternative-designs-for-the-new-russian-destroyer/

    Just a quick note today. My friend and colleague Ilya Kramnik plots out four alternative designs for the new Russian destroyer currently in the works.

    1) 7500-9000 tons, ~160 meters long, gas turbine CODAG propulsion, top speed of >30 knots Equipped with 1x1x130mm gun, 2 CIWS complexes, 32 universal shipboard firing complexes (Kalibr/Oniks) and 64 Redut shipboard missiles, 2 Paket-NK anti-submarine torpedo systems, 2 helicopters

    2) 9500-11500 tons, ~190 meters long, gas turbine CODAG propulsion, top speed of approximately 30 knots Equipped with 1x2x130mm guns, 4 CIWS complexes, 48 universal shipboard firing complexes (Kalibr/Oniks) and 80 Redut shipboard missiles, 2 Paket-NK anti-submarine torpedo systems, 2 helicopters

    3) 12,500-14,700 tons, ~200 meters long, either gas turbine CODAG or nuclear propulsion, top speed of approximately 30 knots Equipped with 2x2x152mm guns, 4 CIWS complexes, 64 universal shipboard firing complexes (Kalibr/Oniks) and 80 Redut shipboard missiles, 2 Paket-NK anti-submarine torpedo systems, 2 helicopters

    4) 13,000-15,200 tons, ~210 meters long, either gas turbine CODAG or nuclear propulsion, top speed of approximately 30 knots Equipped with 1x2x152mm guns, 4 CIWS complexes, 16 universal shipboard firing complexes (Kalibr/Oniks) and 48 Redut shipboard missiles, 2 Paket-NK anti-submarine torpedo systems, 5 helicopters

    All four versions would have the Sigma-E combat management system and Poliment active phased array radar. The largest of these options is pretty close to a cruiser, I suppose. wrote:

    anyone knows if the final design of Russia new destroyer is finished?

    On a side note.. i don't understand why Russia plans to equip their future warships with naval defense systems
    like reduct ,that as far i'm aware ,use only Small range Sams like 9M96 missiles. ~40km . Any NATO combat plane taking off from land in europe or from aircraft carrier , will be able to fire Harpoons with 124km range and newer F-35 will be able to launch other NATO anti-ship missiles like  -JSM- from Norway with 290km range.  Russia without an aircraft carrier with sukhois or migs escorting their future warships ,will be at serious disadvantage when it comes to combat planes defense. i think any serious future Russian warship needs no less that 300 to 400km engagement range in their Sams to counter the new challenges in the future.

    Austin
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 5774
    Points : 6182
    Join date : 2010-05-08
    Age : 40
    Location : India

    Re: Russian Navy: Status & News #1

    Post  Austin on Fri Sep 13, 2013 6:40 am

    Quite an interesting concept in Submarine Self Defence , Hope the Russians are working on something like this

    A3SM: Submarine Self Defence against Threats from the Sky

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vlxIVCurxc4

    Department Of Defense
    Private
    Private

    Posts : 32
    Points : 27
    Join date : 2013-05-07
    Location : In The Neighborhood

    Re: Russian Navy: Status & News #1

    Post  Department Of Defense on Fri Sep 13, 2013 11:45 am

    Viktor wrote:Russia has sensors and choke points on its own so whats the point?
    Precisely ! That's the point . Russia & the US both keep track of the other's submarines through sensors located at strategic choke points .

    Not trying to score brownie points but Russia's anti submarine warfare capabilities are by and large limited to warships & helos . The aircraft dimension is missing . Russia needs to invest in aircrafts like the P 8 Poseidon in order to carry out long range anti submarine operations.

    GarryB
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 15714
    Points : 16419
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    Re: Russian Navy: Status & News #1

    Post  GarryB on Fri Sep 13, 2013 12:14 pm

    Redut is a standard launcher for the naval equivalents of Vityaz (which in the Russian domestic model will have 60km range or 150km range missiles in packs of four per tube) and S-400 which will include the 250km range standard missile and the 400km range long range missile.

    It will also likely incorporate the S-500 missile with 600km range and anti ICBM capability.

    The redut launchers seem to have a capacity of 12 tubes per launcher bin, which means modern Russian ships will have 12, 24, 36, 48, etc launch tubes.

    The thing is that the launch tubes are sized to take the S-400 and S-300 large missiles, which means the much smaller, slimmer Vityaz missiles will fit 4 missiles to a missile tube.

    That means when he talks about a destroyer with 32 tubes for Redut he actually means it can carry up to 32 x 400km range large missiles. In real use it is far more likely it will carry a mix of heavy and light missiles, but the max number of heavy missiles would be 32 x 400km range missiles and the max number of smaller missiles would be 4 times that with 4 x 150km range missiles per tube... in other words 32 x 400km range missiles or 128 x 150km range missiles or a mix of both.

    Option 3 with 80 Redut tubes means up to 80 x 400km range missiles or up to 320 x 150km range missiles or 50km range missiles.

    Doesn't sound that bad for a Destroyer.

    Most likely it will actually have a portion of large SAMs, a portion of medium sized SAMs and some light SAMs too.


    _________________
    “The West won the world not by the superiority of its ideas or values or religion […] but rather by its superiority in applying organized violence. Westerners often forget this fact; non-Westerners never do.”

    ― Samuel P. Huntington, The Clash of Civilizations and the Remaking of World Order

    GarryB
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 15714
    Points : 16419
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    Re: Russian Navy: Status & News #1

    Post  GarryB on Fri Sep 13, 2013 12:47 pm

    We can't consider it as an advantage but they said no need to develop missiles like Russian ones, it's because they have other strong points to control the situation ,as I mentioned before the US navy airforce and submarines "as they said" have strong hands to face Russian submarines that threaten US carriers,
    Really?

    Because I see a whole new generation of Russian Subs on the verge of entering service and AFAIK the west was having serious trouble with the last generation.

    A data link between ASW helos and carriers and F-18 or F-35 could make that F-18 to go farther from the carrier and shot some anti-submarine--anti ships missiles to counter the threat against their carriers , ofcourse the Russian defences are pretty good but we are talking in a theoretical scenario so the others have right to bet on their power .
    What?

    F-18 and F-35 will not be hunting submarines... they will have other roles and duties. The helicopters will be searching for subs cubic metres of the ocean at a time... the distance they can detect modern subs is shrinking all the time.

    Against a third world country they might have lots of satellite coverage and unlimited use of datalinks, but when operational they will be restricting their comms emmissions to prevent the enemy from detecting them... so datalinks OFF.

    If Oscar like submarine tries to use stand off missile like Granit then it will too face formidable barrage of SM2,Aster or similar missile with Electronic Jamming and Soft countermeasures ( Soft/Hard Kill ) .......so all Oscar can do is to fire their missile using long stand off range of Granit and hope it manages to penetrate AD assets and hit the target ....call it Spray and Pray.
    Spray and pray? Granit does not lose accuracy or potency by being launched from maximum range. One Oscar will not fire on a battlegroup alone... it will be a coordinated attack using multiple vessels and platforms including aircraft, ships, subs... perhaps even civilian cargo container ships...

    The advantage always lays with the attacker... wait till the carriers get near land which will effect their radar performance/coverage, wait till neutral ships are nearby... lots of options... hell the single Oscar could wait till a sea state 6 storm and then launch its missiles... does Aster and ESSM etc work in a storm?

    1 ) Since the late 90's the advent of C4ISR and Revolution in Information Warfare in the USN has made it possible to have real time information from all asset integrated into one ...... the quantum leap in communication has helped integration of on board and off board submarine from all asset Ships, Air and Submarine into one single picture , this makes USN very capable in detecting missile as soon as it gets launched .......giving it a very big window to intercept with all asset it has.
    That is what Sigma-2 does for the Russian Navy, so with enemy missiles travelling at subsonic speed it is even safer...

    2 ) Regarding Oscar its very valid , so USN wont wait for Oscar to launch its missile but would pro-actively go and hunt for it and destroy as much of those asset as possible ....so goes with Russian SSBN.
    When there are no other threats it will deploy its ASW helos which are slow and cannot cover enormous areas of sea quickly... the first enemy aircraft spotted and those ASW aircraft will be withdrawn because they are terribly vulnerable to R-77s and R-73s... and then the attack subs and cruise missile subs can move in...

    How much time would it take for an oscar to salvo all its missiles?
    About 30 seconds.

    Just a question , how much is Tartus port important to Russian Navy ....should they loose it if rebels take over Damasucs at some point in time how badly will it be affected without Tartus ?
    A very small maintainence base with mostly civilian manning.

    Russia needs to invest in aircrafts like the P 8 Poseidon in order to carry out long range anti submarine operations.
    Yeah... if only the Russians had a plane like P-8 with long range and the ability to detect enemy submarines... Perhaps you might have heard of the Tu-142 at some stage? In comparison to the flight RANGE of 2,222km of the P-8, the Tu-142M has a flight RADIUS of 6,500km... a range of 13,000km... even the old Il-38 May can fly 9,000km and outranges the 737 based P-8 by more than 3 times....


    _________________
    “The West won the world not by the superiority of its ideas or values or religion […] but rather by its superiority in applying organized violence. Westerners often forget this fact; non-Westerners never do.”

    ― Samuel P. Huntington, The Clash of Civilizations and the Remaking of World Order

    Vann7
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 3270
    Points : 3394
    Join date : 2012-05-16

    Re: Russian Navy: Status & News #1

    Post  Vann7 on Sat Sep 14, 2013 12:53 pm

    GarryB wrote:Redut is a standard launcher for the naval equivalents of Vityaz (which in the Russian domestic model will have 60km range or 150km range missiles in packs of four per tube) and S-400 which will include the 250km range standard missile and the 400km range long range missile.

    It will also likely incorporate the S-500 missile with 600km range and anti ICBM capability.

    The redut launchers seem to have a capacity of 12 tubes per launcher bin, which means modern Russian ships will have 12, 24, 36, 48, etc launch tubes.

    The thing is that the launch tubes are sized to take the S-400 and S-300 large missiles, which means the much smaller, slimmer Vityaz missiles will fit 4 missiles to a missile tube.

    That means when he talks about a destroyer with 32 tubes for Redut he actually means it can carry up to 32 x 400km range large missiles. In real use it is far more likely it will carry a mix of heavy and light missiles, but the max number of heavy missiles would be 32 x 400km range missiles and the max number of smaller missiles would be 4 times that with 4 x 150km range missiles per tube... in other words 32 x 400km range missiles or 128 x 150km range missiles or a mix of both.

    Option 3 with 80 Redut tubes means up to 80 x 400km range missiles or up to 320 x 150km range missiles or 50km range missiles.

    Doesn't sound that bad for a Destroyer.

    Most likely it will actually have a portion of large SAMs, a portion of medium sized SAMs and some light SAMs too.
    Not bad at all lol..
    If only they can make them FASTER. Russia seriously need at least 10 of them and right now. Just in case a major war start needs to be fully prepared for anything.  Did you know if there are any plans to upgrade a second Kirov class with modern kalibr missiles and S-400s? that will truly be awesome if they do it. and to know also its configuraton.  If a destroyer can do 80 reduct x400km  a cruiser should be able to do 160 of them.. which will be very nice. or at least 120 x 400km + 200 Kalibr units + 2 pantsir system.. Smile

    Austin
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 5774
    Points : 6182
    Join date : 2010-05-08
    Age : 40
    Location : India

    Re: Russian Navy: Status & News #1

    Post  Austin on Sat Sep 14, 2013 12:59 pm

    Admiral: U.S. submarine forces decline as forces of China, Russia, Iran advance undersea warfare capabilities
    http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2013/09/13/admiral-us-submarine-forces-decline-as-china-russia-iran-advance-warfare/?intcmp=latestnews

    China, Russia, and Iran pose regional and strategic submarine threats and are building up undersea warfare capabilities as the Navy is cutting its submarine force by 30 percent, the admiral in charge of Pentagon submarine programs told Congress on Thursday.

    Rear Adm. Richard Breckenridge, director of Navy undersea warfare programs, said the decline of U.S. submarines is placing a key U.S. military advantage at risk.

    “Our adversaries are not standing still, and so even though we have an advantage and we have a lead, we can’t sit on our lead,” Breckenridge told a hearing of the House Armed Services seapower subcommittee.

    “We have to continue to move or we do have the potential within 20 years of losing this crown jewel, this advantage that we have in the undersea domain,” he said.

    Breckenridge then outlined advances in the submarine warfare programs of China, Russia, and Iran.

    China’s submarine warfare power is advancing in both numbers of submarines and growing sophistication and missile capability.

    Beijing’s submarines currently are “predominantly a maritime, regional undersea force,” he said.

    “They predominantly use their undersea forces to threaten the presence of our surface ships, to be able to shoulder off the positive, stabilizing influence of our naval forces in an anti-surface warfare dimension,” Breckenridge said.


    However, he warned that China’s submarine programs are “growing towards more of a global strategic undersea force.”

    China’s new Jin-class missile submarines are equipped with JL-2 missiles that “will put them into the stage of using the undersea for more than just maritime regional control,” he said.

    China’s navy is also building conventionally armed, guided-missile submarines, he said.

    “I think that the capability, the quality of their submarines will improve as we march forward a couple of decades,” Breckenridge said. “But right now, there is a capacity challenge that’s unique to what the Chinese navy has.”

    Defense officials revealed to the Free Beacon in July that the first sea patrols of China’s new strategic missile submarines will begin next year, the first time Beijing will send strategic missile submarines far from its shores.

    Currently, China has three Jin-class submarines each equipped with 12 JL-2 missiles. China calls the Jin-class the Type-094.

    The National Air and Space Intelligence Center reported in July that the JL-2 will give China for the first time the capability to target portions of the United States from locations near China’s coasts.

    After deploying at least five Jin-class subs, China currently is working on a more modern version missile submarine called the Type-096.

    The Pentagon’s annual report to Congress said China has placed a high priority on building up its submarine force and currently has more than 55 submarines, including two new Shang-class attack submarines and four improved variants of that sub. It is building a new Type-095 guided missile attack submarine in the next decade, the report said.

    The Chinese also have 12 Russian-made Kilo-class submarines, some armed with SS-N-27 anti-ship cruise missiles, 13 Song-class and eight Yuan-class attack submarines. Up to 20 Yuan-class subs will be deployed in the future.

    Breckenridge said Russia is building two new classes of advanced submarines called the Borei-class nuclear missile submarine and a conventional, guided-missile class called Severodvinsk. He said the Russian submarine program is at the “global strategic level of power.”

    “It is more than just a region,” he said. “It is the ability to control the seas, it is the ability to do land attack from covert positions. It has a much larger utility than just a maritime sea-control, sea-denial perspective alone, and the Russians have always maintained a very capable submarine force.”

    While the U.S. Navy currently has the advantage over Russia in submarine warfare capabilities, “they are a close second with regard to their capability and with regard to their shipbuilding industry and the capabilities they’re putting into their new classes of submarines,” he said.

    Three Borei-class submarines are now deployed and at least five more could be built, he said.

    “There’s been talk of a higher number of SSBNs [strategic missile submarines] within their force,” Breckenridge added. “But that machine is running. Those very good quality ballistic missile submarines are being produced in Russia.”

    The Severodvinsk class of guided missile submarines will have an “eight-pack” of missile tubes, twice the number on U.S. Virginia-class attack submarines.

    “So they see the importance of the concealment of the undersea to bring potency with that, that can be threatening at a strategic level,” Breckenridge said. “And again, we are mindful of that and we are prepared to be able to counter that.”

    Tehran’s submarine force of three Russian Kilo-class submarines, one indigenous Nahang-class submarine and an estimated 12 Ghadir-class midget submarines, poses a regional threat.

    “If you look at Iran, they, like many other countries, use the undersea domain from a purely maritime, sea-denial local region type of influence, much like we did in World War II in the Pacific,” Breckenridge said, “to hold at risk predominantly surface warships.”

    “It is a disruptive force, a challenging force and one that we deal with regard to our ability to project stabilizing influence around the globe,” the admiral said.

    Rick Fisher, a China military affairs analyst with the International Assessment and Strategy Center, said the “capacity” challenge mentioned by Breckenridge is real.

    “The Chinese Navy may have up to 53 somewhat older to quite modern non-nuclear propelled attack submarines plus five more nuclear powered attack submarines for a total of 58,” Fisher said, adding that the force could be much larger.

    “A possible force of 92 Chinese submarines means that U.S. Navy today is facing a very formidable challenge that requires that U.S. submarine levels remain well above 50 ships in order to prevent rapid combat attrition,” he said.

    Breckenridge said the submarine programs of the three potential adversaries are advancing and “we have to be mindful of to make sure that we as a nation preserve this unique advantage that we have in the undersea domain.”

    By contrast, the U.S. submarine force will decline by 25 percent over the next 15 years as a result of a “gradual consequence of a long list of choices made over many years,” he said.

    The total number of submarines will drop from 75 to 52, a 30 percent decline, he said.

    The missile-firing strike payload volume from submarines will decline by over 60 percent as the result of retiring guided-missile and attack submarines, he said.

    The forward-deployed submarines around the world will decline by over 40 percent, despite building two Virginia-class attack submarines per year, he said.

    To address the growing need for submarine power with the declining force, Breckenridge said the Navy has four priorities for its submarine strategy.

    They include sustaining the sea-based nuclear deterrent with a new missile submarine to replace Ohio-class submarines. The follow-on has been delayed for 20 years and “it is now time to make the necessary investments to support procurement of the first Ohio replacement in 2021,” Breckenridge said. “There is no allowance for any further delay.”

    To prevent the worsening decline in attack submarines, the Navy must continue the two-per-year pace of Virginia-class submarines, add a new more efficient missile launch payload module to Virginia submarine, and restart production of torpedoes.

    Subcommittee Chairman Rep. Randy Forbes (R., Va.) said during the hearing that defense spending cuts are harming the Navy.

    “It’s apparent to me that the largest threat to the United States Navy is of our own making,” Forbes said of the defense spending crisis.

    “I continue to believe that the undersea warfare capabilities provided by our United States Navy provide a preeminent role in the control of the global commons,” Forbes said. “These capabilities provide the United States with the key asymmetric advantage over any potential aggressor. Even in a time of declining resources, it’s crucial that our nation continue to retain our strategic advantage in undersea warfare.”

    ahmedfire
    Captain
    Captain

    Posts : 711
    Points : 885
    Join date : 2010-11-11
    Location : egypt

    Re: Russian Navy: Status & News #1

    Post  ahmedfire on Sat Sep 14, 2013 1:31 pm

    Austin wrote:Quite an interesting concept in Submarine Self Defence , Hope the Russians are working on something like this

    A3SM: Submarine Self Defence against Threats from the Sky

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vlxIVCurxc4
    The Russian Kilo class submarine- the Type 877EKM which has been exported to India- has a SAM launcher ,

    http://www.naval-technology.com/projects/kilo877/

    Maybe for selfdefence when the sub is in a harbor , I don't knew if it could be launched when a sub is submerged.

    Austin
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 5774
    Points : 6182
    Join date : 2010-05-08
    Age : 40
    Location : India

    Re: Russian Navy: Status & News #1

    Post  Austin on Sat Sep 14, 2013 3:09 pm

    Kilo's Igla cannot be launched when submerged and its in the front hull

    Russian Patriot
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 1167
    Points : 2061
    Join date : 2009-07-21
    Age : 25
    Location : USA- although I am Russian

    Re: Russian Navy: Status & News #1

    Post  Russian Patriot on Sat Sep 14, 2013 8:10 pm

    Russia's Navy Commander Admiral Viktor Chirkov has announced plans to build up Russian naval presence in the Mediterranean Sea near Syrian coastal waters to as many as ten battleships.

    "The task is crystal clear: to avoid a slightest threat to the security of the state. This is a general practice of all fleets around the world, to be there when a tension level increases. They are all going to act on operational command plan of the offshore maritime zone," Chirkov said on Friday, as cited in an RT report.

    "Russia will be building up its Mediterranean fleet until it is deemed sufficient to perform the task set," the Russian Navy commander stated.

    He also said that over 80 Russian warships and naval support vessels are currently in ocean waters across the world near coastlines.

    "In time of peace Navy's duty and main application is military service, constant naval presence in the zones of military-political tension where interests of the Russian Federation are concentrated," Chirkov added.

    Russia, according to the report, began its military build-up in the Mediterranean Sea in 2012 and has engaged in maintaining a steady naval presence in the eastern portion of the Mediterranean since last December.

    All Russian battleships operating in the tense region were assigned to a "single task force" in May under special offshore maritime zone operation command, the report adds.

    The Russian Navy has so far deployed seven warships in the Mediterranean Sea, including landing craft carriers Aleksandr Shabalin, Admiral Nevelskoy, Peresvet, Novocherkassk and Minsk from its Black and Baltic Sea Fleets, as well as the escort vessel Neustrashimy, and anti-submarine battleship Admiral Panteleyev.

    Recent reports further indicate that Russia's missile cruiser Moskva also passed the Straits of Gibraltar on September 10 and is expected to arrive at its final destination in eastern Mediterranean by September 16.

    Moreover, the Navy's SSV-201 reconnaissance ship Priazovye reportedly joined the eastern Mediterranean Fleet earlier in September.

    The development comes following recent threats of an attack on Syria by the United States and a number of its NATO and Arab allies in the region.

    The rhetoric of war against Syria first gained momentum on August 21, when the militants operating inside the country and the foreign-backed Syrian opposition claimed that over a thousand people had been killed in a government chemical attack on militant strongholds on the outskirts of Damascus.

    The Syrian government categorically rejects the allegation and says the militants carried out the attack to draw in military intervention.

    MFB/HSN


    http://www.globalsecurity.org/wmd/library/news/russia/2013/russia-130913-presstv01.htm?_m=3n.002a.907.dd0ao031i6.tue

    Firebird
    Lieutenant Colonel
    Lieutenant Colonel

    Posts : 921
    Points : 953
    Join date : 2011-10-14

    Re: Russian Navy: Status & News #1

    Post  Firebird on Sun Sep 15, 2013 1:30 am

    WHat would be interesting is how the destroyer might be "modularised".

    ie could there be a "stretch" variant, a nuclear variant, a hybrid variant. Also whether width could be modularised eg extra width put in, whilst based on one format. Rather than a basically different cruiser and smaller destroyer.

    There might be issues of stealth shaping, stability etc. I wonder how many options they have in modularisation...?

    GarryB
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 15714
    Points : 16419
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    Re: Russian Navy: Status & News #1

    Post  GarryB on Sun Sep 15, 2013 10:20 am

    If a destroyer can do 80 reduct x400km a cruiser should be able to do 160 of them.. which will be very nice. or at least 120 x 400km + 200 Kalibr units + 2 pantsir system..
    Sorry my friend, you clearly don't understand Russian ship designers.. there is no way they will build a Cruiser with two naval Pantsir systems... more like 8, plus a half dozen Duet turrets too.

    Their current plans call for designs that are much longer lasting, that can be upgraded more easily and will be upgraded during their operational lifetimes.

    WHat would be interesting is how the destroyer might be "modularised".
    Just look at an IBM PC clone computer... perhaps one is sitting in front of you right now. Very simply design a box and standardise all the pieces that go inside, so with the ATX form factor they will be compatible.

    In other words the ATX form factor places limits in terms of size and shape and connectors and power etc so if you get an ATX box and an ATX motherboard and an ATX power supply and put them all together then fitting RAM and HDDs and other bits and pieces you have a computer... in 5 years time you might need a new motherboard that has new connectors at the back but you can use the same box because it has a blanking plate instead of specific holes for a specific motherboard, so you can change to lots of USB3 connectors and even external SATA connectors with the same old box, but with a new CPU and new motherboard and new RAM and new graphics card you can have a fundamentally new much faster computer.

    Modular. Components built to a specific standard is taken further with USB ports having backwards compatibility and Blue Ray DVD able to read standard DVD and CD etc etc.

    By having a Cruiser standard and a Destroyer standard and a Frigate standard and a Corvette standard and a Carrier standard you might choose to have conventional propulsion for Frigates and Corvettes and nuclear propulsion for Destroyers and Cruisers and Carriers, but all anti ship and anti sub and land attack missiles will use the standard UKSK launch bins that are standard on all vessels from Corvette to Carrier. SAMs can be fitted to either Redut launchers or Shtil-1 launchers or Pantsir launchers... eventually however you want to unify the systems so they are all standardised as much as possible... not Pantsir is a long two stage missile that is not really suitable for vertical launch so some form of reloadable arm launcher makes sense. For some vessels a new naval TOR or Morfei makes more sense, but for upgraded older vessels the pantsir is fine.

    In terms of electronics there will be standardisation of radar and electronics with the main difference between the systems being scale... the main radar array of a corvette will not be the same as the main radar array of a carrier but both will use Sigma-2 to share and collect information from a range of platforms and display it on all linked platforms showing a real time picture of under sea, sea surface, and air and space.

    New systems can be developed but they need to fit the standard... New SAMs need to fit in Redut launchers, new anti ship missiles and land attack missiles and anti sub weapons need to fit into UKSK launchers, new propulsion systems need to replace old systems 1:1.

    Regarding stealth the external shell of a ship can be shaped to maximise internal volume for modules while still remaining stealthy...


    _________________
    “The West won the world not by the superiority of its ideas or values or religion […] but rather by its superiority in applying organized violence. Westerners often forget this fact; non-Westerners never do.”

    ― Samuel P. Huntington, The Clash of Civilizations and the Remaking of World Order

    GarryB
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 15714
    Points : 16419
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    Re: Russian Navy: Status & News #1

    Post  GarryB on Sun Sep 15, 2013 10:28 am

    Maybe for selfdefence when the sub is in a harbor , I don't knew if it could be launched when a sub is submerged.
    Igla needs a lock before it can be launched, though it is possible divers could be deployed with a launcher and fire from the surface with the sub still submerged... the main problem is that shooting down a helo will attract too much unwanted attention and that if the enemy arrive too quickly the diver might need to be left behind.

    Think of the MANPADS as self defence from helos and low flying MPA while snorkelling.

    More interesting will be the next gen of SAMs that the Russians are developing... with ARH Vityaz and of course the IIR Morfei both with lock on after launch capability then the possiblities of firing on enemy aircraft becomes rather more realistic including from a submerged sub with significant anti aircraft performance...

    One Redut tube launcher with 12 tubes could carry 48 50km/150km range SAMs or perhaps more Morfei SAMs with a shorter range...


    _________________
    “The West won the world not by the superiority of its ideas or values or religion […] but rather by its superiority in applying organized violence. Westerners often forget this fact; non-Westerners never do.”

    ― Samuel P. Huntington, The Clash of Civilizations and the Remaking of World Order

    ahmedfire
    Captain
    Captain

    Posts : 711
    Points : 885
    Join date : 2010-11-11
    Location : egypt

    Re: Russian Navy: Status & News #1

    Post  ahmedfire on Sun Sep 15, 2013 11:50 pm

    One Redut tube launcher with 12 tubes could carry 48 50km/150km range SAMs or perhaps more Morfei SAMs with a shorter range...
    In future , can we see a sub equipped with "short/mid-range/long range" air defence missiles and take a role to target aircrafts over atlantic ocean or anywhere else while the sub is submerged ? Wink 

    Stealthflanker
    Major
    Major

    Posts : 809
    Points : 895
    Join date : 2009-08-04
    Age : 28
    Location : Indonesia

    Re: Russian Navy: Status & News #1

    Post  Stealthflanker on Sun Sep 15, 2013 11:58 pm

    ahmedfire wrote:
    One Redut tube launcher with 12 tubes could carry 48 50km/150km range SAMs or perhaps more Morfei SAMs with a shorter range...
    In future , can we see a sub equipped with "short/mid-range/long range" air defence missiles and take a role to target aircrafts over atlantic ocean or anywhere else while the sub is submerged ? Wink 
    nope..unless a mean to detect and designate airborne target from underwater can be invented which is still unlikely.

    ahmedfire
    Captain
    Captain

    Posts : 711
    Points : 885
    Join date : 2010-11-11
    Location : egypt

    Re: Russian Navy: Status & News #1

    Post  ahmedfire on Mon Sep 16, 2013 1:11 am


    nope..unless a mean to detect and designate airborne target from underwater can be invented which is still unlikely.
    perhaps they could use a small radar dish that they poke out of the water kind of like a periscope,

    German type 212s sub have the capacity to fire a kind of missile called IDAS. It's kind of like a sidewinder missile (IR guidance) - but those German type 212 can fire them out of torpedo tubes horizontally. the missile then climbs up to sea level- then it's in the air per normal. Really it's to shoot down helicopters, but it could probably take out fixed wing too .

    Anti-Air missile ("Blowpipe" or SLAM) system on Aeneas (the 'SSG') in the mid-70s.


    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HMS_Aeneas_(P427)



    Sponsored content

    Re: Russian Navy: Status & News #1

    Post  Sponsored content Today at 4:24 pm


      Current date/time is Sat Jan 21, 2017 4:24 pm