Russian Navy: Status & News #4

So not only that Fregat would be cheaper to produce, but also to operate. I hope those recon and fighter pilots won't lose their jobs. And, oh, so much fuel will go unspent!

Rather suspect both manned and unmanned will be used as the manned systems are probably still more capable, but also more expensive...

Yes, that should be more viable threat now. Hopefully also Syrian S-300 will be good enough for that.

The Syrian AD network is being linked to the Russian network there, so what the Syrians see is likely what the Russians have been seeing...

Linking them together makes them both more capable and effective.

Since early nuclear submarine days, Soviets trusted machines more than people. Compare the level of automation between US and Russian submarines and tell me Russians won't exploit machine learning and artificial intelligence in control and command at tactical level.

That is true, but their new A-100 still has radar specialists on board to interpret data and make decisions etc...

Kirov length Hindenburg could lift something more than 9 tonnes nett, while more mobile Fregat can lift more than 1 tonn gross, care to bet how long will it take it to surpass that?

I don't know how many Russian engineers do you want to work on that kilometer long airship, but I'd prefer them to work on Karakurt diesel.

A kirov sized airship would carry rather more than 9 tons... a lot more than 9 tons... but think of the length of the radar antenna it could carry for long wave radar and short wave radar and everything in between... it could probably radar map the moon to 1m resolution...

Russia has sold several aerostats to China that are designed to hold radar antenna and radio transmission equipment... the are tethered to a ground station based in a truck and are intended to operate unmanned for up to 3 months at a time. They scan for low flying targets and offer radio communications in mountainous regions where normal cell phones don't work. They normally have a 3-5km long tether...

Such an arrangement would be ideal for a Destroyer or Frigate... the tether can provide power for the radar and any propulsion systems on board, and also run a fuel cell so you could convert water ballast to hydrogen to increase lift or convert hydrogen into water to decrease lift... a fibre optic cable would allow data to be received or transmitted without emitting a datalink signal... the radar antenna on the aerostat could operate in a variety of modes including LPI and simply listening mode to detect incoming missiles with radio altimeters...

Russia has sold several aerostats to China that are designed to hold radar antenna and radio transmission equipment..

Thats interesting, you mean like the relatively small ones that have been seen in Syria?

I was reading the other day about the US tethered radar blimp system, apparently its dead after one of 3 built got hit on the ground by another blimp & another pulled its tether then drifted across several states causing collision hazard, a big power outage & small fire when it came down.

The idea that Russia would invade the Baltics to 'prove section5 is BS' is incredibly stupid.
Might as well suggest Russia would invade Alaska.

Only scenario I can see is if there's already a big Russia/NATO non-nuke shooting war going on, to secure the flank & push artillery back from St Petersburg but its hard to see that level of war not going nuke already.
Maybe if the Baltics start 'solving the ethnic Russian problem' Hitler style with blessing from NATO?

Hole wrote:The ones on Syria are Au-17 Bars, the tethered baloons sold to China are larger Au-21 Puma.

Any picture of that ? First time I hear about them.

the tethered baloons sold to China are larger Au-21 Puma.

Appears to be French oui?
http://www.aero-systemes.com/airships
http://aero-systemes.com/engine/download.php?id=23

Hole wrote:Au-33 Gepard

Do you know specification of this ? What abou its radar ?

Christopher Miller
‏Verified account @ChristopherJM
Oct 25

I obtained slides from a powerpoint made by Ukrainian military intelligence for Western allies that show the types & number of Russian vessels patrolling Sea of Azov. Ukraine says Russia has 56 vessels, including war ships from Black Sea Fleet & Caspian Flotilla, in Azov waters

How many billion $ did they pay for a copy/past from wikipedia to those ukrainians ?

JohninMK wrote:
Christopher Miller
‏Verified account @ChristopherJM
Oct 25

I obtained slides from a powerpoint made by Ukrainian military intelligence for Western allies that show the types & number of Russian vessels patrolling Sea of Azov. Ukraine says Russia has 56 vessels, including war ships from Black Sea Fleet & Caspian Flotilla, in Azov waters.
..................

Those old Svetlaks alone could win the naval war against Ukrainian Navy

Coast Guard RULES!!!

404s: *pokes The Bear* Victorah!
Russia: *increases maritime policing to dissuade from further acts of piracy*
404s: NATO SAVE US FROM RUSSIAN AGGRESSION!!!11!!1!!

Appears to be French oui?
http://www.aero-systemes.com/airships

Ah, French reseller
They're made by http://rosaerosystems.com

They are not the only ones... the ones I read about operate for 3 months at a time in mountains and operate with a vehicle sized ground station that the airship is tethered to that provides power to the airship and also captures and processes the data in an automated station.

It performs radar scanning of the area but it also operates as a radio relay station to transmit cellphone signals to allow cell phone coverage in very remote places...

Interesting info on the airships guys

As supposed, low service altitude for the tethered versions and high volume/dimensions needed are an important limitation. Maybe higher end technology can improve on that but at the time I think they are a little limited for serving in naval environment

Regarding Airships....

http://rosaerosystems.com/atlant/obj858

Comes in versions with capacities up to 170 tons... now imagine a version with a small nuclear power plant for generating electricity... electric drive motor propulsion, and of course a hydrogen fuel cell able to convert hydrogen gas into water and back so no need to dump ballast except in an emergency...

You could build in enormous radar antenna within the structure, with a hook and tow cable that could be attached to the rear of a frigate or destroyer, or it could land on the sea surface when not operating... you could operate 2 or 3 with a surface action group and have them operating at very high altitudes with enormous radar antennas and unlimited flight ranges...

Have read about designs able to carry thousands of tons, like complete turbines for hydro electric dams.... the airship can fly to the factory that built the turbine and pick it up and deliver it to the dam directly... no breaking it down into smaller parts, no transfers from truck to ship and back onto truck... no problems with winding narrow roads... or no roads... or nearby harbours or airfields...

Made of modern materials it can be light weight and strong, and very fire resistant... while the use of hydrogen does introduce an element of fire risk that can be reduced with nitrogen purging of the internal envelope and the advantage of using the Hydrogen fuel cell to create lift or ballast is enormously valuable.

Hole wrote:Sould be a dedicated ship, not a destroyer. A large airship flying a few hundred metres above the water would be a large target and give away the destroyer and maybe the position of other ship in the task force.

A normal freighter could be used. Flying high enough, with a big radar, the airship could locate targets 800 or 1000km away. The task force could keep a distance of a few hundred kilometres and still be good informed.

I think the issue would be rather how to protect it from attacks or bad weather, being so big. Surface groups are continuously monitored and cannot expect to "hide" anywhere. Russia for instance has the Legend system for that purpose. And then you have subs, OTH and so many other ways of detecting and tracking those big vessels!

NATO is storming the coast of Norway, Russia conducts missile firing

Why corvettes of the Russian Navy is accompanied by a tug?

Russia’s naval construction program continues to suffer from multiple problems, including the shortage or obsolesce of Russian shipbuilding facilities, financial and management problems, as well as technological flaws and lack of access to foreign components—notably Ukrainian-made engines. As a result, a serious gap exists between planned and expected warships. Up to 2020, Russia is likely to operate 5 out of 20 new nuclear submarines, 9 of 20 frigates, 4 of 14 small missile ships, 16–18 out of 41 corvettes and patrol ships, 1 of 6 amphibious ships, 2 minesweepers, and 14 out of 14 fast boats. Such limited numbers of new ocean-going vessels, problems with modernizing older ships (Vz.ru, February 26, 2018), along with reductions to military expenditures (Wek.ru, March 27) may compel Moscow to postpone its blue-water ambitions. https://jamestown.org/program/russias-shipbuilding-program-postponed-blue-water-ambitions/

Tsavo Lion wrote:Up to 2020, Russia is likely to operate 5 out of 20 new nuclear submarines, 4 of 14 small missile ships

Their overall conclusion is probably quite accurate (that the "blue water ambitions" will be delayed, for the most part), but how did they come up with those numbers!? That is some BS. Or am I missing something? I haven't been "watching" RuN very closely recently...

Tsavo Lion wrote:Up to 2020, Russia is likely to operate 5 out of 20 new nuclear submarines, 4 of 14 small missile ships

I am not saying that surface fleet isn't a joke but this part about submarines it complete BS.

2020 is less than 2 years away. It takes over a year to build nuclear submarine. So what are they trying to say here?

And where did they get those ''target'' numbers anyway?

He's not saying that they were all supposed to be built by 2020; I guess the #s r taken from the State Armaments Program.

Oh damn, I actually totally missed the "new" part. But yeah, I think the original plan was: 8 (Borei) + 7 (Yasen) = 15 new nuclear subs by the end 2020, not 20? (Russia has around 20 SSNs and SSGNs in total.) And anyway to just list the new ones is misleading, modernized older boats are also going to be fine at least until the early-to-mid 2030s.