Russian Navy: Status & News #4

Proving NATO can't protect its member states...symbolic 1 m2 is enough.

Hole wrote:What would Russia want there? The Baltics are so shit that even the balts are leaving it.

Well, it would give them a land bridge to Kalingard, they currently do not have that.

That said Russia isn't going to be attacking the Baltics

Isos wrote:

SeigSoloyvov wrote:

Hole wrote:What would Russia want there? The Baltics are so shit that even the balts are leaving it.

Well, it would give them a land bridge to Kalingard, they currently do not have that.

That said Russia isn't going to be attacking the Baltics

They better let the russian go freely to Kaliningrd through their country than bring more troops from nato. At least for civilians. Invading a nice neighbourg would then be seen very bad by russian population.

In the event of war the Baltics would be overrun in days by the Russian's there is no stopping that.

SeigSoloyvov wrote:

Hole wrote:What would Russia want there? The Baltics are so shit that even the balts are leaving it.

Well, it would give them a land bridge to Kalingard, they currently do not have that.

That said Russia isn't going to be attacking the Baltics

Land bridge is some seriously retro concept in this equation

Building actual bridge to Kaliningrad would be both more efficient for Russia and more harmful for Baltics

Hole wrote:What would Russia want there? The Baltics are so shit that even the balts are leaving it.

Baltics is Russian property. Russia bought Baltics from Sweden in 1721.

PapaDragon wrote:

SeigSoloyvov wrote:

Hole wrote:What would Russia want there? The Baltics are so shit that even the balts are leaving it.

Well, it would give them a land bridge to Kalingard, they currently do not have that.

That said Russia isn't going to be attacking the Baltics

Land bridge is some seriously retro concept in this equation

Building actual bridge to Kaliningrad would be both more efficient for Russia and more harmful for Baltics

They cannot build an actual bridge, that would require them building it other nations territory. That bridge would also be extremely long and pointless because if Russia can actually stamp down support pillars that means they own the land they are building on.

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...

Okay this sounds like doomsday survivalist paranoia, but, hell, military lives for worst case scenarios.

But the obvious problem is that there is no win for Russia.... it would just give NATO the excuse it wants to attack Russia and try to steal its resources directly.

Regarding Kaliningrad... Russia should evacuate everything and everyone from there and just pile tens of thousands of nuclear warheads there all set to explode on command or if interfered with... problem solved.

Russia needs the Baltic states like it needs Syphilis...  So what if Russians live there... Russians live in countries all round the world... that is their choice and not Russias problem.  Russia is responsible for Russians in Russia... not anywhere else.

They cannot build an actual bridge, that would require them building it other nations territory. That bridge would also be extremely long and pointless because if Russia can actually stamp down support pillars that means they own the land they are building on.

They could build a bridge that follows the gas pipes to Germany and turn off...

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?

But the obvious problem is that there is no win for Russia

No tactical, only strategic meaning. If NATO doesn't answer and Russia proves it's phoney aliance, it would decrease existenatial threat the US pose on Russia and be their greatest victory since Great Patriotic.

We're talking about level of sophistication above Donbass, protests and barricades with no proofs of Russian involvement, forcing Estonia in firing first bullet and arming protesters afterwards.

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

No tactical, only strategic meaning. If NATO doesn't answer and Russia proves it's phoney aliance, it would decrease existenatial threat the US pose on Russia and be their greatest victory since Great Patriotic.

Sounds like an enormous risk to call a bluff... risking suicide because you think the other side might back down... certainly does not sound like Putin.

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

Au-33 Gepard

JohninMK wrote:I obtained slides from a powerpoint made by Ukrainian military intelligence for Western allies

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!!

There are three versions of the Au-33.

Gepard-12: 1.200m³ volume, 28m long, up to 300kg to 1.000m for 15 days
Gepard-15: 1.500m³ volume, 30m long, up to 400kg to 1.100m for 15 days
Gepard-18: 1.800m³ volume, 32m long, up to 500kg to 1.700m for 15 days


Carries an 1L275 Aragvi radar. Can detect a tank or helicopter from 40km, a man from 15km.

Is part of the 1K135 battlefield recon system.

Different versions were tested in 2009 and 2012.

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