Russian Navy vs Japanese Navy

What pray tell, will Japan do exactly about all their bases, naval ports, airfields, HQs being in range of thousands of Russian cruise missiles?
And how many Russian equivalents will be in range or in danger from anything Japan has?

Where would those thousands missiles come from ? They have no UKSK in the pacific fleet. The only thing they could use is the long range bombers and kh101 but they don't have thousabds of them and their destroyers have very good AD systems.

I won't even touch the anti-naval capabilities afforded by the Tu-22M3s among other things, that can hit the whole Japanese fleet in port without leaving Russian airspace. What are the F-35s and helicopter carriers going to do against that?

F35 has 1000+km combat range and AMRAAM with 100+km range against straight flying bombers. Kh-22 has a range of less than 1000km.

Do the maths.

Funny I seem to recall Turkey being successfully discouraged from making good on their threat to push the Syrian Army back to the pre-Idlib offensive lines not too long ago, and not a single threat of nuclear strike was voiced.

Well that's different. Turkey is in range of western/southern military district that are in range to invade them if they touch Hmeimim. The base in Syria can be overwhelmed easily by Turkey and they have the support of NATO.

Russia clearly said it will use nuks against an overwhelming force.

And put the nukes on what?

Enriching and building nukes is one thing; but SSBNs, ICBMs, strategic bombers take quite a while to develop.

That would be easy to develop for them while they develop the nuclear warheads.

Tu-22M has 2000km range and Kh-32 has 1000km range. It would launch and leave before the f-35 has time to react.

Russia has enough to strike Japan from within territory. Those defenses aren't exactly up to snuff even against subsonic munitions let alone supersonic.

Japan isn't a huge threat. Threat none the less but not a huge one for Russia nor China.

F-35 are sketchy pieces of shit that once an airfield is destroyed, they can't fly unless the jump jet variant which also lacks performance compared to its vstol variant. Japan unfortunately for them is too congested so striking their military facilities would be a very easy success for nearly everyone. And judging by US lack of success in their AD systems which Japan also share and uses, I don't think they would be downing too many low flying missiles since they would need to strike at them at roughly at best 20km distance.

That's what I'm saying. Frigates are not enough for operating far away and they need destroyers or cruiser with more VLS.

With VLS there is no need for a 2.0 Kiriv of 25 000t.

Good so we agree. Certainly a new from scratch design cruiser does not need to be as big as the Kirovs are, but the new modular weapon systems and much more powerful radar and sensors and of course internal fibre optic communications and satellite communications and much better communications between platforms (ships, subs, aircraft, satellites, drones etc etc) means it will be vastly more capable yet probably not as large or heavy.

Japan would make a no fly zone pretty quickly and destroy all the ground launcher in kurils pretty quickly. They have 250 f15, 100 f16, and soon 100 f35. Russia has some flankers but most of its aviation is facing nato.

What would they destroy the ground launchers with?

The air defences over their Pacific Fleet base is pretty strong even if you don't include the ships and air force aircraft...

If Japan tries to strike targets everyone acknowledge as being in Russian territory then they lose any pretence at just wanting their islands back... just assembling a landing force will be noticed, and any attempt to send it for "exercises" near the Kuriles would be an obvious provocation that would send alarm bells ringing in Russia.

Mobilising an attack force would be enough warning to mobilise a response... and that response might kill some Russian fighter pilots, but would likely kill thousands of Japanese sailors. Russian pilots don't need to fly attack missions into Japanese territory... Japanese pilots would need to deal with the SAM threat covering the entire island and any ground based anti ship missile system within 500km of the Kuriles...

MiG-31s operate there and some of them can carry Kinzhals...

How could Japan enforce a no fly zone anywhere except over Japanese airspace... they have no authority to do so over international airspace or indeed Russian airspace over the Kuriles... but also no means to do so... you have to dominate an air space before you can declare a no fly zone... how is Japan going to wipe out or deal with Russias air defence network?

The only thing they couldn't face is the long range missiles and tupolevs. But you cab't win a war with only that.

Aircraft need airfields to operate from... Kinzhals could obliterate command centres and HQs as well as ships and military bases in Japan. Kh-32 could do the same. It would not take long to move Su-35s to the region and MiG-31s would already be there equipped with 300km range R-37M air to air missiles.

Russia is a piper tiger when it comes to power projection and rely on its nuks to forbid the other nation to touch its soldiers. Without them all its forces in Syria, Lybia, cebtral Africa would have been destroyed.

Yes, they are corrupt and all you have to do is kick the door and the whole rotten edifice will collapse itself...

Except that Russian soldiers and commanders and planners seem to have done an exceptional job in Syria... they did a better job in the Crimea than any HATO country could have... the Americans would have shot thousands of people in comparison... the French and British too.... though probably not as many dead...

Japan would not risk invading the Kuriles now or in the near future... maybe in the 1990s, but certainly not now.

They are not connected to Russian systems. The best they could do is use the radio. Networkcentric warfare is systems exchanging in real time btw themselves so that if your plane sees something then your ships see that too. In the best case they can use that for missike targeting.

You mean like they did to Syrian air defence systems in Syria... so they could easily do that then... right?

Certainly if the US is being belligerent enough... which they normally are...

Exactly the only strength of Russia is strategic nuclear weapon. The US has 180 F-22 and another 500F 35. More NATO countries are buying F-35. Russia does not even have a single serial Su-57. He will buy 76 pieces in big bulbs for the next 10 years.

It is not the strategic nuclear forces holding the Kurile islands, nor is it in Syria or anywhere else the Russians operate...

You can spout off that the US has 180 F-22s but how many are actually operational?

How many are they prepared to operate near a functioning S-400 system and Su-35s let alone Su-57s?

Would love to see HATO buy 10,000 F-35s... it would destroy them...

Pacific fleet is rust. Japan navy is way more powerfull. Japanese air force is huge and could deal with russian east forces. If they destroy pacific fleets landing ships russia will be left with nothing to take them back.

They have to take them in the first place, and I rather doubt they could... any landing ship would be obliterated fairly quickly and it would quickly turn in to a debacle for the Japs... they understand island warfare and would know not to try.

Japans force is a defence force... it will take a bit of BS to get the country behind an invasion... especially an invasion of Russia...

What saved Assad are the russian nuks. If Russia didn't had nuks its syrian base would have been destroyed easily. Actually they wouldn't have had any bases there and Russia would have been cut into pieces since the 50s.

The nukes were never even threatened to be used, and it was Russia that basically reorganised and re equipped the Syrians together with the Iranians to face off against the terrorist forces arrayed against them by HATO and Saudi Arabia.

I don't remember HATO or Saudi backing off in any way... they just had their surrogate head choppers defeated on the battlefield and could either send in their own troops to escalate or do nothing and let their terrorist friends rot... they did the latter... unsurprisingly... if they had any balls it would be their people in there doing the fighting in the first place... but even their own troops don't want to fight make some billionaire family at home into trillionaires...

Japan has everything to make its own nuks. If US leave Japan they will be alone against three nuclear armed countries and it wouldn't take them long to think about starting their own program.

Doesn't matter either... even if they started production right now it would be decades before they had as many as Russia and just having a few for deterrence is likely all their population will tolerate. Having a few wont keep them safe if they invade Russia no matter how many times they say it is Japanese territory... and a few would be easier to target...

So as lsos writes, Russia is just a nuclear power and nothing else.

Yeah, being the only country currently able to wipe out the west as we know it is not really that much... especially with the efforts of western countries to do it to themselves first...

But you did just made excellent argument in favor of Russia dropping conventional military and fully switching to nuclear

Would make them too brittle... a Ukrainian attempt to take Crimea back by force would probably only need the people of Crimea to stop and push back but an attempt by Poland to take back Kaliningrad after a particularly big HATO exercise on their territory that had lots of US armoured divisions... well actually nuking the fuck out of Poland might actually be a bit satisfying rather than wasting more Russian blood on those fucking ungrateful euro cunts....

There are times and situations when conventional military force is a proportional response to get your way, where a tactical nuclear strike is going overboard.

The Russian Forces allowed to be active in Syria, to strike terrorist and to deter hostile forces (Turkey, USA, Israel!). Turkey respects the Su-35 and the S-400 in Syria for sure

They liked the Razor so much they bought one for themselves...

Maybe we will see the Super Gorshkov soon Smile as a kind of stimulus package for russian economy ;D

Their next priorities will be ramping up production of the Corvettes and Frigates that work and are useful, and then work on a scaled up design for a destroyer sized vessel because many of the cold war types probably are not worth upgrading too much.

For example...if Russia would take the Baltics, they would determine the location of fight and the time of fight, with a short chain of logistics from Mainland the Baltics couldn't withstand Russia, even with all the might of NATO to defend them. On the other hand Russia would face big problems invading Kansas City ;D

Agreed, but the Pacific Fleet is located right next to the Kurill islands and there are forces on the Islands that would give warning of an attack that could be used to mount some quick counter attacks that should blunt any invasion.

On the Falklands Islands there were some marines and they managed to destroy a few armoured landing vehicles with LAW rockets before being overwhelmed... I would suspect warning of large Japanese landing ships would enable a few anti ship batteries to launch dozens of anti ship missiles at the landing ships and ships supporting the landing within hours... it would be like the Georgian invasion of South Ossetia... the special forces would likely arrive first and their capacity to protect the airfield while reinforcements are landed would make Japans job a nightmare...

Japan has 8 guided missile destroyers and 30 ships more or less to Gorshkov-class (tonnage). Additional 6 corvettes and 4 helicopter carrier, with F-35B they are some kind of aircraft carrier. Don't underestimate the Japanese Navy, even China respects Japan in terms of naval warfare.

The Russians have put Kinzhal in service... it is effectively an anti carrier missile... wouldn't really need it in the black sea or the northern fleet due to the conditions not really being conducive to carrier warfare... only place you would probably base them is the far east near the pacific fleet... 8 guided missile destroyers you say... how long would they last?

Would be interesting to see, but how long do you think they would remain within range... especially after the first salvo...

First time someone attacks you you kill them, kill their families, kill their entire population, incinerate their country and cripple their neighbors

You do that once and others will stop having stupid ideas

Sounds brutal, but if you are soft there is no point in carrying a stick you wont ever use...

[qutoe]You nuke the ship that hijacked Russian ship[/quote]

Sadly the west has hijacked Russian ships and kidnapped Russian people around the world... I like your idea... hand them back or boom.

Azi wrote:
with this attitude, humanity doesn't deserve to survive! ;D

PD wrote:
For Russia only thing that should matter is Russia, mankind is of secondary imporance

Deserve doesn't come in to it... you either do or you don't...

For the price of 1 Leader they can build several smaller FF/DD/CGs- the time for white elephants is over.

Sorry that is bullshit.

You can't say one ship costs the same as 3 smaller ships and then say lets make three smaller ships.

With that stupid fucking logic Russia should stop developing S-500 and get rid of S-400 and S-350 and Pantsir and TOR and all the other SAM systems they developed and just make millions of MANPADS.

An accountant would say three small ships can do what one big ship can.

Someone who knows something about navies will say American spends 13 billion dollars on their super carriers because they are worth it... when they work.

Every one keeps bringing up this american ship or that chinese ship with 200 vertical missile launchers... well small ships can't carry 200 vertical missile launchers.

You can't have a navy of speed boats... the Ukrainian navy is not a model to try to emulate. You need different sized boats for different roles and purposes, but it is important to get them right to start with because once they are right the idea is to make quite a few of them so they actually become significant.

They are at the point of accepting corvettes and frigates into service and time will tell if they are worth buying in numbers, but soon they will need destroyer and cruiser sized ships when the current models that they are using can no longer be upgraded or are ready to be replaced because they need something better.

In many ways their new frigates are as good as their old destroyers, but their smaller size gives them less endurance. Scale them up a few thousand tons and they will make great replacements... but they need to work that out before laying down new destroyers and cruisers willy nilly based on some design some company posted on the internet.

[qutoe]I would like to see a proper model of the Super Gorshkov before making any White Elephant claims about the Leader, after all, if its an elephant then what the hell is the Kirov?[/quote]

The Kirov had and has some problems but was the first ship with vertical missile launchers to enter operational service.

It will be rather like the Falklands then. Well turned up to x10

It would be like the Falklands but instead of the UK being in another hemisphere, them being right next to them on the map... all well within missile range... without refuelling.

Russia clearly said it will use nuks against an overwhelming force.

Which is what all nuclear powers say except the US who wants to be allowed to use them on bunkers their conventional bombs can't reach...

miketheterrible wrote:Tu-22M has 2000km range and Kh-32 has 1000km range. It would launch and leave before the f-35 has time to react.

Russia has enough to strike Japan from within territory. Those defenses aren't exactly up to snuff even against subsonic munitions let alone supersonic.

Japan isn't a huge threat. Threat none the less but not a huge one for Russia nor China.

Japan is no threat in reality, because pacifism is the core of their "self defense forces"!

Of course Russia has enough to strike Japan conventional...russian subs can strike Tokio with hundreds of conventional armed Kalibr in a conflict. But the unrealistic maybe conflict will be decided by the will, who wants it more. As I wrote...a conflict favors the attacker (the defender only if he is fully aware of the attack and prepared), history proves it! In the "Russo-Japanese War" Russia was far superior to Japan, but it lost because of failed tactics.
Actually, there is no point in discussing a scenario, which cannot happen now...I'm with you. Far east is absolute safe, due to many factors, not only military. Another point in the present is genius russian foreign policy. But nobody knows what the future holds, the world is now in economic trouble and will be maybe in 5 years a different one?!

The real discussion is not the Kurile Islands!!! Real discussion is about saving russian interest in overseas. And you can't save your interests only with corvettes, for that Gorshkov class is needed. And additional Super Gorshkov is a must have! Lider class is not that important now. It should be no problem to build Super Gorshkov, if there are able to build Gorshkov-class.

miketheterrible wrote:F-35 are sketchy pieces of shit that once an airfield is destroyed, they can't fly unless the jump jet variant which also lacks performance compared to its vstol variant.  Japan unfortunately for them is too congested so striking their military facilities would be a very easy success for nearly everyone. And judging by US lack of success in their AD systems which Japan also share and uses, I don't think they would be downing too many low flying missiles since they would need to strike at them at roughly at best 20km distance.

Destroying airfields applies to both sides in a conflict. An attacker would try to destroy russian airfields, using saturation attacks with CM and tactical missiles. So all problems for the opponent are your own problems. The real situation would be far more complex.

And yes, the F-35 is shit and lacks a few abilities! ;D

Tsavo Lion wrote:The 4 Kirovs r already built & only 2 will be modernized & kept, as it'll cost more $ & time to build their replacements &/ smaller ships.
https://nationalinterest.org/blog/buzz/russian-navy-dismantling-two-massive-nuclear-battlecruisers-heres-why-53827

Those 2 will be enough for another 20+ years, no need for Leaders.

Only 2 cruisers for 3 fleets?

Japan is no threat in reality, because pacifism is the core of their "self defense forces"!

What are you smocking ? They were far worse than Nazi back in the time. And today Abe is following the same path as the ones in charge in 1940. He is pushing towards a powerfull Japan and is changing the strategy from defence to attack.


Kurils are very important for the japanese. That's a huge ressource of food and they hve a self pride that will always push them to try to get the islands back.

I wouldn't be surprise if they still think the lands of the former empire are still theirs.

Only 2 cruisers for 3 fleets? pwnd

They have 2 kirov and 3 slava with 1 in black sea doing nothing there and 8 Oscar more or less in s Modernize them all with kalibr/oniks and send half in North and half in pacific. Add another 5+5 Gorshkov and it will be good for the next 15-20 years to protect their interests near Russia.

If they plan to have interests further away switch the Gorshkov for super Gorshkov and reinstall some bases in Cuba/Venezuela, Vietnam and one or two in Africa with permanent deployement of corvettes and some il-38/Su35.

The first solution is by far cheaper and more in adequation with Russian strategy/interests.

Tsavo Lion wrote:Why the Navy refused to build super destroyers

For the price of 1 Leader they can build several smaller FF/DD/CGs- the time for white elephants is over. Even China with more $ & longer SLOCs to defend in ice-free waters doesn't plan to build similar class of ships.
https://regnum.ru/news/it/2922231.html

The article is not very good! They are writting about small ships able to strike targets with Tsirkon as far as 1000 km. That's true for sure. But the enemy will maybe have the option to strike at longer range. How? For example the combat radius of an F-35B or C onboard a carrier, part of a carrier battle group, is fully equipped with missiles and bombs less than 1000 km. But with refueling the range increase significant. So it's able to start F-35 from a carrier, refuel them in the air (via drones) and to launch an attack without being in the AD zone of a corvette. Only from a frigate on you can threaten the attacker to become the target himself. This what I mean with an umbrrella bigger ships span for smaller ships. So you can't compare navalized S-500 with Pantsir.

Tsirkon is a great weapon with nearly no defense against it...but you have to come within combat range. So it is the ultimate weapon for subs and can convert any destroyer or cruiser in a ultimate killer, able to destroy a whole carrier group. But a small ship with such a powerful weapon must have luck.

The rules of naval warfare have not changed since cold war! The missiles now are faster and have a bit longer range, but the concepts are the same. One Kirov was able to threaten a whole carrier group and in these days bigger ships are potent too. So why China is building Type 055 destroyers?

Isos wrote:
What are you smocking ? They were far worse than Nazi back in the time. And today Abe is following the same path as the ones in charge in 1940. He is pushing towards a powerfull Japan and is changing the strategy from defence to attack.

Kurils are very important for the japanese. That's a huge ressource of food and they hve a self pride that will always push them to try to get the islands back.

I wouldn't be surprise if they still think the lands of the former empire are still theirs.

I learned for 2 1/2 years japanese language and we learned in class much about culture of Japan. Japan is now a really western country, more or less. The old traditions are broken and nothing more than rituals. Yes of course they are no europeans, their lifestyle is different but modern. Yes, maybe nationlism will rise again but not in the old fashioned style, with an god emperor.

Abe is nationalist, but inside Japan he is critized often for his aggressive foreign stance. He seeks some kind of conflict with China. Russia (Kuriles) is no priority in his politics.

Japan have never given up the right to the area! In contrast to Germany, which accepted (I think in the 70ies) the new borders after war. For Japan the Kuriles Islands are part of Japan and will ever be. But they try to reintegrate the Kurile Island only with peaceful methods. A year ago they offered Russia money for Kuriles Islands ;D LOL They try nearly every year to retake Kurile, sometimes with money, sometimes with partnership and trade and sometimes with both.

Isos wrote: have 2 kirov and 3 slava with 1 in black sea doing nothing there and 8 Oscar more or less in s Modernize them all with kalibr/oniks and send half in North and half in pacific. Add another 5+5 Gorshkov and it will be good for the next 15-20 years to protect their interests near Russia.

If they plan to have interests further away switch the Gorshkov for super Gorshkov and reinstall some bases in Cuba/Venezuela, Vietnam and one or two in Africa with permanent deployement of corvettes and some il-38/Su35.

The first solution is by far cheaper and more in adequation with Russian strategy/interests.

I'm not a fan of the Slavas! Back in time they were nice and they try to refurbish them now, but I doubt they would be so good in future. But yes, you are right...I forgot them. They are officially cruisers.

Russian aircraft can and have been proven to take off and land on unprepared airfields, something American jets cant. F-2 which is Japans F-16 is a hog and a problem in itself. It wouldn't survive taking off or landing on destroyed airfields. Japanese airfields are very limited and in close proximity due to geography. Russian airfields are far more spread out and can survive heavy bombardment as proven in Syria where Syrian airfields built during soviet times survived as well from heavy CM strikes.

miketheterrible wrote:Russian aircraft can and have been proven to take off and land on unprepared airfields, something American jets cant.  F-2 which is Japans F-16 is a hog and a problem in itself.  It wouldn't survive taking off or landing on destroyed airfields.  Japanese airfields are very limited and in close proximity due to geography.  Russian airfields are far more spread out and can survive heavy bombardment as proven in Syria where Syrian airfields built during soviet times survived as well from heavy CM strikes.

What do you mean by destroyed ? Runways are generally 2km or more long and 50m or more wide. A f-16 needs 600-700m to take off and just 7 or so meters wide space. The debris can be cleaned fast if it gets bombed and holes can be repaired quickly too.

Bombing with dumb bombs makes you go over air defence and an airspace full of enemy fighters. Cruise missiles suck at destroying a runway because they make a single hole. Only french have a dedicated cruise missile to destroy runways and it comes with submunitions. Iskander could come with submunition but doesn't have the range to do so.

Russia doesn't have that much bases either in the east:

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Soviet_Air_Force_bases

Sorry that is bullshit. You can't say one ship costs the same as 3 smaller ships and then say lets make three smaller ships.

In the "all things considered" context that the article discusses, bigger & better armed FFGs of the DDG size will be enough, so there's no need for direct Kirov class CGN replacements.
https://vz.ru/society/2020/4/19/1035074.print.html

Russian warships instilled fear in Japan. Russia brought down arrogance from Japan, demonstrating the strength and power of the Pacific Fleet during tactical exercises, writes the Chinese publication Sohu. Since March 25, ambitious maneuvers have been carried out in the waters of the Sea of ​​Japan and the Sea of ​​Okhotsk, involving 15 Russian warships and boats, 12 support vessels, including the Varyag cruiser, the Bystry destroyer, the Marshal Krylov control ship, the Loud corvettes, and "Perfect", as well as the large anti-submarine ship "Admiral Vinogradov." In addition, about 20 units of naval aviation were involved.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YpwG6Y7zjyI

The Oscar SSGNs can destroy JMSDF ships in port, in home waters & open sea with their long range Granits & Onikses; besides additional MiG-31s, Su-33/34s may be deployed to the FE in a matter of hours to join Tu-22M3s/95s already there.  
Japan won't risk invading the S. Kuriles for 1 more reason: China & both Koreas will support Russia &/ may invade Japanese held islands in the W. Pacific, incl. Okinawa.
The Japanese will keep their military assets intact for future confrontations with China & Korea.

Isos wrote:

miketheterrible wrote:Russian aircraft can and have been proven to take off and land on unprepared airfields, something American jets cant.  F-2 which is Japans F-16 is a hog and a problem in itself.  It wouldn't survive taking off or landing on destroyed airfields.  Japanese airfields are very limited and in close proximity due to geography.  Russian airfields are far more spread out and can survive heavy bombardment as proven in Syria where Syrian airfields built during soviet times survived as well from heavy CM strikes.

What do you mean by destroyed ? Runways are generally 2km or more long and 50m or more wide. A f-16 needs 600-700m to take off and just 7 or so meters wide space. The debris can be cleaned fast if it gets bombed and holes can be repaired quickly too.

Bombing with dumb bombs makes you go over air defence and an airspace full of enemy fighters. Cruise missiles suck at destroying a runway because they make a single hole. Only french have a dedicated cruise missile to destroy runways and it comes with submunitions. Iskander could come with submunition but doesn't have the range to do so.

Russia doesn't have that much bases either in the east:

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Soviet_Air_Force_bases

First off, no, runways if hit isn't "debris" it is craters.  Which the jets would have to maneuver around.  Second, Russia has plenty of cruise missiles to cause such damage.  And third, if Russia decided to place Iskanders could do so in Kuril Islands and be within range.

I can also state long range Russian bombers using not dumb bombs would be sufficient too.  But you are too thick to understand that.  You just make up scenarios that doesnt exist.  No, Russia wouldn't use dumb bombs against Japan not until Japans air defense systems were dealt with entirely.  Kh-22 and 32 would be ideal as its warhead is 1,000kg.

You can have make belief viewpoints about Japans capabilities. But they cant fight worth shit and have been neutered since WW2.

kvs wrote:We see the same old nonsense in this thread about Russia being some glorified 3rd world toilet that is not even able to play
second fiddle to mighty western nations.   They even managed to get Japan into this ubermenschen camp.   Western congenital Russophobia
is something else.

The yanquis are scrambling to replace their dinosaur Minuteman III to offset Sarmat.   But hey, Russian key assets will be taken out
quickly.   LOL.   The S-500 system is going to produce brown stains in the underwear of all western military planners if not their bosses.
The only thing that is going to be taken out quickly in the initial stages of a war on Russia is the windbag hubris of the aggressors.

Not to mention when some of these ubermench nations like Japan uses a shitty F-16 variant that is way over priced, and not really all that great. Along with not having really much in the way of being able to strike back at Russia nor at far distances. Then the fact that they use shitty American AD systems that are barely functional.

But oh well. Who cares cause its not like us debating it will change anything. Russia advances while other nations are barely able to advance without either costing hundreds of billions or try to play catch up.

Weird, isn´t it, that even western "think tanks" think that the russian military is at least the second most powerful in the west and the only Thing that makes Amiland "better" are the 800+ bases around the world and the useless carriers. But in reality Russia is just a paper tiger that couldn´t defeat Poland. Sure.

This tread needs to be locked until this project is reactivated (if ever)

No point keeping it open

PapaDragon wrote:
This tread needs to be locked until this project is reactivated (if ever)

No point keeping it open

in some topics discussion starts with construction or no of a ship and ends with WWIII beyween USA and Russia

in some topics discussion starts with construction or no of a ship and ends with WWIII beyween USA and Russia Very Happy

Not USA but Japan. Try to follow a little bit

If/when the 1st Leader is ready, the USN won't be able to deploy as many CSGs anyway- even now most of them r in port/yards since before the pandemic. The GWOT & what followed bankrupted the USA.
Trump is the Demagogue, sweet talker, womanizer & failing Damage Controlman in Chief who himself avoided the draft, but still somehow got out of 3 bankruptcies, w/o a single shot.

kvs wrote:We see the same old nonsense in this thread about Russia being some glorified 3rd world toilet that is not even able to play
second fiddle to mighty western nations.   They even managed to get Japan into this ubermenschen camp.   Western congenital Russophobia
is something else.

The yanquis are scrambling to replace their dinosaur Minuteman III to offset Sarmat.   But hey, Russian key assets will be taken out
quickly.   LOL.   The S-500 system is going to produce brown stains in the underwear of all western military planners if not their bosses.
The only thing that is going to be taken out quickly in the initial stages of a war on Russia is the windbag hubris of the aggressors.

Bullshit! Who said, wrote or implied that Russia is a 3rd world toilet (except Arrow)? What applies to Russia also applies to the United States!!! Russia could easy take out us-american key assets in overseas in minutes. Before you brand everyone as trolls and make yourself the keeper of truth, I recommend modesty.

At start of WW2...wich army was the best equipped and biggest in europe? Nazi Germany? NO!!! It was France, overwhelmed within weeks by Nazi Germany. As I wrote...the attacker can determine the rules of battle and only if the defender is fully aware of the threat he is in better position.

Yes, Russia could react to an attack in Far East, but it would take days or weeks to react. Or you think Russia will move the whole army, everything and every asset from western hemisphere to far east? Maybe pay USA to protect their borders? And move troops, aircraft and ships within seconds thousands of miles? There are many good analyzes that troops in Far East are underarmed and there are simply not enough troops there. All the fancy new stuff is in the western and souther hemisphere of Russia and here is confrontation with NATZO forces, that's correct. Today it's no problem, because Russia has good connections to every country in the region, even good connections to Japan.

And nobody is thinking of an attack NOW! But this region in Asia is very labile and a conflict will for sure not start with Russia as a beginner of the conflict, but it will end with Russia fully involved. To shape the future and to stabilize this region Russia needs a modern and strong Pacific Fleet. No more or less! And you think we are antirussian, because we praise a modern navy with some big ships (Super Gorshkov)?! Or would you prefer some old rustbuckets and only a few corvettes?

George1 wrote:
in some topics discussion starts with construction or no of a ship and ends with WWIII beyween USA and Russia

As always! ;D LOL

Hole wrote:Weird, isn´t it, that even western "think tanks" think that the russian military is at least the second most powerful in the west and the only Thing that makes Amiland "better" are the 800+ bases around the world and the useless carriers. But in reality Russia is just a paper tiger that couldn´t defeat Poland. Sure.

Get down a bit from your views! Never underestimate the enemy!

Russia could react to an attack in Far East, but it would take days or weeks to react. Or you think Russia will move the whole army, everything and every asset from western hemisphere to far east? Maybe pay USA to protect their borders?

Japan, a US ally, knows what the RF mil. doctrine says: there will be nuclear retaliation in the event that the existence of the RF is threatened by nuclear armed states or states allied with nuclear armed states. The loss of S. Kuriles may lead to Pac. Fleet surface units in Vladivostok becoming like tjhe bottled up Baltic & Black Sea Fleets of 1941-44, with Japanese & US navies entering the Sea of Okhotsk at will.
That in turn may lead to the loss of the RFE, Far North, & Siberia, Ural, & fragmentation of European Russia.
Poseidon UUVs can create tsunamis a lot more deadly than the 1 at Fukushima, destroying the entire JMSDF & the US 7th fleet.

Tsavo Lion wrote:

Russia could react to an attack in Far East, but it would take days or weeks to react. Or you think Russia will move the whole army, everything and every asset from western hemisphere to far east? Maybe pay USA to protect their borders?

Japan, a US ally, knows what the RF mil. doctrine says: there will be nuclear retaliation in the event that the existence of the RF is threatened by nuclear armed states or states allied with nuclear armed states. The loss of S. Kuriles may lead to Pac. Fleet surface units in Vladivostok becoming like tjhe bottled up Baltic & Black Sea Fleets of 1941-44, with Japanese & US navies entering the Sea of Okhotsk at will.
That in turn may lead to the loss of the RFE, Far North, & Siberia, Ural, & fragmentation of European Russia.
Poseidon UUVs can create tsunamis a lot more deadly than the 1 at Fukushima, destroying the entire JMSDF & the US 7th fleet.

You know the military doctrine? The russian military doctrine says that there will be NO NUCLEAR FIRST strike! NEVER! Nuclear Forces are only for retaliation, defending the homeland is task of conventional forcess. Conventional forces should be able to repel all attacks.

Yes...that's in the military doctrine of Russia! This and nothing else. I don't understand your wet dreams about the nuclear holocaust for a bit dirt, a few rocks and trees? All the bullshit about the aggressive russians who use nukes if you only watch them too long is propaganda bullshit and only to demonize Russia!!!

In reality a use of tactical nukes is possible if the core of Russia is threatend (all big cities!). The magic word ist tactical nukes and not strategic! There won't be a nuclear war for Kaliningrad, Kurile, Sachalin or Semlja Franza-Iossifa! If the conventional forces are not able to defend it, they lose it. Same for USA and parts of the Bering Strait, Hawaii etc! And the USA have an aggressive first strike doctrine in contrast to Russia, who see nuclear weapons only as a tool for survival of Russia.

You are right if Wladiwostok or large parts of Siberia are threatend, but this will never ever happen! And be realistic please! The use of Poseidon UUV means the use of a strategic nuke against civilian targets, triggering an annihilation strike for Russia and that will trigger a counter attack...with at least minimum 2 billion dead people. Poseidon is only a doomsday weapon, for the big nuclear clash in a possible WW3. There is no other use for Poseidon and will never be!!!

There's no clear mention of what kind of nukes will be used in any particular set of circumsatnces: https://www.files.ethz.ch/isn/96824/00_Apr.pdf

Pl. see pgs 36-37:
https://www.clingendael.org/sites/default/files/pdfs/20110300_haas_doctrine.pdf

The Poseidons r for deterrence ashore & tactical use at sea.
Who said that their road mobile ICBMs in Urals & Siberia & SLBMs the Barentz & Okhotsk Seas can't strike Japanese bases with conventional warheads?
Unlike the Baltic Fleet in 1902, the N. Fleet doesn't need to cross 2 oceans to reinforce the Pac. Fleet during any future confrontation with Japan- it can use the NSR.