Russian Navy: Status & News #1

KomissarBojanchev wrote:And judging by the productions rates you present, Russia will only have 1-3 of those heavy destroyers at most by 2030-2040 and at that time they will be like to be obsolete due to improvements in littoral zumwalt shaped ships that have better stealth than any know ship so far so Russia will need to start another decades long ill fated  construction cycle of new ships while constantly lagging behind.

Like I said, think before you type.

Hard to keep responding to nonsense.

KomissarBojanchev wrote:And judging by the productions rates you present, Russia will only have 1-3 of those heavy destroyers at most by 2030-2040 and at that time they will be like to be obsolete due to improvements in littoral zumwalt shaped ships that have better stealth than any know ship so far so Russia will need to start another decades long ill fated  construction cycle of new ships while constantly lagging behind.

dont worry, LCS would cost them as much as a heavy destroyer would the russians    .
But yeah, no reason to worry, they are making boats with the firepower punching way above
their weights, plus its not like theres an arms race going on atm.

If production rates continue at the same pace then there would have to be something seriously wrong.

New contracts and new work is the best solution to 20 years of stagnation... production rates wont suddenly lift to fantastic levels overnight but with work they will only get better.

After a few new technologies and systems are perfected then mass production will actually be much faster and more efficient than during Soviet times because the new vessels will be modular and the new systems and weapons and propulsion will be standardised.

KomissarBojanchev wrote:And then once those ships you claim  "unrefittable" are decommissioned, judging by extreme pessimism on Russian ship building pace similar to most western detractors, the whole Russian navy will have less than 25 ships  larger than corvettes.

Not a bright future for a nation whose navy some decades rivaled whole of NATO.

On the Kiev: you know how many  UKSKs, reduts, pantsirs,etc it could've been upgraded to deliver ? Also it could have been refitted by now to be a UCAV carrier . Not to mention a good testing platform for Russian VTOL aviation(no matter if the Russian navy doesn't want to operate them, they could've  improved the technological prestige of Russian aeronautics and added another product for export).

What they should done was instead of selling them to china as  floating circuses they should've mothballed them and by now or a few years from now started refitting the Kiev to be a drone cruiser.

I can see why you say that..
But i believe the more bigger is a warship ,the more expensive is its Maintenance.
And you could achieve similar similar performance by just One or TWO Big warship per battlegroup ,escorted by ~10 small modern stealth patrol boats ,the smaller ones helping in the defense of the bigger ones and extending the field of view over the horizon  . In WW2 Canadians small patrol boats had more success defeating German U-boats than the big warships. they were very maneuverable in  water and hard to hit with torpedo and their big numbers made very lethal..


So for a example a effective /cheap battle group could be like this..

1 x Gorshov Class Frigate using S-400s 150km++ range ,Kalibers,torpedos with 1 Ka-27 Helicopter, escorted  by
2 x Gremyashchy-class corvette  with S-400s small range and Kalibers..     with 1 Ka-27  
2 x Steregushchy-class corvette using Shtil-1(Buks)sam defenses + Oniks   with 1 KA-27

4 x Buyan-class small patrol boats with 8x Kalibers each and Igla sams .. 2 x AK-630 gatlin gun defenses.

6 x  Project 22160 small Patrol boats  ,Underwater mortars ,sonars ,Igla missiles and with Ka-52 hellicopters
    armed with Aesa Radars ,with 80x S-8 rockets + Vympe 2x R-73M2 air to air missiles with 40km range + 4x igla missiles.
 
The above Naval force should be more than enough to sink an entire Aircraft Carrier Group of NATO , specially like the one they deployed in Syria. Enough to destroy from 30 and up to ~50 warships with aircraft carrier and submarines. and about 300 combat planes if you have properly setup your navy and helicopters.  The major problem with Too Big Warships like a Kirov or Aircraft Carrier is that if you lose one in combat , Not only you lose thousands marines but the political consequences and negative image for the Power will be disastrous. The war could end for you as soon you have too much casualties your citizens can tolerate for defending an ally. But if you lose a Patrol Boat.. your soldiers will get angry but the fighting will continue . and 1 small cheap patrol boat with 8x 700km Kalibers missiles can sink an Aircraft carrier .

auggh fck it.. i want a Kirov airship now111... KIROV REPORTING111
It would be huge, fcking huge, with survivability against anything but a nuke in mind.
Stealth features too would be a part of design consideration.
Lots of radars on its sides that should detect even B-2s pretty easily.
Lots of VLS tubes on its top, S-500/400/350, hypersonic Oniks, Kalibrs and even drones.
Also lots of point defenses, pantsirs, tors etc.
Nuke power is a must, and this beast must move really fast at high altitudes too.
And last but not the least be able to drop jdamskis   

collegeboy16 wrote:auggh fck it.. i want a Kirov airship now111... KIROV REPORTING111
It would be huge, fcking huge, with survivability against anything but a nuke in mind.
Stealth features too would be a part of design consideration.
Lots of radars on its sides that should detect even B-2s pretty easily.
Lots of VLS tubes on its top, S-500/400/350, hypersonic Oniks, Kalibrs and even drones.
Also lots of point defenses, pantsirs, tors etc.
Nuke power is a must, and this beast must move really fast at high altitudes too.
And last but not the least be able to drop jdamskis   

Ok, excluding the flight capability, what your your basically asking for is a floating !"DOOM Fortress"! with enough firepower to put all of the US navy and NATO to shame, i say build it, just to see what weak excuse the U.S/NATO will make to protect there "precious" image of "naval power".    

So for a example a effective /cheap battle group could be like this..

1 x Gorshov Class Frigate using S-400s 150km++ range ,Kalibers,torpedos with 1 Ka-27 Helicopter, escorted by
2 x Gremyashchy-class corvette with S-400s small range and Kalibers.. with 1 Ka-27
2 x Steregushchy-class corvette using Shtil-1(Buks)sam defenses + Oniks with 1 KA-27

4 x Buyan-class small patrol boats with 8x Kalibers each and Igla sams .. 2 x AK-630 gatlin gun defenses.

6 x Project 22160 small Patrol boats ,Underwater mortars ,sonars ,Igla missiles and with Ka-52 hellicopters
armed with Aesa Radars ,with 80x S-8 rockets + Vympe 2x R-73M2 air to air missiles with 40km range + 4x igla missiles.

Don't let the armament fool you into thinking these boats are something they are not... a decent storm in the atlantic and the Buyan class and Project 22160 would be sunk.

A carrier battlegroup would not be sunk by a frigate and a group of corvettes... if it really was that easy then there would be little point in larger ships.

Russia does need cruisers and carriers if she wants to have a modern mobile navy.

To suggest she can get by with very well armed Frigates because they are cheaper and more mobile and can be bought in larger numbers is like saying there is no need for the PAK FA... for one PAK FA you get a shtload of Yak-130s... put a big AESA in its nose and use AWACS and space based radar and have them all carry R-37M 300km range AAMs and nothing the enemy has will get close...
If the Army is your thing... replace all the MBTs with those light special forces jeeps and don't bother with conventional army forces... just have all spetsnaz...

A navy without a carrier is like an Army without an Air Force... it can still fight but not as well... it will not see as well, it will not reach as far, it will not kill as many bad guys and it will take more casualties in most things it does.

A decent Russian carrier group will include at least one carrier and two cruisers.. preferably a Kirov based vessel and a Slava based vessel.
The Carrier will have all offensive missiles removed and only have SAMs and CIWS... it will have a lot of them.
The cruisers will have enough land attack and anti ship missiles to sink 5 enemy carrier groups and a few countries.
The Aircraft on the carrier will have a critical anti sub mission, a critical anti air mission and a secondary anti ship and land attack mission with aircraft carrying long range cruise missiles.
There will be about 6 multi role destroyers and potentially a Mistral class helicopter carrier depending on the missions... when there is a mistral carrier attached extra ships will be added too, plus all the support vessels.

Frigates will be left at home to patrol local waters as will all patrol boats.

There will be a few Yasen and upgraded Oscar II subs to round out the carrier group along of course with support ships and reloading ships etc.

Remember the Sigma C4IR system will integrate all the data from all the platforms of the fleet and space and surface and subsurface vessels to create a picture of underwater, surface, air, and space around the group in real time.

Can anyone tell me what kind of site if this.. ?

http://info-step.ru/

Can't read russian.. but contains amazing cool looking designs..

There is an amazing stealth warship.. that looks very interesting..




Looks very interesting and very stealthy ,Wondering if that a real warship Russia developing ,and what class it is

Its classified as a corvette that will have 1x palma, 1x A-192 and 8 UKSK launchers.

Interview with Chief Designer  CKB "Rubin" Igor Molchanov.



Has many interesting information on Lada Submariner


http://ria.ru/interview/20140206/993240643.html

KomissarBojanchev wrote:Its classified as a corvette that will have 1x palma, 1x A-192 and 8  UKSK launchers.

Nice but what Project it is the corvette? and when it will be made? will like to know more the project

It is student art, nothing serious.

RF equip ships SAM latest "Thor" to replace outdated "Daggers"

Ships of the Russian Navy will rearm on SAMs (SAM) "M-Tor", which are marine versions of SAM "Thor M2KM" spokesman CEO Concern PVO "Almaz - Antey" Yuri bikes.


"M-Tor" Now replace worth Navy complex "Dagger" (export name "Blade", according to NATO classification SA-N-9 Gauntlet), put into service in 1989.


"Active work is underway to further improve the SAM and increase its combat performance. Together with leading developers and manufacturers of warships for the Russian Navy is working on modernization of ships by replacing obsolete naval SAM SAM modification on sea" Thor M2KM "-" M-Tor " "- said Bajkov reporters Thursday at arms exhibition" Defekspo India 2014 "in New Delhi.


Also worked option modification "Thor M2KM" polar units of the Armed Forces of Russia, said the spokesman.

http://ria.ru/defense_safety/20140206/993387640.html

Dagger can engage 4 targets within 60°x60° simultaneouly;
Tor (no matter what variants) can engage 4 targets within 30°x30° simultaneouly.
It is not a problem for army to adopt Tor.
1)it can have enough units to cover 360°,
2)what army wants is a cheap and less complex system which it can afford to equip so many army units.
If navy wants this Tor-MKM to replace Dagger, interesting...

The naval version might get data from AESA radars fitted and other data sources.

The limitation of engagement is the radar coverage, the Klintok often had two sensor arrays per ship which could engage multiple targets.

The engagement radar has to be pointed at the target but the 3D search radar continues to give a 360 degree picture of the airspace around the platform so if a more serious threat appears the tracking radar can be slewed to engage the new threat/s.

The Army will likely do what the Navy is doing with a combination of expensive TOR, less expensive Pantsir-S1, and cheap Palma... the latter with 10km range laser beam riding SOSNA-R missiles.

The future includes the Morfei short range IIR guided missile too.

WoW ...  


Russia will provide two years nine submarines, including nuclear

Nine submarines, including four nuclear policy will be laid in Russia in 2014-2015, told reporters on Friday CEO "Sevmash" (Severodvinsk) Michael Budnichenkog

And next year, he said, to "Sevmash" lay five submarines, including two "Boreas" and three "Ash."

Absolutely possible.
He said "laid" not launched or even completed.
You just need a small section of hull for official lay down ceremony even attended by Putin.
I am 100% sure Sevmash can build 9 such small sections within 6 months.
It is no problem for Sevmash to lay down 9 nuclear submarines within next 24 months.
The right question is when Russians can finish them...

Yes, well they can, but will they?

2 955 this year is normal, they were pushed back from 2013.
1 885, also fine.
1 research sub, probably Belgorod?

But...1 year later, 5 more subs? Really? Do they even have space for that many submarines?

Ofc funding throughout construction is even more important, and the bigger question.

@TR1 - look at the rapid increase in fighters/planes/helicopters/air defense etc deliveries .... from 2016/7/8 same is expected from new generation of Russian MBT/IFV/APC etc

Im not saying it will for sure but based on what we have seen so far there are reasons for optimism - anyway 2015 is not far away so we will see.

I think Putin really intends to build 8 Yassen and 8 Borei by 2020.

Fifth-generation submarine will be provided the ability to integrate into a single information space of the Defense Ministry in real time

NEW DELHI, Feb. 8. (ARMS-TASS). Nuclear submarine (NPS) of the fifth generation will be provided the ability to integrate into a single information space of the Defense Ministry in real time. This was stated by ITAR-TASS during the exhibition "DefEkspo 2014" General Director of JSC "St. Petersburg Naval Machinery Bureau" Malachite "(SPMBM" Malachite ") Vladimir Dorofeev.

Responding to a question on what parameters will be different submarines 5th generation, he said: "The characteristics of the submarine perspective must be sought not in the high speed, depth, displacement, dimensions, and most other things that are imperceptible - the possibility of their integration into a single information space of the Defense Ministry, the interaction with surface ships and aircraft in real time, that is, the possibility of their participation in the network-centric warfare. "

"There are serious scientific research on problems that are not solved: underwater communication, performance, and information channels - said their opinion Dorofeev. - Prospective boats will be as black and sleek, but their" brains "are their main asset."

"The cost of the displacement of the ship is determined not by air, which he carries, and electronic equipment that is inside - said the expert. He cited the example of the car, the main value of which is" not the body and tires, and security systems, advanced multimedia systems, intelligent control engine. "

"The submarine - is no exception," - he stressed.

GarryB wrote:
Frigates will be left at home to patrol local waters as will all patrol boats.

Garry , but then Russian frigates will become vulnerable to torpedos fired by a swarm of speed boats (I cannot recall the exact term) . The speed boats will come close to the ship and each speed boat will fire a torpedo from close range .

Once these torpedos are released it's impossible to save a ship .

Kashtan or AK 630 on board a Ship may engage the speed boats before they release the torpedo but will not be able to neutralize all the speed boats . Ergo , the ship will be hit with a few of these torpedos.

Deep Throat wrote:

GarryB wrote:
Frigates will be left at home to patrol local waters as will all patrol boats.

Garry ,  but then Russian frigates will become vulnerable to torpedos fired by  a swarm of speed boats (I cannot recall the exact term) . The  speed boats  will come  close to the ship and  each speed boat will fire a torpedo from close range .

Once these torpedos are released it's impossible to save a ship .

Kashtan or AK 630 on board a Ship may engage the speed boats before they release the torpedo but will not be able to neutralize all the speed boats . Ergo , the ship will be hit with a few of these torpedos.

What frigates?
Because the Gorshkov is equipped with the Paket-E anti-torpedo system, while the Grigorovich and Gepard classes have the RBU-6000 which has some effectiveness against torpedoes.

Ustinov, current photo. Work continues @ Zvezdochka.

Garry , but then Russian frigates will become vulnerable to torpedos fired by a swarm of speed boats (I cannot recall the exact term) . The speed boats will come close to the ship and each speed boat will fire a torpedo from close range .

Once these torpedos are released it's impossible to save a ship .

Kashtan or AK 630 on board a Ship may engage the speed boats before they release the torpedo but will not be able to neutralize all the speed boats . Ergo , the ship will be hit with a few of these torpedos.

These swarm torpedo boats... what exactly protects them from mach 3 anti ship missiles the Russian Frigates are carrying?

How do these torpedo boats get close to a corvette with a 100mm automatic cannon, or a frigate with a 130mm automatic cannon?

Not to mention decoys, jammers, and hard kill anti torpedo systems... as FP alludes to.

If some country wants to amass 20 or 30 small boats they could certainly overwhelm any Frigate, but compared to the Frigates of other countries these Russian Frigates are VERY well armed and equipped... don't forget land based air power and even the ships own helo can also be used to defend the vessels in question from naval attack too.