Russia Defence Forum

Would you like to react to this message? Create an account in a few clicks or log in to continue.

Military Forum for Russian and Global Defence Issues


+73
dino00
lancelot
limb
x_54_u43
The-thing-next-door
marat
GarryB
LMFS
owais.usmani
Arrow
PhSt
Rodion_Romanovic
ult
nero
Admin
marcellogo
verkhoturye51
Truck
bolshevik345
Tsavo Lion
PTURBG
Nibiru
kumbor
Hole
Peŕrier
par far
miroslav
ZoA
KiloGolf
GunshipDemocracy
SLB
Tingsay
T-47
tomazy
Big_Gazza
miketheterrible
AlfaT8
PapaDragon
Singular_Transform
hoom
Project Canada
SeigSoloyvov
TheArmenian
Isos
RedJasmin
wilhelm
OminousSpudd
Zivo
max steel
medo
artjomh
flamming_python
Dima
JohninMK
mack8
ExBeobachter1987
Rmf
kvs
Cucumber Khan
KomissarBojanchev
sepheronx
franco
Vann7
magnumcromagnon
Mike E
zg18
Flyingdutchman
George1
Hannibal Barca
TR1
Austin
Firebird
Viktor
77 posters

    Russian Naval Shipbuilding Industry: News

    Admin
    Admin

    Posts : 2934
    Points : 3808
    Join date : 2009-07-10

    Russian Naval Shipbuilding Industry: News - Page 18 Empty Re: Russian Naval Shipbuilding Industry: News

    Post  Admin Fri Mar 22, 2019 10:47 pm

    Tsavo Lion wrote:Then, CV/Ns r not urgent to have, UDKs will be built 1st, & the Adm. K will sailor on with new CMs for another 2 decades, if not more.

    There are two priorities:

    1) Nuclear Deterrent

    2) Export

    ... in that order.
    Big_Gazza
    Big_Gazza

    Posts : 2763
    Points : 2763
    Join date : 2014-08-25
    Location : Melbourne, Australia

    Russian Naval Shipbuilding Industry: News - Page 18 Empty Re: Russian Naval Shipbuilding Industry: News

    Post  Big_Gazza Fri Mar 22, 2019 11:54 pm

    Vladimir79 wrote:She was scheduled to get a billion dollar refit which was cut down to $300 million.  They are not even serious about maintaining an operational carrier.  

    Calling BS on that.  The K doesn't need a $1B-equivalent refit to be returned to a state where she can be fully operational.  New boilers and power-plant upgrade, repairs to arrestor systems, upgraded CIWS, general repairs and refrub.  Yeah, $300M should be enough.

    I'd like to see Granit replacement, improved ASW, new main radar and long/medium range AA but the above program will be adequate and she'll be a useful war-fighter when its all done.

    I've never understood the defeatist pessimism from people who ought to know better  No
    GunshipDemocracy
    GunshipDemocracy

    Posts : 5038
    Points : 5062
    Join date : 2015-05-17
    Location : fishin on Stalin´s Strait between Mexico and Canada

    Russian Naval Shipbuilding Industry: News - Page 18 Empty Re: Russian Naval Shipbuilding Industry: News

    Post  GunshipDemocracy Sat Mar 23, 2019 12:26 am

    Vladimir79 wrote:
    hoom wrote:They've always said it needs some drydock time before the end, they just said its not a vital immediate need & they'll proceed with other stuff in the meantime.
    Suggestion at balancer is the props are off & possibly even the shafts as well.

    She was scheduled to get a billion dollar refit which was cut down to $300 million.  They are not even serious about maintaining an operational carrier.  




    I've heard about 60B rubles but never learned this drops to 20B, do you have any source? Imho they are pretty serious, why then new deck fighter programme was started?
    GarryB
    GarryB

    Posts : 30904
    Points : 31430
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    Russian Naval Shipbuilding Industry: News - Page 18 Empty Re: Russian Naval Shipbuilding Industry: News

    Post  GarryB Sat Mar 23, 2019 6:05 am

    They are not even serious about maintaining an operational carrier.

    They probably don't have a purpose for it right now... or the next 5 years or so, plus a Russian carrier right now will either operate with corvettes and a couple of frigates or it will be a sitting duck with nothing for it to support.

    Fixing the basic problems with it, which right now is propulsion, shouldn't cost that much and when she is ready to sail again there should be a few other vessels that can sail with her too and perhaps she can start spreading the word that there is more than one sheriff in town so you can buy and sell products to Russia as well as the west or the US.... it is a message quite a few countries around the place are looking forward to hearing to be honest.

    China now has 2 CVs with a 3rd on the way; they'll keep the USN + their allies busy. It's cheaper to build & operate subs with Poseidons capable of sinking entire CSGs along with coastal bases & cities.

    Unless China makes a clear commitment to support Russian operations internationally, the number of chinese carriers is not really important to the Russian navy.

    (Should add that the Russian solution to hostile Chinese carriers near its territory would be the same solution it has for US carriers or NATO carriers near its territory... traditionally Tu-22M3 with Kh-22M, and now MiG-31 with Kinzhal and Tu-22M3M with Kinzhal and/or Kh-32 and ship and sub and land launched Onyx).

    The funding priority is the nuclear deterrent. Everything else gets sidelined.

    And rightly so... which means priority is subs in the navy, but their capacity to carry ship launched cruise missiles gives many of the new ships Russia is making strategic nuclear capacity if they want that too... a useful and relatively cheap way to escalate the number of tactical nuclear weapons on the table for combat in europe or Japan...

    IMO, they'll be dedicating substantial resources to non-nuclear precision arms while renewing SSBN & strategic bomber fleets.

    Those precision weapons can give a weapon nuclear like potential without crossing the nuclear threshold, but they could just as easily be all armed with nukes too.

    Then, CV/Ns r not urgent to have, UDKs will be built 1st, & the Adm. K will sailor on with new CMs for another 2 decades, if not more.

    Even if CVNs were thought moderately important they need to finalise the design first and then lay it down and build it... current plans suggest 2023 as the earliest they could lay it down, so we are not talking about carrier in water before 2028 at the very best, so it would not be operational before 2032 even if everything goes to plan...

    I'd like to see Granit replacement, improved ASW, new main radar and long/medium range AA but the above program will be adequate and she'll be a useful war-fighter when its all done.

    Granit is no longer in production so new tubes will be fitted at the very least and at best the tubes removed and UKSK-Ms put there.

    Just the replacement of Kashtan-M with Pantsir-M and the old model TOR missiles with the newer upgraded TOR-M3s would offer an astounding improvement in defensive performance... the new TOR missiles alone offer better range and altitude performance with twice the number of missiles in the same space, with much better accuracy... Pantsir increases range and performance of the missiles too...

    Other posts about economy and petty stuff moved to talking bollocks II thread here:

    https://www.russiadefence.net/t7216p450-talking-bollocks-thread-2


    Last edited by GarryB on Sun Mar 24, 2019 9:08 am; edited 1 time in total
    Admin
    Admin

    Posts : 2934
    Points : 3808
    Join date : 2009-07-10

    Russian Naval Shipbuilding Industry: News - Page 18 Empty Re: Russian Naval Shipbuilding Industry: News

    Post  Admin Sat Mar 23, 2019 9:37 am

    GunshipDemocracy wrote:


    I've heard  about 60B rubles but never learned this drops to 20B, do you have any source?  Imho they are pretty serious, why then new deck fighter programme was started?


    https://www.interfax.ru/russia/582205

    To let the PD 50 sink and lose your only operational dry dock large enough to take capital ships... what is left to repair it?

    If the goal is to make a VTOL as the new deck fighter then they might as well let the Admiral K sink off Kola Bay.
    GunshipDemocracy
    GunshipDemocracy

    Posts : 5038
    Points : 5062
    Join date : 2015-05-17
    Location : fishin on Stalin´s Strait between Mexico and Canada

    Russian Naval Shipbuilding Industry: News - Page 18 Empty Re: Russian Naval Shipbuilding Industry: News

    Post  GunshipDemocracy Sat Mar 23, 2019 12:10 pm

    Vladimir79 wrote:To let the PD 50 sink and lose your only operational dry dock large enough to take capital ships... what is left to repair it?  
    If the goal is to make a VTOL as the new deck fighter then they might as well let the Admiral K sink off Kola Bay.  

    Hmm but Interfax wrote same about scope of work. What was reduced then? (boilers, radars , battle mgmt systems, CIWS)?

    As for drydock well, Russian shipyards need to have large drydocks anyway.  Otherwise no large ships can be maintained in the future.
    miketheterrible
    miketheterrible

    Posts : 6175
    Points : 6149
    Join date : 2016-11-06

    Russian Naval Shipbuilding Industry: News - Page 18 Empty Re: Russian Naval Shipbuilding Industry: News

    Post  miketheterrible Sat Mar 23, 2019 12:28 pm

    Zvezda shipyard can handle it since it can handle upwards to 100,000tons.
    avatar
    hoom

    Posts : 2282
    Points : 2272
    Join date : 2016-05-06

    Russian Naval Shipbuilding Industry: News - Page 18 Empty Re: Russian Naval Shipbuilding Industry: News

    Post  hoom Sat Mar 23, 2019 12:55 pm

    From recollection the big refit was going to be full electronics (radar, battle management, EW, ship stuff), Redut, Pantsir-M & probably Kalibrs.
    Then it got downgraded to what seems to be basically just the boiler change & refit (plus arrestor upgrade?).
    Admin
    Admin

    Posts : 2934
    Points : 3808
    Join date : 2009-07-10

    Russian Naval Shipbuilding Industry: News - Page 18 Empty Re: Russian Naval Shipbuilding Industry: News

    Post  Admin Sat Mar 23, 2019 1:01 pm

    GunshipDemocracy wrote:

    Hmm but Interfax wrote same about scope of work. What was reduced then? (boilers, radars , battle mgmt systems, CIWS)?

    As for drydock well, Russian shipyards need to have large drydocks anyway.  Otherwise no large ships can be maintained in the future.

    According to the article nothing will be modernised, it will only be refurbished.

    If the future deck fighter is a VTOL then it looks like the plan is to operate no ship larger than a Mistral LPH.
    miketheterrible
    miketheterrible

    Posts : 6175
    Points : 6149
    Join date : 2016-11-06

    Russian Naval Shipbuilding Industry: News - Page 18 Empty Re: Russian Naval Shipbuilding Industry: News

    Post  miketheterrible Sat Mar 23, 2019 1:31 pm

    Vladimir79 wrote:
    GunshipDemocracy wrote:

    Hmm but Interfax wrote same about scope of work. What was reduced then? (boilers, radars , battle mgmt systems, CIWS)?

    As for drydock well, Russian shipyards need to have large drydocks anyway.  Otherwise no large ships can be maintained in the future.

    According to the article nothing will be modernised, it will only be refurbished.  

    If the future deck fighter is a VTOL then it looks like the plan is to operate no ship larger than a Mistral LPH.

    I believe that is where they are heading. Reason for Mistral in first place was that I think. Putin made it clear a VTOL is in budget and in works. Very excited to see it. But in that regard, they will end up going with floating jump jet carriers be it cargo like ships to really reduce costs or something more military special like the Mistral. In either case, much cheaper.
    Isos
    Isos

    Posts : 8015
    Points : 7999
    Join date : 2015-11-06

    Russian Naval Shipbuilding Industry: News - Page 18 Empty Re: Russian Naval Shipbuilding Industry: News

    Post  Isos Sat Mar 23, 2019 3:43 pm

    Vladimir79 wrote:

    There are two priorities:

    1) Nuclear Deterrent

    2) Export

    ... in that order.  

    Not really. They just re-armed the black sea fleet with 3 frigates and 6 new subs and 3 more frigates are suppose to come.

    Kalibr plateforms are a priority too.

    They will export nothing if they don't produce the ships for their own navy. Their shipyards already suffer bad reputation, who would buy them ships that exist only in catalogues if their worker don't knkw how to produce them ?
    Admin
    Admin

    Posts : 2934
    Points : 3808
    Join date : 2009-07-10

    Russian Naval Shipbuilding Industry: News - Page 18 Empty Re: Russian Naval Shipbuilding Industry: News

    Post  Admin Sat Mar 23, 2019 3:49 pm

    Isos wrote:

    Not really. They just re-armed the black sea fleet with 3 frigates and 6 new subs and 3 more frigates are suppose to come.

    Kalibr plateforms are a priority too.

    They will export nothing if they don't produce the ships for their own navy. Their shipyards already suffer bad reputation, who would buy them ships that exist only in catalogues if their worker don't knkw how to produce them ?

    That is part of the export strategy, no one will buy it unless they see it in action first. The unused Pacific fleet is rusting away while the BSF gets shiny new toys to launch missiles at Syria.
    Isos
    Isos

    Posts : 8015
    Points : 7999
    Join date : 2015-11-06

    Russian Naval Shipbuilding Industry: News - Page 18 Empty Re: Russian Naval Shipbuilding Industry: News

    Post  Isos Sat Mar 23, 2019 4:15 pm

    First they ordered Boreis for nuclear deterence for pacific and northern fleets and got them really fast.

    Then Baltic fleet received new Steregoushchys.

    Then Black sea fleet received new Grigorovitch and Kilos as nato is more active in ukraine, syria and baltics. They needed kalibr plateforms.

    They armed the smaller fleets with smaller ship.

    Now they ordered 6 new kilo for pacific. Even if pacific is not the priority for russia. US and Chinese are too much occupied countering each other to pose any threat to Russia.

    They got the first gorshkov with more being build. Yasen are also coming. Karakurts are also being produced in mass.

    They also got many coast guard ships. They bought new su-30SM for naval aviation, upgraded il-38

    All that in less than 15 years. It is not going as fast as the chinese but the procurment plan is going nicely and logicaly. The navy was always the third in russian armed force priority. At this rythm, heli carriers will start being laid down in 5 or 6 years.

    It's not only helping export ships. They are getting an all new navy.


    And the ships proved to be very effective as Grigorovitch posed problems to french navy and kilo chased away a british sub during the attack on Syria.
    Admin
    Admin

    Posts : 2934
    Points : 3808
    Join date : 2009-07-10

    Russian Naval Shipbuilding Industry: News - Page 18 Empty Re: Russian Naval Shipbuilding Industry: News

    Post  Admin Sat Mar 23, 2019 5:02 pm

    Isos wrote:First they ordered Boreis for nuclear deterence for pacific and northern fleets and got them really fast.

    Then Baltic fleet received new Steregoushchys.

    Then Black sea fleet received new Grigorovitch and Kilos as nato is more active in ukraine, syria and baltics. They needed kalibr plateforms.

    They armed the smaller fleets with smaller ship.

    Now they ordered 6 new kilo for pacific. Even if pacific is not the priority for russia. US and Chinese are too much occupied countering each other to pose any threat to Russia.

    They got the first gorshkov with more being build. Yasen are also coming. Karakurts are also being produced in mass.

    They also got many coast guard ships. They bought new su-30SM for naval aviation, upgraded il-38

    All that in less than 15 years. It is not going as fast as the chinese but the procurment plan is going nicely and logicaly. The navy was always the third in russian armed force priority. At this rythm, heli carriers will start being laid down in 5 or 6 years.

    It's not only helping export ships. They are getting an all new navy.


    And the ships proved to be very effective as Grigorovitch posed problems to french navy and kilo chased away a british sub during the attack on Syria.

    Remember what I said of priorities, the first is nuclear deterence and Borei falls under that. The only new ships the Pacific Fleet has received that didn't have steel cut before the fall of the CCCP are two Steregushchiy corvettes. The Pacific Fleet is a blue water fleet and the only replacements they receive are corvettes for brown water. No new attacks subs or Kilos... nothing.

    Why did the BFS get so much more than the Pacific Fleet? It certainly isn't more important than the PF. If anyone shuts down the Bosphorus those ships are stranded.

    Getting a whole new navy of corvettes... unshaven That is the cost of export focus.
    Isos
    Isos

    Posts : 8015
    Points : 7999
    Join date : 2015-11-06

    Russian Naval Shipbuilding Industry: News - Page 18 Empty Re: Russian Naval Shipbuilding Industry: News

    Post  Isos Sat Mar 23, 2019 5:45 pm

    Why did the BFS get so much more than the Pacific Fleet? It certainly isn't more important than the PF. If anyone shuts down the Bosphorus those ships are stranded.

    Because black sea is a safe zone for russian ships that will launch kalibr.

    Big ships for blue water capabilities are still not produced in russia. Gorshkov class is only geting introduced now.

    The priority was small ships capable of launching jalibr missiles from stand off positions.

    No new attacks subs or Kilos... nothing.

    They have ordered kilos. And they will have 5 or 6 yasen soon in service.

    Corvettes are more than good enough if you don't want to rule the sea with 10 carriers and 70 destroyers. They got quickly the ability to launch hundreds of kalibr with small cheap corvettes on NATO. If they did go forbdestroyers since 2010 they would have nothing today.
    PapaDragon
    PapaDragon

    Posts : 11544
    Points : 11612
    Join date : 2015-04-26
    Location : Fort Evil, Serbia

    Russian Naval Shipbuilding Industry: News - Page 18 Empty Re: Russian Naval Shipbuilding Industry: News

    Post  PapaDragon Sat Mar 23, 2019 11:21 pm

    Vladimir79 wrote:...Getting a whole new navy of corvettes... unshaven That is the cost of export focus.


    Ain't nothing wrong with corvette Navy as long as corvettes are getting built in sufficient numbers

    Problem is that they aren't at the moment
    Admin
    Admin

    Posts : 2934
    Points : 3808
    Join date : 2009-07-10

    Russian Naval Shipbuilding Industry: News - Page 18 Empty Re: Russian Naval Shipbuilding Industry: News

    Post  Admin Sun Mar 24, 2019 12:02 am

    PapaDragon wrote:
    Ain't nothing wrong with corvette Navy as long as corvettes are getting built in sufficient numbers

    Problem is that they aren't at the moment

    Corvettes are for brown water navies.  It is fine for the BFS because it is all brown water but the blue water fleets need bigger ships like frigates and destroyers.
    JohninMK
    JohninMK

    Posts : 9360
    Points : 9467
    Join date : 2015-06-16
    Location : England

    Russian Naval Shipbuilding Industry: News - Page 18 Empty Re: Russian Naval Shipbuilding Industry: News

    Post  JohninMK Sun Mar 24, 2019 12:14 am

    Vladimir79 wrote:
    PapaDragon wrote:
    Ain't nothing wrong with corvette Navy as long as corvettes are getting built in sufficient numbers

    Problem is that they aren't at the moment

    Corvettes are for brown water navies.  It is fine for the BFS because it is all brown water but the blue water fleets need bigger ships like frigates and destroyers.  

    Surely the Navy only needs a surface blue water fleet if it is intending to attack US carriers at sea. I thought the strike aircraft were for that task. As such, the submarines and frigates/corvettes are pretty much up to the task of nuclear deterrence and homeland defence. In many ways even the K is a brown water ship.
    Admin
    Admin

    Posts : 2934
    Points : 3808
    Join date : 2009-07-10

    Russian Naval Shipbuilding Industry: News - Page 18 Empty Re: Russian Naval Shipbuilding Industry: News

    Post  Admin Sun Mar 24, 2019 2:18 am

    JohninMK wrote:

    Surely the Navy only needs a surface blue water fleet if it is intending to attack US carriers at sea. I thought the strike aircraft were for that task. As such, the submarines and frigates/corvettes are pretty much up to the task of nuclear deterrence and homeland defence. In many ways even the K is a brown water ship.

    If the only purpose of the Navy was to sink US carriers then we wouldn't really need a Navy.
    PapaDragon
    PapaDragon

    Posts : 11544
    Points : 11612
    Join date : 2015-04-26
    Location : Fort Evil, Serbia

    Russian Naval Shipbuilding Industry: News - Page 18 Empty Re: Russian Naval Shipbuilding Industry: News

    Post  PapaDragon Sun Mar 24, 2019 2:24 am

    Vladimir79 wrote:
    JohninMK wrote:

    Surely the Navy only needs a surface blue water fleet if it is intending to attack US carriers at sea. I thought the strike aircraft were for that task. As such, the submarines and frigates/corvettes are pretty much up to the task of nuclear deterrence and homeland defence. In many ways even the K is a brown water ship.

    If the only purpose of the Navy was to sink US carriers then we wouldn't really need a Navy.

    What exactly is mission of Russian surface navy?

    I always assumed that it's purpose is to protect naval nuclear deterrent and keep tabs on economic zone.

    Am I missing something?
    GarryB
    GarryB

    Posts : 30904
    Points : 31430
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    Russian Naval Shipbuilding Industry: News - Page 18 Empty Re: Russian Naval Shipbuilding Industry: News

    Post  GarryB Sun Mar 24, 2019 9:50 am

    If the goal is to make a VTOL as the new deck fighter then they might as well let the Admiral K sink off Kola Bay.

    Yeah, but the problem there is that some people think it is just a case of wanting VTOL deck fighters and the problem is solved.

    The Soviets and the Russians have never made a fighter aircraft that is VSTOL that is anything as like as good as a simple conventional STOL jet fighter.

    The Yak-36 was a testbed with no military capability at all.

    The Yak-38 and Yak-38M would be vastly inferior to using an Su-25 as a fighter... at least it has a decent gun and some armour and the capacity to carry a lot of weapons.

    The Yak-41 well we really don't know... there was a lot of talk and bluster, but it never really got past test bed either to be honest... the main engine seemed OK, but there were issues with landing and taking off and its weapon system was never developed and it only ever had four available wing pylons AFAIK and no possibility for using belly mounted weapons or fuel because of the heat generated during landing and takeoff there...

    Some members here think it would be wonderful, but I really doubt it... just because of basic logic... to be able to hover and to manouver in the hover it needs balanced lift and when the main engine is super powerful to make it supersonic then it either needs to be near the centre of gravity of the aircraft or you need some serious lift power at the front to balance it.... you also need jet thrust nozzles in the tip of your nose, the tips of the tail and the wing tips to allow manouvering in the hover... which means piping high pressure air from the engines to the aircraft nose, aircraft wingtips, and aircraft tail... if any of those fail or are damaged you cannot land vertically and they take up internal volume that can't really be used to store fuel or electronics because of the risk of a burst pipe...

    Very simply when designing something you need proportions... a certain sized aircraft needs X amount of power in terms of engine thrust... if you put too much thrust in you generally end up with a fast but short ranged aircraft. Not enough and you end up with a sluggish aircraft not suited to being a fighter or an interceptor.
    By demanding VSTOL what you are doing is adding weight and greatly increasing the amount of thrust needed... the Yak-41 is an excellent case in point... it was not a big aircraft by any means, but an 15.5 ton thrust main engine... the MiG-29 was a similar size with an 18 ton MTOW with two 8.3 ton thrust engines, so 16.6 ton thrust in total engine thrust in normal flight... the Yak-41 was slightly longer by perhaps a metre and slightly narrower by a metre also, and its MTOW was about 19.5 tons so it needed a 15.5 ton thrust engine to propel it forward but it only manages 1,800km/h because 15.5 tons thrust is not enough to get it airborne... it needs two extra engines... each producing 4.2 tons of thrust to get the aircraft into the air... it is literally the same as taking the two engines from an Su-25 and sticking them directly behind the cockpit of the MiG-29 pointing downwards and modifying the RD-33 engines so they can vector downwards so that it can take off properly, but once in the air those Su-25 engines do nothing and are dead weight till it is time to land... the internal volume needed to allow two jet engines to be placed behind the cockpit increase the frontal area of the aircraft and make it a design that could never get past mach 1.6 or so... a bit like the F-35s problem... now there is a surprise.

    If the future deck fighter is a VTOL then it looks like the plan is to operate no ship larger than a Mistral LPH.

    And when it fails they will have neither...

    I believe that is where they are heading. Reason for Mistral in first place was that I think. Putin made it clear a VTOL is in budget and in works. Very excited to see it. But in that regard, they will end up going with floating jump jet carriers be it cargo like ships to really reduce costs or something more military special like the Mistral. In either case, much cheaper.

    If that is the case then I would suggest they drop the whole thing... that is even cheaper still, and will save a lot of embarrassment and technology dead ends.

    No new attacks subs or Kilos... nothing.

    They have ordered Kilos but have also mentioned a large order of Ladas too...

    Surely the Navy only needs a surface blue water fleet if it is intending to attack US carriers at sea. I thought the strike aircraft were for that task. As such, the submarines and frigates/corvettes are pretty much up to the task of nuclear deterrence and homeland defence. In many ways even the K is a brown water ship.

    If the only purpose for Russia is to fight the US then I would agree they could only use a blue water fleet for fighting US carriers.

    Russia has the weapons it needs to fight the US but unlike the US and the west it knows that will be its last fight, which makes it a fight to avoid rather than actively seek out and encourage.

    Having a blue sea navy opens the entire globe to trade for Russia, trade that the US or its black hearted allies cannot or will choose not to interfere with.

    A US carrier group could be best engaged with a Yasen SSN with 32 Zircon hypersonic anti ship missiles... or indeed upgrade Oscars with tube liners in their Granit tubes with 72 x Zircon missiles loaded or 72 x Onyx missiles loaded... or indeed 72 x 4,500km range land attack cruise missiles leading to US carrier groups all round the world being called back home to defend the motherland....

    What exactly is mission of Russian surface navy?

    I always assumed that it's purpose is to protect naval nuclear deterrent and keep tabs on economic zone.

    Am I missing something?

    Russian home defence can be easily performed by MiG-31s with Kinzhals... you have said as much yourself. SSBNs can launch attacks on the US from within Russian waters under Russian air cover and air support.

    The future purpose of the Russian navy is to secure sea lines of communication and trade for Russia and her allies... it might include sending a corvette or frigate to deal with pirates, or it might involve sending PTG and the K to Venezuela on a good will visit... just after the US declares a naval blockade, which Russia denounces as illegal under international law. Who backs down becomes an interesting question, but who is going to trade with Russia if the US is just going to sanction them and then overthrow their democratically elected government... what if the US imposes more sanctions on North Korea and demands to inspect rail cars going into North Korea from Russia... at what point do you stand up to a bully?
    Admin
    Admin

    Posts : 2934
    Points : 3808
    Join date : 2009-07-10

    Russian Naval Shipbuilding Industry: News - Page 18 Empty Re: Russian Naval Shipbuilding Industry: News

    Post  Admin Sun Mar 24, 2019 2:45 pm

    PapaDragon wrote:
    What exactly is mission of Russian surface navy?

    I always assumed that it's purpose is to protect naval nuclear deterrent and keep tabs on economic zone.

    Am I missing something?

    The goal has always been projecting power far beyond your shores. We did that during the Soviet by having the largest fleet of nuclear attack subs that has ever existed. The Kremlin decided we could never afford to keep up with the carrier race with the US so the only way to operate safely was under the waves. We could go anywhere and destroy anything on or under the water.

    Today the ambitions have to be scaled back. The plan was to model a blue water navy like France, one that was affordable yet powerful when needed and having a fleet of smaller vessels to monitor a large EEZ. The French have been able to maintain and upgrade this model, every time we try to get there something gets in the way to scuttle it.

    If the only goal was to protect our shores from American carriers that could be solved by a powerful Air Force with a large amount of tankers.
    Isos
    Isos

    Posts : 8015
    Points : 7999
    Join date : 2015-11-06

    Russian Naval Shipbuilding Industry: News - Page 18 Empty Re: Russian Naval Shipbuilding Industry: News

    Post  Isos Sun Mar 24, 2019 3:01 pm

    French navy without US navy support is not powerfull, at least not against bigger countries with decent airforce, subs and anti ship missiles. Mostly build around the CdG which has no replacement if destroyed.

    Russia needs to start quickly husky class and build 20 SSN and 5 or 6 SSGN (if they keep the oscars, if not 10 ssgn)
    Admin
    Admin

    Posts : 2934
    Points : 3808
    Join date : 2009-07-10

    Russian Naval Shipbuilding Industry: News - Page 18 Empty Re: Russian Naval Shipbuilding Industry: News

    Post  Admin Sun Mar 24, 2019 3:11 pm

    GarryB wrote:

    And when it fails they will have neither...

    Maybe it will, maybe it won't. There is certainly no budget to develop Super Carriers.
    Admin
    Admin

    Posts : 2934
    Points : 3808
    Join date : 2009-07-10

    Russian Naval Shipbuilding Industry: News - Page 18 Empty Re: Russian Naval Shipbuilding Industry: News

    Post  Admin Sun Mar 24, 2019 3:20 pm

    Isos wrote:French navy without US navy support is not powerfull, at least not against bigger countries with decent airforce, subs and anti ship missiles. Mostly build around the CdG which has no replacement if destroyed.

    Russia needs to start quickly husky class and build 20 SSN and 5 or 6 SSGN (if they keep the oscars, if not 10 ssgn)

    The French don't have it to attack bigger countries, they have it to attack smaller countries or terrorist states. If they are attacking a bigger country it would be part of a coalition and it works well for that too.

    The days of trying to maintain the largest nuclear sub fleet are over. There is not much money left for conventional weapons. We must do procurement in a scaled back and rational way.

    Sponsored content

    Russian Naval Shipbuilding Industry: News - Page 18 Empty Re: Russian Naval Shipbuilding Industry: News

    Post  Sponsored content


      Current date/time is Fri Oct 15, 2021 10:50 pm