Russian Navy: Status and News #5

GarryB wrote:....

Why would anyone wear a tin foil hat when everything America and the west says is true... they never lie.

I was bombed by Americans for 3 months ​straight and I will still take America's word over Vann's nutjob rants any of the week

Now when did I ever say everything the US says is true?. But if you are insane enough to think an US Submarine was sunk by the Russians and it just is brushed under the rug.

That is some next level, go seek help stuff there.

Hole wrote:Few years ago there was a documentary on german TV about the new german sub class. The sub hadn´t left the Harbor as the first short-cirucit in one of the switchboards happened and a small fire broke out.

Did they bother to investigate and determine fault? Or was it "sh*t happens, too bad, let's move on"? In the case
of the latter, the authorities are guilty of aiding criminals. I can understand short circuits in ancient, rusted
buckets like Canada got from the British. But there is zero excuse for this on brand new boats.

I was not fully aware of how old Losharik was. It was constructed during the late 1980s and sat rusting during the 1990s and into
the 2000s. Perhaps the "accident" is not that surprising. This begs the question as to the safety of resurrecting decades old
abandoned projects instead of starting from scratch.

Point is that things like that can happen anytime, anywhere as long as electricity is in play. It can be a newly build, perfectly maintained ship/aircraft/vehicle and still some malfunction can occure. No need for a big conspiracy or "all shit made in this or that country is bad!".

The accident location and the type of sub involved make me believe it is related to those nuclear powerplant supposed to work under the water. It was in russian water, so not deep waters and not unfamiliar ones, there is little work for a sciebtific sub there unless it worked on military facilities. And there is this article.

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2019-07-08/stricken-russian-nuke-sub-crew-prevented-planetary-catastrophe

Isos wrote:The accident location and the type of sub involved make me believe it is related to those nuclear powerplant supposed to work under the water. It was in russian water, so not deep waters and not unfamiliar ones, there is little work for a sciebtific sub there unless it worked on military facilities. And there is this article.

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2019-07-08/stricken-russian-nuke-sub-crew-prevented-planetary-catastrophe

There isn't enough nuclear material in deep water sub, carrier sub and powerplant combined to cause anything even resembling planetary problem let alone catastrophe

You just posted crap from Bloomberg, that doesn't raise red flags on validity of article?

Content from MSM which makes light fun of white elephant like Kuznetzov is enemy propaganda but nonsense about "planetary catastrophies" is somehow accurate?

Also, water is best possible location to drop any and all nuclear material because it absorbs radiation perfectly and precludes possibility of dust spreading so unless someone activates massive Cobalt salted thermonuclear warhead there is no possibility of anything "planetary" (and even this would be continetal at best)

Hole wrote:Point is that things like that can happen anytime, anywhere as long as electricity is in play. It can be a newly build, perfectly maintained ship/aircraft/vehicle and still some malfunction can occure. No need for a big conspiracy or "all shit made in this or that country is bad!".

I disagree. You are invoking experience based on consumer products. Mass production items have defect rates. Those defects
are not driven by the laws of physics, but my mostly human mistakes. There are the direct kind where Chinese sweatshop workers
are too tired to repeat some task to the level necessary, and the indirect kind where machinery glitches produce defects. The
Detroit car industry of the 1970s was notorious for crap levels of human labour. So defects are not a law of nature and inevitable.
The Japanese car assembly lines in North America but the domestic (Ford, GM, etc.) lines to shame.

Short circuiting electrical panels indicate:

1) Bad design where loads are underestimated. This is a competence test for the designers. If their designs short circuit after
assembly, then they are not competent and their designs are crap. Not "good enoug" but defective crap. One has to start from
scratch.

2) Poor component quality. This can be considered as "sh*t happens". But sourcing low bid Chinese junk is asking for it. So this
is another test of competence.

So why is incompetence to be tolerated? When your hack-assed design and assembly kill dozens of people, that is called
criminal negligence at best.

GarryB wrote:Yeah, there is a myth that accidents only happen with old equipment... does that mean Malaysian aircraft that got lost but were state of the art brand new Boeings prove the myth or disprove it?

Of course Boeings with known faults are ignored till a few planes crash and some people die but lets totally ignore that because it doesn't suit the agenda...

This "myth" is factual and informed. Accidents, aka failures, happen with quality old equipment since aging degrades it. Failures with
new equipment happen because it is literal sh*t. Trying to equate sh*t equipment with quality equipment and insinuate that they both have
similar failure rates is simply not valid. Boeing subcontracted the programming of the 737 Max to a low bid clown outfit. I will repeat:
do not equate sh*t to quality. Newness is not a magic process that makes sh*t into gold.

My brand new car became unusable because the assembly line monkeys could not properly plug two of the electronic connectors together.
I am not going to excuse these clowns as being some sort of "accident". They didn't do their freaking jobs right and put my life in
danger. The same goes for the Losharik. I bet the clowns who authorized this project did not ensure that rotted wiring and other parts
were totally removed and changed. A visual inspection is not going to inform anyone of the actual state of wiring.

Russia has come a long way from the 1980s rot. But it still needs decades of cultural progress to get out of the hack and wing it
mentality.

kvs wrote:

Hole wrote:Point is that things like that can happen anytime, anywhere as long as electricity is in play. It can be a newly build, perfectly maintained ship/aircraft/vehicle and still some malfunction can occure. No need for a big conspiracy or "all shit made in this or that country is bad!".

I disagree. You are invoking experience based on consumer products. Mass production items have defect rates. Those defects
are not driven by the laws of physics, but my mostly human mistakes. There are the direct kind where Chinese sweatshop workers
are too tired to repeat some task to the level necessary, and the indirect kind where machinery glitches produce defects. The
Detroit car industry of the 1970s was notorious for crap levels of human labour. So defects are not a law of nature and inevitable.
The Japanese car assembly lines in North America but the domestic (Ford, GM, etc.) lines to shame.

Short circuiting electrical panels indicate:

1) Bad design where loads are underestimated. This is a competence test for the designers. If their designs short circuit after
assembly, then they are not competent and their designs are crap. Not "good enoug" but defective crap. One has to start from
scratch.

2) Poor component quality. This can be considered as "sh*t happens". But sourcing low bid Chinese junk is asking for it. So this
is another test of competence.

So why is incompetence to be tolerated? When your hack-assed design and assembly kill dozens of people, that is called
criminal negligence at best.

It IS due to the very basic law of physics: entropy.

The final product quality depending on the entropy level of organisation.

The untrained worker who make a mistake is only the symptom.

Easy way to fight against of it is to have a mismatch between the product quality and price ( have more workforce than needed to compensate for organisation issues )

In the Krylov Research Center told about the submarines of the future

Submarines will be unmanned and may be similar to flying saucers , said center head Valery Polovinkin

SAINT-PETERSBURG, July 10th. / Tass /. The appearance of future submarines will be completely different from the look of modern submarines. TASS was informed on Wednesday at the International Naval Salon by Valery Polovinkin, Scientific Director of the Krylov State Research Center.

“Submarines of the future will have contours that are fundamentally different from modern submarines. They may even look like flying saucers. And, of course, they will be crewless,” he said, answering the question whether the center is leading the work on concept projects promising submarines.

According to Polovinkin, they held one of the meetings of the academic council, which opened the doors to fantasy. "There, specialists from one of our departments offered options for fundamentally new hull lines," the scientist said.

"Today, the possibility of further reducing noise, securing secrecy has reached a certain threshold, when traditional forms from the point of view of any further research will not lead to any decent results. Therefore, of course, we are considering somewhat different lines, they can be completely different,"

More

https://tass.ru/armiya-i-opk/6648666

Regarding te Losharik fire, according to this article an experimental lithium battery caused the fire. Apparently the Losharik has both nuclear and electric propulsion...it's a longish piece with some speculation on what happened

https://vk.com/milinfolive?w=wall-123538639_1153109

Some pics from IMDS, interesting size comparison between the ships there

High Flight Sniper: Tu-142 will destroy targets under water and on the ground
"Submarine killer" equipped with high-precision guidance system

Vietnamese Navy's ship arrives to Russia's Vladivostok for friendly visit

https://tass.com/defense/1070292

China has sent an 052C to participate in Navy Day in St Petersburg
https://rg.ru/2019/07/24/reg-szfo/kitajskij-esminec-sian-pribyl-v-peterburg-dlia-uchastiia-v-parade.html
Was an 054A frigate last year.
Next year 054D, 055 in 2021?

How was the main naval parade in St. Petersburg? What did it show? https://regnum.ru/news/polit/2674811.html

India slao sent the FFG Tarkash. On the way home, they won't be sailing too far apart. "If u can't beat them, join them!"

Ruptly Naval Day coverage

Starts off with arabic translation, then none for a while but eventually gets english.

From Russia Navy day parade

Project 22800 Karakurt class, "Mytischchi"



Project 22160 patrol ship, "Vasily Bykov"




Project 20380, "Steregushchiy"





Project 20380, "Stoykiy"




Udaloy I class "Severomorsk"

https://tass.ru/armiya-i-opk/6747493/amp?__twitter_impression=true

Oscar class submarine "Omsk" returns to service in Pacific fleet.

Tsavo Lion wrote:Russian Navy recognized as "non fully deployable"

“And here even 180 ships that the fleet should receive by the indicated date should not mislead us - the vast majority of them are small warships and auxiliary vessels,” the specialist explained.

And his solution to most new ships being small:

The specialist believes that the way out of this situation is the creation of corvettes and frigates (patrol ships) with a displacement of up to 4.5 thousand tons, as well as diesel-electric submarines, which Russia has been engaged in for many years.
The Navy will retain its military-political significance only in nuclear deterrence and near Russian borders, the expert said.

Do what they're already doing