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


+31
lyle6
miketheterrible
Sujoy
RTN
marcellogo
magnumcromagnon
x_54_u43
Arrow
thegopnik
Tsavo Lion
George1
Mindstorm
Hole
Big_Gazza
walle83
kvs
LMFS
ult
mnztr
The-thing-next-door
dino00
Viktor
PapaDragon
hoom
GarryB
Isos
AlfaT8
SeigSoloyvov
Vann7
max steel
Austin
35 posters

    Russia's naval doctrine and strategy

    avatar
    Austin


    Posts : 7617
    Points : 8014
    Join date : 2010-05-08
    Location : India

    Russia's naval doctrine and strategy Empty Russia's naval doctrine and strategy

    Post  Austin Wed Aug 05, 2015 12:05 pm

    Found SmoothieX2 after a long time , He now runs a blog , He is ex Russian Navy and has good knowledge on Russian Submarine , So you can ask any questions you have in the blog and I have requested him to join RMF

    http://smoothiex12.blogspot.in/2015/07/russias-navy-day.html#comment-2174771999

    Check comment section for some questions answered
    max steel
    max steel


    Posts : 2930
    Points : 2955
    Join date : 2015-02-12
    Location : South Pole

    Russia's naval doctrine and strategy Empty Re: Russia's naval doctrine and strategy

    Post  max steel Wed Aug 05, 2015 12:55 pm


    Russia inevitably will come (back) to global naval Sea Denial force (highly modified, of course) as USSR was during Gorshkov tenure.

    Austin wrote:Found SmoothieX2 after a long time , He now runs a blog , He is ex Russian Navy and has good knowledge on Russian Submarine , So you can ask any questions you have in the blog and I have requested him to join RMF

    http://smoothiex12.blogspot.in/2015/07/russias-navy-day.html#comment-2174771999

    Check comment section for some questions answered


    I had a brief conversation with this guy on National interest article related to usa navy.
    avatar
    Vann7


    Posts : 5385
    Points : 5485
    Join date : 2012-05-16

    Russia's naval doctrine and strategy Empty Russia's naval doctrine and strategy

    Post  Vann7 Thu Apr 25, 2019 8:00 am

    Take a look at South Front  "Review" of Russia surface navy..
    their channel have turned into full dooom and gloom propaganda ,throwing
    a very dark picture for Russia navy ,even with all the advances they have done..

    The core of his IDIOTIC logic ,seems to be,that if Russia don't match American
    Aircraft carrier and Destroyers numbers.. that they are out of hope to project power
    outside Russia borders.. lol1  

    if Russia wanted to project power lets say in the atlantic.. they can very
    get for free a military naval base in Cuba and Venenzuela and from there their their Airforce like
    Migs-31 and long range bombers ,armed with Hypersonic missiles ,they can terrorize
    any NATO battle field group , since they have no capabilities to intercept hypersonic missiles
    ,even they say that.. and just one Kinzhal hypersonic missile is enough to erase from the map
    an 1-3 Aircraft carrier group with a hundreds of warships ,including destroyers , near the strike
    zone..



    Also Russia can do a preventive surprise strike too ,near US eastern Coast.. in time of "peace" , before the war start.. if they feel the war can't be avoided.. So a decapitation strike with a hypersonic missile
    on washington DC.. is completely possible in technical terms ..if Russia wanted to have that option on the table.. And positioning in place many Bombers with Hypersonic missiles.. including submarines positioning , if for example the location of most US Ohio subs is known ..can make the difference between a fast Victory of Russia ,before the enemy organize for a retaliation.

    Is not my coincidence that Rand Corporation ,the major experts that Pentagon request help to
    simulate wars vs RUssia and CHINA... in all their simulation ,they show US losing that war..
    Long RAnge tactical strike Airfoce is where Russia needs to invest more.. Those TU-160s and bombers and backfires ,and mig 31 needs all to be modernized and be able to fire hypersonic missiles.and this will provide Russia with a very serious deterrence against NATO .. combine this
    with Russia electromagnetic weapons to destroy NATO satellites in space and it will be a very
    convincing deterrence to NOT start a major war against Russia ,not anywhere in the short ,medium or long future.. Contrary to South Front Doom and Gloom analizing ,Russia today have the capabilities to Win in a fight vs NATO in any part of the world.. if use their airforce wisely and the correct weapons..

    Russia needs to open a base in Cuba with at least 100 planes and a dozen of them armed with
    hypersonic missiles.. and do routine , patrols along the US eastern Coast.. that will scare the shit
    of them.. knowing Russia can strike them with a nuke  in 2-3 minutes hit their decision centers and they can't stop it . and only thing can do is retaliate.. this will force US navy to mobilize more closer to US borders to follow very closely any Russian plane ..near their borders.
    SeigSoloyvov
    SeigSoloyvov


    Posts : 3668
    Points : 3648
    Join date : 2016-04-08

    Russia's naval doctrine and strategy Empty Re: Russia's naval doctrine and strategy

    Post  SeigSoloyvov Thu Apr 25, 2019 8:13 am

    A lot of the points they make about Russia's issues are in fact accurate, In the end, if they need to match the US navy ship for ship is a personal view nothing more.

    That said I thought they were already building the Lider! Enhie lied to me!.
    AlfaT8
    AlfaT8


    Posts : 2439
    Points : 2430
    Join date : 2013-02-02

    Russia's naval doctrine and strategy Empty Re: Russia's naval doctrine and strategy

    Post  AlfaT8 Thu Apr 25, 2019 3:48 pm

    SeigSoloyvov wrote:A lot of the points they make about Russia's issues are in fact accurate, In the end, if they need to match the US navy ship for ship is a personal view nothing more.

    That said I thought they were already building the Lider! Enhie lied to me!.

    Lider is still in the plan, if Russia isn't gonna make carriers, then the other plan is to make Cruisers for Carrier Denial.
    The question isn't "if" it's "when".
    News of the Borei-K show that Lider might not be constructed anytime soon.
    Isos
    Isos


    Posts : 11233
    Points : 11203
    Join date : 2015-11-06

    Russia's naval doctrine and strategy Empty Re: Russia's naval doctrine and strategy

    Post  Isos Thu Apr 25, 2019 3:56 pm

    "When" depends also on tge size of the Lider. Something similar in size to Kirivs isn't going to happen any day soon.
    GarryB
    GarryB


    Posts : 38484
    Points : 38984
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    Russia's naval doctrine and strategy Empty Re: Russia's naval doctrine and strategy

    Post  GarryB Fri Apr 26, 2019 6:24 am

    The Kirovs were the size they were so they could carry the armament they carried.

    Replacement vessels can be much smaller because the new armament they carry is much more compact, as is all the command and communications electronics and equipment...

    Well right now they have Corvettes better armed than Cold war destroyers like the Sovs and the Udaloys, but of course being smaller vessels they wont have the endurance.

    Another aspect that so many people ignore... a Russian CVN is a support ship... it is there to provide AWACS and CAP to the surface vessels in the group.

    Different mixes of surface vessels will suggest different roles... a surface group with Kuznetsov and two Mistral class helicopter carriers, an upgraded Kirov and perhaps 4 x 20K ton nuke powered destroyers plus a few support ships and other types suggests either landing troops, or landing training, or some sort of humanitarian mission to help an ally that includes a large helicopter contingent.
    avatar
    hoom


    Posts : 2352
    Points : 2340
    Join date : 2016-05-06

    Russia's naval doctrine and strategy Empty Re: Russia's naval doctrine and strategy

    Post  hoom Sat Apr 27, 2019 2:46 am

    I don't know why people quote Southfront as some sort of authoritative source, they're Westerners using open sources & frequently have translation errors that implies use of Google translate & not great ability to read between the lines of its limitations.

    That said the basic thesis there is not wrong: Official plan calls for multiple blue-water CV groups but they're still nowhere near having an adequate new force to defend near-coastal regions.
    IMO first priority should be completing 6-ship squadrons of frigates, SSKs, ASW corvettes, minesweepers & missile boats for each main fleet as a basic minimum.
    Thats no small ask, its 120 ships...

    I love how they made Khabarovsk smaller in this diagram than Lada-class even though it's a modified Borei SSBN... lol1
    Good spotting Suspect
    My guess he got confused with Losharik?
    PapaDragon
    PapaDragon


    Posts : 13197
    Points : 13239
    Join date : 2015-04-26
    Location : Fort Evil, Serbia

    Russia's naval doctrine and strategy Empty Re: Russia's naval doctrine and strategy

    Post  PapaDragon Sat Apr 27, 2019 3:16 am

    hoom wrote:I don't know why people quote Southfront as some sort of authoritative source, they're Westerners using open sources & frequently have translation errors that implies use of Google translate & not great ability to read between the lines of its limitations...


    They are also right wing nationalists so anything that isn't​ UBER EXTREME is not good enough in their book
    Viktor
    Viktor


    Posts : 5796
    Points : 6429
    Join date : 2009-08-25
    Age : 43
    Location : Croatia

    Russia's naval doctrine and strategy Empty Re: Russia's naval doctrine and strategy

    Post  Viktor Tue Jul 21, 2020 10:59 pm

    Yesterday Russia laid down 90k tons of warships Laughing
    dino00
    dino00


    Posts : 1677
    Points : 1714
    Join date : 2012-10-12
    Age : 36
    Location : portugal

    Russia's naval doctrine and strategy Empty Yesterday Russia laid down 90k tons of warships

    Post  dino00 Tue Jul 21, 2020 11:03 pm

    Viktor wrote:Yesterday Russia laid down 90k tons of warships  Laughing

    The weight of an aircraft carrier, but much more useful and cheaper Very Happy
    The-thing-next-door
    The-thing-next-door


    Posts : 1250
    Points : 1306
    Join date : 2017-09-18
    Location : Uranus

    Russia's naval doctrine and strategy Empty In what way are LHDs more useful than an aircraft carrier?

    Post  The-thing-next-door Mon Jul 27, 2020 10:40 am

    dino00 wrote:

    The weight of an aircraft carrier, but much more useful and cheaper Very Happy

    In what way are LHDs more useful than an aircraft carrier?

    LHDs sole purpose is peacetime imperialism, a carrier can be used for both peacetime imperialism and wartime operations against the west.
    dino00
    dino00


    Posts : 1677
    Points : 1714
    Join date : 2012-10-12
    Age : 36
    Location : portugal

    Russia's naval doctrine and strategy Empty russian navy status

    Post  dino00 Mon Jul 27, 2020 12:41 pm

    The-thing-next-door wrote:
    dino00 wrote:

    The weight of an aircraft carrier, but much more useful and cheaper Very Happy

    In what way are LHDs more useful than an aircraft carrier?

    LHDs sole purpose is peacetime imperialism, a carrier can be used for both peacetime imperialism and wartime operations against the west.

    I was talking about the 6 ships vs the aircraft carrier.

    An LHD is useful for amphibious operations.
    PapaDragon
    PapaDragon


    Posts : 13197
    Points : 13239
    Join date : 2015-04-26
    Location : Fort Evil, Serbia

    Russia's naval doctrine and strategy Empty Re: Russia's naval doctrine and strategy

    Post  PapaDragon Mon Jul 27, 2020 2:49 pm

    The-thing-next-door wrote:
    dino00 wrote:The weight of an aircraft carrier, but much more useful and cheaper Very Happy
    In what way are LHDs more useful than an aircraft carrier?

    LHDs sole purpose is peacetime imperialism, a carrier can be used for both peacetime imperialism and wartime operations against the west.

    Neither are part of nuclear triad so their utility in conflicts against the West is identical

    GarryB
    GarryB


    Posts : 38484
    Points : 38984
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    Russia's naval doctrine and strategy Empty Re: Russia's naval doctrine and strategy

    Post  GarryB Tue Jul 28, 2020 8:00 am

    Neither are part of nuclear triad so their utility in conflicts against the West is identical

    I agree with what I think you are trying to say, but disagree with the way you said it.

    Once Russia had a few helicopter carriers in service then they can be used for all sorts of things... a visit to pacific islands offering free healthcare for brownie points... perhaps even do a deal with Cuba and replace one Marine of the two it can normally carry with a group of Cuban doctors that can be heli lifted out to individual islands for those unable to get to the ship... it would be like the Soccer world cup... good PR with the actual people...

    But once they are operational and if Russia got wind that the in power US regime wanted to boost its flagging voter numbers by invading Venezuela then scheduling some exercises where a helicopter carrier and a few cruisers and of course the Kuznetsov have to go to Venezuela for a couple of months for an extended exercise programme might be all they need to do to make the US look at plan B.

    There is no denying that in terms of a full scale nuclear conflict with HATO anything outside the nuclear triad is not very important...
    Tsavo Lion
    Tsavo Lion


    Posts : 5818
    Points : 5774
    Join date : 2016-08-15
    Location : AZ, USA

    Russia's naval doctrine and strategy Empty Re: Russia's naval doctrine and strategy

    Post  Tsavo Lion Sat Aug 01, 2020 4:53 am

    dino00 wrote:An LHD is useful for amphibious operations.

    In the same month, Sivkov announced that a pair of Project 23900 (Priboy) universal amphibious assault ships (UDC), which was laid down in July, worth 100 billion rubles, more meet the tasks of the Russian Navy than the French Mistral, but it does not need it at all. In his opinion, the UDC "will turn out to be expensive but useless toys" and "it would be much more useful to turn them into light aircraft carriers." https://lenta.ru/news/2020/07/31/navy/
    SeigSoloyvov
    SeigSoloyvov


    Posts : 3668
    Points : 3648
    Join date : 2016-04-08

    Russia's naval doctrine and strategy Empty Re: Russia's naval doctrine and strategy

    Post  SeigSoloyvov Sat Aug 01, 2020 5:20 am

    Tsavo Lion wrote:
    dino00 wrote:An LHD is useful for amphibious operations.

    In the same month, Sivkov announced that a pair of Project 23900 (Priboy) universal amphibious assault ships (UDC), which was laid down in July, worth 100 billion rubles, more meet the tasks of the Russian Navy than the French Mistral, but it does not need it at all. In his opinion, the UDC "will turn out to be expensive but useless toys" and "it would be much more useful to turn them into light aircraft carriers." https://lenta.ru/news/2020/07/31/navy/

    Honestly, two ships do not, they would need at least six of the class honestly, perhaps once the first two are done however long that takes they will lay down some more.
    Tsavo Lion
    Tsavo Lion


    Posts : 5818
    Points : 5774
    Join date : 2016-08-15
    Location : AZ, USA

    Russia's naval doctrine and strategy Empty Re: Russia's naval doctrine and strategy

    Post  Tsavo Lion Sat Aug 01, 2020 5:35 am

    Yes, there were supposed to be 4 Mistrals. That's the plan: the next in series will be modified based on the results of their trials & use.
    avatar
    mnztr


    Posts : 2684
    Points : 2722
    Join date : 2018-01-21

    Russia's naval doctrine and strategy Empty Re: Russia's naval doctrine and strategy

    Post  mnztr Mon Aug 03, 2020 2:46 am

    I read that the Chinese are buiding an LHD with an EMALS on it. It will be very interesting to see what that looks like. Perhaps Russia can license Chinese EMALS tech or the Chinese can provide it in compensation for all the tech Russia has provided to them.
    avatar
    ult


    Posts : 837
    Points : 877
    Join date : 2015-02-20

    Russia's naval doctrine and strategy Empty Re: Russia's naval doctrine and strategy

    Post  ult Mon Aug 03, 2020 5:59 am

    mnztr wrote:I read that the Chinese are buiding an LHD with an EMALS on it. It will be very interesting to see what that looks like. Perhaps Russia can license Chinese EMALS tech or the Chinese can provide it in compensation for all the tech Russia has provided to them.

    How old are you? You sound so naive. First of all Chinese tech isn't be-all and end-all, Russia had plenty of issues with whatever little experience we got of it, their engines sucked ass. Second of all, Russia is not gonna rely on anyone but itself. Today the political climate is one way, the next day it could change just like that. And China providing compensation is just laughable. They only know how to steal tech.

    Also so far they can't provide anything of value anyway.

    Big_Gazza dislikes this post

    avatar
    mnztr


    Posts : 2684
    Points : 2722
    Join date : 2018-01-21

    Russia's naval doctrine and strategy Empty Re: Russia's naval doctrine and strategy

    Post  mnztr Mon Aug 03, 2020 7:14 am

    ult wrote:

    How old are you? You sound so naive. First of all Chinese tech isn't be-all and end-all, Russia had plenty of issues with whatever little experience we got of it, their engines sucked ass. Second of all, Russia is not gonna rely on anyone but itself. Today the political climate is one way, the next day it could change just like that. And China providing compensation is just laughable. They only know how to steal tech.

    Also so far they can't provide anything of value anyway.

    They seem to be building ships at a pretty impressive rate, and they have grown their economy faster then anything the world has ever seen in its history. Also, Russia massively depends on China as a market for its products. Saying China has nothing to offer is pretty childish and absurd. China is a massive manufacturer of batteries and has invested heavily in electrfying technologies. Russia has never built a CATOBAR carrier. China took a Russian hulk, recomissioned it and built another in just over 2 years.. yet you say Russia has nothing to learn from the Chinese?

    Big_Gazza likes this post

    ult dislikes this post

    GarryB
    GarryB


    Posts : 38484
    Points : 38984
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    Russia's naval doctrine and strategy Empty Re: Russia's naval doctrine and strategy

    Post  GarryB Mon Aug 03, 2020 12:41 pm

    Two landing ships to start with and likely eventually four... two in the Northern Fleet and two in the Pacific Fleet, but likely all four used together when available.... there is little chance they will want to perform two simultaneous landings in different places... they will only have one CV to protect them for a start and the cruisers and destroyers they currently have should be freed up by the time these landing ships are ready because by then Russia will have enough Corvettes and Frigates for duties in and around Russian waters freeing up cold war destroyers and cruisers.... with upgrades to sail further afield..

    Russia is hardly going to buy Chinese EM technology... they haven't got any aircraft that need it at the moment... they have been working on it for a period of time now and are probably at least comparable to Chinese levels of capability if not better... the thing is that until they put a CVN in the water we wont know really.

    Russia and China can work together in a lot of areas and share or sell technology, but neither owes the other anything...

    Personally I think Russia should choose China as a partner for their high speed train network instead of Germany... the latter are just too unreliable, while the Chinese have a lot more recent practical experience...

    They seem to be building ships at a pretty impressive rate, and they have grown their economy faster then anything the world has ever seen in its history.

    Building ships is nothing... if Russia was just building Sovremmeny class ships and Udaloys they could have made them in large numbers too... there is more to ship building than making an aerodynamic shell that looks modern and then filling it with copies of weapons you have licence produced...

    And a rapid growth spurt is to be expected then you start near the bottom... bacteria split and double their numbers every half hour.... in a year or two that means two bacteria would have grown to an object the size and weight of the planet earth... but don't be scared when you go for that petris dish in the fridge because when they get to the edge of the dish and run out of food the exponential expansion in numbers stops and they start eating each other.

    What the Chinese have achieved is impressive and clear evidence that a managed economy can work very well with investment from outside and the right conditions... but don't get blinded by the fact that now the west recognises the threat and will take measures to isolate and perhaps even attack China, and limit their ability to trade with the rest of the world... just like they are doing with Russia. All the western companies will take their investment and factories out of China and move to India or Bangledesh...

    China took a Russian hulk, recomissioned it and built another in just over 2 years.. yet you say Russia has nothing to learn from the Chinese?

    Do we know it is even operational? They might have just got the engines working and put a nice coat of paint on them. For all we know they might be nightmares inside.

    I have a lot of respect for China, but they have been spoilt for their role in taking down the Soviet Union... but now the west recognises it is more of a threat than Russia is in terms of economics and resources, because China is also a large hungry animal that needs to eat and consume and as a competitor for the west it will drive up the prices or shut the west out of some markets completely...

    Copying systems is certainly a skill in itself but copying all the time means you are always behind because what is out what is in service what is sold is already a generation behind what is working in the labs...
    SeigSoloyvov
    SeigSoloyvov


    Posts : 3668
    Points : 3648
    Join date : 2016-04-08

    Russia's naval doctrine and strategy Empty Re: Russia's naval doctrine and strategy

    Post  SeigSoloyvov Mon Aug 03, 2020 3:04 pm

    China is the better shipbuilder, thats a fact.
    avatar
    mnztr


    Posts : 2684
    Points : 2722
    Join date : 2018-01-21

    Russia's naval doctrine and strategy Empty Re: Russia's naval doctrine and strategy

    Post  mnztr Mon Aug 03, 2020 3:32 pm

    GarryB wrote:
    Russia is hardly going to buy Chinese EM technology... they haven't got any aircraft that need it at the moment... they have been working on it for a period of time now and are probably at least comparable to Chinese levels of capability if not better... the thing is that until they put a CVN in the water we wont know really.

    Russia and China can work together in a lot of areas and share or sell technology, but neither owes the other anything...

    Personally I think Russia should choose China as a partner for their high speed train network instead of Germany... the latter are just too unreliable, while the Chinese have a lot more recent practical experience...

    They seem to be building ships at a pretty impressive rate, and they have grown their economy faster then anything the world has ever seen in its history.

    Building ships is nothing... if Russia was just building Sovremmeny class ships and Udaloys they could have made them in large numbers too... there is more to ship building than making an aerodynamic shell that looks modern and then filling it with copies of weapons you have licence produced...

    And a rapid growth spurt is to be expected then you start near the bottom... bacteria split and double their numbers every half hour.... in a year or two that means two bacteria would have grown to an object the size and weight of the planet earth... but don't be scared when you go for that petris dish in the fridge because when they get to the edge of the dish and run out of food the exponential expansion in numbers stops and they start eating each other.

    What the Chinese have achieved is impressive and clear evidence that a managed economy can work very well with investment from outside and the right conditions... but don't get blinded by the fact that now the west recognises the threat and will take measures to isolate and perhaps even attack China, and limit their ability to trade with the rest of the world... just like they are doing with Russia. All the western companies will take their investment and factories out of China and move to India or Bangledesh...

    China took a Russian hulk, recomissioned it and built another in just over 2 years.. yet you say Russia has nothing to learn from the Chinese?

    Do we know it is even operational? They might have just got the engines working and put a nice coat of paint on them. For all we know they might be nightmares inside.

    I have a lot of respect for China, but they have been spoilt for their role in taking down the Soviet Union... but now the west recognises it is more of a threat than Russia is in terms of economics and resources, because China is also a large hungry animal that needs to eat and consume and as a competitor for the west it will drive up the prices or shut the west out of some markets completely...

    Copying systems is certainly a skill in itself but copying all the time means you are always behind because what is out what is in service what is sold is already a generation behind what is working in the labs...

    Oh come on Garry, I know you live close to the great dragon and they are kinda scary, yes I am uneasy about Chinas rise as well but to question if Laioning is operational?



    We forget that Russia built it first heavy bomber by copying the b-29 and copied British RR engines to get to where they are today. The US copied tons as well.

    If it made sense Russia could put Emals and MIG 29 on the 23900..or use it for heavy strike drones like Okhotnik. If they put 5 Okhotniks on the 23900, it would increase the strike capability of the ship by several orders of magnitude.

    EMALS is not an easy tech to master. Also the Chinese claim to have made some breakthoroughs on DC power systems that could transform shipboard power systems.

    The J20 is quite an impressive machine all in all as well.

    In terms of great powers that do little copying, I would say France, Britain and Germany tend to develop the most independant IP.


    Last edited by mnztr on Mon Aug 03, 2020 9:46 pm; edited 1 time in total
    Tsavo Lion
    Tsavo Lion


    Posts : 5818
    Points : 5774
    Join date : 2016-08-15
    Location : AZ, USA

    Russia's naval doctrine and strategy Empty Re: Russia's naval doctrine and strategy

    Post  Tsavo Lion Mon Aug 03, 2020 8:10 pm

    I agree with him 100%: https://nvo.ng.ru/armament/2020-07-30/6_1102_flag.html?print=Y

    Sponsored content


    Russia's naval doctrine and strategy Empty Re: Russia's naval doctrine and strategy

    Post  Sponsored content


      Current date/time is Sat Feb 24, 2024 2:31 pm