Mistral News thread

magnumcromagnon wrote:They have the blueprints to build them on their own, plus it's stipulated in the contract that if France doesn't delivery they will have to pay a huge fine that greatly exceeds the cost of delivering their helicopter carriers...

... and these Mistrals were specifically bulit for Russia, with many parts were made by Russia, many parts were modified to suit Russian standards... so on and so forth therefore no one in NATO want to take all the inconvenience to convert them back to suit NATO.

It's White House style ! Op op op op it's White House style !

GarryB wrote:

I think they probably started designing a ship domestically(or they must must be doing something domestically), when France backed out of the deal(with american pressure), then I think they probably started doing something.

Russias domestic ship building industry will have been listening and watching events as they unfold, and will likely have their own plans and designs, which unfortunately are untested because they are not built yet. I suspect they have learned a lot of producing half of the two Mistrals built and would be incorporating such things in their own designs, but anything they were working on would need extensive full scale testing to make sure it is OK... stuff the actual Mistrals have already been through years ago.

I don't think it will take as long now to develop a Russian equivalent, than it would have when the requirement was first drawn up, and of course making a domestic design means it would be better adapted to Russian sensors and weapons and systems than Mistral was and there might be a change in proportion of payload while they have the chance...

Getting the vessels they paid for would still be the fastest solution and would mean much more time to develop a future replacement vessel.

So the Mistral could come with nasty surprises inside.. spy hardware ,that could reveal the ship location to NATO at all times.. from satellite

The US did the same with computer chips it sold to the Soviet Union that it knew were being used in nuclear power stations.

It is not an accident that the first two Mistrals will go to the Pacific Fleet, while the two potentially built in Russia will operate in the Northern Fleet in the arctic.

Russia wont trust France either...

Russian ship building companies have enough experience to design ships that are good enough without testing. It's not
like they throw together some pieces of metal and see of it survives the ocean waves. In fact, it is up to the Russian
navy to specify what characteristics it wants and this is where most of the uncertainty lies.

Russia should either completely abandon the Mistrals and build its own original design. Or it should build the other two
mistrals with no commission for France. Call it compensation. I am sure that Russia has all the plans for the full ships
and not just parts of them.

My preference would be to adapt the French designs and come up with something better.

F-15E wrote:Russian Sailors Left France Without The Mistral.

What's going to be even more funny is what the French will do with this hulk if the Russians decide not to permit the sale of their hull section, electronic systems and other propriety technologies installed on it to another customer. In effect, the French won't have to return the money for those components given that the Russians refuse to sell them - but what they will be left with is a completely useless ship that they will have to start over with again and only half of which they'll be able to salvage - costing them a great deal of money while there is still no customer in sight for a new Mistral. And everyone else knows there is no customer in sight, but that the French will be forced to build the Mistral anyway otherwise it'd be a waste. So anyone in the market will just wait until the French finish - then wait a little more for the price to lower, and then buy it up for cheap.

All that of course, will be after the return of the money that the Russian government has already given to the French shipyards to do their sections of the Mistral, and the payment of penalty fees to the tune of some $300 million or whatever it is that is specified in the contract for non-delivery.

The Poles and so on are claiming that now France's chances for contracts will be higher - that might be the case only as long as France doesn't step on the toes of the US, which dominates all the contracts there - so France might get some small pickings in compensation.
What they will lose though - is not only this Mistral, but the one after it, and the possibility of any further ones, or future large projects with Russia - where there was great potential. The other casualties of this are the French-Russian JVs on building next-gen military radios for the Russian MoD, cable-laying & logistics vessels possibly for both country's militaries, and an AFV targetted for the export market.

But if frenchies would greenlight Mistral they would get even bigger troubles. Do you think they shot their own foot without the pressure from US? You don't have want to be on the wrong side when it comes to US.

Regular wrote:But if frenchies would greenlight Mistral they would get even bigger troubles. Do you think they shot their own foot without the pressure from US? You don't have want to be on the wrong side when it comes to US.

Correct me if I am wrong, but there is a certain person (or a number of people, I have not remembered yet) said that, it is easy to be the US's enemy but it is very hard to make friend with the US.

higurashihougi wrote:

Regular wrote:But if frenchies would greenlight Mistral they would get even bigger troubles. Do you think they shot their own foot without the pressure from US? You don't have want to be on the wrong side when it comes to US.

Correct me if I am wrong, but there is a certain person (or a number of people, I have not remembered yet) said that, it is easy to be the US's enemy but it is very hard to make friend with the US.

In their own words "America does not have friends, only shared interests at that moment in time".

In other words "use them, fuck them, dump them, kill them".

F-15E wrote:Russian Sailors Left France Without The Mistral.

Like other posts have said that Russia now have the blueprints and know have learned the deatils of how to build the ship. Now Russia can just build their own ship, by not getting the ships might be a blessing in disguise for Russia, by not delivering on the contract, France has hurt its reputation has reliable arms exporter and this can play right into Russia hands, all they have to do is convince India that the Rafale deal is not good for them(and it is not) because the U.S. can put sanctions on India anytime because India is an Russian ally and part to f the BRICS. I would not trust any of NATO countries for arms and this just proves that point.

I don't think India needs to break the deal because of the Mistrals. It just has to take into account the Mistral case
in future purchase decisions. By no means should Russia try to exert any sort of influence on India or any other country
in its dealings with France. That just makes the regime in France look like a victim.

Because of the political interference I think it is clear already that France has become an unreliable partner in trade... if the EU and US can make it break contracts signed in good faith then how can anyone buy French with confidence again?

Even if they do deliver both vessels I suspect this bullshit has killed the option for the next two vessels to be considered and I also expect that the Russian ship designers are now working on Mistral-M design that better suits Russian systems and equipment.

That just makes the regime in France look like a victim.

In many ways it is the ship builders in France that are the real victims and in some ways you could argue the current French regime is a victim too, but only in the sense of being a coward and not standing up to Washington the way the French normally do when it is in French interests to do so.

Now Russia has clearly said it:

http://rt.com/politics/217287-france-mistral-russia-rogozin/

Dmitriy Rogozin wrote:No one on our side is going to take seriously any explanations that some conditions are supposedly not ripe enough to hand over these ships to our country. We don’t consider it a force-majeure, this is simply a demonstration of France’s geopolitical weakness.

France is giving in to pressure from its NATO colleagues. I think General De Gaulle is turning in his grave now.

flamming_python wrote:

F-15E wrote:Russian Sailors Left France Without The Mistral.

What's going to be even more funny is what the French will do with this hulk if the Russians decide not to permit the sale of their hull section, electronic systems and other propriety technologies installed on it to another customer. In effect, the French won't have to return the money for those components given that the Russians refuse to sell them - but what they will be left with is a completely useless ship that they will have to start over with again and only half of which they'll be able to salvage - costing them a great deal of money while there is still no customer in sight for a new Mistral. And everyone else knows there is no customer in sight, but that the French will be forced to build the Mistral anyway otherwise it'd be a waste. So anyone in the market will just wait until the French finish - then wait a little more for the price to lower, and then buy it up for cheap.

All that of course, will be after the return of the money that the Russian government has already given to the French shipyards to do their sections of the Mistral, and the payment of penalty fees to the tune of some $300 million or whatever it is that is specified in the contract for non-delivery.

The Poles and so on are claiming that now France's chances for contracts will be higher - that might be the case only as long as France doesn't step on the toes of the US, which dominates all the contracts there - so France might get some small pickings in compensation.
What they will lose though - is not only this Mistral, but the one after it, and the possibility of any further ones, or future large projects with Russia - where there was great potential. The other casualties of this are the French-Russian JVs on building next-gen military radios for the Russian MoD, cable-laying & logistics vessels possibly for both country's militaries, and an AFV targetted for the export market.

Half of the ship already belongs to Russian!!
If the French are not returning money (with the Russian half of the ship) or the ship, this is nothing but a thefts

zidzu wrote:
Half of the ship already belongs to Russian!!
If the French are not returning money (with the Russian half of the ship) or the ship, this is nothing but a thefts

Indeed. Russia must get compensation for this deal break. If France tries to get away without paying a cent
then serious action has to be taken. For example, Russia should pass a law that allows it to violate property
rights of entities (e.g. France) that engage in clear politically motivated sabotage of contracts. If France or
anyone else tries to take Russia to arbitration court for "stealing" intellectual property they should not have
an easy time of it.

It is a freaking circus. It's OK for NATO members to break contracts on a whim, but Russia is supposed to abide by
all conditions that the west unilaterally imposes. Totally unacceptable BS.

kvs wrote:

zidzu wrote:
Half of the ship already belongs to Russian!!
If the French are not returning money (with the Russian half of the ship) or the ship, this is nothing but a thefts

Indeed.  Russia must get compensation for this deal break.  If France tries to get away without paying a cent
then serious action has to be taken.   For example, Russia should pass a law that allows it to violate property
rights of entities (e.g. France) that engage in clear politically motivated sabotage of contracts.   If France or
anyone else tries to take Russia to arbitration court for "stealing" intellectual property they should not have
an easy time of it.  

It is a freaking circus.  It's OK for NATO members to break contracts on a whim, but Russia is supposed to abide by
all conditions that the west unilaterally imposes.   Totally unacceptable BS.

Fuck the NATO - West its saying they are right all the time what they say is the right thing in the world
Maybe that’s why they kill over million people in Iraq over 10 year period. They can imposed anything in the world as because their right (nothing but a illusion in their minds)
Blanca of power in the world has to be imposed at any cost only Russia can do it
France has to pay big price for this if not all other countries in the world have to make them pay (Not of the west)

So after the deal went BUST and dmitri rogozin said we dont need it let me play nastradamus and qoute myself from:

Tue Jun 22, 2010 6:38 am

NationalRus wrote:i think this ship is totaly useless for us, i just don't get it how this big flotting target .....hugggm sorry i mean "Helicopter carrier" is usefull for russia, if we would fight a war thousends of km away of our country i get it, or have a enclave thousends of km away i would get it too... but this big sea target... huhm sorry i mean helicopter carrier just screams to rot in the damn harbour

i see this purchase as a political one, like breaing the wall of western cuntrys selling armament to russia, but its useless.. if the wannt to realy break this wall in the heads of cold war politicans the should have gone for a rafale deal... or to lay down the cards one the table completly a pure technology deal... and not this USELESS sea box/grave

so much to mistral

Mistral was not needed, Russia does not need France to make its ships.  Why would we even buy that? Was that some sick joke?  We should come with  own designs, Even if it takes a while.  NationalRus  I agree with you.  We had a better design in the USSR why can we not make that?  I hope that future military deals with NATO will not happen I do not want Russia to buy equipment from its enemies.

VladimirSahin wrote:Mistral was not needed, Russia does not need France to make its ships.  Why would we even buy that? Was that some sick joke?  We should come with  own designs, Even if it takes a while.  NationalRus  I agree with you.  We had a better design in the USSR why can we not make that?  I hope that future military deals with NATO will not happen I do not want Russia to buy equipment from its enemies.

The Mistral deal was the gift of corrupt Serdyukov to Russia. Even though he was appointed by Putin in 2007 as Minister of Defense, it was under
Medvedev's leadership that he was allowed to go on a rampage. He did a massive amount of damage to Russia's military including the industrial
part by diverting funds to foreign producers and sabotaging Russian projects. Medvedev as also bending over backwards to accommodate NATO
in cases such as Libya. No UN approval for a no-fly zone should have been allowed.

Serdyukov is a пидорас, time is changing since EU wants to be enemies with Russia so be it.  I support Putin 100% but one thing that gets me angry is he's not acting as aggressive as he should be towards EU.

Agree! He needs to f@ck 'em!

VladimirSahin wrote:Serdyukov is a пидорас, time is changing since EU wants to be enemies with Russia so be it.  I support Putin 100% but one thing that gets me angry is he's not acting as aggressive as he should be towards EU.

I think it is best for Russia if it does not escalate the conflict. This does not mean Russia should kiss NATO a** but a gradual response
to any ratcheting of tensions and sanctions by the west is the best. It keeps the west confused and gives the world a clear view of
who the aggressors are. Banging shoes on podiums and making token moves to plant the flag are not valuable in the long run even
if they feel right.

Putin's priority should be remove all the 5th column elements in Russia. Starting with the Central Bank.

I have always said this:

For Russia, war is a tragedy. For the USA, it is business.

George1 wrote:Project 1178 Kherson was a 1980s-era Soviet LHD program derived from the Kiev class aircraft carrier design comparable to the US Tarawa class amphibious assault ship. The ship would have been about 40,000 tons displacement, with steam turbine power plants and carried about 12 helicopters and 3 Tsaplya class LCACs. It was cancelled with the fall of the Soviet Union in 1991.

Time to revive this badboy right here. Fully modernized of course, and taking into account the latest production, materials technologies and lessons learnt from the Mistral.

Would blow the pussy Mistral right out of the water.

TheArmenian wrote:I have always said this:

For Russia, war is a tragedy. For the USA, it is business.

Putin's priority should be remove all the 5th column elements in Russia. Starting with the Central Bank.

Very, true, but the 5th column is rather deep and has to many roots in different parts of economy, it's like cancer, leave a single cell alive and it will spread again.

TheArmenian wrote:I have always said this:

For Russia, war is a tragedy. For the USA, it is business.

You're wrong Armenian - Russia will make war a tragedy for the US, the only nation that can do so

Project 10200 Khalzan

Pr.10200 Khalzan

The Pr.10200 was designed on the initiative of Admiral N.N. Amelko as a relatively cheap ASW helicopter carrier. The design was evaluated against the Pr.1143 Kiev class and an ASW version of Pr.10780, where it turned out to have considerably worse search capability. The design also became nearly as expensive and complex as Pr.1143.5, too noisy, and unable to meet military structural strength and damage control requirements. Regardless of this it was planned in March 1980 to build two ships of this class at the Chernomorsky shipyard before 1990. However, this decision was revoked, and Khalzan re-designed into the Pr.11780 landing ship.
The Pr.10200 was based on the hull of the Pr.1609 Kapitan Smirnov fast container ship, however eventually only the underwater part of the hull and the power plant remained the same. The design was to also have a well deck and capacity to carry a battalion of marine infantry and 50-60 tanks.

Displacement full load, tons: 31,000
Length, metres: 229.4/212.2
Beam, metres: 39.2/30.0
Draught, metres: 9.9
Speed, knots: 27
Propulsion: 2 GTU, 50,000 shp

Missiles:
12 SA-N-9 Gauntlet (RZ-130 Kinzhal) vertical launchers.
Guns:
8 AK-630M 30 mm.
Helicopters:
28 Ka-27 Helix-A.

http://www.secretprojects.co.uk/forum/index.php/topic,766.msg9346.html?PHPSESSID=7r4au49djcbhr7du7410dl9jn4#msg9346