Home
Latest images
Register
Log in
I don't think that Russia will use China as intermediaries. Serdyukov's little venture is finally dead and buried. Good riddance.
+90
Maximmmm
franco
JohninMK
Rmf
PapaDragon
zepia
Cplnew83
OminousSpudd
jhelb
Rodinazombie
higurashihougi
George1
mack8
GunshipDemocracy
Book.
Flanky
ExBeobachter1987
rtech
Cyberspec
Dima
max steel
KoTeMoRe
Honesroc
Tyloe
mutantsushi
collegeboy16
kvs
VladimirSahin
Regular
bantugbro
Kyo
zidzu
F-15E
GarryB
wilhelm
type055
par far
GJ Flanker
Werewolf
Hannibal Barca
magnumcromagnon
AlfaT8
Big_Gazza
Firebird
arpakola
Feldmarszal
EKS
Hachimoto
navyfield
redgiacomo
Mike E
fragmachine
Asf
flamming_python
macedonian
TheArmenian
Flyingdutchman
Vann7
highlander3
Deep Throat
Sujoy
dionis
Zivo
Shadåw
ricky123
Mr.Kalishnikov47
KomissarBojanchev
medo
TR1
ahmedfire
AbsoluteZero
runaway
Ogannisyan8887
Hoof
IronsightSniper
Austin
milky_candy_sugar
NationalRus
Cléo
Serbia Forever 2
Viktor
Sukhoi37_Terminator
IBRIS
Jelena
soldieroffortune
Vladislav
sepheronx
Admin
Stealthflanker
Russian Patriot
94 posters
Mistral News thread
kvs- Posts : 15840
Points : 15975
Join date : 2014-09-11
Location : Turdope's Kanada
KomissarBojanchev- Posts : 1429
Points : 1584
Join date : 2012-08-05
Age : 27
Location : Varna, Bulgaria
The refusal to get mistrals and the aspiration for replacement is IMO a shitty decision. Why waste 2 perfectly good helicopter carriers that still have a massive chance to be delivered due to being unarmed and french economic considerations being swapped for paper ships that will take decades to build? If it takes 5 years to build a corvette and 5 more to "test" the prostpect for a russian built larfge helicopter carrier is arriving on time is impossible.
IMO Russia needs these 2 ships far more in the long term than the $2 billion. And why instead of Lavrov repeating the delicate ultradiplomatic BS that he knows the west won't listen to, openly sues for broken contract for at least 5-10 times the worth of the mistrals by stressing that they're not compliant to sanctions due to being unarmed and effectively civilian vessels?
IMO Russia needs these 2 ships far more in the long term than the $2 billion. And why instead of Lavrov repeating the delicate ultradiplomatic BS that he knows the west won't listen to, openly sues for broken contract for at least 5-10 times the worth of the mistrals by stressing that they're not compliant to sanctions due to being unarmed and effectively civilian vessels?
GunshipDemocracy- Posts : 6165
Points : 6185
Join date : 2015-05-17
Location : fishin on Stalin´s Strait between Mexico and Canada
KomissarBojanchev wrote:The refusal to get mistrals and the aspiration for replacement is IMO a shitty decision.
Like in west there are any laws besides steal from Russia. Vide Yukos where criminals have granted compensation. By Mikey Mouse court.
Strange in US Madoff was not really compensated.
BTW why Mistral is so capable unlike Russian design?
Book.- Posts : 692
Points : 745
Join date : 2015-05-08
Location : Oregon, USA
Cyberspec wrote:Sounds like it would be similar in size to the Mistral's but like mentioned above, with nuclear propulsion....it's to have anti-aircraft and anti-sub weaponry
Deputy Chairman of the Industry Committee of the State Duma Vladimir Gutenev noted that in the case of the need for a ship like "Mistral" for the Armed Forces, it would be similar in size to the Mistral, but with a nuclear power plant. Equipped with "air defense and antisubmarine defense. "
РИА Новости http://ria.ru/defense_safety/20150526/1066636532.html#ixzz3bHsqYjfO
Project 22220 icebreaker
Mini atomic plant ready
Russia hold Mistra doc.
make the copy?
GunshipDemocracy- Posts : 6165
Points : 6185
Join date : 2015-05-17
Location : fishin on Stalin´s Strait between Mexico and Canada
France should pay fines for non delivery of Misrals
Now I got what fine French products mean. Pay fines
Why copy inferior Misral design? better to update 1178/11780. BTW 11780 could with slight modification take air wing 6-8 MiG-29k
and the rest you can find here
http://nevskii-bastion.ru/11780-udk/
Project 11780
Now I got what fine French products mean. Pay fines
http://tass.ru/armiya-i-opk/1996275
MOSCOW, may 26. /TASS/. The head of the Duma Committee on defense Vladimir Komoedov (Communist party) believes that France should have to pay fines for non-delivery of Russian "Mistral".
"In addition to the costs - direct and indirect - I think it is necessary to impose a penalty for dishonesty, public indecency," said the MP TASS today. In his opinion, Russia should be consulted on this issue in the international legal instance. "It's not going Jean and Ivan (and contract), flew in the air at the time, defended, and fight together learned, and now...", - stated with regret Komoedov
Book. wrote:
Mini atomic plant ready
Russia hold Mistra doc.
make the copy?
Why copy inferior Misral design? better to update 1178/11780. BTW 11780 could with slight modification take air wing 6-8 MiG-29k
and the rest you can find here
http://nevskii-bastion.ru/11780-udk/
Project 11780
Last edited by GunshipDemocracy on Wed May 27, 2015 6:59 pm; edited 1 time in total
mack8- Posts : 1039
Points : 1093
Join date : 2013-08-03
GD, just bare in mind that the small drawing you posted belongs to the project 10200 Khalzan based on a Ro-ro civilian hull, not of the pr.11780 Kherson. But yeah, a nuclear powered Kherson?! That would be well sweet, and also groundbreaking, no one made a nuclear powered LHD or LHA before.
GarryB- Posts : 40489
Points : 40989
Join date : 2010-03-30
Location : New Zealand
Well I suspect they had solid plans for the use of these two Mistrals, so with the detailed design of the Mistrals at hand they could easily redesign it to their needs... nuke power would extend range and increase speed, while a redesign of the armament will make it safer in international waters and more compatible with other Russian vessels.
They will be able to incorporate chances related to their new land vehicles and further modify it for new potential aircraft including UCAVs...
I don't think they should waste their time with a real carrier replacement... they are a different program for a different role.
this is a landing vessel with trucks and armoured vehicles and after the initial landings it would use its hovercraft and helos to unload supplies from transport vessels... it wont be an air defence carrier and wont need MiGs.
They will be able to incorporate chances related to their new land vehicles and further modify it for new potential aircraft including UCAVs...
I don't think they should waste their time with a real carrier replacement... they are a different program for a different role.
this is a landing vessel with trucks and armoured vehicles and after the initial landings it would use its hovercraft and helos to unload supplies from transport vessels... it wont be an air defence carrier and wont need MiGs.
GunshipDemocracy- Posts : 6165
Points : 6185
Join date : 2015-05-17
Location : fishin on Stalin´s Strait between Mexico and Canada
mack8 wrote:GD, just bare in mind that the small drawing you posted belongs to the project 10200 Khalzan based on a Ro-ro civilian hull, not of the pr.11780 Kherson. But yeah, a nuclear powered Kherson?! That would be well sweet, and also groundbreaking, no one made a nuclear powered LHD or LHA before.
How annoying you are
edited corrected. This was to be Kherson indeed. Nobody before made tank like Armata either. The point here is about range an d dual use. Exactly as planned in Soviet Union. French need Mistrals to introduce colonial rule where is uranium, crude or other deposits. sorry to defend human rights. US to invade one peaceful an d rich in resources nations. None of this is task for Russian fleet AFAIK
GunshipDemocracy- Posts : 6165
Points : 6185
Join date : 2015-05-17
Location : fishin on Stalin´s Strait between Mexico and Canada
GarryB wrote:Well I suspect they had solid plans for the use of these two Mistrals, so with the detailed design of the Mistrals at hand they could easily redesign it to their needs... nuke power would extend range and increase speed, while a redesign of the armament will make it safer in international waters and more compatible with other Russian vessels.
They will be able to incorporate chances related to their new land vehicles and further modify it for new potential aircraft including UCAVs...
I don't think they should waste their time with a real carrier replacement... they are a different program for a different role.
this is a landing vessel with trucks and armoured vehicles and after the initial landings it would use its hovercraft and helos to unload supplies from transport vessels... it wont be an air defence carrier and wont need MiGs.
I believe that Soviet concept was much better for RN. Two roles by design (AC/LHD) and 30-50% more displacement. Not to mention better sea worthiness in Arctic. Russia in medium term needs more helicopter ASW AC with eventual air wing than truck to carry troops.
medo- Posts : 4343
Points : 4423
Join date : 2010-10-24
Location : Slovenia
This 11780 ship looks great, but I would change it a little. I would take off those heavy guns and just keep air defense weapons. I would also prolong the flight deck to the beginning of the ship and get additional take off and landing space. With more tick and quality flight deck, they could place a group ( 6 to 8 ) of VSTOL fighters Yak-141 on them for protection of the ship and for support of the marines.
Russia could start building them in the new Zvezda shipyard in Vladivostok, which is capable of building large ships. They have machinery and tools to cud and veld ship parts and before they will put those parts together in a ship, shipyard will be finished. I'm not sure which shipyard could start building them for Northern fleet.
Russia could start building them in the new Zvezda shipyard in Vladivostok, which is capable of building large ships. They have machinery and tools to cud and veld ship parts and before they will put those parts together in a ship, shipyard will be finished. I'm not sure which shipyard could start building them for Northern fleet.
Admin- Posts : 2926
Points : 3798
Join date : 2009-07-10
higurashihougi wrote:Now I wonder what France is going to do with the Mistral ? Sell it to... China ?
Probably Canada and a Scandinavian country if the discount is deep enough. They are in need of Arctic certified vessels.
KoTeMoRe- Posts : 4212
Points : 4227
Join date : 2015-04-22
Location : Krankhaus Central.
Vladimir79 wrote:higurashihougi wrote:Now I wonder what France is going to do with the Mistral ? Sell it to... China ?
Probably Canada and a Scandinavian country if the discount is deep enough. They are in need of Arctic certified vessels.
Well so far the rumour has it that the vessels cannot be ceded to a NATO-party if they want to re-sell them. So the only possibility is Sweden, with a billion Euro pricetag, which the Swedish MoD doesn't have, plus about half a billion for armament and refit. Ergo about 20 to 25% extension to the current budget.
GunshipDemocracy- Posts : 6165
Points : 6185
Join date : 2015-05-17
Location : fishin on Stalin´s Strait between Mexico and Canada
KoTeMoRe wrote:Vladimir79 wrote:higurashihougi wrote:Now I wonder what France is going to do with the Mistral ? Sell it to... China ?
Probably Canada and a Scandinavian country if the discount is deep enough. They are in need of Arctic certified vessels.
Well so far the rumour has it that the vessels cannot be ceded to a NATO-party if they want to re-sell them. So the only possibility is Sweden, with a billion Euro pricetag, which the Swedish MoD doesn't have, plus about half a billion for armament and refit. Ergo about 20 to 25% extension to the current budget.
So far they rely on active protection against Russian submariners
. But wtf - Sweden has access to arctic shelf?
sepheronx- Posts : 8823
Points : 9083
Join date : 2009-08-06
Age : 35
Location : Canada
Vladimir79 wrote:higurashihougi wrote:Now I wonder what France is going to do with the Mistral ? Sell it to... China ?
Probably Canada and a Scandinavian country if the discount is deep enough. They are in need of Arctic certified vessels.
We cant even afford it. We reduced federal taxes and our deficit increased. Add to that, we are planning a ridiculous amount of corvettes that are being built by an incapable shipyard that is now facing major issues and delays. Add to that, we are now making cutbacks to the military.
Ships that are important for arctic use, Submarines, are none existent in Canada. We got none. We bought 3 of them from England and 1 of them caught fire and is now out of commission. So we got 2 others that are sitting at a dock cause we don't even have torpedo's that fit the bloody thing.
Count Canada out.
kvs- Posts : 15840
Points : 15975
Join date : 2014-09-11
Location : Turdope's Kanada
sepheronx wrote:Vladimir79 wrote:higurashihougi wrote:Now I wonder what France is going to do with the Mistral ? Sell it to... China ?
Probably Canada and a Scandinavian country if the discount is deep enough. They are in need of Arctic certified vessels.
We cant even afford it. We reduced federal taxes and our deficit increased. Add to that, we are planning a ridiculous amount of corvettes that are being built by an incapable shipyard that is now facing major issues and delays. Add to that, we are now making cutbacks to the military.
Ships that are important for arctic use, Submarines, are none existent in Canada. We got none. We bought 3 of them from England and 1 of them caught fire and is now out of commission. So we got 2 others that are sitting at a dock cause we don't even have torpedo's that fit the bloody thing.
Count Canada out.
Yeah, what a joke. But our dear leader Harper is sure keen on treating environmental groups like terrorists.
sepheronx- Posts : 8823
Points : 9083
Join date : 2009-08-06
Age : 35
Location : Canada
kvs wrote:sepheronx wrote:Vladimir79 wrote:higurashihougi wrote:Now I wonder what France is going to do with the Mistral ? Sell it to... China ?
Probably Canada and a Scandinavian country if the discount is deep enough. They are in need of Arctic certified vessels.
We cant even afford it. We reduced federal taxes and our deficit increased. Add to that, we are planning a ridiculous amount of corvettes that are being built by an incapable shipyard that is now facing major issues and delays. Add to that, we are now making cutbacks to the military.
Ships that are important for arctic use, Submarines, are none existent in Canada. We got none. We bought 3 of them from England and 1 of them caught fire and is now out of commission. So we got 2 others that are sitting at a dock cause we don't even have torpedo's that fit the bloody thing.
Count Canada out.
Yeah, what a joke. But our dear leader Harper is sure keen on treating environmental groups like terrorists.
Harper has been and always will be a fool. Although, he is not at fault for the lack of jobs and poor business practices in Canada, he isn't helping. As well, it is his cabinet that has had so many cost overruns and then over spending. Now they make great cuts and what not.
Anything Canada promises they will do, take with a grain of sand. Unless it is whatever US peddles.
Tyloe- Posts : 32
Points : 29
Join date : 2015-02-24
What are the chances that they'll be scrapped instead? If they're too expensive to sell or preserve and they's no other demand, then they're left to be destroyed. Probably used as two dumb targets in an 'exercise' to make the best out of them. It would be a waste of fresh steel but it would symbolic to what happens when you have no independent policy on your own foreign relations and trade.
Rodinazombie- Posts : 575
Points : 601
Join date : 2015-04-22
Tyloe wrote:What are the chances that they'll be scrapped instead? If they're too expensive to sell or preserve and they's no other demand, then they're left to be destroyed. Probably used as two dumb targets in an 'exercise' to make the best out of them. It would be a waste of fresh steel but it would symbolic to what happens when you have no independent policy on your own foreign relations and trade.
I hope thats what happens to them - it will serve the french right for having no backbone and caving in under US pressure. Any self respecting nation with an independent foreign policy would have told them to butt out and mind their own business.
GarryB- Posts : 40489
Points : 40989
Join date : 2010-03-30
Location : New Zealand
This 11780 ship looks great, but I would change it a little. I would take off those heavy guns and just keep air defense weapons. I would also prolong the flight deck to the beginning of the ship and get additional take off and landing space. With more tick and quality flight deck, they could place a group ( 6 to 8 ) of VSTOL fighters Yak-141 on them for protection of the ship and for support of the marines.
I disagree... I think take off those 130mm twin guns and fit 152mm twin guns... 70km range guided shells with a 10m CEP would be excellent naval gun support weapons... I would not bother with the fixed wing aircraft... S-350, S-400 and S-500 based missiles would effectively make it a well protected vessel anyway, plus the Ka-52Ns with R-77 AAMs and AESA radars should make the vessel safe enough... while still keeping numbers of onboard Helos high.
Nothing ruins a helicopter carrier more than having lots of fixed wing aircraft on board.
The primary role is to support landed forces... fixed wing air support can come from a larger carrier... this helicopter carrier can provide serious landing capabilities from ships with lots of cargo to shore using lots of heavy transport helos, plus some attack helos to attack targets. the fixed wing carrier can provide air support in the form of MiG-29K2s and Su-33s upgraded, while CAS support can come from the Ka-52Ns. Ka-29s can deliver troops rapidly and bring back wounded soldiers, while Ka-27s can transfer weapons and ammo and food from the ships in the battle group and also take wounded back to the helicopter carrier.
Well so far the rumour has it that the vessels cannot be ceded to a NATO-party if they want to re-sell them. So the only possibility is Sweden, with a billion Euro pricetag, which the Swedish MoD doesn't have, plus about half a billion for armament and refit. Ergo about 20 to 25% extension to the current budget.
Australia might buy them... NZ certainly can't afford them...
The Russians don't currently have any vessels optimised for humanitarian interventions... (I mean real ones... not contrived ones like the west create...)
From disaster relief in case of a natural or man made disaster, to just visiting the Pacific Islands offering medical assistance to some of the poorest nations on the planet... nations that have votes in the UN...
KoTeMoRe- Posts : 4212
Points : 4227
Join date : 2015-04-22
Location : Krankhaus Central.
Tyloe wrote:What are the chances that they'll be scrapped instead? If they're too expensive to sell or preserve and they's no other demand, then they're left to be destroyed. Probably used as two dumb targets in an 'exercise' to make the best out of them. It would be a waste of fresh steel but it would symbolic to what happens when you have no independent policy on your own foreign relations and trade.
There is a demand, it's only that the demand isn't welcomed by the two parties at hand. Russia doesn't want the vessel to land in a Nato-party (and I assume Australia would be NO-GO over its Ukraine stance), France (and NATO) doesn't want to cede the two to countries "like Russia" (IE China). There isn't much demand for the BPC's, because they're fraught with Russian approval and an horrendous price tag (as said count about 1.5 bln) to recoup the losses (if they have to payback the 1.2 bln Eur to Russia). If penalties are applied, there might be even a more important sum to spill.
On every aspect this is going, towards either a later delivery to Russia or very problematic resale to a third party wich would probably still integrate it to the NATO system. Sweden, if the price is right might acquire them, budget be damned. NZ/AUS fall both into a NO GO area for China (complicating the approval for Russia), Taiwan equally.
collegeboy16- Posts : 1135
Points : 1134
Join date : 2012-10-05
Age : 28
Location : Roanapur
contrived and created, isnt it the same thing?GarryB wrote:
Australia might buy them... NZ certainly can't afford them...
The Russians don't currently have any vessels optimised for humanitarian interventions... (I mean real ones... not contrived ones like the west create...)
From disaster relief in case of a natural or man made disaster, to just visiting the Pacific Islands offering medical assistance to some of the poorest nations on the planet... nations that have votes in the UN...
Tyloe- Posts : 32
Points : 29
Join date : 2015-02-24
Australia has no interest in Mistrals since they've already in a deal for two Spanish LHDs.
KoTeMoRe- Posts : 4212
Points : 4227
Join date : 2015-04-22
Location : Krankhaus Central.
Tyloe wrote:Australia has no interest in Mistrals since they've already in a deal for two Spanish LHDs.
Totally forgot about the Juan Carlos BPE.
Admin- Posts : 2926
Points : 3798
Join date : 2009-07-10
KoTeMoRe wrote:Vladimir79 wrote:higurashihougi wrote:Now I wonder what France is going to do with the Mistral ? Sell it to... China ?
Probably Canada and a Scandinavian country if the discount is deep enough. They are in need of Arctic certified vessels.
Well so far the rumour has it that the vessels cannot be ceded to a NATO-party if they want to re-sell them. So the only possibility is Sweden, with a billion Euro pricetag, which the Swedish MoD doesn't have, plus about half a billion for armament and refit. Ergo about 20 to 25% extension to the current budget.
Once the money is returned, the contract is nullified leaving DCNS free to do whatever they want with them.
mutantsushi- Posts : 283
Points : 305
Join date : 2013-12-12
Even the French say because Russia constructed one block of the ship, and issues the certificate for that portion,
that they cannot sell the whole ship off without Russia's approval... In their negotiations they seek to ensure
that Russia will approve transfering that certificate, but of course, the decision on that is still in Russia's court.
that they cannot sell the whole ship off without Russia's approval... In their negotiations they seek to ensure
that Russia will approve transfering that certificate, but of course, the decision on that is still in Russia's court.