Russian Navy: Status & News #2

Vann7 wrote:

Flyingdutchman wrote: There are almost no us naval ships right there.

Does this make sense to any of you?

I understand what you say.. That because US is not properly defending that zone ,that Russia can penetrate it.   
That still does not change the fact that US Gov is not prepared to defend against a Russia in case of war if attacked
from the south. Any Russian attack from the Gulf of mexico with a cruise missile can reach the white house and
they will not see it until it explode.   

Vulnerable points of USA are attacks from the south  from the gulf of mexico or attacks from the artic that are more harder to detect by satellites at least this is what Russia have said. Vulnerable places against Russia i think are from the far east that they do not have many defenses there.. Still they will have plenty of time to counter attacks from the east because of its Huge Territory.. RUssia have near 4 times the size of US main land.

Take a look at Russia Sams defenses coverage.
s-300s and S-400s Looks like a real nightmare for NATO to fly over there?   



but in that map is not included the passive defenses that Russia have of BUKs -TORS and Pansirs.. those will not be seen by NATO until they have a missile on their tail. And if fly too close of a pantsir will not see anything at all ,until they hit.

Compare that with Libya what NATO had to face.. 4 lonely S-200 that where easily overwhelmed
with 100+ tomahawks missiles. their core defenses where short range S-75 that are next to useless against cruise missiles.




NATO is not really prepared to a conventional war with Russia. They will not have ever Air superiority in an invasion and without their airforces they are all doomed . Their Tanks will not survive A kornet-D attack or Russian precision lazer artillery and the Iskanders will rain over their heads with 7 meters precision and 750kg warhead . thats going to hurt. In georgia Russia said they destroyed 28 georgian tanks in 1-2 hits. 

Austin wrote:Admiral: the incident with the submarine reveals the increasing surveillance
http://ria.ru/defense_safety/20140809/1019418352.html

You mean the Russians got this unique opportunity to force a Virginia class sub to actually surface and capture a Kodak moment but instead simply allowed it to go , with a warning ?

Yes, but the US Navy isn't patrolling in the Mexican Gulf!!
And the Russian Navy is patrolling alot in the area where the US sub was detected.
There are almost no us naval ships right there.

But please give me some links where i can read that the US Navy is actively patrolling the gulf of Mexico, because as far i know they don't.

Comment on the incident Vzglyad asked the President of the St. Petersburg Submariners' Club of Captain Igor Kurdina.

Igor K., whether in relation to the situation say that there was something unusual?

Igor Kurdin: We were times when such cases are not reported at all. Now it is reported, and our media, and foreign - that they find our submarines. Nothing surprising for me in this. Perhaps it has some value in the current political situation, when we want to emphasize that foreign submarines - I do not want to say "enemy" - constantly carry out intelligence activities in the Barents Sea and in the Arctic, and they did not ever stopped. Just like our submarines perform their tasks in the Atlantic, in the Mediterranean, in the same Arctic regions.

This is the normal state of any fleet.

Governed by whether the actions in such cases?

IK .: Certainly, there are guidelines that clearly define the action of our fleet. Firstly, the detection of any submarine, regardless of the area - whether it is in coastal or ocean waters - the one who discovered it, must report it and make contact, establish tracking of the submarine.

In this case, the American boat was discovered in the Barents Sea. It had imposed anti-forces: Air Force - anti-IL-38 - and search and attack group of surface ships. They managed to carry out pursuit for 27 minutes. This is long enough so that if there would be a certain situation, to apply for this boat weapons.

How would you rate the Russian forces?

IK .: 27 minutes - it's a nice touch. And that was handed over to the contact antisubmarine aircraft and naval search and strike group, indicates good training of our anti-submarine forces.

And the commander of American submarine had no choice but to leave the area?

IK .: Command performed a maneuver called a "separation from tracking." And in this case, it is logical to assume that he left the area. As I understand it, he did it.

As far as I know, violations of territorial waters in this case was not. The boat followed, no it will not supplanted. I was the commander of the submarine also say - if I find the probable enemy antisubmarine forces, my main task - to break away from their pursuit. In this case, everything worked professionally. This is common practice. The media can often see the message that our plane allegedly trespassed or something else. I can tell you that according to our governing documents we are forbidden to approach closer than 30 miles to the boundary of the territorial waters of a foreign state. I am seven years old boat commanded and for his service commander never know such a case that one of our commanders is violated. There were once isolated cases of trespassing, but it was unintentional, due to errors of navigation. Unfortunately, this was the case with us, and the American submariners. The sea all happens.

In the media there were suggestions that an American submarine was trying to track down the latest Russian submarine project "Ash". How, in your opinion, it probably is?

IK .: And in Soviet times, and in our time, the British and American nuclear submarines are always in the Barents Sea. Their task - to identify submarines, especially strategic and identify their routes deployment.

I remind you, tomorrow the 14th anniversary of the death of the nuclear submarine "Kursk". So at that point in the Barents Sea were three nuclear submarines: American "Memphis" and "Toledo" and the English "Splendid". They performed the task of tracking. Especially spends most of the Northern Fleet maneuvers, and therefore their task - to keep track of everything that's going on, and, of course, submarines.

If now in the Barents Sea was "Ash", then, of course, their task - to keep track of it, to him seeing as much as possible to install and remove tracking sonar performance. Each boat noise in their own way, each has its own sonar portrait. And write such a portrait would be a great success for our probable opponents in the past, and now probable friends. They found "Ash", whether there "Ash" - do not think that someone may say. This information, of course, closed.

Submarine type "Virginia" - the new ships in the United States Navy, and yet she could not go unnoticed ...

IK .: Yes, it is one of the new boats are well equipped with good weapons. It is strong and dangerous opponent. But our boat is not worse.

Technology "Stealth" in submarines yet, and no matter how low noise she was, all the same it can be found. Boats are improved in terms of noise, but also improved and the system of detection.

Were there earlier detections boats of this class?

IK .: I can not say, but it is one of the first cases of which we know from the press.

What useful information could get Russian sailors, carrying pursuit of the American boat?

IK .: If the Americans are trying to remove an acoustic portrait of our boat, and we will do the same. And this acoustic portrait then easily classified. If I know what the enemy in front of me, you know, and how to deal with it. Different boats - different tactics.

How would you describe the composition of forces and funds raised for the tracking of the boat? Are there too many?

IK .: This is a standard set of tools. I can imagine that this boat has found one of our submarines. Then, as a rule, caused by anti-submarine aircraft, IL-38, and then goes on duty naval anti-submarine group of usually three ships. Now, if there were two aircraft and six ships, it would be unusual.

Worked on duty anti-money and their task they coped.

Flyingdutchman wrote:

http://www.defensenews.com/article/20140819/DEFREG01/308190021/Russian-Defense-Minister-Vows-Strengthen-Navy

Defence Minister Sergei Shoigu told a general security meeting that he expected to hear a detailed report from Russia’s navy commander about how this could be achieved efficiently over the coming six years.
“These proposals must ensure that our forces are reequipped with modern weapons and military equipment,” Russian news agencies quoted Shoigu as saying.
The new strategy “must also improve the operational readiness of Russian naval forces in locations posing the greatest strategic threat,” said Shoigu.
“I will not hide that this in large part is linked to events of recent months,” he said in reference to the pro-Russian insurgency convulsing eastern Ukraine.

NATO and the United States have both stepped up air defenses of former Soviet satellites that are growing increasingly wary of Russia’s military ambitions and see President Vladimir Putin as a fast-emerging threat.
US President Barack Obama unveiled a $1 billion security plan for eastern Europe during a June visit to Poland that is aimed at helping countries on Russia’s western periphery build more modern armies.

And outgoing NATO chief Anders Fogh Rasmussen expressed concern last week that Putin’s ambitions went “beyond Ukraine” and now covered a Russian-speaking region of ex-Soviet Moldova and two separatist parts of the small Caucasus nation of Georgia — both now closely allied with the European Union.

France has irritated the United States by pushing through plans to deliver two Mistral-class helicopter carriers that Russia wants to station in Ukraine’s seized Crimea peninsula and near a string of disputed islands claimed by Japan.

'Major Problems With Readiness'
Russia has only one functioning aircraft carrier that was first commissioned in the Soviet era and has been lacking the money and know-how to develop a more modern class.

The 10 active carriers available to the United States have posed one of the biggest obstacles to Putin’s hopes of countering Washington’s global domination with a new alliance between the Kremlin and nations such as China.

Putin promised ahead of his 2012 third-term election to nearly double Russia’s military spending over the coming decade to 23 trillion rubles ($635 billion, €475 billion).
But Russia’s current economic downturn has seriously threatened those plans.

The defense ministry’s attempts in the past two years to procure new weapons from its huge network of defense production facilities were hampered by the discovery that plants simply lacked the technology to churn out modern weapons in any significant quantity.

The Defence Academy of the United Kingdom notes that Russia’s “industrial base... remains a significant area of concern”.
“The Russian navy continues to have major problems with readiness and the quality of both personnel and equipment.”

Shoigu said that Russia’s recent attempts to improve procurement by awarding contracts to outside companies had also failed to live up to expectations.
“Outsourcing did not become the universal method of ensuring the Russian army’s needs,” Shoigu told the security meeting.
“We therefore must reform the existing system of providing for the armed forces.”

PLA's new destroyer could bring down F-35 stealth fighter



The US fifth-generation F-35 stealth fighter can be detected by the radar system installed aboard the People's Liberation Army Navy's new Type 052D destroyers, according to the Moscow-based Voice of Russia, citing military experts.

Vladimir Evseev, director of the Moscow-based Center for Social and Political Studies, told the Russian broadcaster that details of China's radar project, including the amount spent on its development, remain unknown, however it is a great leap forward in regards to the nation's military modernization program.

China has encountered a lot of obstacles in its attempts to develop its own radar system, but it has managed to overcome these issues with Russian help, Voice of Russia said, citing Konstantin Sivkov, director of the Russian Academy for Geopolitical Issues.

Sivkov said that the most crucial part of China's success is that the PLA Navy finally knows how to handle active electronically scanned array radar systems. With this technology, Chinese destroyers are able to track and shoot down F-35 fighters from a distance of 350 kilometers.

Meanwhile, Pavel Zolotaryov, deputy head of Institute for USA and Canada Studies of the Russian Academy of Sciences, said that the Chinese warship not only has the ability to locate the US stealth fighter but can also deploy countermeasures against the fighter's electronic interference capability.

The new system will gradually increase the combat capability of the PLA Navy in Western Pacific region, Voice of Russia said.


http://www.wantchinatimes.com/news-subclass-cnt.aspx?cid=1101&MainCatID=11&id=20140509000110

AlfaT8 wrote:

Flyingdutchman wrote:

http://www.defensenews.com/article/20140819/DEFREG01/308190021/Russian-Defense-Minister-Vows-Strengthen-Navy

Ooh god, where do i even begin, well first of Dutchman kunt u niet een betere bron vinden?

Defence Minister Sergei Shoigu told a general security meeting that he expected to hear a detailed report from Russia’s navy commander about how this could be achieved efficiently over the coming six years.
“These proposals must ensure that our forces are reequipped with modern weapons and military equipment,” Russian news agencies quoted Shoigu as saying.
The new strategy “must also improve the operational readiness of Russian naval forces in locations posing the greatest strategic threat,” said Shoigu.
“I will not hide that this in large part is linked to events of recent months,” he said in reference to the pro-Russian insurgency convulsing eastern Ukraine.

From dictionary:
convulse:  1.to shake violently; agitate.
               2.to cause to shake violently with laughter, anger, pain, etc.
               3.to cause to suffer violently, spasmodic contractions of the muscles.

Hmm.... I don't think the Pro-Russians are the ones causing that, definitely the Kiev forces.   

NATO and the United States have both stepped up air defenses of former Soviet satellites that are growing increasingly wary of Russia’s military ambitions and see President Vladimir Putin as a fast-emerging threat.
US President Barack Obama unveiled a $1 billion security plan for eastern Europe during a June visit to Poland that is aimed at helping countries on Russia’s western periphery build more modern armies.

Desperately trying to get justification for their missile shields being placed in E.Europe, but end up admitting that its against Russia not those so called "Rogue States".

NATO is the one building up military forces along Russia's borders, the threat isn't Russia, IT'S NATO and there "military ambitions"

And outgoing NATO chief Anders Fogh Rasmussen expressed concern last week that Putin’s ambitions went “beyond Ukraine” and now covered a Russian-speaking region of ex-Soviet Moldova and two separatist parts of the small Caucasus nation of Georgia — both now closely allied with the European Union.

“Beyond Ukraine” wow Rasmussen truly is a true to god idiot, seriously, what the hell is there in Europe that would make Russia want to invade??   

When the hell did Transnistria, Abkhazia and S.Ossetia become EU allies, the author must be an idiot.

France has irritated the United States by pushing through plans to deliver two Mistral-class helicopter carriers that Russia wants to station in Ukraine’s seized Crimea peninsula and near a string of disputed islands claimed by Japan.

France is trying to for fill it's contractual obligations, if only Russia had done the same with respects to Iran and Syria.
Deploying big ships to troubled spots is what anyone would do.

'Major Problems With Readiness'
Russia has only one functioning aircraft carrier that was first commissioned in the Soviet era and has been lacking the money and know-how to develop a more modern class.

The Kuznetsov may be from the Soviet era, but it's much more capable then any of it's western counterparts since it can actually defend itself instead of relying solely on it's aircrafts for defense.
And lack of developing modern class carriers isn't because of the lack of "money and know-how", but because of money and shipyards (that were in Ukraine) this fool didn't even try to research the basic facts.

The 10 active carriers available to the United States have posed one of the biggest obstacles to Putin’s hopes of countering Washington’s global domination with a new alliance between the Kremlin and nations such as China.

I'm not even sure how to respond to this one, so i am just gonna say it's pure F'ing BS.

Putin promised ahead of his 2012 third-term election to nearly double Russia’s military spending over the coming decade to 23 trillion rubles ($635 billion, €475 billion).
But Russia’s current economic downturn has seriously threatened those plans.

sepheronx, this ones all yours.

The defense ministry’s attempts in the past two years to procure new weapons from its huge network of defense production facilities were hampered by the discovery that plants simply lacked the technology to churn out modern weapons in any significant quantity.

Anyone else wanna take this, GarryB, Mindstorm, Mike E, magnum??

The Defence Academy of the United Kingdom notes that Russia’s “industrial base... remains a significant area of concern”.
“The Russian navy continues to have major problems with readiness and the quality of both personnel and equipment.”

Is this an oxymoron, first they say that there a "significant concern" and then mentions "major problems" with "personnel and equipment"??
P.S: Russia doesn't doesn't have a lack of "quality personnel" they have a lack of equipment, typical western stereotype of the inferior Russian.

Shoigu said that Russia’s recent attempts to improve procurement by awarding contracts to outside companies had also failed to live up to expectations.
“Outsourcing did not become the universal method of ensuring the Russian army’s needs,” Shoigu told the security meeting.
“We therefore must reform the existing system of providing for the armed forces.”

Ok, the "outsourcing failure" failed because they found out the outsourced equipment were practically all inferior to there Russian counterparts, the claim by the west of "high quality" was/is pure BS.
----------
I wish AGENCE FRANCE-PRESSE would put the names of the authors on there articles, so i'd know exactly who this idiot is.

Being serious, it is said to be a S-band AESA system. - So it should "see" the "F-35" and other stealth aircraft just fine. Whether it was developed with Russia I don't know..

The defense ministry’s attempts in the past two years to procure new weapons from its huge network of defense production facilities were hampered by the discovery that plants simply lacked the technology to churn out modern weapons in any significant quantity.

Flyingdutchman wrote:
I thought it was news so i posted it, didn't know you would be mad.

Sorry hoor.

AlfaT8 wrote:

Flyingdutchman wrote:
I thought it was news so i posted it, didn't know you would be mad.

Sorry hoor.

Nee jongen, it's not you i'm angry at, it's this article, it's author and the sites that host this article, and have the gall to actually call it "news".

GarryB wrote:

Being serious, it is said to be a S-band AESA system. - So it should "see" the "F-35" and other stealth aircraft just fine. Whether it was developed with Russia I don't know..

While the US has the most experience with AESA radars the Russians are enormously far behind and likely have more experience with AESA radars that don't operate in the X or Ku bands... ie long wave radar arrays.

China likely chose that frequency band for very specific reasons... likely one of which was anti stealth capabilities and I have no reason to doubt the article... they required some assistance from Russia to get it to work effectively... no doubt they paid for the assistance... so all good.

The defense ministry’s attempts in the past two years to procure new weapons from its huge network of defense production facilities were hampered by the discovery that plants simply lacked the technology to churn out modern weapons in any significant quantity.

Hahaha.. actually if you paid attention to the plan... expected production is really only supposed to gather pace and become significant about 2015 onwards... up until then little things like C4IR stuff, and things like getting GLONASS operational and functioning so that everything can benefit from its service... as you can see UAVs are now being embraced and are being put into service and used during exercises... by the forces involved in the exercises but also by the orgs monitoring the exercises so things can be assessed and examined and learned from too.

Any shortcomings with regard to factory production capacity has been dealt with and is being dealt with and the next few years of production will iron out any kinks and problems and result in modern tooled up factories with well trained and skilled staff, and mass production for domestic and export...