Russian Navy: Status & News #2

PapaDragon wrote:
2 questions from naval-noob:

1) Heard Russian company is working on gas turbines. How is that thing going? When should product be ready?

2) Kerch shipyard in Crimea. It is supposed to be large enough to handle helicopter carrier with room to spare and they are said to be installing new heavy load crane in dry dock. Is this info accurate?  

1) The video was pretty good on the predictions for this. The officials say 2017 is when we'll start getting new turbines, I'd bank on at least a year delay. We shouldn't expect frigate construction to resume before late 2018-2019.

2) It's big but there are 2 major issues:
-No experience with military contracts. They just laid down a new search/rescue vessel for the navy and they'll need to be eased into more serious contracts as for the last two decades they've been surviving on tankers.
-Modernization & skills. The shipyard is getting upgraded and that'll take a while, furthermore the entire industry is still suffering shortages of talent, so there's not many spare experts that can be sent there to get things going.

Overall, it may be a good candidate for building those types of vessels, but no earlier than 2019-2020ish if I had to guess.


Also, that video really isn't too bad. They're pretty spot on with their analysis of the future direction and some of the major issues the navy has. Carriers are a pipe-dream and that's just a hard truth. Biggest point disagreed with was their view of our SSBN's.

Maximmmm wrote:..................................

Also, that video really isn't too bad. They're pretty spot on with their analysis of the future direction and some of the major issues the navy has. Carriers are a pipe-dream and that's just a hard truth. Biggest point disagreed with was their view of our SSBN's.

Not arguing with data and I really don't think that Russian Navy even needs carrier class larger than Kuznetsov (modern version of course).

My beef was with overall tone of participants.

I assume 18th century colonial officers used the same tone when describing native population in Africa.

And of course USSR=Russian Federation as usual.

[quote="PapaDragon"]

Maximmmm wrote:
Not arguing with data and I really don't think that Russian Navy even needs carrier class larger than Kuznetsov (modern version of course).

My beef was with overall tone of participants.

I assume 18th century colonial officers used the same tone when describing native population in Africa.

And of course USSR=Russian Federation as usual.    

Ah gotcha, well I'm pretty used to the tone after so many years abroad
I was pleasantly surprised not to hear the usual "Russia can't do a damn thing right" routine that most "Experts" always spout. Wasn't impressed that the guy didn't know much about coast-guard ship construction since that has been one of the few really really good moments of our shipbuilding industry. Doesn't get covered enough.

Maximmmm wrote:

PapaDragon wrote:
2 questions from naval-noob:

1) Heard Russian company is working on gas turbines. How is that thing going? When should product be ready?

2) Kerch shipyard in Crimea. It is supposed to be large enough to handle helicopter carrier with room to spare and they are said to be installing new heavy load crane in dry dock. Is this info accurate?  

1) The video was pretty good on the predictions for this. The officials say 2017 is when we'll start getting new turbines, I'd bank on at least a year delay. We shouldn't expect frigate construction to resume before late 2018-2019.

2) It's big but there are 2 major issues:
-No experience with military contracts. They just laid down a new search/rescue vessel for the navy and they'll need to be eased into more serious contracts as for the last two decades they've been surviving on tankers.
-Modernization & skills. The shipyard is getting upgraded and that'll take a while, furthermore the entire industry is still suffering shortages of talent, so there's not many spare experts that can be sent there to get things going.

Overall, it may be a good candidate for building those types of vessels, but no earlier than 2019-2020ish if I had to guess.


Also, that video really isn't too bad. They're pretty spot on with their analysis of the future direction and some of the major issues the navy has. Carriers are a pipe-dream and that's just a hard truth. Biggest point disagreed with was their view of our SSBN's.

They are assholes and anyone who agrees with them, simple as that.

As well, the gas turbines are undergoing tests NOW, so 2017 is when tests should be done and production can start.

Maximmmm wrote:

PapaDragon wrote:

Maximmmm wrote:
Not arguing with data and I really don't think that Russian Navy even needs carrier class larger than Kuznetsov (modern version of course).

My beef was with overall tone of participants.

I assume 18th century colonial officers used the same tone when describing native population in Africa.

And of course USSR=Russian Federation as usual.    

Ah gotcha, well I'm pretty used to the tone after so many years abroad
I was pleasantly surprised not to hear the usual "Russia can't do a damn thing right" routine that most "Experts" always spout. Wasn't impressed that the guy didn't know much about coast-guard ship construction since that has been one of the few really really good moments of our shipbuilding industry. Doesn't get covered enough.

Or construction of Talwar ships, or Gepard, or etc etc etc.

Yeah, they skim over a lot of details and live in their paranoid fantasy land.

sepheronx wrote:

Or construction of Talwar ships, or Gepard, or etc etc etc.

Yeah, they skim over a lot of details and live in their paranoid fantasy land.

They mentioned the Talwars when talking about why we built the Grigorovitches. Gepards they forgot, but since our navy only bought 2 and the rest are meant for Vietnam they're not an important factor. Overall though the Gepards did fit into the comments about small ships packing a big punch.

Fundamentally the video was right about the shipbuilding strategy (small ships--> bigger ships), operating priorities (Mediterranean) and strategic place in the defence plans (cooperate with rest of armed forces, nuclear deterrent on the subs, coastal defence).

Maximmmm wrote:

PapaDragon wrote:

Maximmmm wrote:
Not arguing with data and I really don't think that Russian Navy even needs carrier class larger than Kuznetsov (modern version of course).

My beef was with overall tone of participants.

I assume 18th century colonial officers used the same tone when describing native population in Africa.

And of course USSR=Russian Federation as usual.    

Ah gotcha, well I'm pretty used to the tone after so many years abroad
I was pleasantly surprised not to hear the usual "Russia can't do a damn thing right" routine that most "Experts" always spout. Wasn't impressed that the guy didn't know much about coast-guard ship construction since that has been one of the few really really good moments of our shipbuilding industry. Doesn't get covered enough.

Agreed. Those big Russian Coast Guard ships are IMO the prettiest ships that sail today.

Does anyone have pic with size comparison of all RU Navy ship classes currently in service?

I looked but could not find anything...

Hell yeah! Looks like the first ever soviet nuclear sub will be made into a museum. The shipyard just got the money to do some minor work so they can float the sub and keep it afloat until a museum project is developed. bmpd.livejournal.com/1408898.html

Edit:
Also some news.
The first BSF buyan-M has arrived in Novorossiysk for trials (Zeleniy Dol).
Rastorropniy is being prepped for scrapping.

Austin wrote:Russia’s Naval Power in the 21st Century

https://russiamil.wordpress.com/2015/07/27/russias-naval-power-in-the-21st-century/

I wasted an hour and a half of my time watching that video

TheArmenian wrote:

Austin wrote:Russia’s Naval Power in the 21st Century

https://russiamil.wordpress.com/2015/07/27/russias-naval-power-in-the-21st-century/

I wasted an hour and a half of my time watching that video

I lasted 20 minutes.

franco wrote:

TheArmenian wrote:

Austin wrote:Russia’s Naval Power in the 21st Century

https://russiamil.wordpress.com/2015/07/27/russias-naval-power-in-the-21st-century/

I wasted an hour and a half of my time watching that video

I lasted 20 minutes.

I watched the hole thing,they had some god points but overall i wouldn't call them experts on Russia or Russia navy.....i could have sad much more without reading from paper and i don't consider my self expert or anything simillar

Still they were at least watchablle compared to some western comentators and "experts"

nobunaga wrote:
I watched the hole thing,they had some god points but overall i wouldn't call them experts on Russia or Russia navy.....i could have sad much more without reading from paper and i don't consider my self expert or anything simillar

Still they were at least watchablle compared to some western comentators and "experts"

They're experts in context. Usually the level of debate in those "think tanks" is pathetically low or amazingly biased. For a western view that was pretty good. We're all on dedicated forum so we know more, but as a primer for some english-speaker it does the trick.


Also in the news:
Kilo-class vladikavkaz is ready to undergo sea trials after 7 years in overhaul.

Maximmmm wrote:

nobunaga wrote:
I watched the hole thing,they had some god points but overall i wouldn't call them experts on Russia or Russia navy.....i could have sad much more without reading from paper and i don't consider my self expert or anything simillar

Still they were at least watchablle compared to some western comentators and "experts"

They're experts in context. Usually the level of debate in those "think tanks" is pathetically low or amazingly biased. For a western view that was pretty good. We're all on dedicated forum so we know more, but as a primer for some english-speaker it does the trick.


Also in the news:
Kilo-class vladikavkaz is ready to undergo sea trials after 7 years in overhaul.

Dmitry Gorenburg is one of the foremost academic Western experts on Russia and the FSU. That in context can be scary. I believe in this case he was playing to the sentiments of this crowd.

franco wrote:

Dmitry Gorenburg is one of the foremost academic Western experts on Russia and the FSU. That in context can be scary. I believe in this case he was playing to the sentiments of this crowd.

Yeah, agreed.

We don't really have a similar "expert" culture, so I assume the guys who know the most are all under wraps working in a nondescript building somewhere.

Maximmmm wrote:

franco wrote:

Dmitry Gorenburg is one of the foremost academic Western experts on Russia and the FSU. That in context can be scary. I believe in this case he was playing to the sentiments of this crowd.

Yeah, agreed.

We don't really have a similar "expert" culture, so I assume the guys who know the most are all under wraps working in a nondescript building somewhere.

Fact that they all think that the scale models of future aircraft carrier and nuclear destroyer that were shown on Navy Expo a while back are real projects is hilarious in itself. Even 8 graders know that real things will not even resemble those scale models...

franco wrote:Dmitry Gorenburg is one of the foremost academic Western experts on Russia and the FSU. That in context can be scary. I believe in this case he was playing to the sentiments of this crowd.

Dmitry Gorenburg is a decent fellow, but I would hesitate calling him a "foremost academic" or an "expert" on military affairs. He is a pretty general Russian affairs analyst with some defense/security bend.

I think he is generally ok as a likbez source, but I wouldn't call him a subject matter expert. I've read a couple of his papers and listened to some of his podcasts with Cmdr Salamander at US Naval Institute and I found him to be pretty shallow in his explanations. Good top-side analysis, but not a lot of depth or insight, compared to the real military academics that would write for publications like the Proceedings or Military Thought. Stuff he says is pretty obvious to anyone who is familiar with the Russian military.

Still, I echo Maximmmm's statement that as a primer for complete noobs it was pretty decent.

Maximmmm wrote:Yeah, agreed.

We don't really have a similar "expert" culture, so I assume the guys who know the most are all under wraps working in a nondescript building somewhere.

That's because most of the analysis that people have readily available is essentially blogs written by "military enthusiasts" not much more knowledgeable than what you can read here on this forum.

Real military academics from Western sources are head and shoulders above these bloggers. I've read some very impressive and serious research by active members of the US military. Analysis by people who, for example, wrote doctorate dissertations on the Russian Navy, not those who skimmed through Wikipedia and pretend they are qualified to give an opinion.

artjomh wrote:

Maximmmm wrote:Yeah, agreed.

We don't really have a similar "expert" culture, so I assume the guys who know the most are all under wraps working in a nondescript building somewhere.

That's because most of the analysis that people have readily available is essentially blogs written by "military enthusiasts" not much more knowledgeable than what you can read here on this forum.

Real military academics from Western sources are head and shoulders above these bloggers. I've read some very impressive and serious research by active members of the US military. Analysis by people who, for example, wrote doctorate dissertations on the Russian Navy, not those who skimmed through Wikipedia and pretend they are qualified to give an opinion.

Of course of course, it would be really sad if that's the best they had. I'm sure the Pentagon's got some great analysts. What I meant is that compared to the US we don't really have a million think-tanks where people endlessly publish thinly-veiled political agendas, so when people hear stuff from "The Woodrow Wilson Centre" they have expectations that are too high.

Maximmmm wrote:

artjomh wrote:

Maximmmm wrote:Yeah, agreed.

We don't really have a similar "expert" culture, so I assume the guys who know the most are all under wraps working in a nondescript building somewhere.

That's because most of the analysis that people have readily available is essentially blogs written by "military enthusiasts" not much more knowledgeable than what you can read here on this forum.

Real military academics from Western sources are head and shoulders above these bloggers. I've read some very impressive and serious research by active members of the US military. Analysis by people who, for example, wrote doctorate dissertations on the Russian Navy, not those who skimmed through Wikipedia and pretend they are qualified to give an opinion.

Of course of course, it would be really sad if that's the best they had. I'm sure the Pentagon's got some great analysts. What I meant is that compared to the US we don't really have a million think-tanks where people endlessly publish thinly-veiled political agendas, so when people hear stuff from "The Woodrow Wilson Centre" they have expectations that are too high.

If your country has no agendas for world domination there is a very hard job to justify thousands over thousands of think tanks and research centres to evaluade each possible way to hurt anyone that could even remotley rival your country in political, military or economical way.

Werewolf wrote:If your country has no agendas for world domination there is a very hard job to justify thousands over thousands of think tanks and research centres to evaluade each possible way to hurt anyone that could even remotley rival your country in political, military or economical way.

Let me break it to you: Russia also has thousands upon thousands of think tanks on all sorts of issues with their own agendas and goals. Both public and private, competent and amateurish, old and new, academic and just-a-paid-tv-talking-head-type.

Real military academics from Western sources are head and shoulders above these bloggers.

I don't doubt that to be true, but such people also tend to have a strong western bias, and also for those actually in the US navy a preference for the way it is done in the US Navy without much critical thinking about why another way might be better... not just for another navy with less money and resources, but even for the US Navy itself.

artjomh wrote:

Werewolf wrote:If your country has no agendas for world domination there is a very hard job to justify thousands over thousands of think tanks and research centres to evaluade each possible way to hurt anyone that could even remotley rival your country in political, military or economical way.

Let me break it to you: Russia also has thousands upon thousands of think tanks on all sorts of issues with their own agendas and goals. Both public and private, competent and amateurish, old and new, academic and just-a-paid-tv-talking-head-type.

If amateurish or Paid TV talking heads are "Think Tanks" then DFI, F-16 and mp.nut (themess) are full off "Think Tanks".

Think-Tanks are people like Brezinksy and alike not some bloggers,forumers and other non important people that do not transport their little thinking into actual ballistics.

The word Think Tank already tells you its purpose and not just a mere brainstorm like Forumers. Think Tanks are paid to bring their proposed political moves to the real world.

Russia hasn't nowhere near nor for the same purpose Think Tanks, they have them for economy, counter western influence, propaganda and their drive for WW3. Those are all legitimate and very good reasons for Think Tanks, not for global domination and enslavement of all.

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

Total confirmation that the found sub was the SOM
http://flot.com/2015/%D0%A8%D0%B2%D0%B5%D1%86%D0%B8%D1%8F%D0%9F%D0%BE%D0%B4%D0%BB%D0%BE%D0%B4%D0%BA%D0%B010/

Divers went down to the old girl, got some great footage.