Russian Navy: Status & News #4

Russia knew that it was coming when they ordered the 2 Caspian Flotilla + 2 more BSF ships to the E. Med. Sea. The PLAN could also benefit by participating in a real world ops. But they may not arrive there in time.

GunshipDemocracy wrote:ok Graham second brain damaged after McCain       This military sounds reasonable here.

Incredibly I was feeling compassion for a guy like Carter

It is a ship packing huge amount of cheap missile for its size supposed to go with bigger ship to launch massive attack in closed zones like black sea.

Where would it be operating where it is beyond range of land based air support?

America thinks Phalanx is fine for shooting down subsonic anti ship missiles... a 20mm cannon firing at half the rate of either of the two Russian 30mm cannons with a much lighter projectile than the Soviet guns... plus there is a 76mm gun on the front with presumably airburst ammo able to hit flying targets too.

It is basically a light patrol boat that can also be used for coastal defence using some anti ship missiles... if an enemy force approaches it will likely fire its anti ship missiles and then withdraw... it should be able to pretty much take on anything in the Caspian sea...

unless drone like Riper/Predator hovers on 5kms with couple of Hellfire missiles. Surely small ships alwasy have cover unless they dont.

Till the airburst 76.2mm shell shatters it... it would be better trying from 12km... but then Hellfires don't reach that far do they?

really nothing? what tghis dude was smokin? I need same stuff for the weekend

Yes, of course... the Russian Navy have never even comprehended the idea of a threat from low flying subsonic missiles threatening their ships and would be powerless to do anything about it... change the target from a land coordinate to a ship at sea and they become anti ship missiles which would be decimated by the Russian fleet that practises against such threats all the time... but set the target with land coordinates and they are in trouble...

The reason I didn't quote that is because he's only partially right.
Some targets may be hit, & the VMF will play a supporting role in operations in Idlib. It's the last rebel held enclave where many on both sides will be taken out of the gene pool soon.

Are you kidding?

A US strike on Syria wont be to help the forces in Idlib... they are already screwed... a US led cruise missile attack on Syria will focus on trying to take down the air defence forces of Syria... followed by waves of missiles to try to kill assad and his government structure...

first of all it's for deterrence. If Russian ship get hit will be response to carrier. So guess why Popmeo asked Lavrov for meeting? CMs flying without entering Turkey or Israel can decimated, but not all destroyed. There is more on land

A group of Russian ships in the Med also pushes back potentially safe launch positions for the cruise missile carriers... to avoid the risk they might be targeted...

So not only does it introduce a layer of defence against low flying subsonic cruise missiles... it greatly extends the flight time of the missiles because they will have to fly low... which uses up more fuel and makes them slower... it adds to the areas where they can be intercepted on the way to their targets, and it increases the warning time for forces in Syria to prepare for the attack.

Even klintok (naval OSA) is very capable of shooting down low flying cruise missiles, let alone larger SAMs on Russian ships...

The added factor is that those ships also carry anti ship and land attack missiles that could also be used to target the launch platforms of any missile strike... something NATO is not familiar... a target that can hit back.

You all fail to understand the point, if Russia is willing to escalate things to that point with the US they could do something, but Russia isn't about to cross that line with the states over Assad.

Assad is a figurehead... even if a cruise missile managed to kill him... the regime would remain and anyone who replaced him in office is hardly going to be pro west and Americas best friend in the region...

And it is the US that is crossing lines, Russia is just reacting... any of those cruise missiles pass close to Russian ships they might consider it a threat and retaliate on the source of the threat... nothing the US Navy would not do...

Hold your​ horses everyone

Those missiles are for Idlib

Let's not go full whatever that last USA ops was again

The US has made it clear it will hold Assad personally responsible for any chemical weapon attack... we know they don't have any requirement for evidence... they just need footage on social media showing men in a hospital washing children with fire hoses... they wont fire a single missile at Idlib... this is going to be a heavy strike and it is going to target the Assad regime with the goal of decapitation of the Syrian government....

Its about Russia. After fall of Assad is Iran then Russia. Meh no psychos in West.

It is about Russias future... lets face it if Assad was in americas pocket he could murder any one he liked... he would be a bastard, but he would be our bastard.... just check out bus killing Saudis... they execute gays and human rights activists but they are OK because they bought 400 billion dollars worth of US weapons....

Lets face it... no matter who Russia deals with... the west will class them as tyrants and murderers and dictators... even elected people like Hugo Chaves...

At the end of the day when the US pushes the Russians are going to have to start pushing back... the cold war ended and the warsaw pact and part of the former soviet union jumped ship like the rats they are... actually probably a good deal for Russia and a bad deal for NATO, but it was a significant loss of market.

Russia needs to find new trading partners... it doens't matter if they are poor... both trade partners can develop and grow with mutually beneficial trade.

The rich powerful west are going to do all they can to stop this of course because they want to contain the Russians and keep the rest of the world under their thumb.

It is why in 10-15 years Russia will need a powerful navy including carriers so when this sort of shit happens off the coast of south africa or south america that Russia will be able to respond with sufficient force to make the west back down.

If Russia can't defend their allies it will be isolated, weakened and ultimately defeated.

And importantly right now when dick head Trump is stupid enough to be a bully in public (the US was allways a bully but doing it in public is a good lesson for the average people of the world who don't normally see their governments getting hot crumpet from behind by the US ambassador and being told what they should be doing if they don't want the Gaddafi treatment).

Now is a time to get allies and new trade partners... countries that would previously never have considered Russia as a partner, but realise what sort of relationship they have with the west is bad for them... of course if russia backs down or does nothing and Syria gets its regime killed then they are no longer a viable alternative to the west...

So not only does it introduce a layer of defence against low flying subsonic cruise missiles... it greatly extends the flight time of the missiles because they will have to fly low... which uses up more fuel and makes them slower...

Why can't CMs be programmed to fly high & low over water & low over land? Those launched from a ship & the B-1B in the Arabian Gulf won't even fly over the Med. Sea.

really nothing? what tghis dude was smokin? I need same stuff for the weekend

Well the article is largely trash & I don't think its quite what he meant but he is correct: US already launched I think 2/3 of the last strike from the Red Sea & Persian Gulf side -> bypassing the Russian fleet/bases & it would be very surprising if they wouldn't do the same again.

I'll be curious to see if Russia starts the Jihadistan op with a massed Kalibr strike (theoretically can make a 60 missile salvo, possible extra 24 on the subs) or they'll all be fully loaded with Onyx/Sizzler for deterrence.

Maybe a mix but that would reduce the impact of both.

What would be really interesting is if Ustinov turns out to have actually got the angled tube Kalibr/Onyx in the upgrade after all.
That'd be an extra unexpected 48/64 missiles.

These small land attack Caliber equipped boats are bit puzzling. Generally cruise missiles are launched in mass at the start of a war on risky targets or to augment air power. They may also be used for precision strikes against high value highly defended targets. You would need a large number of such missiles in the hundreds as was the case in desert storm.
A dozen Buyan Class need to be gathered to equate 1 Arleigh-Bruke class in strike power. These ships are designed for shore defense under land AA and radar coverage against ships, land attack is a distant last in capability.

william.boutros wrote:These small land attack Caliber equipped boats are bit puzzling. Generally cruise missiles are launched in mass at the start of a war on risky target or to augment air power. They may also be used for precision strikes against high value highly defended targets. In the first occasion you would need a large number of such missiles in the hundreds as was the case in desert storm.

Perhaps these small boat CM platforms were designed with minor scale conflicts in mind like that in Syria, a larger war with Nato however would definitely require a bigger vessel to house more CMs to saturate most Nato targets.

More platforms means more flexibility. You can launch a massive salvo from different locations. In case of Russia from the Caspain Sea, Black Sea, Med, Baltics.

... and even from many kilometres of rivers in Russia, so they would be almost impossible to track and counter. US wanted to implement something like this with their "distributed lethality" concept, Russia has already done it. With these missiles, a single corvette can realistically threaten a carrier group or attack enemy bases at sub-strategic level, that has lots of military value IMHO.

In Syria they make sense both to attack high value jihadist targets and as deterrence against the coalition. US military planers have to consider the presence in theater of such assets and mitigate the risk exposure to them, so they tend to get more reasonable.

Russia to hold ‘large-scale’ drills in Mediterranean
http://www.atimes.com/article/russia-to-hold-large-scale-drills-in-mediterranean/?utm_source=The+Daily+Report&utm_campaign=f848721a60-EMAIL_CAMPAIGN_2018_08_31_12_20&utm_medium=email&utm_term=0_1f8bca137f-f848721a60-31607385

The TU-160s will probably do some carpet bombing to support the advance on Idlib.

Hole wrote:More platforms means more flexibility. You can launch a massive salvo from different locations. In case of Russia from the Caspain Sea, Black Sea, Med, Baltics.

More likely it allows them to launch surprise precision strike against a high-value target from anywhere at any time. Any UKSK-equipped vessel is capable of long range LACM strikes, and that gives excellent operational flexibility and ability to take advantage of opportunities as the occur.

GunshipDemocracy wrote:

Russian ships and planes on the exercises in the Mediterranean Sea will hold missile firing

In the course of maneuvers, the tasks of anti-submarine warfare and anti-aircraft defense will be handled, as well as anti-piracy issues

   

Not that funny.

Israel almost lost a ship against hezbollah guerilla. In Yemen there were successfull attacks with single missile or even full of bombs motor boats against Saoudi supply vessels.

It's more usefull to train against pirates in the syrian context than train to attack US navy. Terrorist used drones to attack russian base, they could easily use a drone boat to attack the erussian ships coming in the port.

The new Black Pearl.

GunshipDemocracy wrote:

Isos wrote:
Not that funny.

Israel almost lost a ship against hezbollah guerilla. In Yemen there were successfull attacks with single missile or even full of bombs motor boats against Saoudi supply vessels.

not very good examples to me
Hezbollah is by no means pirates, they are anti-Israeli resistance
Houtis are Yemeni guerrillas fighting for independence against US/Saudi occupation


Somalu or Nigerianpirates are pretty far away tho that's why I believe its funny

It's more usefull to train against pirates in the syrian context than train to attack US navy. Terrorist used drones to attack russian base, they could easily use a drone boat to attack the erussian ships coming in the port.

against US fleet? meh who launches Granits against US it is only good against Somalian pirates  or US/UK/France sponsored terrorists true , they can provide terrorists with weapons

What russian navy could face in syria is an attack by very small boats full of explosives like those Houtis launched against Saoudi ships.

West countries won't provide full set of radars and Harpoons but rather help them build very simple weapons like the drones that are launched against russian air base.

Anti pirate training means training against an oponent that will use unconventional and rather simple tools and not an armada of destroyers with anti ship missiles. Pirates are on the sea what guerillas are on the land. When they say anti pirate training they don't mean chasing black beard and protecting trades routes.

So yeah, it is the most interesting and usefull aspect of those exercices.

What russian navy could face in syria is an attack by very small boats full of explosives like those Houtis launched against Saoudi ships.

Govt controls the coast & if it hasn't happened 3 years in its unlikely to happen now.

The recent instances of piracy nearby have all been Israel boarding, shooting & capturing the ships of unarmed peace activists attempting to provide aid to Gaza strip...

Transfer of ships from Caspian to BSF continues.
Apparently the Buyan non-M Makhachkala is moving too

I wonder if its to do with the recent Caspian treaty, like even if not on paper there was an agreement to reduce ships?
Or if its just the need for BSF is higher (and enabled with Caspian being quiet)

Deployment to the Sea of Azow?

Apparently yes to Azov.