Russian Military News, Reports, Data, etc.

Discussion in 'World Armed Forces' started by tphuang, Mar 24, 2006.

  1. Dizasta1
    Offline

    Dizasta1 Junior Member

    Joined:
    Jan 4, 2011
    Messages:
    835
    Likes Received:
    874
    This whole talk about Russia being economically incapable to building large surface warships, is an incorrect understanding of the subject. The first mistake people make is, to compare Russia's manufacturing capabilities with others. Particularly with America.

    There are two things that distinctly separate Russia from America, in terms of manufacturing capabilities and it's economy.

    1. Russian Ruble is not the global reserve currency in the world, American Dollar is. Along with this, Russian Ruble is intricately entwined with the global payment system as the American Dollar is. The Dollar fundamentally has hegemony over the world due to this global payment system.

    2. Unlike America, Russian economy is based on selling natural resources, military hardware and commodity goods such as wheat. Therefore, unlike America, the Russian Federation does not have a federal reserve banking cartel that prints and conjures up trillions of dollars out of thin air.

    People seem to make the stupid mistake to assume that the Russian Federation is the former Soviet Union. It is not and there is a monumental difference between the two. The Russian Federation is not brain dead like the former Soviet Union, that it can compete with the American Federal Reserve banking cartel, and it knows that it is foolish to sink it's economy, trying to build a large military, to compete with America.

    Hence, the Russian Federation is taking prudent decisions to not overstretch it's economy, whereby it self-destructs as the idiot leadership of the Soviet Union did.
     
  2. ougoah
    Offline

    ougoah Junior Member
    Registered Member

    Joined:
    Apr 1, 2008
    Messages:
    984
    Likes Received:
    959
    This is mostly true except I think this confirms what you are refuting. Russia is economically incapable of doing this. It's a bit of semantics in this case but what you have described is essentially the narrative that Russia chooses not to because it doesn't possess all the financial and economic tools that the US does. So another way to put it is simply that their economy is incapable at the moment because it would certainly be unwise to do so.
     
    Dizasta1 likes this.
  3. gelgoog
    Offline

    gelgoog Junior Member
    Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jun 1, 2017
    Messages:
    188
    Likes Received:
    136
    That's kinda neat. I've read about such simultaneous launches before but never seen a recording of one salvo like that. Assuming it is real.

    With regards to the previous discussion. Some technologies do kind of translate to naval activities. Like engine gas turbine technology to marine turbines and civilian LWR nuclear reactor technology to naval nuclear reactors. SAM AESA radars vs ship based AESA radars. SAM missiles vs ship based anti-air missiles. The list continues. What the Russians lack is shipbuilding capacity and experience with modern shipbuilding construction methods.
    It is even likely the Russians lack some kinds of construction materials for all I know, like certain kinds of steel, I have seen arguments to this point before.
    Only now have the Russians started to really invest on their shipyards so they are over a decade behind the Chinese shipbuilding effort in that regard. While the Chinese built a lot of civilian ships to keep the shipyards active and modernizing the Russians bought a lot of ships from places like South Korea and Finland. Things like icebreakers and tanker ships. So Russia's naval industry is less advanced than China's in general. The exception is their nuclear submarine industry.

    Also like it was said before for a lot of weapon systems you are better of comparing GDP in PPP than GDP in USD. For Russian tanks and aircraft for example this applies. Where this does not apply currently is in the naval sector because they need to purchase a vast amount of tools to be able to modernize. We already see this, for example, in the shipyard that the Russians expanded in Vladivostok, which had a lot of Chinese cranes and the like. Russia still needs to import a lot of machine tools or even ship designs and this is a problem they have.

    The Mistral actually ended up becoming a good deal for them. They got much of the technology and the schematics for the ship and didn't end up paying a cent because the French cancelled the contract.

    Also while the Russians are under sanctions they still export oil & gas like they used to. Europe & Japan never stopped buying gas from them for example. And prices are going up like I said at the same time as 3 pipelines and the respective gas fields are being built.
     
    #6273 gelgoog, Oct 9, 2018
    Last edited: Oct 9, 2018
    bruceb1959 likes this.
  4. TerraN_EmpirE
    Offline

    TerraN_EmpirE Tyrant King

    Joined:
    Aug 29, 2005
    Messages:
    10,565
    Likes Received:
    8,982
    You are correct in this the US and Russia have vast differences in terms of capacity but the biggest killer is eluding you.
    Barking up the wrong tree but along a line to be close. The US standard was not because the US forced but because it's the largest economy. Simply printing money though is not the power of the US dollar both Russia and China have done that yet it didn't help grow capacity. France did that and all it did was drive mobs to behead the king.
    First part WRONG, the US does export resources. Second part even more wrong as they to have printed money to try and keep a float all it did was cause issues. Neither though is the main issue for Russian ship building. PORTS.
    And not just ports Warm water ports. Portland Me, Boston Ma, New Haven Ct, New York Ny, Newark Nj, Phillidelpha Pa, Baltimore Md, Huntington WV, New Port News Va, Savannah Ga, Miami Fl, New Orleans La, Galvastin Tx, Los Angeles Ca, San Francisco Ca, Seattle Wa, Pearl Harbor Hi .. and so so many more.
    Russia? St Petersburg, Vladivostok and Crimea.
    That's your difference. America two huge coast lines of warm water year round. Over 95,000 miles of coast compared to 23,000 miles of coast.
    This drives Russian military history and mindset. Where the US has to overcome the sea for missions the Russians are more likely to have to fight a neighbor or internal battle inside the world's largest nation by land. A nation that has a hugely disparate population density. With a GDP ranking of 6th in PPP, 11th or 13th Nominal and spending almost exactly 1/10th the US in defense. And compared to the US with a 2nd PPP or 1st nominal.
    It's a massively lop sides comparison that you might as well compare a middle school Basketball team to the best stars of the NBA.
     
    ougoah and bruceb1959 like this.
  5. AndrewS
    Offline

    AndrewS Senior Member
    Registered Member

    Joined:
    Oct 5, 2015
    Messages:
    1,265
    Likes Received:
    1,847
    Look at the geo-economic situation that Russia faces.

    On the Western Russian border, the European Union has an economy which is 6x larger than Russia.
    And the combined EU does spend a lot more on the military than Russia, even though the EU is currently fragmented.

    That alone means that Russia should really be concentrating fully on its army and air force to match the EU, because it doesn't have the luxury of spare economic/industrial capacity for a blue-water navy.

    And on the Eastern Russian border, China has an economy which is 7x larger than Russia. Again, China easily spends a lot more on the military than Russia.

    Lastly, the USA economy is also 5x larger than Russia. So how is Russia supposed to have the spare resources to support an industrial base for a blue-water navy?

    ...
    Also, the US economy is not solely based on financial engineering. It does spend a lot on technology R&D.

    R&D Spending (BIL USD PPP)

    1. United States 511
    2. China 451
    3. European Union 388
    4. Japan 165
    ...
    8. Russia 42
     
    #6275 AndrewS, Oct 10, 2018
    Last edited: Oct 10, 2018
  6. gelgoog
    Offline

    gelgoog Junior Member
    Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jun 1, 2017
    Messages:
    188
    Likes Received:
    136
    The USA has their aerospace sector and they still are world leaders in chip design. Then there is Hollywood and the likes.
    They also have heavy machinery manufacturers like Caterpillar. Plus it's able to feed itself and even export food. Now they are a major oil exporter.
    It is not TOTALLY dire.

    They just lost much of the consumer electronics market, but that happened decades ago. First to Japan, then to South Korea, and China. Their car manufacturing sector is also on the ropes but if Tesla does succeed they might just turn that around, like SpaceX did to space launch, which used to be dominated by Arianespace and the Russians. USA infrastructure (other than their highways) does look like someplace in the 3rd world though. Heck Russia has better high speed rail infrastructure than the USA. It is sad really. Mass transport in the USA seems to be mostly stuck in the 1960s-1970s.
     
  7. TerraN_EmpirE
    Offline

    TerraN_EmpirE Tyrant King

    Joined:
    Aug 29, 2005
    Messages:
    10,565
    Likes Received:
    8,982
    Fact is the U.S has favored a more independent mode of transport in the rail sector. It has to do with a number of reasons but among them is just lack of interest. Travel back to the start of the 20th century and Trains were big business. But as time progressed the automobile became king. Trains faltered and ended up in Amtrack which as kept transport rail on life support well industry rail has remained active.
     
    ougoah likes this.
  8. H2O
    Offline

    H2O New Member
    Registered Member

    Joined:
    May 3, 2018
    Messages:
    48
    Likes Received:
    37
    A very big 'if'. Tesla has 143 days to defuse it's $11.5 Billion ticking debt bomb. IMO, Musk drove Tesla into the ground. NIO will likely succeed where Tesla failed.
     
    KIENCHIN likes this.
  9. TerraN_EmpirE
    Offline

    TerraN_EmpirE Tyrant King

    Joined:
    Aug 29, 2005
    Messages:
    10,565
    Likes Received:
    8,982
    Anyway we are deep off topic
     
  10. Dizasta1
    Offline

    Dizasta1 Junior Member

    Joined:
    Jan 4, 2011
    Messages:
    835
    Likes Received:
    874
    For those who live in the real world, where reality includes limitations and challenges. Intelligent ones make decisions, mitigating these challenges and limitations, by prioritizing what decisions would bare favorable outcomes. And this is what Russia has chosen to do, by investing in next generation weapons, which would ensure that they would have a military response, when threatened. As such, choosing hypersonic missiles, nuclear powered cruise missiles and so on, makes sense particularly when economic sanctions and oil glut, are the "economic tools" used by adversary nation, to undermine the progress of another country. Rather than pursuing large aircraft carriers, nuclear cruisers and so on, priority was given to "achievable goals," ones which would tip the balance of power, in their favor.

    Russia has been sensible in accepting it's limitations, and in doing so, has been able to progress unhindered, despite the absurd sanctions, threat of naval blockade to its maritime commerce and threat to prospective client States that dare to defy CAATSA by purchasing Russian weapons. What the Russian Federation is not falling for, is what the Soviet Union drowned itself in, is political grandstanding. By spending hundreds of billions dollars on military programs that hurt more than they benefit a country.
     
    bruceb1959 likes this.
Loading...

Share This Page