Russian Military News, Reports, Data, etc.


Anlsvrthng

Senior Member
Registered Member
Not everything.
Just because you are debt free doesn't set a credit rating. They had top of the Line Russian tech but that was replete across the Caucasus. And who wanted that? When you could but it at rock bottom prices.

The most unique bits of Soviet tech were either practically stolen (Kuznetsov) or incomplete (Liaoning).
And with the end of the cold war the only buyers were getting rock bottom pricing or was Russia who needed below rock bottom.
The Ukrainian economy was attached at the hip to the Soviet and like the rest of the former Soviet states so to was there post Soviet. And as corrupt as the Late Soviet leadership was so to was the post Soviet and modern oligarchs in both the Russian and Ukraine.
The important bit is the capability to develop and make, the existence of huge market .Ukraine had all.

Russia was in disadvantage, but Putin did a good job to suppress the Oligarch .

I think it was the main reason why the Ukrainian Oligarchy doesn't wanted any strong Rus-Ukr relations.
 

Bhurki

Junior Member
Registered Member
The more i focus on the future of Russia navy, it seems like its going to become a green water navy not so far in the future...
With the newest destroyer in service being atleast 20 years old, and other capital ships like battlecruisers being even older,
No likely replacement remains a big issue (Lider class not finalised).
The sub surface component is way better protected from economic constraints than the surface navy.
It does, then seem that within about a decade, russia navy surface service will include of numerous gorshkov, steregushchiy, grigorovich class additions to itself.. However will lack any major power projection element.
 

Jura

General
thought I wouldn't repost the Kremlin stuff anymore, but now I will:
Борисов: испытания комплекса "Авангард" доказали его способность разгоняться до 27 Махов
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

:
Official: Russian Weapon 27 Times Faster than Speed of Sound
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
 

gelgoog

Senior Member
Registered Member
The more i focus on the future of Russia navy, it seems like its going to become a green water navy not so far in the future...
With the newest destroyer in service being atleast 20 years old, and other capital ships like battlecruisers being even older,
No likely replacement remains a big issue (Lider class not finalised).
The sub surface component is way better protected from economic constraints than the surface navy.
It does, then seem that within about a decade, russia navy surface service will include of numerous gorshkov, steregushchiy, grigorovich class additions to itself.. However will lack any major power projection element.
The Russians will basically refit the Kirov-class battlecruisers with more modern weapon systems. To be honest I think the Lider-class design is kinda cumbersome and for all that mass does not even have enough VLS cells to compete with a much lower mass Ticonderoga-class cruiser or the Chinese Type 055. I think the Russians need to go back to the drawing board on that one.

There is a huge question of what design they will use as a modern capital ship. All of these will require major investments. Russia clearly failed to modernize their naval construction yards to enable them to be competitive in this sector. I think this result was to be expected. Still it's not the end of the world. France and Italy for example use multi-role frigates for most tasks. Given modern Russian cruise missile system technology any ship they design will be a lot more combat capable than their older designs.
 

Anlsvrthng

Senior Member
Registered Member
The Russians will basically refit the Kirov-class battlecruisers with more modern weapon systems. To be honest I think the Lider-class design is kinda cumbersome and for all that mass does not even have enough VLS cells to compete with a much lower mass Ticonderoga-class cruiser or the Chinese Type 055. I think the Russians need to go back to the drawing board on that one.

There is a huge question of what design they will use as a modern capital ship. All of these will require major investments. Russia clearly failed to modernize their naval construction yards to enable them to be competitive in this sector. I think this result was to be expected. Still it's not the end of the world. France and Italy for example use multi-role frigates for most tasks. Given modern Russian cruise missile system technology any ship they design will be a lot more combat capable than their older designs.
Russia just in the middle of a huge shipyard investment project(s), for LNG tankers, icebreakers and so on.

They has the capacity to make big warships, it is more of a matter of need.
 

Skywatcher

Senior Member
Russia just in the middle of a huge shipyard investment project(s), for LNG tankers, icebreakers and so on.

They has the capacity to make big warships, it is more of a matter of need.
Building a Lider class DDG to civilian standards won't be the most optimal solution.

India and Turkey can throw together pretty decent civilian ships, but that doesn't mean that they can start coughing out an Arleigh Burke Flight III or Type 055 tomorrow.

And with Russia having gone on a large surface combatant construction holiday for nearly two decades, most of the experience in building and designing DDGs+ is gone.
 

Tirdent

Junior Member
Registered Member
India and Turkey can throw together pretty decent civilian ships, but that doesn't mean that they can start coughing out an Arleigh Burke Flight III or Type 055 tomorrow.

And with Russia having gone on a large surface combatant construction holiday for nearly two decades, most of the experience in building and designing DDGs+ is gone.
The same could've been said about China or South Korea what feels like yesterday, and unlike Turkey or India the Russians DO have recent experience *designing* large warships.

Fact of the matter is that the PLAN build-up came on the back of a large and healthy civilian yard infrastructure, so it is not clear to me why improvements to the same in Russia would not have similar benefits (if they are funded and realized). And while the Russians did go on a *construction* holiday (as you correctly said) due to ship yard problems, the design bureaus certainly kept on designing them.

So the crux of the issue apparently lies with the yards, and that is precisely where the planned civilian investments will help (the notion that you can't build to military standards in a yard originally created for civilian purposes is risible).
 
Last edited:

Anlsvrthng

Senior Member
Registered Member
Building a Lider class DDG to civilian standards won't be the most optimal solution.

India and Turkey can throw together pretty decent civilian ships, but that doesn't mean that they can start coughing out an Arleigh Burke Flight III or Type 055 tomorrow.

And with Russia having gone on a large surface combatant construction holiday for nearly two decades, most of the experience in building and designing DDGs+ is gone.
You mean a 33000 tons nuclear icebreaker is easier to make than a 15000 tons cruiser?
 

Top