Russian Military News, Reports, Data, etc.

MwRYum said:

Well, it's typical US saber rattling - 2 Mistral class LHD could hardly be any threat to East Asia region, without respectable naval and air support to operate with; besides, even the S.Korea and Japan have something similar in this class, not to mention the US. It under-note the fact that Russia lacks the capacity to build large warship at this time, or worse, in the foreseeable future.

Plus, so long as the Shanghai Corporation organization framework still stands, such presence pose no threat to China either; though in the context of politika China should rightfully be wary of it, yet in foreseeable future the weaken state of the Russian Pacific Fleet would not so likely be rectified; without any respectable surface fleet to operate with, the LHD could hardly make any impact.

Click to expand...

Thank you for your interesting reply.

With all due respect, a statement by a US Congresswoman is not called "sabre-rattling"..that is the actual transfer of some form of military force to (or close to) an area of military contention, not just words. However, you then contradict yourself by saying that, anyway, "China should rightfully be wary of it", (the purchase and home-port of these vessels); which is all I suggested, not that China take any action, merely note what has happened and not forget it.

The essence of all things military, is not the mere purchase of military equipment, of course, but the strategy behind the purchases. And Putin has made clear; he intends to put pressure, by these and future purchases of western equipment, on Russia's former Empire, to bring them slowly back into the grasping power of Russia. To be sure, that is not at first, directly affecting China. But Russia sees itself as a huge Empire again; at some future time. Do not think that they will neglect their Eastern shores. Remember how much power, in the past, Stalin moved East, the huge land battles against Japan; right on Chinese land. Such as Khalkhin gol. And the many border skirmishes in post-war border disputes with China.

I assume you are also a student of military history; and it's a pleasure posting to you, and joining this Forum.

A russian nuclear submarine has caught fire in a shipyard. Wooden structures on the dock caught fire and that spread onto the sub. Not really a reassuring way of how they handle their nuclear subs.



29 December 2011 Last updated at 21:06 GMT
Russian nuclear submarine, Yekaterinburg, in dock fire

A fire has broken out during repairs to a Russian nuclear submarine at a dock near the northern port of Murmansk.
The Russian Emergency Ministry said there had been no leak of radiation, and nobody was injured.
The Yekaterinburg submarine was being repaired when wooden structures in the dock caught fire and the flames spread to the vessel, say Russian media.
Eleven fire crews and a navy launch fought the blaze, which has now been put out.
Local media reports said a helicopter was also used.

'Fire cannot spread'

The Russian defence ministry said the nuclear reactors on the vessel were already shut down when the fire broke out.
All weapons had also been removed from the submarine before it entered the dock, the ministry said.
As a huge plume of smoke billowed into the sky a Russian defence ministry spokesman, Igor Konashenkov, insisted there was no major risk from the fire.
"The power unit was switched off and is now safe," he told Russian state television.
"The fire cannot spread into the sub. There is no threat to onboard technical equipment."
Russian news agencies later said the submarine had been partially submerged in the dock to help extinguish the blaze.
The Yekaterinburg is a Delta-IV-class nuclear submarine. It was commissioned by the Soviet Union in 1985 and can carry 16 intercontinental ballistic missiles.
Safety on Russian navy submarines is a sensitive issue for the military following the Kursk disaster in August 2000.
The Kursk nuclear submarine sank in the Barents Sea off north-west Russia, killing all 118 seamen on board.
Investigators concluded that an explosion of fuel from one of its torpedoes caused the sinking.

firefox007 said:

Thank you for your interesting reply.

With all due respect, a statement by a US Congresswoman is not called "sabre-rattling"..that is the actual transfer of some form of military force to (or close to) an area of military contention, not just words. However, you then contradict yourself by saying that, anyway, "China should rightfully be wary of it", (the purchase and home-port of these vessels); which is all I suggested, not that China take any action, merely note what has happened and not forget it.

The essence of all things military, is not the mere purchase of military equipment, of course, but the strategy behind the purchases. And Putin has made clear; he intends to put pressure, by these and future purchases of western equipment, on Russia's former Empire, to bring them slowly back into the grasping power of Russia. To be sure, that is not at first, directly affecting China. But Russia sees itself as a huge Empire again; at some future time. Do not think that they will neglect their Eastern shores. Remember how much power, in the past, Stalin moved East, the huge land battles against Japan; right on Chinese land. Such as Khalkhin gol. And the many border skirmishes in post-war border disputes with China.

I assume you are also a student of military history; and it's a pleasure posting to you, and joining this Forum.

Click to expand...

Thanks for discussing the Mistral-class. The deal by Russia is intended as actually buying the ability to construct and maintain the Mistral class. While not a thread by themslves, they provide technology study capabilities of a sophisticated French carrier for commando warfare.
I wouldn't be surprised if Russia used the knowledge gained to construct larger commando carriers than the Mistral on this blueprint.

If you look at the Russian carrier concepts, they were quite missile and helicopter heavy, so a commando carrier serves the purpose well of upgrading their carrier-building capabilities. Selling naval aircrafts to China and old and good ties with India (operating more carriers soon) will in my opinion provide more knowledge on capable concepts of integrating a fighter wing for air cover.
It's my own guess that a future generation of naval carriers will be built on the Mistral design with impressive flooded tonnage that gives them much resilence against all kinds of attacks. I think the large anti-ship missile component will be reduced and moved to another platform in favour of added commando capability. Together with commando capability a large number of small precision strike guided missiles would be fine (like on US guided missile submarines) to give the deployed army much more bite. Futhermore there's a strike fighter airwing of capable Russian aircrafts (that will most certainly depend on Chinese catapult technology or have an idea to make better use of the ski jump ramp) and naturally the very numerous and important helicopter component.
I'd call that a commando/helicopter carrier with a fixed wing air-wing. It's a small step from combing the flight deck cruiser concept with the Mistral because the new enemy are't carrier strike groups of US fashion, but global and local intervention, disaster relief and raiding enemy coasts (sounds strange, but is actually how NATO sees "From the Sea" warfare in the future).

That submarine fire just one of a number of incidents, showing the decrepit nature of the post-Soviet Russian Navy. It has very little funding, and surely cannot put to sea as often as necessary for professional needs. There have been a number of submarine accidents. Some of these have been fatal. One of the involved the Russian submarine Kursk, of the largest & most modern of the Fleet. In that case all of the ship's crew was lost and the Russian Nation suffered a serious blow.

The first Mistral class amphibious assault ship for Russia will be laid down at the start of February in a French shipyard, a military industry official told RIA Novosti on Tuesday.

"The first of two Mistrals will be laid down in the first few days of February in St. Nazaire," said deputy director of the Federal Service for Military-Industrial Cooperation, Alexander Fomin.

Click to expand...

navyreco said:

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

Click to expand...

how long does it usually take the french to build a ship of this caliber?

CottageLV said:

how long does it usually take the french to build a ship of this caliber?

Click to expand...

not long at all...

Dixmude, third and latest of Mistral class dates:
Laid down: 20 January 2010
Launched: 17 September 2010
Commissioned: December 2011

edit: then maybe the first Russian Mistral will have its own specificities and will take a bit longer

navyreco said:

not long at all...

Dixmude, third and latest of Mistral class dates:
Laid down: 20 January 2010
Launched: 17 September 2010
Commissioned: December 2011

edit: then maybe the first Russian Mistral will have its own specificities and will take a bit longer

Click to expand...

it's amazing how even with today's technology and production capability, a big ship like this still takes 2 years to go from construction to service. no wonder why majority of the ships fought in WWII were made before the war, those started construction during the war were useless by the time they're built.

no wonder why majority of the ships fought in WWII were made before the war, those started construction during the war were useless by the time they're built.

Click to expand...

What?? I would not call Essex class carriers useless. Nor Iowa class battleships. Nor Gearing & Fletcher class destroyers..