PDA

View Full Version : Russian Armed Forces News & Discussion thread



Pages : 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 [12] 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34

Raden5
04-21-2012, 04:03 PM
http://img-fotki.yandex.ru/get/6004/25744697.56/0_7c3df_27e5b170_orig

Started talks on a new modification of the engine AI-222-25, for "battle" version of YAK-130. Tractive force, in new modification, will be increased ~ 2800 kgf (now - 2500).

If I understand correctly - negotiations began in the exhibition "Engines 2012".

Maximmmm
04-22-2012, 02:56 AM
Sorry for the Russian guys, but this is the best summary of ships being built or under contract for the Navy I've ever stumbled across. I'll add some descriptions in english to make it easier:

Data for feb 2012

К 2020 должны быть:

LDH:

1. Заказ N 1, "Владивосток" Mistral, DCN, laid down, delivery scheduled 2014
2. Заказ N 2, "Севастополь" Mistral, DCN, ordered, delivery scheduled 2015
3. Заказ N 3, Mistral, Балтийский Завод или Севмаш, к ?
4. Заказ N 4, Mistral, Балтийский Завод или Севмаш, к ?

БДК (landing ship):

1. Заказ N 01301 "Иван Грен, 11711, ССЗ Янтарь, delivery scheduled 2013
2. Заказ N 01302, 11711, ССЗ Янтарь, к 2017

Possibility for 4 further ships

Десантные катера (landing craft Dyugon class):

1. Заказ N 811 "Атаман Платонов", 21820, ССЗ "Волга", in service since 2010
2. Заказ N 4001, 21820, Восточная верфь, under construction, delivery scheduled 2012
3. Заказ N 701 "Денис Давыдов", 21820, Ярославский ССЗ, under construction, delivery scheduled2013
4. Заказ N 702 "Мичман Лермонтов" 21820, Ярославский ССЗ, ordered, to be laid down in 2012
5. Заказ N 703 "Лейтенант Римский-Корсаков", 21820, Ярославский ССЗ, ordered, to be laid down in 2012
6. Заказ N, 21820, неизвестно, план к 2020
7. Заказ N, 21820, неизвестно, план к 2020
8. Заказ N, 21820, неизвестно, план к 2020
9. Заказ N, 21820, неизвестно, план к 2020
10. Заказ N, 21820, неизвестно, план к 2020

Destroyers:

This one is pure speculation
1. Заказ N 1, перспективный эсминец с АЭУ, неизвестно, к 2018

Проектирование должно быть закончено к концу 2012.
Planning of project should be finished by 2012

Frigates:

1. Заказ N 921 "Адмирал флота Советского Союза Горшков", 22350, Северная Верфь, under construction,delivery scheduled november 2012
2. Заказ N 922 "Адмирал флота Касатонов", 22350, Северная Верфь, under construction, delivery scheduled 2014
3. Заказ N 923 "Адмирал Головко", 22350, Северная верфь, under construction, к 2018
4. Заказ N 924 "Адмирал Юмашев", 22350, Северная верфь, ordered, to be laid down in 2012, к 2018
5. Заказ N 925, 22350, Северная верфь, есть контракт, к 2018
6. Заказ N 926, 22350, Северная верфь, есть контракт, к 2018
7. Заказ N 927, 22350, Северная верфь, план, к 2020
8. Заказ N 928, 22350, Северная верфь, план, к 2020

Admiral grigorovich class
9. Заказ N 01357 "Адмирал Григорович", 11356М, ССЗ Янтарь, under construction, delivery 2014
10. Заказ N 01358 "Адмирал Ессен", 11356М, ССЗ Янтарь, under construction, delivery 2014
11. Заказ N 01359 "Адмирал Макаров", 11356М, ССЗ Янтарь, строится, delivery 2014
12. Заказ N 01360 "Адмирал Корнилов", 11356М, ССЗ Янтарь, ordered, to be laid down in 2012, к 2015
13. Заказ N 01361 "Адмирал Истомин", 11356М, ССЗ Янтарь, ordered, to be laid down in 2013, к 2016
14. Заказ N 01362 "Адмирал Бутаков" 11356М, ССЗ Янтарь, ordered, to be laid down in 2013, к 2016

Corvettes:

Stereguschy & Gremyashchy class (projects 20380, 20381 and 20385)
1. Заказ N 1002 "Сообразительный", 20381, Северная верфь, in service since 2011, БФ.
2. Заказ N 1003 "Бойкий", 20381, Северная верфь, under construction, delivery scheduled 2012.
3. Заказ N 1004 "Стойкий", 20381, Северная верфь, under construction, delivery scheduled 2013.
4. Заказ N 2101 "Совершенный", 20381(?), Амурский ССЗ, under construction, delivery 2013-2015(?) (this shipyard is really damn slow)
5. Заказ N 2102 "Громкий", 20381(?), Амурский ССЗ, under construction, сдача в 2015(?)
6. Заказ N 1005 "Гремящий", 20385, Северная верфь, under construction, сдача в 2015(?)
7. Заказ N 1006 "Проворный", 20385, Северная верфь, ordered, закладка 2012, сдача 2015(?)
8. Заказ N 1007, 20385, Северная верфь, контракт, к 2018
9. Заказ N 1008, 20385, Северная верфь, контракт, к 2018
10. Заказ N 1009, 20385, Северная верфь, контракт, к 2018
11. Заказ N 1010, 20385, Северная верфь, контракт, к 2018
12. Заказ N 1011, 20385, Северная верфь, контракт, к 2018
13. Заказ N 1012, 20385, Северная верфь, контракт, к 2018
14. Заказ N 1013, 20385, Северная верфь, контракт, к 2018
15. Заказ N, 20380, неизвестно, план 2020
16. Заказ N, 20380, неизвестно, план 2020
17. Заказ N, 20380, неизвестно, план 2020

Озвучены планы до 2020 иметь 18 корветов 20380, один из них был готов до ГПВ 2020

Light frigate, Gepard class
18. Заказ N 952 "Дагестан", 11661, Зеленодольский ССЗ, will be delivered this year

Beefed up Buyan class
19. Заказ N 631 "Град Свияжск", 21631, Зеленодольский ССЗ, under construction , delivery 2012
20. Заказ N 632 "Углич", 21631, Зеленодольский ССЗ, under construction, delivery 2013
21. Заказ N 633 "Великий Устюг", 21631, Зеленодольский ССЗ, under construction, delivery 2013
22. Заказ N 634, 21631, Зеленодольский ССЗ, план, к 2014
23. Заказ N 635, 21631, Зеленодольский ССЗ, план, к 2014
24. Заказ N 636, 21631, Зеленодольский ССЗ, план, к 2015(?)
25. Заказ N 637, 21631, Зеленодольский ССЗ, план, к 2015(?)
26. Заказ N 638, 21631, Зеленодольский ССЗ, план, к 2016(?)
27. Заказ N 639, 21631, Зеленодольский ССЗ, план, к 2016(?)
28. Заказ N 640, 21631, Зеленодольский ССЗ, план, к 2016(?)

Regular Buyan class
30. Заказ N 703 "Махачкала", 21630, Алмаз, under construction, delivery 2013

31. ?
32. ?
33. ?
34. ?
35. ?

По ГПВ 2020 всего 35 корветов. Сведений о пяти из них в открытых источниках нет

Разведовательные корабли:

1. Заказ N 787 "Вице-адмирал Юрий Иванов", 18280, Северная Верфь, строится, сдача в 2013
2. Заказ N, 18280, неизвестно, план к 2020

Океанографическое исследовательское судно:

1. Заказ N 01602 "Янтарь", 22010, ССЗ "Янтарь", строится, сдача в 2013

Базовый тральщик:

1. Заказ N 521, 12700, Средне-Невский ССЗ, строится, план сдачи 2013, возможна задержки или отказ.

Возможна серия или отказ от проекта

SSBN:

1. Заказ 201 "Юрий Долгорукий", 955, Севмаш, готов, сдача в 2012
2. Заказ 202 "Александр Невский", 955, Севмаш, готов, сдача в 2012
3. Заказ 203 "Владимир Монамах", 955, Севмаш, строится, сдача в 2013
4. Заказ 204, "Святитель Николай", 955А, Севмаш, закладка в 2012 но корпус уже готов, сдача к 2020
5. Заказ 205, 955А, Севмаш, создаётся задел, закладка возможно в 2012, сдача к 2020
6. Заказ 206, 955А, Севмаш, создаётся задел, закладка возможно в 2012, сдача к 2020
7. Заказ 207, 955А, Севмаш, план, закладка в 2013, сдача к 2020
8. Заказ 208, 955А, Севмаш, план, закладка в 2014, сдача к 2020
9. Заказ 209, 955А, Севмаш, план, закладка в 2015, сдача к 2020
10. Заказ 210, 955А, Севмаш, план, закладка в 2015-2016, сдача к 2020

SSN:

1. Заказ N 160 "Северодвинск", 855, Севмаш, готов, сдача 2012
2. Заказ N 161 "Казань", 855М, Севмаш, строится, к 2013
3. Заказ N 162, 855М, Севмаш, контракт, закладка в 2012, к 2020
4. Заказ N 163, 855М, Севмаш, контракт, к 2020
5. Заказ N 164, 855М, Севмаш, контракт, к 2020
6. Заказ N 165, 855М, Севмаш, контракт, к 2020
7. Заказ N 166, 855М, Севмаш, план, к 2020
8. Заказ N 167, 855М, Севмаш, план, к 2020 (?)
9. Заказ N 168, 855М, Севмаш, план, к 2022
10. Заказ N 169, 855М, Севмаш, план, к 2022

Другие АПЛ:

1. Заказ N 664 "Белгород", спецпроект 949АМ, Севмаш, строится, сдача ?


ДЭПЛ:

1. Заказ N 01570 "Санкт-Петербург", 677, Адмиралтейские верфи", в 2010, опытная эксплуатация.
Остальные лодки проекта не строятся, проект на доработке до 2013, возможно после этого будет решение о постройке.

2. Заказ N , "Новороссийск", 636.3, Адмиралтейские верфи, заложена, сдача 2014
3. Заказ N , "Ростов на Дону", 636.3, Адмиралтейские верфи, заложена, сдача 2014
4. Заказ N, 636.3, Адмиралтейские верфи, контракт, сдача 2014
5. Заказ N, 636.3, Севмаш, контракт, закладка возможно в 03/2012, сдача 2015
6. Заказ N, 636.3, Севмаш, контракт, сдача 2016
7. Заказ N, 636.3, Адмиралтейские верфи, контракт, сдача 2016
8. ?
9. ?
10. ?
11. ?
12. ?
13. ?
14. ?
15. ?
16. ?
17. ?
18. ?
19. ?
20. ?

Всего план - 20 ДЭПЛ до 2020 из них как минимум 6 проекта 636.3

Глубоководные аппараты:

1. Заказ N , 18271, Красное Сомово, достройка АВ, строится, сдача 2012
2. Заказ N 01690 "АС-39", 16811, Адмиралтейские верфи, в строю с 2011
3. Заказ N 01210 "АС-31", 10831, Севмаш, в строю с 2010


Морской транспорт вооружения

1. Заказ N 2130, 21130, Амурский ССЗ, строится, сдача 2012

2. Заказ N "ВТР-79", 20360, Окская судоверфь, в строю с 2010
3. Заказ N, 20360, Окская судоверфь, строится, возможен отказ или долгострой.

4. Заказ N 01318 "Академик Ковалёв", 20180ТВ, "Звёздочка", строится, сдача 2014
5. Заказ N, 20180, неизвестно, план, к 2020
6. Заказ N, 20180, неизвестно, план, к 2020
7. Заказ N, 20180, неизвестно, план, к 2020
8. Заказ N, 20180, неизвестно, план, к 2020

Морской транспорт

1. Заказ N, 23120, объявлен тендер 3/2012, сдача до 2013, ТОФ
2. Заказ N, 23120, объявлен тендер 3/2012, сдача до 2014, СФ
3. Заказ N, 23120, объявлен тендер 3/2012, сдача до 2015, ЧФ
4. Заказ N, 23120, объявлен тендер 3/2012, сдача до 2016, ТОФ

Малое гидрографическое судно:

1. Заказ N 2001 "Виктор Фалеев", 19910, Восточная верфь, строится, сдача 2012
2. Заказ N, 19910, к 2020
3. Заказ N, 19910, к 2020

Опытовое судно:

1. Заказ N 01601 "Селигер", 11982, ССЗ "Янтарь", строится, в строю с 2012

Спасательные суда:

1. Заказ N 01218 "Звёздочка", 20180, "Звёздочка", в строю с 2010

2. Заказ N, "Игорь Белоусов", 21300, Адмиралтейские верфи, строится, сдача 2014
3. Заказ N, 21300, неизвестно, план к 2020
4. Заказ N, 21300, неизвестно, план к 2020
5. Заказ N, 21300, неизвестно, план к 2020


Морской буксир

1. Заказ N 220 "Александр Пискунов", 22030, Хабаровский ССЗ, строится, сдача 2012
2. Заказ N, 22030, Хабаровский ССЗ, план к 2020
3. Заказ N, 22030, Хабаровский ССЗ, план к 2020

4. Заказ N 442, 745МБ, Зеленодольский ССЗ, в строю с 2011
5. Заказ N 443, 745МБ, Зеленодольский ССЗ, строится, сдача к 2020(?)
6. Заказ N 444, 745МБ, Зеленодольский ССЗ, строится, сдача к 2020(?)

Рейдовый буксир

1. Заказ N 918 "РБ-34", 90600, Ленинградский завод "Пелла", в строю с 2009
2. Заказ N 919 "РБ-47", 90600, Ленинградский завод "Пелла", в строю с 2009
3. Заказ N 920 "РБ-48", 90600, Ленинградский завод "Пелла", в строю с 2009
4. Заказ N 923 "РБ-386", 90600, Ленинградский завод "Пелла", в строю с 2010
5. Заказ N 924 "Поморье", 90600, Ленинградский завод "Пелла", в строю с 2011
6. Заказ N 925 "РБ-389", 90600, Ленинградский завод "Пелла", в строю с 2010
7. Заказ N 926 "РБ-43", 90600, Ленинградский завод "Пелла", в строю с 2011
8. Заказ N 927 "РБ-45", 90600, Ленинградский завод "Пелла", в строю с 2011
9. Заказ N 929 "РБ-20", 90600, Ленинградский завод "Пелла", в строю с 2011
10. Заказ N 930 "РБ-27", 90600, Ленинградский завод "Пелла", в строю с 2011
11. Заказ N 931 "РБ-42", 90600, Ленинградский завод "Пелла", в строю с 2011
12. Заказ N, 90600, Ленинградский завод "Пелла", строится, сдача 2012
13. Заказ N, 90600, Ленинградский завод "Пелла", строится, сдача 2012
14. Заказ N, 90600, Ленинградский завод "Пелла", строится, сдача 2012
15. Заказ N, 90600, Ленинградский завод "Пелла", строится, сдача 2012

16. Заказ N 618, 16609, Ленинградский завод "Пелла", в строю с 2011
17. Заказ N 619, 16609, Ленинградский завод "Пелла", строится, сдача 2012
18. Заказ N 621, 16609, Ленинградский завод "Пелла", строится, сдача 2012
19. Заказ N 622, 16609, Ленинградский завод "Пелла", строится, сдача 2012

20. Заказ N 001 "РБ-39", 705Б, Астраханский СРЗ, в строю с 2010
21. Заказ N 002 "РБ-10", 705Б, Астраханский СРЗ, в строю с 2011
22. Заказ N 003, 705Б, Астраханский СРЗ, строится, сдача 2012


Рейдовый разъездной катер

1. Заказ N 023, 21960, ССЗ "Алмаз", в строю с 2009
2. Заказ N 024, 21960, ССЗ "Алмаз", в строю с 2009
3. Заказ N 025, 21960, ССЗ "Алмаз", в строю с 2009
4. Заказ N 026, 21960, ССЗ "Алмаз", в строю с 2010
5. Заказ N 027, 21960, ССЗ "Алмаз", в строю с 2010
6. Заказ N 028, 21960, ССЗ "Алмаз", в строю с 2011
7. Заказ N 029, 21960, ССЗ "Алмаз", строится, сдача в 2012

Противодиверсионный катер:

1. Заказ N 981 "П-104", 21980, Зеленодольский ССЗ, в строю с 2009
2. Заказ N 982, 21980, Зеленодольский ССЗ, в строю с 2011
3. Заказ N 983, 21980, Зеленодольский ССЗ, строится, сдача в 2012

Гидрографический катер:

1. Заказ N 01842, 19920, ССЗ "Вымпел", строится 2012
2. Заказ N 01843, 19920, ССЗ "Вымпел", строится 2012

tadeus
04-22-2012, 03:52 AM
I'm just glad they caught him Seph, I mean for christsake it's our flagship after all.
Btw the bastard is saying he's not guilty: http://www.navy.ru/news/navy/?ELEMENT_ID=109991

Some news: Gosoboronzakaz to be cut by 25billion (Rub), also some other news on the state of signed contracts
http://lenta.ru/news/2012/04/19/borei/

Why did they (navy/DOD/ship master) decided to change the anchor anyway? What was wrong with the old one?

Maximmmm
04-22-2012, 04:04 AM
Why did they (navy/DOD/ship master) decided to change the anchor anyway? What was wrong with the old one?

Probably just standard wear&tear lifetime replacement. She went out on that Mediterranean cruise last year, must have shown some wear on the old one.

Anyways we're all waiting for the concrete announcement to put her in complete overhaul. Expected sometime this year, but god knows when or if they actually decide to do it. I hope they do, Kuznetsov has a lot of little diseases that they need that overhaul to fix. Not to mention the hangar expansion, hopefully they'll do something about her engines, etc etc etc. So an anchor is really minor news.

_GDS_
04-22-2012, 04:33 AM
Anyways we're all waiting for the concrete announcement to put her in complete overhaul. Expected sometime this year, but god knows when or if they actually decide to do it. I hope they do, Kuznetsov has a lot of little diseases that they need that overhaul to fix. Not to mention the hangar expansion, hopefully they'll do something about her engines, etc etc etc. So an anchor is really minor news.

Yeah, electronics and engines need that refit badly. But hangar expansion is nearly impossible. Because just in front of the hangar are elevators with elevator shafts to main munitions bunker bellow hangar level, in order to expand hanger till Granits compartment, they will have to do something about that main munitions bunker with elevators, since it's in the way.
check it your selves (http://forums.airbase.ru/2002/09/t72844,32--tavkr-proekta-11435-admiral-flota-sovetskogo-soyuza-kuznetso.html)

Maximmmm
04-22-2012, 04:38 AM
Yeah, electronics and engines need that refit badly. But hangar expansion is nearly impossible. Because just in front of the hangar are elevators with elevator shafts to main munitions bunker bellow hangar level, in order to expand hanger till Granits compartment, they will have to do something about that main munitions bunker with elevators, since it's in the way.
check it your selves (http://forums.airbase.ru/2002/09/t72844,32--tavkr-proekta-11435-admiral-flota-sovetskogo-soyuza-kuznetso.html)

Nice pictures! Hmm yeah I see the problem indeed. But since the rumors say it's gonna be a Gorshkov-style refit, so goodbye granit and kinzhal, that should free up a bit of space. Add to that massive redecorating inside, I think the engineers will think of something.
I just want her to have modern electronics and engines that don't break down as often as they do nowadays. That by itself should make it actually deployable, as opposed to the on-off service she's doing now.

Raden5
04-22-2012, 02:01 PM
April 22, 2012

The envoy of the president of Russia in Uralsk the Federal district Evgeny Kuyvashev reported: "according To our information, will not be resumed supplies of BMP-3 in the army. Also the Ministry of defense has refused purchases of BMD-4M, although was the initiator of his development".

XTX-Horus
04-22-2012, 08:09 PM
April 22, 2012

The envoy of the president of Russia in Uralsk the Federal district Evgeny Kuyvashev reported: "according To our information, will not be resumed supplies of BMP-3 in the army. Also the Ministry of defense has refused purchases of BMD-4M, although was the initiator of his development".

I get the not needing the BMP-3 for now with new vehicle projects underway and prototypes looming on the horizon but not buying BMD-4M's?!! It has a better chassis then the BMD-4 and is far more efficient in crew tasks, eliminating a crew member to make room for an additional soldier. By buying 4M's, you can phase out the older BMD-1's and 2's, giving the VDV a good increased tactical punching power in form of the main weapon systems of the 4M.

----

Anyways, I am quite confused about the R-74:

-Is the R-74 a further development of the R-73M, R-73M1 or the R-73M2?

-Does the R-74M have the same 75 degree off-bore seeker head range of the R-74E ("normal" R-73 has a 60 degree off-bore)?

-Does the "R-74-PD" exist in some form or another? On Ausairpower.net, Carlo Kopp posted an article talking about a possible R-74 modification in which you put the R-74 on top of the Rocketbooster of the R-27 to transform the R-74 into a BVR ranged missile with WVR missile performance. Here is the link to the page i am talking about (Scroll to about a quarter to a third the way down):

>>http://www.ausairpower.net/APA-NOTAM-200408-1.html

Maximmmm
04-22-2012, 10:08 PM
The decision surrounding the BMP's is most likely related to armata. Since that platform will be used to develop a true APC, capable of performing well on today's battlefields.
The main problem with the BMP family is the low protection against anti-tank equipment and mines, while the system itself is armed as a light tank.
So this decision is parallel to the lack of MOD interest in the T-90MS.

void
04-22-2012, 10:11 PM
The decision surrounding the BMP's is most likely related to armata. Since that platform will be used to develop a true APC, capable of performing well on today's battlefields.
The main problem with the BMP family is the low protection against anti-tank equipment and mines, while the system itself is armed as a light tank.
So this decision is parallel to the lack of MOD interest in the T-90MS.

Not Armata, Kurganets. That is the codename of the medium tracked platform being developed right now. Armata is a heavy platform and is not suited for IFV role as it will not be amphibious.

Maximmmm
04-22-2012, 11:21 PM
Not Armata, Kurganets. That is the codename of the medium tracked platform being developed right now. Armata is a heavy platform and is not suited for IFV role as it will not be amphibious.

Ah damn you're right indeed. I forgot.
But I though there would be some heavy stuff in the works a la the Namer or Achzarit?

void
04-22-2012, 11:27 PM
Ah damn you're right indeed. I forgot.
But I though there would be some heavy stuff in the works a la the Namer or Achzarit?

Possibly, but it will be for special units, not as a general purpose IFV. The Russian army intends to keep a large scale amphibious capability as far as I know, so any heavy IFV will be for special units only.

Maximmmm
04-23-2012, 12:07 AM
That does make sense I guess, especially since a true heavy IFV will probably be too costly to introduce to the army in massive numbers.

Flamming_Python
04-23-2012, 01:59 AM
Heavy stuff is not really in our doctrine. The Armata would probably be pushing it; with the increased weight I'm not sure how many bridges will be able to withstand it. Would this platform also have snorkeling equipment and be able to drive along the river bed if needed?

Raden5
04-23-2012, 04:16 AM
I get the not needing the BMP-3 for now with new vehicle projects underway and prototypes looming on the horizon but not buying BMD-4M's?!! It has a better chassis then the BMD-4 and is far more efficient in crew tasks, eliminating a crew member to make room for an additional soldier. By buying 4M's, you can phase out the older BMD-1's and 2's, giving the VDV a good increased tactical punching power in form of the main weapon systems of the 4M.


Maybe - this is due to a decrease in the role of "parachuting" and increase the role of "airmobile". That is quite different things, and makes it possible to equip the VDV more than heavy machinery.
But this - version...

Andy_UA
04-23-2012, 04:38 AM
Heavy stuff is not really in our doctrine. The Armata would probably be pushing it; with the increased weight I'm not sure how many bridges will be able to withstand it. Would this platform also have snorkeling equipment and be able to drive along the river bed if needed?

Interesting, I just forund answer to that -
"Armata" will go under water?

- This is a mandatory requirement for a prospective tank. almost all the machines in this family will get Ability to overcome the water barrier on the bottom.

http://www.vestnik-rm.ru/news-4-875.htm

void
04-23-2012, 04:41 AM
Interesting, I just forund answer to that -
"Armata" will go under water?

- This is a mandatory requirement for a prospective tank. almost all the machines in this family will get Ability to overcome the water barrier on the bottom.

http://www.vestnik-rm.ru/news-4-875.htm

Im not sure it is really a workable solution for an APC to ford a river along the bottom. For Russian tanks the fording training is fairly rigorous, requires breathing apparatus for the crew, preparation, and strong psychology. It would be a pain to apply that for an APC carrying infantry.

Andy_UA
04-23-2012, 04:42 AM
Im not sure it is really a workable solution for an APC to ford a river along the bottom. For Russian tanks the fording training is fairly rigorous, requires breathing apparatus for the crew, preparation, and strong psychology. It would be a pain to apply that for an APC carrying infantry.

After tank paves the way sure, why not?

void
04-23-2012, 05:50 AM
After tank paves the way sure, why not?

Because you then need to provide much more extra training to all of the infantry. ie: how to use the gas/oxygen masks, how to perform an emergency underwater evacuation of the APC, etc. Is it feasible to train just normal (mostly conscript) infantry to do this?

Hyde
04-23-2012, 09:05 AM
Im not sure it is really a workable solution for an APC to ford a river along the bottom. For Russian tanks the fording training is fairly rigorous, requires breathing apparatus for the crew, preparation, and strong psychology. It would be a pain to apply that for an APC carrying infantry.

I don't think it will be used as a general APC which would ever come into the situation to need to cross a river.

The Kurganets and Boomerang IFV's and APC's will not be fording, but swimming. Only the Armata, like any other tank chassis, will be fording because it can't swim. And the number of heavy tank-based APC's will probably be relatively small and restricted in role (only be available to be used by units when doing tasks which require them over a regular IFV) and geography (I doubt they'll be used somewhere where there is no real need for heavy infantry carriers).



Because you then need to provide much more extra training to all of the infantry. ie: how to use the gas/oxygen masks, how to perform an emergency underwater evacuation of the APC, etc. Is it feasible to train just normal (mostly conscript) infantry to do this?

What does them being conscripts have to do with anything? The tanks crews that learned that also were conscripts, so that's no difference. But as I said, I doubt that the heavy Armata-based APC will be fording anything*, and that it will even be the regular vehicle of any unit. I think it will, if it is even bought, only be a secondary vehicle to be used for special purposes, while all soldiers will be attached to regular APC's and IFV's generally.


*(they said "almost all", not "all", I think that excludes special vehicles like the APC and the artillery)

Hyde
04-23-2012, 09:12 AM
doublepost

Maximmmm
04-23-2012, 01:37 PM
Well here's our answer (partially):
http://lenta.ru/news/2012/04/23/modules/
Rogozin said the Armata will be used for a BMP as well.
I'd have to agree with Hyde though in saying that it'll have a limited role, too expensive to introduce in the massive numbers we would need.

Other news:
2 delta's are rejoining the fleet

http://www.navy.ru/news/navy/?ELEMENT_ID=110224 Vertohurie in 2012
http://www.navy.ru/news/navy/?ELEMENT_ID=110270 Yekaterinburg in 2014 (this is the one that burned)
Btw Rogozin says the cost of repair will be half of the projected cost because they "found a SKAT sonar, fresh in factory oil as it were".
How the **** do you find an SSBN class sonar just lying around? Guess we got pretty lucky.

Hyde
04-23-2012, 01:48 PM
I'd have to agree with Hyde though in saying that it'll have a limited role, too expensive to introduce in the massive numbers we would need.

Need? What they need, a new BMP, they will get in the form of Kurganets. They don't need a MBT-chassis based IFV.

Flamming_Python
04-23-2012, 02:05 PM
http://www.navy.ru/news/navy/?ELEMENT_ID=110224 Vertohurie in 2012
http://www.navy.ru/news/navy/?ELEMENT_ID=110270 Yekaterinburg in 2014 (this is the one that burned)
Btw Rogozin says the cost of repair will be half of the projected cost because they "found a SKAT sonar, fresh in factory oil as it were".
How the **** do you find an SSBN class sonar just lying around? Guess we got pretty lucky.

"Hmm now let's just see what we can dig up from the ol' USSR military depot, eh?"

SKS... nope
T-62.. na
250Kt Nuclear warhead...... next!
SCUD-B... not what we need
ah, here, a SKAT sonar - perfect!

_GDS_
04-23-2012, 02:32 PM
so they are upgrading BMD-1s to BMD-2 level and also denying the BMD-4Ms, thus denying the paradroppable capability by ongoing development of kurganets platform (too heavy for paradropping)... so it means VDV won't get new/modern paradroppable IFVs till 2020 at least (since none is in development).
I sence change in VDV's doctrine, role and tactics :(

I gues rakuchka project (replacement of BTR-Ds) is also dead end.

On 2008 08 08 VDV landed from ships, they did what marines should have done, oh well...

artjomh
04-23-2012, 02:41 PM
How the **** do you find an SSBN class sonar just lying around? Guess we got pretty lucky.

If I were a betting man, I would say that the sonar they've "found in the warehouse" would be taken off BS-64 Podmoskovye

AustinJ
04-23-2012, 03:44 PM
How do they maintain positive control over tactical nukes/semi-strategic types , for eg if they have a Nuclear Torpedo or Nuclear Cruise missile , do they have a similar Permmisive Action Link (PAL ) or similar system on SSBN and SSN that are identical ? Or its the descrition of the boss of the SSN to use Nuclear torpedo or Anti Ship missile as he wishes so ?

AustinJ
04-23-2012, 03:46 PM
"Hmm now let's just see what we can dig up from the ol' USSR military depot, eh?"

SKS... nope
T-62.. na
250Kt Nuclear warhead...... next!
SCUD-B... not what we need
ah, here, a SKAT sonar - perfect!

That was funny :lol:

artjomh
04-23-2012, 03:47 PM
How do they maintain positive control over tactical nukes/semi-strategic types

Is that a serious question, or are you working for FSB?

Maximmmm
04-23-2012, 03:50 PM
Is that a serious question, or are you working for FSB?

Better question: I wonder when's the last time our attack subs actually carried nuke-tipped torpedoes.

AustinJ
04-23-2012, 03:51 PM
Is that a serious question, or are you working for FSB?

Just curious to know , I am sure Nuke must be a very serious weapon before they are used be it SS-18 or just a N torpedo.

But the permission to use it must be a layered one with General Staff and finally presidential sanction required for the job but then in actual war when it involves SSN or a Battle Cruiser with SS-N-16 Shipwreck , a lot of it might be situational or tactical in nature.

So was wondering if the local top guy in Ship/Submarine makes the call , or its strictly General Staff/President sanction to do so.

I recollect reading in good old Soviet days the Commander had the authority and discretion to use tactical nukes

artjomh
04-23-2012, 03:55 PM
Better question: I wonder when's the last time our attack subs actually carried nuke-tipped torpedoes.

1992........

Raden5
04-23-2012, 04:18 PM
so they are upgrading BMD-1s to BMD-2 level and also denying the BMD-4Ms, thus denying the paradroppable capability by ongoing development of kurganets platform (too heavy for paradropping)... so it means VDV won't get new/modern paradroppable IFVs till 2020 at least (since none is in development).....

Information not enough.
We can not judge - what conflicts consider more likely analysts of General staff.
We do not know who of competitors of Kurganmashzavod, what and to whom had promised.

Flamming_Python
04-23-2012, 06:35 PM
Information not enough.
We can not judge - what conflicts consider more likely analysts of General staff.
We do not know who of competitors of Kurganmashzavod, what and to whom had promised.

Air-droppable vehicles are useful for conventional warfare & rapid deployment to remote hotspots. I'm sure that the VDV won't be keen to give up this capability; for counter-insurgency it's hardly essential but then so aren't plenty of other things that we continue procuring. Perhaps its simply that the Boomerang class or whatever it's called will be air-droppable; would make some sense as it would likely have comparable armour to the current BMD-series; if not even a little higher.

Rubick
04-23-2012, 07:16 PM
Boomerang was a wheeled platform and i think is supposed to be 25 tons heavy. There was a platform named "typhoon" that was supposed to go up to 17 tons. Maybe that will be a basis for paradrop platforms ?


Does anyone know what the last gunboat class that SU built ?

fiorellabel
04-23-2012, 07:24 PM
For what i've heard to date both Armada than Kurganets and Boomerang are to be intended like a complete family of vehicles and not like a single item,i.e every basic chassis are intended to be modular and it would be possible to configure it into several vehicles, like Mervaka/Namer or Centauro/Freccia for an example.
Think about a soviet era motorized regiment with almost three main fighting vehicles and several minor ones and an actual Striker brigade: operatively the latter maybe would lack some flexibility but logistically and economically thing make a lot of sense.
VDV is a separate organization from Army and so they would be probably granted an ad hoc solution.

Raden5
04-23-2012, 07:30 PM
Air-droppable vehicles are useful for conventional warfare & rapid deployment to remote hotspots. I'm sure that the VDV won't be keen to give up this capability; for counter-insurgency it's hardly essential but then so aren't plenty of other things that we continue procuring. Perhaps its simply that the Boomerang class or whatever it's called will be air-droppable; would make some sense as it would likely have comparable armour to the current BMD-series; if not even a little higher.

Airborne is not an independent service and does not decides - what to buy and what not.
But I in general wrote about other - about null information, but not about quality of some armour. Purchases could stop in general on banal reason - Kurganmashzavod an order will not execute.

Flamming_Python
04-23-2012, 08:49 PM
Airborne is not an independent service and does not decides - what to buy and what not.
But I in general wrote about other - about null information, but not about quality of some armour. Purchases could stop in general on banal reason - Kurganmashzavod an order will not execute.

Are you using Google Translate or do you just talk like Yoda naturally? :)

GunshipDemocracy
04-24-2012, 09:38 AM
New center for advanced weapons to be build in Siberia. Looks like away form potential war zones and I am looking forward for portable EM guns for Russian Space Marines ;-)

in Russian
http://sib.fm/news/2012/04/19/centr-razrabotki-perspektivnykh-boevykh-tekhnologij#.T5RfIx6W7-g.twitter

and in English
http://www.translate.ru/siteTranslation/autolink/?direction=re&template=General&sourceURL=http://sib.fm/news/2012/04/19/centr-razrabotki-perspektivnykh-boevykh-tekhnologij#.T5RfIx6W7-g.twitter

==========

and here something I do not really get. Why Rogozin said about 12 years of gap? Does it mean that avionics FA-PAK is worse than in Typhoon or F-16 block 52?! WTF?

http://en.rian.ru/mlitary_news/20120423/172990024.html

In processing power of processors it is ~5 years but who is using top power civil processors for smart ammo?! did I miss something?

Khathi
04-24-2012, 09:52 AM
There might be two not necessarily mutually exclusive reasons for his words. First, Rogozin loves to run his mouth, that's his well known trait. Second, he might be referring to the general state of thing, not the specific parts. Russian microelectronics is indeed lagging, and the most advanced companies, such as MCST, are so strongly hit by a bran drain that they in a way serve as a "farm clubs" of sorts for American, Korean and Japanese microelectronic industries. MCST, for example, loses a lot of people each year to Intel, with which it has historical ties: both its founders, Vladimir Pentkovsky and Boris Babayan, ended up there, and Pentkovsky even was the chief developer of Pentium III, which later evolved into the current Core architecture.

PS: OT, but a funny aside: the famous Russian choirmaster Mikhail Turetsky is Vladimir Pentkovsky's cousin. ;)

GunshipDemocracy
04-24-2012, 10:39 AM
Indeed Russian microelectronic HW companies are lagging some years but maybe this is a "verbal barrage" before requesting more investment in microchips in Russia? including salaries for scientists and R&D engineers... Without governmental investment the gap will not be closed. South Korean govt invested many years in chaebols before they can stand competition. IMO Russia shall follow same way.





PS: OT, but a funny aside: the famous Russian choirmaster Mikhail Turetsky is Vladimir Pentkovsky's cousin.

apparently music and science use similar genes ;-)

Khathi
04-24-2012, 10:45 AM
Maybe, but for now the story is as follows: the company hires a bunch of fresh PhysTech graduates who are happy to be hired because no commercial company in Russia would hire any graduate without experience. These guys work for the company for a couple of years, learn the ropes, complete their PhDs, and pfft! Off they go, hello Intel/Samsung. Rinse, repeat.

GunshipDemocracy
04-24-2012, 11:05 AM
Agreed 100%. Since now we are on the same page, let's wait when Russian govt will come to the proper conclusions ;-)

But I am still an optimist - engineers "stolen" by Intel/Samsung once might return to Russian market. They will bring experience, connections, ideas so can participate in creation of local start-ups.

DasVivo
04-24-2012, 11:12 AM
Maybe, but for now the story is as follows: the company hires a bunch of fresh PhysTech graduates who are happy to be hired because no commercial company in Russia would hire any graduate without experience. These guys work for the company for a couple of years, learn the ropes, complete their PhDs, and pfft! Off they go, hello Intel/Samsung. Rinse, repeat.

I thinkk it sounds like there really needs to be either higher rewards in staying 'in house' (not so easy) or atleast some sort of legislation requiring that University Graduates are kept in Country for a certain duration to garantee they atleast give back what they get somewhat

sepheronx
04-24-2012, 11:28 AM
Agreed 100%. Since now we are on the same page, let's wait when Russian govt will come to the proper conclusions ;-)

But I am still an optimist - engineers "stolen" by Intel/Samsung once might return to Russian market. They will bring experience, connections, ideas so can participate in creation of local start-ups.

$$ is the answer. The thing is, these companies rely mostly on government contracts and get some money on side through sales of components to other industries within Russia (for Roscosmos, etc). What they either need to do is privatize or make these semiconductor companies public organizations so there is more funding thus being able to spend more in R&D and graduates. As I understand, the Semi-conductor sector is making a comeback in Russia, but not as quick and up to par with others. That said, what I think Rogozin said is that in the development/manufacturing level of the newer equipment, and not the new equipment themselves. For instance, PAK FA is latest and greatest next to what US has for aircraft (as an example) and uses mostly to all Russian components (Don't forget, things like microprocessors in these new jets are actually quite old and have been in development for ages due to high tolerance to electronic countermeasures and their actual purpose of use (being sufficient)); but instead, talking about the equipment of making said...equipment. Maybe that is why development for PAK FA may be taking a while or even the manufacturing of newer jets (although as I understand, most Sukhoi plants are already updated) so this may fall in line with some other major companies.

Edit: it has been said for a while that the manufacturing process in Russia is heavily outdated, and with newer electronics and automation these days, Russia is being left behind in that field.

Rubick
04-24-2012, 11:29 AM
There might be two not necessarily mutually exclusive reasons for his words. First, Rogozin loves to run his mouth, that's his well known trait. Second, he might be referring to the general state of thing, not the specific parts. Russian microelectronics is indeed lagging, and the most advanced companies, such as MCST, are so strongly hit by a bran drain that they in a way serve as a "farm clubs" of sorts for American, Korean and Japanese microelectronic industries. MCST, for example, loses a lot of people each year to Intel, with which it has historical ties: both its founders, Vladimir Pentkovsky and Boris Babayan, ended up there, and Pentkovsky even was the chief developer of Pentium III, which later evolved into the current Core architecture.

PS: OT, but a funny aside: the famous Russian choirmaster Mikhail Turetsky is Vladimir Pentkovsky's cousin. ;)



Didn't he have the entire hand in the Pentium processors. The whole line was named after him from what i read here.

African-European
04-24-2012, 01:07 PM
Russia and Kyrghyzistan seal military base lease deal

The deal was signed following a meeting between Defense Minister Anatoly Serdyukov and his counterparts from Kyrgyzstan and Tajikistan in Beijing on Tuesday, Serdyukov’s spokeswoman Lt. Col. Irina Kovalchuk said.“During a meeting with Kyrgyz Defense Minister Major General Taalaibek Omuraliev a protocol on rent compensation for the use Russian military facilities in Kyrgyzstan was signed. Work to resolve the problems which occurred with payables on rent was completed,” Kovalchuk said.“The signing of the protocol legally sets out the debt,” she saidThe Russian and Tajikistan Defense Ministers sides signed an intergovernmental agreement on Tajikistan citizens attendance in the educational institutions of the Russian military.“It creates the necessary legal and regulatory framework for the training of Tajikistan citizens in the Suvorov schools and cadet corps of Russian Defense Ministry,” Kovalchuk said.Serdyukov is in Beijing to attend a meeting of Defense Ministers of the Shanghai Cooperation Organization, which will be held on Tuesday.During his visit to Moscow in February, Kyrgyzstan’s President Almazbek Atambayev criticized Russia for not paying the rent for its military base in Kant (http://en.rian.ru/mlitary_news/20120227/171554590.html) and questioned the rationality of allowing Moscow to keep a base on Kyrgyz territory.Kyrgyz Prime Minister Omurbekh Babanov said on Tuesday the country’s authorities were planning to decide whether to extend the U.S. lease of the Manas air base near Bishkek by taking into account the opinion of partner states within the Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe (OSCE).The United States began operations at the Manas base in 2001 in the aftermath of the 9/11 attacks to support military operations against the Taliban in Afghanistan. It remains a key supply facility for the ongoing military campaign there.When Kyrgyz President Almazbek Atambayev assumed his post last November, he stated that Kyrgyzstan would not prolong the lease contract with the United States, which expires in 2014, saying that he did not want a third country carrying out a retaliatory strike against the civilian airport. Pentagon officials have since been trying to persuade the Kyrgyz authorities to change their mind.

http://en.rian.ru/world/20120424/173007597.html


Russia to draft new defense industry concept by yearend

Russia will draft a new concept for the development of its defense industry that reflects existing and potential threats to its national security by the end of 2012, Deputy Prime Minister Dmitry Rogozin said on Tuesday.
His satement was earlier misinterpreted by reporters as an announcement of plans to draft a new military doctrine.
“It will be a document on strategic planning for 30-40 years ahead,” Rogozin clarified in his Twitter blog.
The new concept will take into account “the analysis of potential threats, internal and external, and the preparation of a military-technical response to localize and neutralize these threats.”
“Work on the new concept will start in mid-May,” Rogozin said.
The announcement comes at a time when Moscow is searching for ways to counter the so-called European missile shield, NATO’s expansion toward Russia’s borders, terrorism and drug-trafficking.
It has been only two years since Russian President Dmitry Medvedev approved the country's new military doctrine, which allows preventive nuclear strikes against potential aggressors and the use of military force to protect the lives and interests of Russian citizens abroad.
The Russian military has insisted on the strengthening of Russia’s nuclear deterrent as the cornerstone of strategic stability, while maintaining highly-efficient, mobile conventional forces.
The Russian government has allocated 22 trillion rubles ($730 billion) on the state arms procurement program until 2020.

http://en.rian.ru/mlitary_news/20120424/173013523.html


Russia paratroopers test new portable radar

Russian paratroopers have started testing a modernized portable radar that could be installed on airborne combat vehicles or carried by a small crew, the Defense Ministry said on Tuesday.
“The first six radars have been delivered to air defense units which are part of airborne and air-assault brigades stationed in Novorossiisk, Ivanovo and Tula,” Col. Alexander Kucherenko said.
The testing of Garmon portable radars will continue until the end of 2012.
According to various sources, the Garmon (1L122M) radar is designed to detect and track at least three types of airborne targets despite active electronic countermeasures.
The system weighs about 30kg and consists of an antenna array, a CPU, a tactical display and a Glonass receive

http://en.rian.ru/mlitary_news/20120424/173017525.html

Maximmmm
04-24-2012, 03:48 PM
More news ladies:

Ivan Gren to be floated out in may :D, although the reduced firepower bums the **** out of me.
http://flotprom.ru/news/?ELEMENT_ID=110492

Borei contract to be delayed again :(
http://lenta.ru/news/2012/04/24/rogo/

Mock fights between our Mig-29SMT's, Mig-31's and Su 34's. Glad to see our pilots flying this much!
http://lenta.ru/news/2012/04/24/exercise/

Mi-8 made emergency landing during training flight, all three crew members unharmed. Heli is ruined though.
http://tvzvezda.ru/news/forces/content/201204241626-ircy.htm

Hyde
04-24-2012, 04:28 PM
What did they change in the Ivan Gren's armament?

Maximmmm
04-24-2012, 04:33 PM
What did they change in the Ivan Gren's armament?

Here's a good article on it: http://flotprom.ru/publications/actual/prenatalscars/
Basically the design went through a ton of changes. Originally they projected it with the standard armament, so 100mm main gun, grad-M (like on the buyans), 2x Palash and some jamming equipment.
That all went down the drain and now all it will be armed with is x2 Ak-630M Duet (the two-barreled one) and 2x regular Ak-630.

The ship is practically harmless now.

Flamming_Python
04-24-2012, 05:06 PM
Here's a good article on it: http://flotprom.ru/publications/actual/prenatalscars/
Basically the design went through a ton of changes. Originally they projected it with the standard armament, so 100mm main gun, grad-M (like on the buyans), 2x Palash and some jamming equipment.
That all went down the drain and now all it will be armed with is x2 Ak-630M Duet (the two-barreled one) and 2x regular Ak-630.

The ship is practically harmless now.

It's hardly going to be going in alone. Perhaps they reasoned that this armament will be redundant. It makes sense to fit AA and Anti-Ship missiles on as many craft as possible as these are constant threats for any naval force. But artillery support to marines in the form of main cannon fire and Grad missiles is a far more specific mission, there is perhaps no need for more than 1-2 ships in the task-force to have such capabilities.

At least that's my take on it :P
Personally though I think it would have been worth it, to have it pack more of a punch. At least to have kept the Grad.

GunshipDemocracy
04-24-2012, 05:07 PM
Here's a good article on it: http://flotprom.ru/publications/actual/prenatalscars/
That all went down the drain and now all it will be armed with is x2 Ak-630M Duet (the two-barreled one) and 2x regular Ak-630.
The ship is practically harmless now.

and why a landing ship is supposed to have any more firepower then for self-defense?

Maximmmm
04-24-2012, 05:12 PM
Well I personally think they did it because the project has been sitting there forever and they just want it done ASAP and as cheap as they can.
Packing a bit more punch would have been keeping up with soviet BDK doctrine. The Ropucha, our most successful landing ship class (build in Poland) has about the same armament as the Gren would have had.

XTX-Horus
04-24-2012, 05:16 PM
Maybe - this is due to a decrease in the role of "parachuting" and increase the role of "airmobile".That is quite different things, and makes it possible to equip the VDV more than heavy machinery.
But this - version...

Hello Raden5.

So, if i understand this correctly: The BMD-4M isnt being bought due to the fact that the Russian MoD decreases the role of the VDV in strategic warfare and wants it to be a lighter (less machines, more paratroop oriented) and more tactical force?



-Is the R-74 a further development of the R-73M, R-73M1 or the R-73M2?

-Does the R-74M have the same 75 degree off-bore seeker head range of the R-74E ("normal" R-73 has a 60 degree off-bore)?

-Does the "R-74-PD" exist in some form or another? On Ausairpower.net, Carlo Kopp posted an article talking about a possible R-74 modification in which you put the R-74 on top of the Rocketbooster of the R-27 to transform the R-74 into a BVR ranged missile with WVR missile performance. Here is the link to the page i am talking about (Scroll to about a quarter to a third the way down):

>>http://www.ausairpower.net/APA-NOTAM-200408-1.html

Bump to get these questions awnsered correctly as i am quite curious to say the least.

Hyde
04-24-2012, 05:23 PM
It's just a landing ship, so from that point of view I can see how it wouldn't need any of that armament. On the other hand I also see how it WOULD need all of that armament. They should've left it at least with a Palash for self-defence.

Raden5
04-24-2012, 05:24 PM
Hello Raden5.

So, if i understand this correctly: The BMD-4M isnt being bought due to the fact that the Russian MoD decreases the role of the VDV in strategic warfare and wants it to be a lighter (less machines, more paratroop oriented) and more tactical force?

"Russia will develop a new military doctrine by the end of 2012..." (с)

I am not able to predict the future.

Maximmmm
04-24-2012, 05:26 PM
Can't answer your second question Horus, not knowledgeable enough xD

As for the BMD we simply don't know.
-Option one is they're waiting for one for the new platforms under development and don't want to waste precious money on older systems.
-Option two is the VDV will undergo some serious structural changes, giving the force different capabilities and equipment
-Option three is that there's a limited amount of money that's being given to the VDV with all the other purchases going on and they simply can't purchase it at the moment.

I think the first option is most likely.

Khathi
04-25-2012, 03:36 AM
Didn't he have the entire hand in the Pentium processors. The whole line was named after him from what i read here.
Not really. The whole project was started back in early 90s, and when Pentkovsky joined in, IIRC, 1996, the first series of P1 were already long on the shelves. On the other hand, the collaboration between ITMiVT and Intel started as early as in 1991, so he was at least well known to Intel bosses at the time. ;)

Einhander
04-25-2012, 04:27 AM
No way a company would name their most soughtafter(worldwide!) product after a single project' participant who is known to be a rival country citizen, no matter how big was his contribution. Pentkovsky / Pentium names are just a coincidence.

artjomh
04-25-2012, 12:42 PM
Sources in the Navy Staff are saying that the Yasen class submarines will be armed with "hypersonic missiles with a range of 1000 km".

http://www.lenta.ru/news/2012/04/25/yasen/

Well, there are your first stats on BrahMos 2/Oniks 2.

By method of exclusion, Klub is subsonic and has a range of 2500 km. BrahMos is supersonic, but not hypersonic. By exclusion, this means they are referring to BrahMos 2.

1000 km is pretty good for a hypersonic missile in the 9 by 0.7 meter dimensions.

Rubick
04-25-2012, 12:51 PM
Or Zircon-S.

artjomh
04-25-2012, 12:57 PM
I think Zircon-S is the same thing as BrahMos 2.

"Mineral" name, supersonic cruise missile. Who else do you think is making it if not NPO Mash, makers of Amethyst, Bazalt, Granite, Malachite, Onyx, etc?

Rubick
04-25-2012, 01:29 PM
I think Zircon-S is the same thing as BrahMos 2.

"Mineral" name, supersonic cruise missile. Who else do you think is making it if not NPO Mash, makers of Amethyst, Bazalt, Granite, Malachite, Onyx, etc?


Related i think, distanten cousin at that but i'd be suprised if Zircon-S and Brahmos are same missile's.

artjomh
04-25-2012, 02:00 PM
I seriously doubt they are developing several different missiles, at least as far as propulsion and materials are concerned (which is 90% of the work).

As per usual, Indians are going to get gimped range and indigenous electronics, but in all important ways, I seriously doubt that these two missiles are from different R&D projects. That's just not economically efficient, especially since NPO Mash is given an opportunity to develop a missile on Indian dime.

Raden5
04-25-2012, 02:01 PM
I think Zircon-S is the same thing as BrahMos 2.

"Mineral" name, supersonic cruise missile. Who else do you think is making it if not NPO Mash, makers of Amethyst, Bazalt, Granite, Malachite, Onyx, etc?

But it is not yet known - what kind "ten types of guided high-precision aircraft and naval weapons" develops the JSC TMC.

AustinJ
04-25-2012, 02:25 PM
Brahmos chief Dr Pillai mentioned that Hypersonic Brahmos is still in design stage and next year they will fire the scramjet in real condition which is actual flight.

According to him Brahmos-2 will enter some time in 2018-20 , which is assume will be possible if all goes well and Brahmos 2 will only be an Air Launched Missile initially .

I did personally speak to Dr Pillai at AeroIndia 2011 and he told me it was not sure sure if DRDO or Russian scramjet design will be accepted ,as both are working on it.

So unless the so called new hypersonic missile of 1000 km range is inducted some time in 2020 which is assuming they have tested the non-export stuff and cleared the sub launched variant , then this missile is something not related to the Indo-Russian brahmos-2.

AustinJ
04-25-2012, 02:35 PM
How Truth is in this news that Ukraine can sell R-27 missile to another country without Russian consent or approval , does Ukraine retain the IP and export rights of R-27 missile ?

Ukraine on Brink of Missile Deal with India - Media (http://en.rian.ru/mlitary_news/20120425/173046325.html)

artjomh
04-25-2012, 02:37 PM
How Truth is in this news that Ukraine can sell R-27 missile to another country without Russian consent or approval , does Ukraine retain the IP and export rights of R-27 missile ?

Ukraine on Brink of Missile Deal with India - Media (http://en.rian.ru/mlitary_news/20120425/173046325.html)

Because they've retained the factory and they don't give a **** about anyone's rights.

BTW, Russia makes the active radar homing head for R-27, so if they wanted to, they could block this deal easily. However, R-27 is so outdated compared to R-77, that they may not even bother.

XTX-Horus
04-25-2012, 02:41 PM
"Russia will develop a new military doctrine by the end of 2012..." (с)

I am not able to predict the future.
+

Can't answer your second question Horus, not knowledgeable enough xD

As for the BMD we simply don't know.
-Option one is they're waiting for one for the new platforms under development and don't want to waste precious money on older systems.
-Option two is the VDV will undergo some serious structural changes, giving the force different capabilities and equipment
-Option three is that there's a limited amount of money that's being given to the VDV with all the other purchases going on and they simply can't purchase it at the moment.

I think the first option is most likely.

Thank you both for the swift replies gentlemen.

So i guess its either waiting for the next gen vehicles to arrive and/or its waiting untill the new military doctrine has been outlined.


Sources in the Navy Staff are saying that the Yasen class submarines will be armed with "hypersonic missiles with a range of 1000 km".

http://www.lenta.ru/news/2012/04/25/yasen/


The P-1000 "Zyrkon" has a range of 1000 kilometers!!!!??? My heavens!!!! And that with a device/machine that can go 7+ mach and carrying a ~400 kilogram warhead!!

And here i thought my estimation of 700 kilometers was nothing more then daydreaming. The striking power of the Russian navy would be super increased to the point i cannot even fanthom.

Universals
04-25-2012, 02:42 PM
Because they've retained the factory and they don't give a **** about anyone's rights.

So they can source all the components from within Ukraine?

Rubick
04-25-2012, 02:43 PM
I seriously doubt they are developing several different missiles, at least as far as propulsion and materials are concerned (which is 90% of the work).

As per usual, Indians are going to get gimped range and indigenous electronics, but in all important ways, I seriously doubt that these two missiles are from different R&D projects. That's just not economically efficient, especially since NPO Mash is given an opportunity to develop a missile on Indian dime.

I agree but. Even if they are a close allies would you really give them the most capable anti ship missile ? Even if downgraded.

Related I think they are but cousins more then anything else.


P-1000 is vulcan not Zyrkon-c XTX. Also I would not dream of Mach 7+ missile.

AustinJ
04-25-2012, 02:47 PM
The real problem with such long range missile targeting moving target like Ships or CBG etc is the ability to get real time intelligence from off board sensors , its the ability to get all the targeting data and midcourse update that would make such long range targeting possible , I read even oscar-2 had real problems using the real long arm of Shipwreck

Without such targetting data from offboard sensors and using only submarine sonars against ship , practically you can aim for 250-300 km range.

Raden5
04-25-2012, 02:48 PM
Because they've retained the factory and they don't give a **** about anyone's rights.
BTW, Russia makes the active radar homing head for R-27, so if they wanted to, they could block this deal easily. However, R-27 is so outdated compared to R-77, that they may not even bother.

Russia accuses Ukraine, that she did not sign the contracts (over 5 years) for the delivery to India of missiles for Russian fighters.

P.S. And JSC TMC - the development of "10 new types of missiles," and not enough production areas.

artjomh
04-25-2012, 02:48 PM
So they can source all the components from within Ukraine?

The IR version is Ukrainian. The SARH/ARH version has to be sourced in Russia.

Shilo
04-25-2012, 02:49 PM
The real problem with such long range missile targeting moving target like Ships or CBG etc is the ability to get real time intelligence from off board sensors , its the ability to get all the targeting data and midcourse update that would make such long range targeting possible , I read even oscar-2 had real problems using the real long arm of Shipwreck

Without such targetting data from offboard sensors and using only submarine sonars against ship , practically you can aim for 250-300 km range.

Naturally they are going to use the Legenda replacement that is coming online (Liana/Lotos?).

AustinJ
04-25-2012, 02:54 PM
Naturally they are going to use the Legenda replacement that is coming online (Liana/Lotos?).

Lets assume the so called Leganda/Lotus/Pumpkin Ocean Recon Satellite work well in actual war situation and provide the initial target cuing in real time , but by the time the missile reaches 1000 odd Km the target may not be there , so they would need some form of midcourse updates to keep the missile and its seeker in FOV of the target once it goes active say 50-100 km closing the target.

Shilo
04-25-2012, 03:02 PM
Lets assume the so called Leganda/Lotus/Pumpkin Ocean Recon Satellite work well in actual war situation and provide the initial target cuing in real time , but by the time the missile reaches 1000 odd Km the target may not be there , so they would need some form of midcourse updates to keep the missile and its seeker in FOV of the target once it goes active say 50-100 km closing the target.

Naturally the system should be able to continuously monitor the target - at least to some extent... or what's the point?

At ~M6.5, it would travel 1000KM in ~7.5mins.

AustinJ
04-25-2012, 03:07 PM
Assuming its a consistent M 6.5 and powered all the way say by scramjet all the way to target and it does not do any manouvering and we have not taken the time to boost the missile till scramjet burns.

You will still need a very reliable satellite that hopefully your enemy does not shoot down and some form of midcourse update which will some by Aircraft and not by sat.

Rubick
04-25-2012, 03:10 PM
Why would you need a midcourse update from an aircraft and not by sat.

Shilo
04-25-2012, 03:13 PM
Assuming its a consistent M 6.5 and powered all the way say by scramjet all the way to target and it does not do any manouvering and we have not taken the time to boost the missile till scramjet burns.

You will still need a very reliable satellite that hopefully your enemy does not shoot down and some form of midcourse update which will some by Aircraft and not by sat.

ASAT is still pretty far away from being ubiquitously deployed... not to mention it's a big sky and payloads like this can be masked when sent up.

YevgenyP
04-25-2012, 03:16 PM
Russian Warships to Get NATO Communications Equipment



Russian warships will be equipped with NATO navigation and communications systems to improve coordination in anti-piracy missions around the world, Chief of the Russian General Staff Nikolai Makarov said on Wednesday.The issue has been discussed during a meeting of the NATO-Russia Council in Brussels.“We decided to install standard NATO navigation and communications systems on our warships,” Makarov said.

http://en.rian.ru/world/20120425/173053100.html

AustinJ
04-25-2012, 04:05 PM
Kamov vs. Mil: prospects for Russian chopper fleet (http://english.ruvr.ru/2012_04_25/72893378/)

Universals
04-25-2012, 04:07 PM
The IR version is Ukrainian. The SARH/ARH version has to be sourced in Russia. I see. Thanks

Fulcrum-35
04-25-2012, 06:26 PM
I've three questions:

- What is the exact difference between the Kh-555 and Kh-55SM missiles?

- Do you have any info on the development of the NK-65 engine for the improved An-124?

- What is the status of the Kh-32 program? What are its real specifications?

Thanks in advance!

artjomh
04-25-2012, 07:07 PM
I've three questions:

- What is the exact difference between the Kh-555 and Kh-55SM missiles?

Top - Kh-55. Bottom - Kh-55SM. Those conformal tanks give SM additional range.

Kh-555 is, essentially, identical to Kh-55, but has an improved guidance package and somewhat lower range due to heavier non-nuclear warhead.

http://img214.imageshack.us/img214/4008/x55l.jpg (http://img214.imageshack.us/i/x55l.jpg/)

http://img836.imageshack.us/img836/7691/x5501.jpg (http://img836.imageshack.us/i/x5501.jpg/)


- What is the status of the Kh-32 program? What are its real specifications?

Tested, but never went into IOC.

C.Puffs
04-25-2012, 07:10 PM
Sources in the Navy Staff are saying that the Yasen class submarines will be armed with "hypersonic missiles with a range of 1000 km".

http://www.lenta.ru/news/2012/04/25/yasen/

Well, there are your first stats on BrahMos 2/Oniks 2.

By method of exclusion, Klub is subsonic and has a range of 2500 km. BrahMos is supersonic, but not hypersonic. By exclusion, this means they are referring to BrahMos 2.

1000 km is pretty good for a hypersonic missile in the 9 by 0.7 meter dimensions.

roflroflroflroflrofl Oh wow. I'd take that with a truckload of salt.

Shilo
04-25-2012, 08:47 PM
Tested, but never went into IOC.

How do you know? They look identical anyway..

Shilo
04-25-2012, 08:47 PM
roflroflroflroflrofl Oh wow. I'd take that with a truckload of salt.

You must have missed the part about the 'maneuverable' warhead, then...

AustinJ
04-26-2012, 12:47 AM
- What is the status of the Kh-32 program? What are its real specifications?

In the new book - "Russian Strategic Aviation Today - Yefim Gordon & Dmitriy Komissarov" quoting the Kh-32 part below

#####

The principal weapon of modernised Tu-22M3 will be the Kh-32 supersonic air-to-surface missile developed by NPO Raduga as an upgrade of the familiar Kh-22. It features an improved rocket motor and a new seeker head.

The old Kh-22 anti-shipping missile was severely handicapped by its shortrange - a few hundered kilometers, that is, within visual range for a high flying aircraft. Over-the-horizon attackes were all but impossible: the Kh-22's seeker head could not find the target. In a real-life attack scenario against a carrier task force, the Tu-22M3 would have to break through fightercover , inevitably suffering loss.

Raguda new Kh-32 is the solution. While Kh-22 climbs to 22000m and acclerates to about 3600 km/h on the way to target, the Kh-32 at first soars up almost to the outer space an altitude of some 44 km/27.3 miles then "looks beyond the horizon", detecting the target at 600 km or even 1000 km range. The warhead/seeker of the new missile is much smarter - it can classify the targets and select the priority target an aircraft carrier or cruiser.

Also the Kh-32 closes on the target at much higher speed, which makes it impossible to intercept. In Russia that this missile and the Tu-22M3 modernisation to carry it are considered a serious military detterent and an effective weapon against the most powerful carrier task force. Test of the Kh-32 were successfuly conpleted back in late 1990 in so doing the long range aviation worked in close co-operation with the Navy,which willing supplied decommisioned warships as target.

#####

DRA
04-26-2012, 01:08 AM
roflroflroflroflrofl Oh wow. I'd take that with a truckload of salt.

C.Puffs, I am sorry to start your day like this, but nobody here cares how you would take it: with a truckload of salt or up your as*.

Flamming_Python
04-26-2012, 02:08 AM
roflroflroflroflrofl Oh wow. I'd take that with a truckload of salt.

Maybe; but this isn't Iranian technology we are talking about.

sepheronx
04-26-2012, 02:15 AM
Maybe; but this isn't Iranian technology we are talking about.

If it isn't LHM or Ratheon, then it is all Iranian technology...to him at least.

AustinJ
04-26-2012, 02:30 AM
Russia to Spend RUR 300 bln for Navy (http://rusnavy.com/news/navy/index.php?ELEMENT_ID=15005)


By 2020, Russian Navy will receive 23 new types of surface ships and submarines; Defense Industry Development Federal Program provides RUR 292 bln for that purpose, said academician Valentin Pashin, research manager and director general of the Krylov Central Scientific & Research Institute.

According to Pashin, 23 new types of surface ships and submarines will be laid down and delivered to Russian naval mariners. Overall displacement of ships will make 800,000 tons. Major part of tonnage (550,000 tons) will be displaced by new ships, the rest – by those subject to modernization.

"Shipyards are ruled by the Defense Industry Development Federal Program. Only its naval section is financed by RUR 292 bln. This sum is quite enough to modernize production, introduce scientific innovations, and train high-qualified personnel", said the scientist.

As for him, current construction periods of warships and civil vessels are often "noncompetitive, which rises cost of works. For example, a five-year long delay makes cost of shipbuilding works 1.5 times higher. In this regard, we must improve pre-production design engineering works, holding a course not for administrative leverage but market mechanisms".

Pashin appeared at jubilee session of the St. Petersburg Association of Shipbuilders which coordinates the core industry of the Russian "northern capital city" comprising 43 shipyards, research institutes, and design bureaus.

According to Prof. Vladimir Aleksandrov who heads the shipbuilders' association, it is important that "Russian companies buy ships from national yards. For instance, it is unclear why the Europe's largest slipways of Baltiysky Zavod and Admiralteyskie Verfi are not workloaded in full. Indeed, they can build large-tonnage ships - supertankers and LNG carriers, heavy frigates and cruisers".

AustinJ
04-26-2012, 02:30 AM
Didnt they talk of 100 Ships and submarines for SAP 2020 ? 23 new ships and subs are too low.

sepheronx
04-26-2012, 02:32 AM
Didnt they talk of 100 Ships and submarines for SAP 2020 ? 23 new ships and subs are too low.

Who is they? And 100 ships and submarines in what? 9 years? That aint going to happen. How many ships is that per year? 11 per year? Add that it is between submarines and surface ships.

AustinJ
04-26-2012, 02:41 AM
Well the Navy gets around ~ 4.8 trillion roubles as part of SAP 2020 , if they spend 300 billion roubles in ship and submarine building what happens to the remaining 4.5 trillion roubles ? thats a huge sum.

sepheronx
04-26-2012, 02:46 AM
Well the Navy gets around ~ 4.8 trillion roubles as part of SAP 2020 , if they spend 300 billion roubles in ship and submarine building what happens to the remaining 4.5 trillion roubles ? thats a huge sum.

I cant read article now as I am at work, but let me read what it states first (fully) than I will maybe be able to give some sort of better guess. Maybe it is just one order so far? And then they may order another batch of 27 or so ships, etc? I mean, look at the aircraft procurement, it seems to go that way.

Maximmmm
04-26-2012, 04:13 AM
Here's a very interesting interview with the commander of the 58th army that won the 08 war.
Link to part 2 also in the article
http://sdelanounas.ru/blogs/16875/

It's interesting how he counters the perception of how we fought the war by arguing that it was a well oiled machine, before any reforms got to **** with it.

AustinJ
04-26-2012, 05:06 AM
Here is something on Russian -Indian Hypersonic program


India to Test Own Hypersonic Ramjet (http://rusnavy.com/news/othernavies/index.php?ELEMENT_ID=14991)

India's Defense Research and Development Organization (DRDO) will hold trials of domestically-developed hypersonic combustion ramjet in 2013, reports PTI referring to DRDO director Vijay Kumar Saraswat. According to him, the propulsion system will be capable to work at speeds six times higher than sound speed. Saraswat declined to give any details of the prospective project.

Presently, India is developing a hypersonic missile capable to accelerate up to six Mach numbers. The project is developed by Russian-Indian joint venture BrahMos. The new ammunition will be based on supersonic cruise missile BrahMos already operated by Indian Army. In its turn, BrahMos missile is based on Russian cruise missile Onyx.

Today, active development works on hypersonic vehicles are held by the US, Russia, and Brazil. In particular, American planemaker Boeing jointly with US Air Force is developing hypersonic missile X-51A Waverider accelerating up to six Mach numbers. Besides, Lockheed Martin designs hypersonic vehicle Falcon HTV-2. In its turn, Brazil is developing missile 14-X also supposed to fly at speeds exceeding six Mach numbers.

As was reported late in Aug 2011, Russia's Tactical Missiles Corporation had started research works on a hypersonic missile project. According to the company's chief designer Boris Obnosov, Russian missile will be capable to fly at speeds 12-13 times as high as sound speed.

Besides, it is considered that the Baranov Aircraft Engine Building Institute is also engaged in development of hypersonic vehicle Igla under Project Holod-2. Its deputy director Valentin Solonin told AviaPORT on Apr 22, 2012 that the institute was researching integration of a ramjet and an airframe.

"We research effective compression, combustion, and expansion processes occurring in hypersonic vehicle's propulsion plant, and consider its integration with the airframe. Also, we actively study thermal states of ramjet and airframe. Since the inside temperature makes 2,600-2,700 degrees Celsius and the flight is quite continuous, there are some problems regarding thermal state", Solonin said.

metberkut
04-26-2012, 08:16 AM
Here is something on Russian -Indian Hypersonic program

Wow, Holod-2.

artjomh
04-26-2012, 09:48 AM
Didnt they talk of 100 Ships and submarines for SAP 2020 ? 23 new ships and subs are too low.

23 ship TYPES, not 23 ships.

GunshipDemocracy
04-26-2012, 11:57 AM
Here is something on Russian -Indian Hypersonic program

does it mean India and Russia will have different Brahmos-2 missiles? how about current version? is Brahmos now used in Russian AF/Fleet or Onyx without updates?

Rubick
04-26-2012, 12:28 PM
does it mean India and Russia will have different Brahmos-2 missiles? how about current version? is Brahmos now used in Russian AF/Fleet or Onyx without updates?

Who knows. No, Bhramos isn't used by Russians. Nor will it be. Unless they want a supersonic land attack capability.

xav
04-26-2012, 01:57 PM
I always thought Brahmos = P-800 Oniks more or less

AustinJ
04-26-2012, 01:58 PM
Here is some update on Hypersonic Brahmos from recent Defexpo 2012 at Delhi

link (http://www.defenseworld.net/go/defensenews.jsp?n=Russia, India To Jointly Develop New Brahmos-Like Missile&id=6772)


After the success of Brahmos, Russia and India are in talks to jointly develop yet another hypersonic cruise missile capable of flying at Mach 5-Mach 7 and will soon agree on a general outline of the design, the head of the BrahMos Indian-Russian cruise missile program, Praveen Pathak, said on Friday at the Defexpo in New Delhi.

"In the near future, we will set up a joint working group which will work out the parameters of the missile in cooperation with developers, and also decide how much each side will contribue to the project," Pathak said.

"We want to create a weapon which would not differ much from the existing BrahMos missile in weight and dimensions, so that it could be used in existing launchers on ships or mobile launchers. In this case it would not take too much work to convert such systems to hypersonic," he said. "We hope by the end of the year we'll carry out the first launch from an aircraft. It will be an air-launch”.

Rubick
04-26-2012, 02:43 PM
I always thought Brahmos = P-800 Oniks more or less

Yeah, more or less. Brahmos(different seeker and some go fast *****pes)= Yakhont which is an export downgrade version of Onyx.

GunshipDemocracy
04-26-2012, 03:03 PM
Yeah, more or less. Brahmos(different seeker and some go fast *****pes)= Yakhont which is an export downgrade version of Onyx.

so what Russia does have from this cooperation? if no feature developed in India seems to be used and Onyx was long time developed? I thought that land attack capability or shared costs for hypersonic version might be the case. Apparently I do not not see something ;-)

Rubick
04-26-2012, 03:21 PM
so what Russia does have from this cooperation? if no feature developed in India seems to be used and Onyx was long time developed? I thought that land attack capability or shared costs for hypersonic version might be the case. Apparently I do not not see something ;-)

Onyx was 80's project. Went online in 90's. As far as hypersonic ASM well money and maybe some know how from India. Though how much India really contributed to Zircon-S if any Is to be seen. For all we know Zircon-S and Brahmos part deux are two different missile's or perhaps distant cousins or one and the same. Nobody knows or can say for sure now.


I'm hoping they ain't related and two different potent sytems. That be *****ing. That and I can totally rub it into to Lord Artjomh's face.

xav
04-27-2012, 06:59 AM
Russian Navy to receive seven project 855 (Yasen class) SSN submarines by 2021

By 2021 defense shipyard Sevmash will build seven strike nuclear submarines of Yasen class for the Russian Navy including six submarines with reinforced missile armament and reduced level of noise, a source in the governmental military industrial commission reported.

The source said, "The first nuclear submarine Severodvinsk of project 855 of Yasen class of the fourth generation will be adopted for service and will be commissioned with the Navy this year." He added, "Construction of the lead submarine Kazan of project 855M, a modernized strike submarine with reduced level of noise and reinforced missile armament, should be completed in 2015. In addition to this it is planned to build a series of five such nuclear submarines by 2021. The state contract on them worth more than 150 billion rubles was signed between the Defense Ministry and USC in November of 2011."

According to the source, "The overall costs of construction of all seven nuclear submarines of Yasen class exceed 200 billion rubles. One strike nuclear submarine of project 855M of this class costs 50-100% more than a strategic missile-carrying submarine of project 955 and even project 955A of Borey class with reinforced nuclear missile armament."

http://www.navyrecognition.com/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=445

African-European
04-27-2012, 07:24 AM
Medvedev sends Air Force Commander into retirement


Russian President Dmitry Medvedev has sacked Russian Air Force Commander, Colonel-General Alexander Zelin and dismissed him from military service, the Kremlin said on Friday.Zelin, 59, has occupied the top military post for five years, during which the air force has begun to receive new aircraft and equipment in significant numbers for the first time since the end of the Soviet Union.“To the observer Zelin appeared to preside over a period where air force procurement and plans became more planted in reality than merely in aspirations,” said Douglas Barrie, an air warfare analyst at the London-based International Institute of Strategic Studies.No reason was given for the dismissal but senior military commanders in Russia usually retire at age 60.Igor Korotchenko, chairman of Defense Ministry’s Public Council said that the reshuffle was a normal practice for military officials.“Medevedev’s move will give the road to new, younger military specialists,” Korotchenko said, adding an experienced commander Zelin would likely move on to a top post in a defense industrial holding or corporation.

http://en.rian.ru/mlitary_news/20120427/173084185.html

Raden5
04-27-2012, 02:07 PM
[official data]

On the celebration of the "100 years of the air force", in Zhukovsky, will be: T-50, Tu-160, Tu-95MS, A-50U, Su-27SM, Su-30M2, Su-34, Su-35S, Su-30SM, Su-25SM, MiG-31BM, Mi-28N, Mi-8MTV-5-1, Mi-8AMTSh.

AustinJ
04-27-2012, 03:09 PM
For all we know Zircon-S

I have been hearing Zircon-S for a long time what kind of project it is , may be hypersonic something but any more details ?

DRA
04-27-2012, 03:58 PM
Tonight Russia has lost a great man - Anatoly Lebed. Hero, role model and a total bad as*...
He died after crashing his bike near Moscow
Rest in Peace, we will miss you...
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/9/9b/Anatoly_Lebed.jpg/180px-Anatoly_Lebed.jpg

http://bankrat.gorod.tomsk.ru/uploads/11956/1281107556/Anatoli_Vyacheslav_Lebed.jpg

http://i.kremenchug.ua/images.php/i1105_02865fff701badXL.jpg

http://img-fotki.yandex.ru/get/3805/soustov.7c/0_3d2bb_ab728699_XL.jpg

http://dniester.ru/sites/default/files/node_images/history/lebedanatviach11.jpg

YevgenyP
04-27-2012, 04:03 PM
Tonight Russia has lost a great man - Anatoly Lebed. Hero, role model and a total bad as*...
He died after crashing his bike near Moscow
Rest in Peace, we will miss you...
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/9/9b/Anatoly_Lebed.jpg/180px-Anatoly_Lebed.jpg



Can not believe.
RIP.

artjomh
04-27-2012, 04:04 PM
Tonight Russia has lost a great man - Anatoly Lebed. Hero, role model and a total bad as*...

WOW, really? Unbelievable.

Rest in peace, great soldier!

Universals
04-27-2012, 04:08 PM
R.I.P ....Quite shocking.

AustinJ
04-27-2012, 04:12 PM
Sad , Its bad to loose such a great person in such a way , RIP Soldier

my name again
04-27-2012, 04:19 PM
How sad. Somehow this news really touched me.
R.I.P

memfisa
04-27-2012, 04:23 PM
Tonight Russia has lost a great man - Anatoly Lebed. Hero, role model and a total bad as*...
He died after crashing his bike near Moscow
Rest in Peace, we will miss you...
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/9/9b/Anatoly_Lebed.jpg/180px-Anatoly_Lebed.jpg

http://bankrat.gorod.tomsk.ru/uploads/11956/1281107556/Anatoli_Vyacheslav_Lebed.jpg

http://i.kremenchug.ua/images.php/i1105_02865fff701badXL.jpg

http://img-fotki.yandex.ru/get/3805/soustov.7c/0_3d2bb_ab728699_XL.jpg

http://dniester.ru/sites/default/files/node_images/history/lebedanatviach11.jpg

Damn, thats a surprise.

R.I.P. Sir.

eskachig
04-27-2012, 05:05 PM
Tonight Russia has lost a great man - Anatoly Lebed. Hero, role model and a total bad as*...
He died after crashing his bike near Moscow
Rest in Peace, we will miss you...
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/9/9b/Anatoly_Lebed.jpg/180px-Anatoly_Lebed.jpg
I thought he would live forever :(

****ing motorcycles, so much fun, so stupidly dangerous.

RIP.

Maximmmm
04-27-2012, 05:11 PM
RIP, to have lived though so much and die on a motorcycle. What a damn shame...

African-European
04-27-2012, 05:17 PM
Gone too soon, r.i.p.:-(



Ex-Air Force Commander to become adviser to Russia defense minister


Former Air Force Commander Col.-Gen. Alexander Zelin will take up the post of an adviser to the Russian defense minister on the development of the Air Force, the Defense Ministry reported on Friday.“Colonel-General Alexander Zelin voluntarily resigned due to a transfer to civil service in the capacity of an aide (adviser) to the defense minister of the Russian Federation,” the ministry said.Russian President Dmitry Medvedev on Friday dismissed Zelin from the post of Air Force Commander and from military service.Zelin, 59, occupied the top military post for five years, during which the Air Force began to receive new aircraft and equipment in significant numbers for the first time since the end of the Soviet Union.“To the observer Zelin appeared to preside over a period where air force procurement and plans became more planted in reality than merely in aspirations,” said Douglas Barrie, an air warfare analyst at the London-based International Institute of Strategic Studies.Senior military commanders in Russia usually retire at age 60.Igor Korotchenko, chairman of Defense Ministry’s Public Council said that the reshuffle was a normal practice for military officials.“Medvedev’s move will give the road to new, younger military specialists,” Korotchenko said, adding experienced commander Zelin would likely move on to a top post in a defense industrial holding or corporation.

http://en.rian.ru/mlitary_news/20120427/173099987.html

Hyde
04-27-2012, 05:40 PM
Tonight Russia has lost a great man - Anatoly Lebed. Hero, role model and a total bad as*...
He died after crashing his bike near Moscow
Rest in Peace, we will miss you...


Can't believe it, damn shame for a great man to die in such arbitrary conditions.

RIP Hero, may the earth rest lightly on you.

Flamming_Python
04-27-2012, 06:12 PM
OMG

RIP to Mr. Lebed

merk666
04-27-2012, 06:15 PM
RIP, Big Man.

GunshipDemocracy
04-27-2012, 06:17 PM
R.I.P ....Quite shocking.

R.I.P. Brave Soldier

blilov
04-28-2012, 02:05 AM
R.I.P. Not a good way to die for such a man:(

Siberian wolf
04-28-2012, 04:37 AM
Tonight Russia has lost a great man - Anatoly Lebed. Hero, role model and a total bad as*...
He died after crashing his bike near Moscow

RIP Hero..

medo
04-28-2012, 05:12 AM
Rest in peace hero.

Rey
04-28-2012, 01:22 PM
He was a true hero, Rest In Peace.

Fulcrum-35
04-29-2012, 07:13 PM
He was a true hero, Rest In Peace.

R.I.P. Great soldier.

Seems that Ivan Gren will be the only ship of its class...


Russian aircraft carrier design complete in 2014; work on "common platforms"

Kaliningrad, 27 April: The United Shipbuilding Corporation (USC [Russian: OSK]) will over the next three years draw up the designs of common platforms for future naval ships, to be submitted to the Russian Defence Ministry, USC President Roman Trotsenko told reporters on Friday [27 April].
"The Russian Navy is going through a transitional period, during which the further development of and prospects for various classes of ships will be determined. At USC, we understand that the navy's aim is to cut down on both the type and class nomenclature of surface and submarine forces," Trotsenko said.
According to him, USC's design outfits are actively engaged in work in this direction. What are known as common platforms for the types and classes of ships that will form the basis of the Russian Navy in the future are under development.
"For example, on the corvette class, the design will be ready as early as 2012. The ocean-going ship will be there in 2013, and the aircraft carrier design is scheduled for completion in 2014," the president of the company said.
He added that the standardization of the fleet according to type will allow the effectiveness of not only construction but also ships' operation and maintenance to be raised. These innovations will also necessitate adjustments in the combat training of the Russian Navy.
For example, it has now been decided that OAO [JSC] Baltic Shipyard Yantar will not now build a series of Project 11711 Ivan Gren large landing ships (BDK) for the Russian Navy.
"Only one hull will be completed. At the same time, the new ocean-going ship under development will combine not only strike capability but also perform missions specific to landing ships," Trotsenko said.
Interfax-AVN military news agency, Moscow, in Russian 1259 gmt 27 Apr 12

Fulcrum-35
04-29-2012, 07:16 PM
Russia: Up to 60 navy ships of various classes planned by 2020

Kaliningrad, 27 April: The companies of the United Shipbuilding Corporation (USC [Russian: OSK]) will over the next eight years build 60 ships for the Russian Defence Ministry, the corporation's President Roman Trotsenko told reporters on Friday [27 April].
"Today, we can see that the Defence Ministry's new shipbuilding policy will yield a qualitative result. There is confidence that by 2020, the Russian Navy will have a new look and a new fleet," Trotsenko said.
According to him, over the next eight years USC companies will build 60 ships of various classes for the Russian Navy, including six Project 885 Yasen submarines, Project 636 diesel-electric submarines and a corvette series, under construction at the Amur shipyard.
As for the prospects of OAO Baltic Shipyard Yantar, the USC president noted that it will be the "main builder of 2nd and 3rd Rank ships for the Navy. The shipyard will deliver ships at the rate of two to three a year. Today already, Yantar is fully provided with various orders right up to 2018".

Interfax-AVN military news agency, Moscow, in Russian 1254 gmt 27 Apr 12

Andy_UA
04-30-2012, 06:42 AM
Non lethal weapon developed in russia (http://sdelanounas.ru/blogs/16811/)

New compact scalable multi-band multi-array radar in development by Phazotron and MAI (http://sdelanounas.ru/blogs/17031/)

also here (http://missiles2go.wordpress.com/2012/04/23/маи-в-2012-году-завершит-разработку-новой/)

http://sdelanounas.ru/i/b/n/bnZvLm5nLnJ1L2ltYWdlcy8yMDEyLTA0LTI3LzE0LTEzLTMuanBnP19faWQ9MTcwMzE=.jpg

First sketches of MALE UAV in development by TRANSAS and Sokol emerge (previously posted news (http://www.militaryphotos.net/forums/showthread.php?197506-Russian-Armed-Forces-News-amp-Discussion-thread&p=6103368&viewfull=1#post6103368) )

http://missiles2go.files.wordpress.com/2012/04/1335274297203947_big_photo.jpg

Interview with chief UAV designer working on these projects (http://expert.ru/russian_reporter/2012/16/beschelovecheskoe-buduschee/?n=345653) !!!

AustinJ
04-30-2012, 11:02 AM
Nice post Andy

BTW can some one tell me what is the big deal of the multi band multi array radar , from what i could see from pictures and could understand translation , this is just a slotted antenna with one Ka and other X band , they have developed dual band conventional antenna in the past .....the big deal to me is they have made it small as in light.

Had this been a dual band AESA antenna then it would have been worth unless i got this wrong .

Strong47
05-02-2012, 06:30 AM
Russia creates own Future Soldier combat system


Russia has developed the long-awaited military equipment for "soldiers of the future." It goes about first-class armor suit, which protects 90% of soldier's body surface from fragments, bullets and land mines. The tests of the new products called "Warrior" are set to begin in June. In 2013, if all goes well, the new equipment will be passed into service.

The new suit is 70% better than its predecessors. It was created by Kirasa Company from state-of-the-art Alyuteks aramid fiber. The suit made from the aramid fiber is designed to protect military men from fragments of mines, grenades, shells and open flame.



http://english.pravda.ru/russia/economics/15-03-2012/120799-future_soldier-0/




Russia unveils fifth-generation Kalashnikov assault rifle


Russia's largest firearms manufacturer, JSC Izhmash, unveiled its first model of the fifth-generation Kalashnikov assault rifle. The new rifle is tentatively called AK-12. The assembly of the new weapon, the development of which was initiated by Izhmash's chief designer Vladimir Zlobin, was completed in 2011. Specialists currently test the new weapon, the press service of the enterprise said Wednesday.

Russia's Interior Ministry has already requested the AK-12 for test exploitation. Izhmash is ready to arrange the deliveries of the new weapon for the Russian army too, Interfax reports.



http://english.pravda.ru/russia/economics/26-01-2012/120338-kalashnikov_ak_12-0/

void
05-02-2012, 06:41 AM
http://english.pravda.ru/russia/economics/15-03-2012/120799-future_soldier-0/

http://english.pravda.ru/russia/economics/26-01-2012/120338-kalashnikov_ak_12-0/

God damn it why does everything have to be "Fifth generation" now. I really hate the media sometimes. First it was "no foreign analogues in the world", then it everything had "nanotechnology", now everything is "fifth generation".

Strong47
05-02-2012, 06:54 AM
God damn it why does everything have to be "Fifth generation" now. I really have the media sometimes. First it was "no foreign analogues in the world", then it everything had "nanotechnology", now everything is "fifth generation".

It's all part of their aggressive marketing strategy I guess

Strong47
05-02-2012, 08:01 AM
All Russian Air Force aerodromes to be reconstructed by 2020


MOSCOW, May 2 (Itar-Tass) —— All the aerodromes at the sites where military airbases are located will be reconstructed by 2020, Russian Air Force spokesman Col. Vladimir Drik told Itar-Tass on Wednesday. Under reconstruction will be base aerodromes, aircraft test airfields and grounds of army air force units. Full reconstruction has begun at the Krymsk airbase in the Rostov Region. Construction of new additional runways has started on the airfields of Chkalovsky, Engels and Akhtubinsk. Work on documentation is underway to reconstruct three base aerodromes in the Krasnodar Territory and the Tver and Amur regions. New equipment is also bought for the airfields. Two sets of aerodrome equipment have been supplied to the airbases in the Leningrad and Moscow regions since the beginning of this year. Re-equipping of the Tver and Engels airfields is also planned for this year.




http://www.itar-tass.com/en/c32/407594.html

Strong47
05-02-2012, 09:01 AM
Rearmament of Russian Army to Boost Economy


The Russian government expects that the rearmament of the army on which it is expected to spend over 20 trillion rubles ($681 billion) will boost the growth of the entire Russian industry, presidential aide Arkady Dvorkovich said in an interview with RIA Novosti.

“I believe that the decision to switch to a professional army, which requires a different armament, is without exaggeration the most important decision made over the last four years and it will have a tremendous positive impact on our entire country, on our society,” Dvorkovich said.

Russia has allocated more than 20 trillion rubles on the rearmament of its Army and Navy until 2020. As of April 15, the Russian Defense Ministry has concluded 77 percent of contracts worth over 520 billion rubles ($17.7 billion), although earlier Russian authorities set a deadline to place the state defense order by April 2012.



http://en.rian.ru/mlitary_news/20120502/173165137.html

GunshipDemocracy
05-02-2012, 06:37 PM
God damn it why does everything have to be "Fifth generation" now. I really hate the media sometimes. First it was "no foreign analogues in the world", then it everything had "nanotechnology", now everything is "fifth generation".

well because without nanotech there's no 5 generation :lol:

AustinJ
05-02-2012, 11:52 PM
Interview with CEO, "Izhmash" Maxim Kuzyukom

http://lenta.ru/articles/2012/05/02/izhmash/

sepheronx
05-03-2012, 02:46 AM
Nice post Andy

BTW can some one tell me what is the big deal of the multi band multi array radar , from what i could see from pictures and could understand translation , this is just a slotted antenna with one Ka and other X band , they have developed dual band conventional antenna in the past .....the big deal to me is they have made it small as in light.

Had this been a dual band AESA antenna then it would have been worth unless i got this wrong .

The big deal is that it is multi band and it is small. Only real benefit aesa would bring to the table is lower power usage and better ecm protection.

AustinJ
05-03-2012, 07:19 AM
The big deal is that it is multi band and it is small. Only real benefit aesa would bring to the table is lower power usage and better ecm protection.

Well multiband true but they use 2 seperate antenna for two different bands , i think they have used similar 2 different antenna for eg in Su-24 one for navigation and one for targeting etc

Other then the fact its small i dont see much in there to call it a big deal.

Flamming_Python
05-03-2012, 01:54 PM
God damn it why does everything have to be "Fifth generation" now. I really hate the media sometimes. First it was "no foreign analogues in the world", then it everything had "nanotechnology", now everything is "fifth generation".

Russian capitalists and salesmen learnt quickly :-D

Hyde
05-03-2012, 02:12 PM
You said that the AK-12 - a fifth-generation machine. And at what point is counted?
The count is conducted with an AK-47, which was in 1947 adopted for, since 1949, is available. Next was a series of AKM, and then came AK-74 - it was the third generation, fourth generation - is the AK-74M and the "one hundredth series", which are very close.

That is, the chances are high to hit the market?
Of course. At the same time I know that there is tremendous interest among our regular clients abroad. Because the AK-12 - exactly what is now required for the conduct of modern warfare. If we release the Series, which will not be very different for the price of an AK-12 (and this is the main goal), then the potential is very large, and the export and domestic market. However, we do not dwell on it. We now have in exploring a number of other weapons for special forces, including those based on other principles of automation.


The last sentence is interesting.

African-European
05-04-2012, 03:35 PM
Multiple Launch Rocket System Tests to Conclude Soon

Tests of Russia’s Tornado-G multiple launch rocket system tests will be completed by late May. A Defense Ministry source told the newspaper that the system will be test-fired at the Kapustin Yar development center in the Astrakhan Region.Military and independent analysts have little doubt that the tests will be successful. The system will then be adopted by the Army to replace the Grad (Hail), Smerch (Sand Storm) and Uragan (Hurricane) multiple rocket launchers whose service lives will expire within the next eight years.Viktor Murakhovsky, editor in chief of the defense industry magazine Arsenal, said the Russian Army still uses Soviet-made Grad systems which need replacing. “It would be better to replace them with new improved systems,” he said.The General Staff of the Russian Armed Forces estimates that the Army currently has about 600 multiple rocket launchers which are scheduled to be replaced with Tornado-G systems by 2020.The Tornado-G version can fire 122-mm Grad munitions. The Tornado-U and Tornado-S versions are also available. The Tornado-U version can fire the same munitions as the 220-mm Uragan multiple rocket launcher. And the Tornado-S version can launch the same rockets used by the largest, 300-mm, Smerch multiple rocket launcher.These modified, interchangeable variants differ only in their barrel diameter and can be converted to Tornado-G, Tornado-S or Tornado-U specifications.The Tornado-G has two 15-barrel modules, and the Tornado-S features two six-barrel modules. Each launcher is mounted on a four-axle BAZ-6950 truck platform manufactured by Bryansk. Each launcher has an estimated cost of about 32 million rubles.The Tornado multiple rocket launcher was developed by specialists at Splav (Alloy) State Research and Production Association in Tula, Russia. Splav was also the developer of the Grad, Smerch and Uragan systems. A corporate spokesperson noted that several dozen launchers could be produced annually but that production volumes could be increased. The spokesperson added that the Tornado system’s range had increased two-and-a-half fold and that it could fire reconnaissance capsules that can hover above a battlefield, plus target acquisition systems and guided munitions. In the long run, the Tornado system will be able to launch cruise missiles and ballistic missile.

Source: Izvestia


Smaller Russian Crews Face Intense Training To Run Mistral Ships: French Officer


PARIS — Crew training will be a key part of an expected contract for four Mistral-class command and projection warships to Russia, a French Navy officer said May 3.
The 21,000-metric-ton multirole ship needs a crew of 177, compared to the 1,200 or so personnel on a U.S. landing helicopter dock (LHD), which is larger than the Mistral vessel, the officer said.
Negotiations on the Russian contract have not been “finalized,” the officer said.
A huge difference in crewing will require the Russian Navy to rethink its organization, as there is ample manpower to crew the large number of vessels in service, the officer said.
The smaller crew is possible due to a high level of automation on the French ships, designed by prime contractor DCNS. The crews require intense training, with a year needed to certify senior officers, the French Navy officer said.
Russian Navy planners and deck officers will probably need two or three years to learn how to operate the new ships to their full capabilities. That was how long it took the French Navy to adapt to the Mistral, which serves as an amphibious assault ship housing about 450 troops, deploying helicopters, landing craft, and carrying onboard a field hospital and headquarters command center.
A Russian Navy tour of the Mistral provoked a mixture of envy and worry, as senior officers admired the ship’s capabilities but also showed concern that France could design and build such a capable vessel while Russian companies had been unable to match that, the French officer said.
Russia is acquiring four Mistral-class warships in a deal reported to be worth more than 1 billion euros ($1.3 billion). The acquisition stirred controversy among central European and Baltic nations in the wake of the 2008 Russian invasion of Georgia.
The four-ship package compares to an estimated construction price of $600 million per ship. The French government has not disclosed price information on the Russian deal, but has said the sale meant 5 million work hours or jobs for 1,000 workers for four years at the Saint-Nazaire shipyard.
The first two ships will be built jointly by DCNS and shipbuilder STX at Saint-Nazaire, northern France. The third and fourth will be built by Russian company OSK at a new yard at Saint Petersburg, with the help of French technology transfer.
The French Navy’s Mistral took part in the extensive U.S. Navy Bold Alligator exercise off the coast of Norfolk, Va., earlier this year.

http://www.defensenews.com/article/20120503/DEFREG03/305030002/Smaller-Russian-Crews-Face-Intense-Training-Run-Mistral-Ships-French-Officer?odyssey=tab|topnews|text|FRONTPAGE

AustinJ
05-05-2012, 10:28 AM
Good Details on PD-30 Program , may power Airplane 2020 and An-124-300


New Russian Geared Turbofan Could Re-engine the Ruslan (http://www.ainonline.com/aviation-news/ain-defense-perspective/2012-05-04/new-russian-geared-turbofan-could-re-engine-ruslan)

The Kuznetsov design bureau, part of the United Engine Corporation (ODK), unveiled a new geared turbofan design at the Engines 2000 exhibition in Moscow last month. The PD30 is proposed for an upgrade to the Antonov An-124 Ruslan heavy airlifter, which is currently powered by the Ukrainian Ivchenko Progress D18T. The PD30 could also power Russia’s proposed widebody airliner, known as Airplane 2020.

http://www.ainonline.com/sites/ainonline.com/files/uploads/5-2012-1-pd-30-geared-turbofan.jpg

The PD30 is portrayed as a low-risk project through extensive use of off-the-shelf components and technologies proven on other projects. However, it features many innovations: a high-power (50,000 hp, 99 percent efficiency) reduction gearbox between fan and turbine, wide-chord hollow (honeycomb) fan blades, very-low-emission combustor, mono-crystal blades, blisks in the HP compressor and booster, chevron nozzle, all-composite nacelle, intake and thrust reverser, and Fadec.

When fitted to the An-124-300, the PD30 would develop 29.5 metric tons (65,000 pounds) of thrust for takeoff and 5.7 to 6.2 metric tons (12,560- to 13,670 pounds) when cruising at 11,000 meters (36,000 feet). Low specific fuel consumption (SFC) of 0.535-0.548 lb/lb/hr is achieved through a high bypass ratio (between 7.65 and 8.7), while gas temperatures are kept at 1,433K at maximum continuous power.

By comparison, the D18T series 5 delivers 27.85 metric tons (61,400 pounds) thrust at takeoff and 6.28 metric tons (13,840 pounds) in cruise, with an SFC of 0.541 lb/lb/hr. At 5,140 kg (11,330 pounds), the PD30 weighs 560 kg (1,235 pounds) less than the D18T. Kuznetsov says that the PD30 has a similar performance to the Rolls-Royce Trent series, while running at lower temperatures for higher margins and lower emission levels.

The centerpiece of the PD30 project is the use of a “modified baseline gas generator” from the improved NK32 turbofan that powers the Tupolev Tu-160 strategic bomber. Production of the NK32 was restarted recently, with some 40 engines already manufactured. The fleet leader has logged more than 3,500 flight hours. The modified gas generator is undergoing bench testing, and has so far amassed 1,000 hours. Kuznetsov says its industrial turbine NK36ST that is derived from NK32 has logged 25,000 hours without removal, while running continuously at 1,520K.

Kuznetsov promises low noise through the use of a new low-speed fan with rotational speeds below 340-350 m/sec (1,115-1,148 ft/sec) to comply with upcoming ICAO standards. Levels of NOx, CO and hydrocarbon are two, 10 and 15 times less than ICAO 2004 requirements, respectively, through use of a multi-fuel-injector combustor with a life of 30,000 flight hours before removal. This unit has been tested on industrial engines during an 8,000-hour run.

The reduction gearbox is the most complex part of the project. It uses sliding bearings tried on Kuznetsov’s experimental NK93 propfan. Key technologies come from the 33,000-hp unit developed for the An-70’s D27 powerplant. The hollow blades are considered lower risk since Kuznetsov has already tested elements of their design on the NK56 and NK44 in the late 1980s. The blades will be manufactured at ODK’s new factory in Ufa, which specializes in diffusion soldering.

Kuznetsov has issued manufacturing documentation for the PD30 and expects the engine to be mature enough for series production in four to five years. Should the engine be selected for the Airplane 2020 program, its fuel burn could be lowered through higher bypass ratio and higher gas temperatures.

Andy_UA
05-05-2012, 11:18 AM
Good Details on PD-30 Program , may power Airplane 2020 and An-124-300

Cheers Austin. Nice project, hope it goes through. It can be a stepping stone for new strategic bomber engine.

Photos from engine exhibiton (http://missiles2go.wordpress.com/2012/04/17/двигатели-родины-2012/)

P.S. one more article on the engine (http://www.aviaport.ru/news/2012/05/05/234014.html)

AustinJ
05-05-2012, 11:27 AM
**** deleted ********

AustinJ
05-05-2012, 11:34 AM
Nice project, hope it goes through. It can be a stepping stone for new strategic bomber engine.

Photos from engine exhibiton (http://missiles2go.wordpress.com/2012/04/17/%D0%B4%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B3%D0%B0%D1%82%D0%B5%D0%BB%D0%B8-%D1%80%D0%BE%D0%B4%D0%B8%D0%BD%D1%8B-2012/)

P.S. one more article on the engine (http://www.aviaport.ru/news/2012/05/05/234014.html)

Indeed this looks like a promising project specially for Airplane 2020 and it looks from the thrust of engine , the new Wide Body Aircraft will be in class of 787 with twin engine.

I wonder what happened to PD-18 GTF engine , PD-18 was a follow up to PD-14 engine.

The new bomber will most likely use some modified PAK-FA engine of 18T class .

BTW does the new PS-90A3 engine uses any American/P&W IP similar to PS-90A2 or its a complete Russian development with no IP from foreign sources ?

Akril
05-05-2012, 11:48 AM
Airplane 2020

I'm sorry but what is this? Can't find anything on this.

Andy_UA
05-05-2012, 05:11 PM
BTW does the new PS-90A3 engine uses any American/P&W IP similar to PS-90A2 or its a complete Russian development with no IP from foreign sources ?


Yes, seems its design still incorporates P&W patents. It has improvements in turbine similar to PS-90A2, but don't think it will go for American certification like A2. It is said to have even improved durability and reliability. It will be serial modification for remotorization of all Tu-204, Tu-214, Il-96 and Il-76.
IIRC it has slightly lesser weight than A2 (some tenth of kg)... Ps-90A3 has already got russian certification.


I'm sorry but what is this? Can't find anything on this.

It is in market and technology feasibility studies stage now. Not much has been heard. Last years articles here (http://vz.ru/economy/2011/3/15/475818.html) and here (http://www.ato.ru/content/minpromtorg-nachinaet-finansirovanie-samoleta-2020).

AustinJ
05-06-2012, 06:50 AM
PD-14 update from AW&ST

http://i44.servimg.com/u/f44/15/54/62/79/pd1411.jpg

AustinJ
05-06-2012, 08:48 AM
Didnt realise upload quality of Akula article was bad , here are better uploads


Akula-1 http://www.mediafire.com/file/x4i2534wrh0n2up/Akula-1.zip

Akula-2 http://www.mediafire.com/file/g51jihx5giujag1/Akula-2.zip

metberkut
05-06-2012, 09:31 AM
Good Details on PD-30 Program , may power Airplane 2020 and An-124-300

I hate to be the guy, but that engine upgrade doesn't seem to be impressive at all. In terms of consumption it is 0.535-0.548. D-18T(5) use 0.541. So, it means PD-30 can potentially use *more* than D-18T(5)? And even if it was using lets say 0.537 that is hardly a huge difference. Now, it is hard to calculate exactly how much fuel would be saved vs D-18T(5), but looking purely at those numbers it doesn't seem much. And PD-30 has less trust than D-18T(5) in cruise.

Raden5
05-06-2012, 09:55 AM
I hate to be the guy, but that engine upgrade doesn't seem to be impressive at all. In terms of consumption it is 0.535-0.548. D-18T(5) use 0.541. So, it means PD-30 can potentially use *more* than D-18T(5)? And even if it was using lets say 0.537 that is hardly a huge difference. Now, it is hard to calculate exactly how much fuel would be saved vs D-18T(5), but looking purely at those numbers it doesn't seem much. And PD-30 has less trust than D-18T(5) in cruise.

"D-18T" - Ukrainian engine.

AustinJ
05-06-2012, 10:03 AM
I hate to be the guy, but that engine upgrade doesn't seem to be impressive at all. In terms of consumption it is 0.535-0.548. D-18T(5) use 0.541. So, it means PD-30 can potentially use *more* than D-18T(5)? And even if it was using lets say 0.537 that is hardly a huge difference. Now, it is hard to calculate exactly how much fuel would be saved vs D-18T(5), but looking purely at those numbers it doesn't seem much. And PD-30 has less trust than D-18T(5) in cruise.

Note that PD-30 they have given lower and upper end value of fuel consumption and it compares favorably , some what better infact ........ multiply the marginal fuel saving of each engine and multiply by 4 x engine and you realise the fuel saving will be significant over its entire operational life ....... now multiply that with 40 An-124-300 and note the fuel savings then during entire operational life.

Similar cruise thrust has upper and lower value ...... upper value matches well with D-18T 5.

Note that PD-30 is 670 Kg lighter , that for 4 engine makes it 2.5 T lighter compared to D-18T 5 , which means more fuel to carry or more load.

Plus there is no point bank rolling Ukranian development over Russian Engine which in future in a modified form could power Airplane 2020

my name again
05-06-2012, 10:46 AM
What is this "Airplane 2020"?

Raden5
05-06-2012, 10:56 AM
What is this "Airplane 2020"?

Program of the Ministry of Industry and Trade of Russia. In parallel, the SSJ-100 and MS-21.

my name again
05-06-2012, 11:02 AM
Program of the Ministry of Industry and Trade of Russia. In parallel, the SSJ-100 and MS-21.

Thank you , never heard of it. Lets see what i can find in the internet about it.

metberkut
05-06-2012, 04:26 PM
"D-18T" - Ukrainian engine.

Yes i know. Which is somewhat why i expected more.


Note that PD-30 they have given lower and upper end value of fuel consumption and it compares favorably , some what better infact ........ multiply the marginal fuel saving of each engine and multiply by 4 x engine and you realise the fuel saving will be significant over its entire operational life ....... now multiply that with 40 An-124-300 and note the fuel savings then during entire operational life.

Similar cruise thrust has upper and lower value ...... upper value matches well with D-18T 5.

Note that PD-30 is 670 Kg lighter , that for 4 engine makes it 2.5 T lighter compared to D-18T 5 , which means more fuel to carry or more load.

Plus there is no point bank rolling Ukranian development over Russian Engine which in future in a modified form could power Airplane 2020

2.5 tons of weight saving is pretty good, don't argue with that. I understand that a little fuel saving here and there on each engine makes a difference, but i expected that difference to be bigger considering how much expertise they have.

AustinJ
05-06-2012, 04:50 PM
You should not forget that both PD-30 and D-18 Series 5 are both 5th generation engine .....so fuel saving and other parameters will be almost equal ......to have a big difference in fuel saving like 15 % you have to move to next generation engine.

Even a 0.1 % fuel saving over its entire life cycle say of 25 years will translate into big savings , considering fuel will get costly every time.

The key things for engine these days are Fuel Economy , Engine Life , Maintenance and Noise regulations

PD-30 is just at the beginning of its life so when it materalises it will have good growth potential over D-18 series.

artjomh
05-06-2012, 05:04 PM
Russian Ministry of Defence finally posted their English presentations from the Missile Defence conference in Moscow.

I recommend the videos.


General of the Army Makarov, Chief of General Staff, Russian Federation MoD views on the issues of missile defence (http://www.mil.ru/files/morf/Eng_VIEWS%20OF%20THE%20MINISTRY%20OF%20DEFENSE%20OF%20THE%20RUSSIAN%20FEDERATION%20ON%20MISSILE%20DEFENSE%20ISSUES.ppt)

Colonel-General Gerasimov, Deputy Chief of General Staff, Evaluation of the missile defence global potential (http://www.mil.ru/files/morf/Eng_Gerasimov_Assessment%20of%20BMD%20Global%20capabilities.ppt)

Video 1 (http://www.mil.ru/files/morf/part_1.rar)
Video 2 (http://www.mil.ru/files/morf/part_2.rar)
Video 3 (http://www.mil.ru/files/morf/2-2_m2%20centr.wmv)
Video 4 (http://www.mil.ru/files/morf/2-3_sp.wmv)
Video 5 (http://www.mil.ru/files/morf/3-1%20Gabala.wmv)

Major-General Sergun, head of GRU, Evaluation of missile threat (http://www.mil.ru/files/morf/Missile%20Threat%20Assessment.ppt)

Major-General Sheremet, head of military-scientific council, Evaluation of the NATO-Russia theatre missile defence exercise (http://www.mil.ru/files/morf/Russia_s%20Assessment%20of%20NATO-Russia%20Theatre%20Missile%20Defence%20exercise.ppt)

Colonel Ilyin, head of international cooperation department, Missile defence cooperation as an element of military cooperation (http://www.mil.ru/files/morf/Eng_ILYIN_Assessment%20of%20BMD%20Global%20capabilities(1).ppt)
Lieutenant-General Ostapenko, head of Air and Space Defence Forces, Creation of Russian Air and Space Defence Forces (http://www.mil.ru/files/morf/______%20___________%20___.%20___%20(28.04.2012)%20ENG.doc),

Hyde
05-06-2012, 06:21 PM
I hate to be the guy, but that engine upgrade doesn't seem to be impressive at all. In terms of consumption it is 0.535-0.548. D-18T(5) use 0.541. So, it means PD-30 can potentially use *more* than D-18T(5)? And even if it was using lets say 0.537 that is hardly a huge difference. Now, it is hard to calculate exactly how much fuel would be saved vs D-18T(5), but looking purely at those numbers it doesn't seem much. And PD-30 has less trust than D-18T(5) in cruise.

That is the "specific" fuel consumption, so it is not that it uses that number of fuel, but that it consumes that amount of lb of fuel per force in lb generated per hour.

Generate 10,000 lbs of force, it uses that number times 10,000 times h. Generate 20,000lbs of force, it consumes that number times 20,000 times h. And so on.

Now, these engines save the aircraft 2.5t (5500lbs) of weight, given the same load and weight for the rest of the aircraft, they will need to produce less force (5500lbs/2500kg less force) to keep the aircraft in the air at the same speed and height for the same time as the other engines. And there's your fuel savings. There's a difference whether the same aircraft carrying the same load flying the same route at the same envelope will have to produce extra force just to carry the useless extra 2500kg/5500lbs weight of the engines. 4 engines producing 12,500lbs of force each vs 4 engines producing 13,750lbs of force each, for the same flight envelope with the same aircraft and load, is a difference. 0,541 times 5500 per hour is what the four D-18T use more in an hour to achive the same flight envelope just because of their higher weight. That's almost 3000lbs of fuel per hour more. (forgive me if my math is off, this is not a study, it's just an illustrative explanation)
I hope you now understand why they are more fuel efficient.

It's like the difference of the fuel savings with the same 1.4L engine in a 1100kg car or in a 1800kg car, you will always have to push the gas more to achieve a desireable driving speed in the heavier car, thus consuming more fuel.

AustinJ
05-07-2012, 01:47 AM
Renaissance of the Russian Navy? (http://www.usni.org/magazines/proceedings/2012-03/renaissance-russian-navy)
Proceedings Magazine - March 2012 Vol. 138/3/1,309 (http://www.usni.org/magazines/proceedings/2012-03) [2]
By Captain Thomas R. Fedyszyn, U.S. Navy (Retired


Russia’s warship construction may be on the rise again, but the Russian naval mission of the 21st century appears markedly evolved from the Soviet naval mission of the 20th century.


The maritime-strategy world is getting accustomed to hearing about the growth of the Chinese navy, but then–Chief of Naval Operations Admiral Gary Roughead caught everyone off guard when he announced that the “Russian navy is moving again” during his March 2011 testimony before the Senate Appropriations Committee’s Defense Subcommittee. 1 (http://www.usni.org/magazines/proceedings/2012-03/renaissance-russian-navy#footnotes) Several scholars already have noted that Russia is developing the capacity to once again become a maritime threat to Western naval power, particularly in light of the Russian Black Sea Fleet’s support of the 2008 Russia-Georgia War. 2 (http://www.usni.org/magazines/proceedings/2012-03/renaissance-russian-navy#footnotes) However, deeper analysis of recent events suggests a counterintuitive conclusion: The slumbering bear is awakening, but this time as a new, less combative and aggressive animal. In terms American naval strategists might appreciate, Russian naval power seems to be heading down largely the same road as that prescribed in our Sea Services’ directive, A Cooperative Strategy for 21st Century Seapower .
Few American naval officers study Russian naval tactics and capabilities these days. The Soviet Union’s demise prompted tectonic shifts in the global balance of naval power. The Soviet Navy, the main opponent of the U.S. Navy throughout the 1980s, shrank markedly after the fall of the Berlin Wall. By most estimates, the Russian Federation Navy (RFN) of 2007 was approximately one-fourth the size of the Soviet Navy at its peak. The submarine force, once the jewel in Moscow’s crown, deteriorated even more sharply, shrinking from a high of almost 400 boats in 1985 to 65 in 2007, with estimates suggesting that less than half of those were fully operational. Active-duty personnel dropped from almost a half million in 1985 to 146,000, many of whom were conscripts. Russia’s volatile transition from a military-oriented, centrally planned economy to a capitalist experiment moved in fits and starts. The state was unable, and perhaps unwilling, to invest properly in its navy. And it showed.

New Strategy for a New Era


However, beginning in 2008 the Russian navy began sending messages that it was on the rebound. Startling headlines from Moscow announced plans to build nuclear-powered aircraft-carrier strike groups and the RFN resumed operations in theaters it had not seen for a generation. 3 (http://www.usni.org/magazines/proceedings/2012-03/renaissance-russian-navy#footnotes) Specifically, Russia’s two showcase ships, the aircraft carrier Admiral Kuznetsov and nuclear-powered cruiser Pyotr Veliki ( Peter the Great ), deployed to the Mediterranean and Caribbean in flamboyant fashion, operating with former Cold War allies and adversaries alike. Russian naval aviation began flying patrols in the Norwegian Sea and off Alaska with regularity. In effect, Moscow was announcing that the Russian navy was back. What changed?



A nation’s grand strategy rarely changes quickly. In 2000, however, newly elected President Vladimir Putin made it clear that in the 21st century, Russia would once again be a global leader. The strategic documents issued shortly after his election insisted on Russia’s pride of place in the international order. However, words and attitude alone were insufficient to improve and modernize Russia’s armed forces. The mineral-based Russian economy continued to lag behind the West, and the hoped-for transformation of the Russian military sputtered without strong budgetary support.


After economic expert Dmitry Medvedev became president in 2008 (with Putin staying on as prime minister), the world witnessed both a nuanced change in official Russian strategic thought and budgetary priorities. While Russia still strove to be a “world leader,” its new strategic guidance, Russia’s National Security Strategy to 2020 , reflected maturation in the understanding of all elements of national power. 4 (http://www.usni.org/magazines/proceedings/2012-03/renaissance-russian-navy#footnotes) In particular, the new strategy viewed military power increasingly as a means to a new end: economic well-being and prosperity. Indeed, it made the following noteworthy points:


• Russia’s development will follow the path of globalization and the interdependence of the international system; Russia intends to join the ranks of the top five countries by size of GDP
• International politics will focus on energy resources, particularly in the Arctic Ocean and Caspian Basin
• Russia’s top two national interests are to enhance the competitiveness of its economy and to regain standing as a world power
• National defense will be provided on the principle of reasonable sufficiency and will include public diplomacy, peacekeeping, and international military cooperation
• Terrorist organizations remain a threat to national security.


The Russian national security strategy’s emphasis on economics and quality of life as principal issues, as well as its insistence on not matching the American military dollar-for-dollar, suggests a competitive, but not confrontational, Russia. In this strategy, Russia portrays itself as no longer a prisoner of the Eurasian landmass by emphasizing the Arctic, Caspian, and Far East (Pacific) regions of growing importance, along with those of global trade and interdependence. Moscow willingly volunteers to engage in international peacekeeping operations worldwide and to vigorously pursue terrorist extremist groups.

Economics Trumps Bellicosity


While the Russian equivalent of our national military strategy, The Military Doctrine of the Russian Federation , always was notoriously hard-line on defense issues, its most recent version (February 2010) is decidedly less confrontational. The publication’s “main tasks for the military” include: multilateral cooperation with partner states, combating piracy, ensuring the economic activities of the Russian Federation, participating in international peacekeeping activities, and combating international terrorism. 5 (http://www.usni.org/magazines/proceedings/2012-03/renaissance-russian-navy#footnotes)

Over the past decade Russian naval strategy has been considerably harder to distinguish than its more general and far-reaching national security strategy. In fact, Russia has not produced a formal and comprehensive naval strategy since 2001. 6 (http://www.usni.org/magazines/proceedings/2012-03/renaissance-russian-navy#footnotes) Given the navy’s historically inferior position in the Ministry of Defense, it is more useful to consider ministerial guidance as well as official ****ouncements and news releases to understand the thrust of contemporary Russian naval policy.


As early as 2004, the Russian Ministry of Defense’s blueprint for a future navy revolved around eliminating a blue-water or “ocean” capability and focusing instead on the 500-kilometer zone of territorial waters. 7 (http://www.usni.org/magazines/proceedings/2012-03/renaissance-russian-navy#footnotes) The 2010 Russian National Maritime Policy , published together with the Ministries of Trade and Commerce, touched on naval strategy, since its central theme was unfettered use of the world’s oceans to support the growth of the Russian economy. The navy’s role in this national strategy is mentioned, but only after lengthy discussions of shipping, fishing, minerals and energy, and scientific activities. While naval roles include the obvious missions of deterrence and protection of sovereignty, there is even more extensive discussion of peacekeeping, humanitarian missions, mineral exploitation, maintaining freedom of the seas, and showing the flag.

The section on regional naval priorities makes clear that the Arctic and Pacific theaters, followed closely by the Caspian Sea, matter most. The discussion focuses on providing access to the Exclusive Economic Zone and continental shelf in the Arctic Ocean and on ensuring complete control of the Northern Sea Route through an Arctic Ocean that has become ice-free for longer periods each successive year. Not surprisingly, maintaining superiority in the development and deployment of nuclear-powered icebreakers remains a priority. Discussion of the Pacific also revolves around sea-based economic activity and the intensification of exploitation of mineral resources. This, in turn, calls for the development of coastal-port infrastructure in the Kuril Islands, an area of contention with Japan.


The Caspian regional priority can be summed up in one word: oil. For Russian national maritime policy, economic issues—mineral exploitation, maritime transport, and pipeline security—represent Russia’s principal interests.


Two themes characterize Russian strategic guidance to its military. First, all branches of the military will be reformed through downsizing and professionalization. Those most in danger of severe cutbacks are those not optimally responsive to the ends of Russian grand strategy. Second, Russia’s economic interests require a complementary military force to provide security and expansion. These considerations shape Russia’s thinking about its navy.

From ‘Irreversible Collapse’ to Accelerated Construction


Russian naval leaders saw the fleet degrade over the generation following Admiral Sergey Gorshkov’s death in 1988. With the advent of the Putin administration in 2000, some began to talk—only talk—of how Russia would restore its former naval greatness. Then came two setbacks. First, political leaders decided that the Russian Infrastructure Fund, amassed after the turn of the 21st century, would not be used to rebuild the Russian military. Next, the global recession led to a sharp drop in the price of oil—the source of most of Russia’s wealth. Western naval analysts dubbed the Russian navy the “fleet that has to die” citing a study by the Moscow-based Independent Military Review , which saw Russian naval shipbuilding in a “situation of irreversible collapse.” 8 (http://www.usni.org/magazines/proceedings/2012-03/renaissance-russian-navy#footnotes)


Soon after (and in some cases simultaneously), however, there were more positive developments as well. First, the new Russian defense minister, Anatoly Serdyukov, known primarily for his business expertise, called for wholesale reform of the armed forces. This included the elimination of the Russian navy’s aging and obsolescent platforms—along with a large portion of its officer corps. Further, Russian shipbuilding corporations were consolidated in an attempt to reduce redundancy and make the surviving shipyards more efficient, enabling the skilled shipbuilders to concentrate. Finally, the Medvedev administration announced an expanded investment plan for the Russian military and allocated 25 percent of its military investment budget to the navy, a percentage vastly exceeding that of the past generation. 9 (http://www.usni.org/magazines/proceedings/2012-03/renaissance-russian-navy#footnotes) This proposal should be considered realistic, as the price of oil is once again hitting record highs. Russia, the world’s largest exporter of oil, natural gas, and numerous precious minerals, will be a principal beneficiary of what some economic analysts see as an inexorable cost-growth of all extractive commodities. 10 (http://www.usni.org/magazines/proceedings/2012-03/renaissance-russian-navy#footnotes)


Russia’s streamlined shipbuilding capacity is beginning to show progress in the construction of several types of warships. The most publicized project is the development of the new Borey-class nuclear-powered ballistic-missile submarine (SSBN), planned to initiate eight hulls by 2017. The class leader, the Yuri Dolgorukiy , was commissioned in 2009 in St. Petersburg, following 25 years of sporadic construction, but follow-on building is adhering closely to original schedule. This class will replace the obsolescent Delta III and IV classes of SSBNs as the navy’s contribution to Russia’s strategic nuclear deterrent. The Yasen class of up to ten nuclear-powered guided-missile submarines (SSGNs) is led by the Severodvinsk , which was commissioned in 2010 after a 16-year building process. The Kazan , the second of the class, is scheduled for commissioning in 2013, only four years after construction began. Accelerated construction times for both classes of submarines are attributed to the “resumption of regular funding of defense contracts and newly established industrial cooperation.” 11 (http://www.usni.org/magazines/proceedings/2012-03/renaissance-russian-navy#footnotes)


Surface-combatant construction is following the same trend. The 2007 launching of the Steregushchiy , a 2,100-ton corvette touted for her low-observable design along with a high degree of automation and combat-systems integration, signaled Russia’s return to developing its own surface-warfare fleet. While the lead ship took more than six years to deliver, her successors, the Soobrazitelniy (recently commissioned), Boiky , and Stoiky , are expected to follow in considerably less time. The plan is for 10–20 ships of this class, intended for coastal patrol and escort duties. Further, Russia has built frigates for the Indian Navy and is now beginning to produce three identical Project 11356 frigates for itself, scheduled to be homeported in the Black Sea. More formidably, Russian shipyards have just commissioned the first Admiral Gorshkov –class frigate. This 4,000-ton warship is equipped for modern antisubmarine and antisurface warfare as well as escort duties.

Arctic, Pacific, and Caspian Concerns


The Russian icebreaker inventory is a special case, dwarfing the rest of the world’s fleets. Her six nuclear icebreakers (four oceanic, two coastal) are designed to maintain the Northern Sea Route for commercial as well as military purposes. The aging Russian fleet will be augmented by a third-generation nuclear-powered vessel, capable of operating near the coast as well in the deep waters of the Arctic Ocean. Russia expects to build three or four of these icebreakers, the first of which will be operating in 2015.

Development of offensive strike platforms—aircraft-carrier strike groups—is the lone area where Russian actions do not match Russian words. For several years, Moscow’s official policy has stressed the importance of aircraft carriers, maintaining that they are a staple of all great navies. In early 2008, former Russian naval commander Admiral Vladimir Masorin ordered Russia’s design bureaus to draw up plans for nuclear-powered carriers displacing 60,000 tons. 12 (http://www.usni.org/magazines/proceedings/2012-03/renaissance-russian-navy#footnotes) President Medvedev even announced a goal to build “five or six aircraft carrier task forces” designated for operations in the Pacific and Northern Fleets regions. 13 (http://www.usni.org/magazines/proceedings/2012-03/renaissance-russian-navy#footnotes) However, in striking defiance of earlier ****ouncements, Defense Minister Serdyukov confirmed that their construction will not begin until at least 2020, and that there was no longer any discussion of building new ocean-class cruisers. 14 (http://www.usni.org/magazines/proceedings/2012-03/renaissance-russian-navy#footnotes)

In all likelihood, the Russian nuclear aircraft-carrier striking fleet will remain an expression of future aspiration, and its only cruisers will be repaired versions of its four aging capital ships. The more realistic naval-aviation scenario is that Russia will maintain this capability through its purchase of French Mistral -class large-deck amphibious platforms. Russia hopes to buy two and then construct two more of these platforms, whose specialties include troop deployment as well as humanitarian assistance and disaster relief.


As important as what the Russians are building is how and where they intend to operate these ships. The Northern Fleet, always preeminent in the Russian navy, will continue to receive a disproportionate share of new warships. However, beyond the ballistic-missile submarines dedicated to strategic deterrence, most strategic discussion centers around Russia’s need to exploit Arctic mineral and trade resources. Russia’s second-biggest fleet, in the Pacific, is being similarly tasked. Given the country’s simmering confrontation with Japan over the Kuril Islands, most experts expect that at least one of the first two Mistral s—to be named the Vladivostok and Sevastopol —will be homeported in the Pacific, able to both deploy Russian naval infantry and perform missions of humanitarian assistance and disaster relief.


The Baltic Fleet probably will continue to shrink but will increasingly be called on to safeguard Russian undersea gas and oil pipelines. While Georgia will occupy the Black Sea Fleet’s attention, this too is a region of growing Russian trade and oil commerce. The Caspian Flotilla, always a stepchild in strategic discussions, is being fortified with impressive Astrakhan -class patrol boats to ensure that Russia has the premier naval force in this oil-rich region. In an effort to gain more worldwide visibility and support for its antipiracy operations, Russia was actively engaged with Vietnam, Syria, and Venezuela (and up until March 2011, Libya), for logistics and repair services in their principal ports.


Russian naval strategy—like all strategies—can be discerned through analyzing the allocation of defense resources. Several conclusions emerge as Russian naval activity is evaluated. First, the navy’s relative stature is growing in Russia. Ships are being built at a markedly faster pace and these ships are increasingly joining the Russian fleet, not only being sold to foreign countries. Thus, Admiral Roughead was correct in his assessment: The Russian navy is on the move again. Second, Russia is relying more on its navy to provide an invulnerable strategic second-strike capability, the seaborne deterrent SSBN force. Third, however, Russian shipbuilding projects (other than perhaps the Yasen-class SSGN) are not principally designed for countering other navies or for projecting offensive military power beyond territorial waters. Instead, their weapon systems allow them to conduct independent operations and to inter-operate with other navies, but not challenge them. Most new Russian ships are smaller than their forebears and designed to be multimission rather than to specialize in one warfare area.

Naval Convergence Theory?


Finally, Russian naval strategy, as manifested in its operations, ****ouncements, and budgets, is becoming well aligned with Russian national-security strategy—perhaps as its principal military tool. This strategy, as noted earlier, seeks to enhance both national prosperity and Russia’s stature. Military power is aimed primarily at preventing war, but otherwise is considered another element of national power, used principally in support of Russia’s economic growth. This same message is repeated throughout our own guidelines, A Cooperative Strategy for 21st Century Seapower . 15 (http://www.usni.org/magazines/proceedings/2012-03/renaissance-russian-navy#footnotes)


While Russian and American strategies refer to regional warfighting capability in concert with allies, both nations’ military forces primarily exist to foster stability, trust, prosperity, and cooperation. Both strategies also acknowledge that, while sovereignty disputes and natural-resource competition may spark future conflict, each navy’s most likely principal challenges are terrorist networks, criminal elements, and natural disasters.


This logic could likewise underpin the argument for the relative importance of American naval power, enabling us to become an “offshore balancer” after we withdraw from ground wars in the Middle East and Central Asia. However, it almost certainly argues for major changes in the size, shape, and composition of the future Russian military, and particularly in its navy.


The historic Russian obsession with large standing armies of conscripts created an unaffordable military tool without a credible mission. Even the technologically sophisticated portions of the Russian military aimed at offensive operations against large nation-states have become problematic, and this leaves the need for a smaller, professional, military capable of defending Russian borders and combating domestic disruptions caused by terrorists and nationalist movements. It also calls for a military force whose principal role is to project the Russian image abroad and ensure the security of all Russian economic expansion. This is the strategic and ever-widening niche for the future Russian navy.


These trends may result in a rise back into the upper crust of the world’s navies. However, we are more likely to see Russian warships operating in multinational antipiracy patrols in the Gulf of Aden than trailing American carrier strike groups in the Pacific or the Mediterranean. These antipiracy patrols will increasingly be carried out by small, fast, stealthy multimission platforms. The very likely increased Russian presence in the Arctic Ocean will have more to do with global trade and oil security than it will with bastion defense of ballistic-missile submarines. Russian task groups in the Caribbean will be increasing Russia’s international stature as well as selling arms to Latin American nations, rather than threatening American military exercises. The U.S. task is to be able to discriminate those military activities required by an expanding economy from those that challenge vital U.S. interests as our national-security strategy moves into the second decade of the 21st century. The U.S. Navy’s maritime strategy just might have struck a resonant chord in Moscow.


1. “Roughead says Russian, Chinese Navies Growing,”, www.navytimes.com/news/2011/03/defense-navy--cno-assesses-russian-chines (http://www.navytimes.com/news/2011/03/defense-navy--cno-assesses-russian-chinese-navies-031611/)... .

2. LTCOL John A. Mowchan, “Russia’s Black Sea Threat,” U.S. Naval Institute Proceedings , vol. 137, no. 2 (February 2011), pp. 26–31. Lee Willett, “The Navy in Russia’s Resurgence,” The RUSI Journal , vol. 154, no. 1 (2009), pp. 50–55.

3. Vladimir Petrov, “Medvedev orders construction of aircraft carriers for the Russian Navy,” Jane’s Defence Weekly , 14 October 2008.
4. “Russia’s National Security Strategy to 2020,” 12 May 2009, http://rustrans.wikidot.com/Russia-s-national-security-strategy-to-2020 (http://rustrans.wikidot.com/Russia-s-national-security-strategy-to-2020) .
5. “The Military Doctrine of the Russian Federation Approved by Russian Federation Presidential Edict on 5 February 2010,” http://www.sras.org/military_doctrine_russian_federation_2010 (http://www.sras.org/military_doctrine_russian_federation_2010) .
6. “Maritime Doctrine of the Russian Federation 2020,” approved by Vladimir Putin, 27 July 2001, www.oceanlaw.org/downloads/arctic/Russian_Maritime_Policy_2020.pdf (http://www.oceanlaw.org/downloads/arctic/Russian_Maritime_Policy_2020.pdf) .
7. Andrei Kislyakov, “Will Russia create the World’s second largest Navy?” RIA Novosti , 13 November 2007, http://en.rian.ru/analysis/20071113/87843710.html (http://en.rian.ru/analysis/20071113/87843710.html) .
8. Reuben F. Johnson, “The Fleet That Has To Die,” The Weekly Standard , 15 July 2009.
9. Keith Jacobs, “Russian Navy: Quo Vadis?” Naval Forces , vol. 30, no. 3 (2009), pp. 56–64.
10. Jeremy Grantham, “Time to Wake Up: Days of Abundant Resources and Falling Prices Are Over Forever.” GMO Quarterly Letter , April 2011.
11. “Nevsky and Novomoskovsk: Two Submarines for Putin,” RIA Novost , 15 December 2010.
12. Milan Vego, “The Russian Navy Revitalized,” Armed Forces Journal , May 2009, pp. 34–47.
13. Vladimir Petrov, “Medvedev orders construction of aircraft carriers for Russian Navy,” Jane’s Defence Weekly , 14 October 14 2008.
14. “No New Russian Aircraft carriers until 2020,” Agence France-Presse , 10 December 2010.
15. While the document comprehensively addresses all potential naval missions including large-scale warfare, its immediate and lasting impression is its emphasis on “soft power.” See Ann Scott Tyson, “New Maritime Strategy to Focus on Soft Power,” Washington Post , 17 October 2007.

AustinJ
05-08-2012, 04:15 PM
More details on

PD-30 Engine Program --------> http://www.aviaport.ru/news/2012/05/05/234014.html
PD-14 Engine Program --------> http://www.aviaport.ru/news/2012/05/05/234051.html

Upgrade plan for SaM146 link (http://www.aviaport.ru/news/2012/05/05/234051.html)


In the next 10-15 years with the company expected to improve the SNECMA engine SaM146. In the first phase is planned to improve the basic engine components for the calculated results. In particular, the planned reduction in specific fuel consumption by 3.5%, reducing engine weight by 5%, provide a decrease in emissions from the existing base by 7% and reducing the cost of flying hours by 20%, a lower life cycle cost.

artjomh
05-08-2012, 09:30 PM
Norwegian P-3 maritime patrol aircraft’s close encounter with an aggressive Russian Mig-31 Foxhound


According to the Norwegian newspaper Andoyposten which gave the news, Apr. 10, 2012 will go down as a date that one particular Royal Norwegian Air Force P-3 crew will never forget.

Whilst flying over the Barents Sea on a routine mission, the P-3 Orion came across a Russian Air Force Mig-31 Foxhound. Nothing unusual, apparently, as the RNoAF planes come close to the Russian ones, especially when the Norwegian F-16s are called to intercept Russian aircraft approaching Norwegian airspace, normally without incident.

However, on this occasion, the Norwegian crew initially observed the Mig-31 twice shadowing the P-3 at a safe distance, then disappearing. Moments later the Russian fighter jet came back from behind the patrol aircraft, so fast and close it was in danger of a mid-air collision.

Fortunately, in spite of the “uncomfortable distance” the Orion did not collide with the Foxhound and the aircraft could safely return to its homebase.

http://theaviationist.com/2012/05/09/mig31-p3/

sepheronx
05-09-2012, 01:40 AM
@ AustinJ

Not a bad article, but kinda misleading in the part where it says Russia is worlds largest exporter of Oil and gas (not true, as Saudi Arabia is worlds largest exporter of oil), and about the aircraft carrier ambitions. Plans are being drawn up, but it will take quite the time for development. And they have not stopped talking about ocean based ships, as they have been talking constantly about them and the need for a new nuclear powered ships.

jstcvw09cd
05-09-2012, 07:23 AM
Very nice. appreciate for the notice!

Abanamat85
05-09-2012, 08:42 AM
A Russian Sukhoi Superjet 100 passenger plane with at least 44 people aboard has gone missing on a demonstration flight in Indonesia, reports say.

The plane disappeared from radar screens during a flight from Jakarta meant to last 30 minutes, a blogger with the Sukhoi delegation said.
Helicopters were dispatched to look for the jet, thought to have been flying near a mountain, Sergey Dolya said.
Emergency services confirmed a Sukhoi plane was missing.
Gagah Prakoso, spokesman for Indonesia's national search and rescue agency, said 46 people had been aboard the plane, which vanished from radar near Bogor, a city in West Java province.
He told BBC News it was unclear who was on board because they were people invited by Sukhoi, but they were "likely to be reps of Indonesian airlines".
"We are still looking for it and we are uncertain whether it crashed," he told AFP news agency earlier.
Dolya tweeted that there were 44 people aboard, eight of them Russians.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-18004097

http://lenta.ru/news/2012/05/09/jet/
(In Russian)

http://ru.wikipedia.org/wiki/Авиакатастрофа_в_Индонезии_9_мая_2012_года
(In Russian)

That region is mountainous and can be treacherous for flight. I really hope they're safe, and that it's a big misunderstanding. :/

Flamming_Python
05-09-2012, 08:48 AM
OMG. Hope everyone is safe!

GunshipDemocracy
05-09-2012, 06:01 PM
Ooops Iposted this oneby mistake in the other thread ;-) I did not see this info here yet, apologies if any repost.



Better later then never so no new WW will be EVER AGAIN.

"Russia will only be able to adopt a new 100-ton liquid-propellant intercontinental ballistic missile (ICBM) intended to penetrate the US missile defense system (http://en.rian.ru/infographics/20100227/158030266.html) by 2022, the manufacturer said on Tuesday"
http://en.rian.ru/mlitary_news/20120508/173310124.html


New Arms Procurement System

" Effective system of placement and implementation of state defense orders will be established when new Russian government is forged, Prime Minister Dmitry Medvedev said Tuesday."
http://en.rian.ru/mlitary_news/20120508/173315767.html


Cliche but somebody has to say at least once ;-)

"Putin orders the armed forces take into account future threats-experts say"
http://ria.ru/defense_safety/20120508/644241161.html

Mr_Blob
05-09-2012, 07:53 PM
Postol's interview : http://kommersant.ru/doc/1928495?stamp=634722127643735773
Ah, they finally figured out how they could solve the decoy pb :D



:-(

Maximmmm
05-10-2012, 04:10 AM
LOL: http://lenta.ru/news/2012/05/10/savtomatom/
Guy walked though Moscow with a fake ak-74 round his neck to check security. Needless to say he wasn't checked even once.

a.godumov
05-10-2012, 05:21 AM
Kind of stupid in my opinion. He wasn't checked but he just as easily could've ended up dead. With all those dignitaries (president, prime minister, memebers of the government, generals) and snipers on roof tops guarding them...

Cypriot
05-11-2012, 09:00 AM
hey does anyone knows when the gorshkov class frigate will start sea trialls ??

AustinJ
05-12-2012, 03:10 AM
vedomosti has an interview with Amlaz Antei chief , can some one who reads russian can log in to this site and post the interview here ?

http://www.vedomosti.ru/newspaper/article/280533/rakety_izgotovleny_zhdem_vyhoda_v_more_vladislav_menschikov

calimero2
05-12-2012, 03:19 AM
According to the commander of the VDV, the BMD-4M will be purchased after all. Series production of an improved version should start "not earlier than 2016."

http://gurkhan.blogspot.com/2012/05/4.html

Maximmmm
05-12-2012, 04:22 AM
http://en.rian.ru/mlitary_news/20120512/173404790.html
Poliment-redut to be tested at the end of this year.
My bets on the Gorshkov testing them.

Mr_Blob
05-12-2012, 05:31 AM
vedomosti has an interview with Amlaz Antei chief , can some one who reads russian can log in to this site and post the interview here ?

http://www.vedomosti.ru/newspaper/article/280533/rakety_izgotovleny_zhdem_vyhoda_v_more_vladislav_menschikov

http://www.vedomosti.ru/library/news/1731358/rakety_izgotovleny_zhdem_vyhoda_v_more_vladislav_menschikov?full#cut

AustinJ
05-12-2012, 05:43 AM
http://www.vedomosti.ru/library/news/1731358/rakety_izgotovleny_zhdem_vyhoda_v_more_vladislav_menschikov?full#cut

Thanks a lot , Interesting interview.

African-European
05-12-2012, 09:25 AM
Russia to test new naval air-defense system by year end

Russian air defense systems manufacturer Almaz Antei hopes to complete testing of its new Poliment-Redut ship-based air defense missile system by the end of this year, the company’s General Director Vladislav Menshikov said on Saturday.Previous Russian media reports have claimed the development of the system has been delayed.Poliment-Redut is derived from the land-based Vityaz air defense system which uses the 9M96 medium-range air defense missile.“Work on the system is at a preliminary test stage. But to complete testing we need a ship at sea,” Menshikov said. “This year, by all estimates, testing should be complete. The missiles are ready, we are waiting to go to sea,” Menshikov said in an interview with Vedomosti newspaper published on Saturday.Almaz Antei is also working on new radars and missiles for its future land-based S-500 air defense system, he said.Russia is continuing to develop its "promising" airborne defense laser program, Menshikov said.“The Americans have not managed to achieve the planned results [in their airborne laser projects], although the technology… is still being used in other developments,” he said.“Similar research work is under way in Russia, and we consider it quite promising,” he said.The United States began developing airborne defense lasers designed to destroy enemy nuclear intercontinental ballistic missiles in the mid-1990s. In a successful February 2010 test, a multi-megawatt-class chemical oxygen iodine laser installed in a Boeing 747-400F aircraft destroyed a ballistic missile and other targets.However, the project, which would eventually cost $5 billion, was reportedly shelved because of mounting costs and doubts about its actual practical value.Nevertheless, Pentagon officials have said the technology would be used to develop other laser defense systems, to be mounted on high altitude drones.

http://en.rian.ru/mlitary_news/20120512/173404790.html

Russia testing Italian tank

Russia is testing Italy's Centauro wheeled tank and considering building it under license, a representative of the Oto-Melara company which makes the tank said on Saturday.
"The first two machines with 105-mm and 125-mm guns are on trial at a Moscow Region proving ground," he said.
Two more Centauros with 120-mm and 30-mm guns will also join the trials in another six weeks. "The tanks will take part in laboratory, driving and firing trials," the Oto-Melara representative said.
When the trials are complete at the end of this year, Russia will consider creating a joint venture for production of the tank with an enterprise from the Russian military-industrial complex, he said.
Russian truck maker Kamaz in Naberezhny Chelny could be involved in the deal, according to a source in Russian arms sales holding Rosoboronexport.
Russia signed a deal with Italy in December for the semi-knocked down assembly of 60 Lynx light multirole armored vehicles (LMV) from Iveco, Deputy Defense Minister Alexander Sukhorukov said in January.
Oto-Melara, part of the Italian Finnmeccanica group, is part of the CIO joint venture with vehicle manufacturer Iveco to make military vehicles.
Italy already has 400 Centauros in service. The 24 ton tank has a four-man crew, top speed of 100 km/h (60 mph) and range of 800 km (500 miles). It has a main gun and two 7.62 mm machineguns.

http://en.rian.ru/mlitary_news/20120512/173407220.html


Medvedev replaces Russian Navy commander

Outgoing President Dmitry Medvedev has dismissed Russian Navy Commander, Admiral Vladimir Vysotsky, and appointed Vice-Admiral Viktor Chirkov for the position, the Kremlin press office reported on Sunday, without explaining the reasons for the dismissal.
Vysotsky, 57, has occupied the top military post for almost five years.
The new Navy Commander Chirkov, 52, was commander of the Baltic Fleet, before his appointment.
After his appointment, Chirkov said he would prioritize the construction of navy fleets in Russia.
“The most important thing for Russia is to build a fleet with the support of the president and like-minded persons,” Chirkov told RIA Novosti.
In a similar move in late April, Medvedev sacked Russian Air Force Commander, Colonel-General Alexander Zelin (http://en.rian.ru/mlitary_news/20120427/173084185.html), and dismissed him from military service.
Zelin, 59, has occupied the top military post for five years, during which the air force has begun to receive new aircraft and equipment in significant numbers for the first time since the end of the Soviet Union.
By his decrees, Medvedev has also appointed Major-General Viktor Bondarev, 52, as Russia’s new Air Force Commander, and Zelin as an aide to the Russian defense minister, the press office said.
Senior military commanders in Russia usually retire at age 60.
Igor Korotchenko, chairman of the Defense Ministry’s Public Council previously said that the reshuffle was a normal practice for military officials.
“Medevedev’s move will give the road to new, younger military specialists,” Korotchenko said.

http://en.rian.ru/mlitary_news/20120506/173260767.html


Military sources explain firing of Russian Navy commander

The dismissal of Russian Navy Commander Admiral Vladimir Vysotsky (http://en.rian.ru/mlitary_news/20120506/173260767.html) was due to his reluctance to comply with an order by Russia’s top military leadership to move the Navy General Staff from Moscow to St. Petersburg, a high-ranking source in the General Staff of the Armed Forces said on Saturday.
Vysotsky, 57, who has occupied the top Navy post for almost five years, was dismissed and replaced with Vice-Admiral Viktor Chirkov, former Baltic Fleet commander, by a presidential decree on May 6.
“Vysotsky has not moved to St. Petersburg. This is the main reason of his dismissal,” the source said.
Boris Gryzlov, then speaker of the Russian parliament’s lower house, proposed back in 2007 moving the Navy General Staff from Moscow to St. Petersburg, where the Navy command was located until the 1917 Russian Revolution. The initiative was promptly supported by Russia’s military leadership.
In early March 2012, the entire Navy command was ordered to move to the northern city.
A military source told RIA Novosti on Saturday Vysotsky was not against the very idea of moving the Navy command, but “insisted that the relocation should be gradual and thought through.”
In 2008, the initiative was estimated to cost the Russian budget between 40 and 50 billion rubles ($1.3-1.6 billion), the source said. This would cover the cost of personnel relocation and the construction of a new command center in St. Pertersburg.

http://en.rian.ru/mlitary_news/20120512/173407474.html

Nyusu
05-12-2012, 11:14 AM
Why the hell would Russia need Centauro? It doesnt seems to fit in.

Herman the II
05-12-2012, 11:26 AM
Are there wheeled plattforms that carry 100mm+ weaponry that are manufactured in Russia?

Khathi
05-12-2012, 11:39 AM
The true reason for Centauros is most probably that Italians won't sell any blueprints (which are really what anyone wants) without some actual hardware.

Nyusu
05-12-2012, 11:43 AM
The true reason for Centauros is most probably that Italians won't sell any blueprints (which are really what anyone wants) without some actual hardware.
I mean why would they wish to buy them? What would be the use of them for Russian military?

Universals
05-12-2012, 11:45 AM
Why the hell would Russia need Centauro? It doesnt seems to fit in. probably not. MoD deals are crooked at times. But I really don't this one happening.


Are there wheeled plattforms that carry 100mm+ weaponry that are manufactured in Russia? nona SVK, Sprut SD

Khathi
05-12-2012, 11:48 AM
Reportedly, MoD is interested in how Italians do their wheeled platforms, and how they modify them to suit various needs, probably to apply the know-how to the Boomerang platform. But Italians won't sent blueprints and stuff without some actual hardware, that's why they are acquired.

KoTeMoRe
05-12-2012, 11:49 AM
Are there wheeled plattforms that carry 100mm+ weaponry that are manufactured in Russia?

BTR 90 with 2A70/2A72 (BMP3 Turret). And there is the Sprut-D turret.

Universals
05-12-2012, 11:54 AM
But Italians won't sent blueprints and stuff without some actual hardware, that's why they are acquired. no decision has been made on acquisition, they are reportedly testing out two copies.

Nyusu
05-12-2012, 12:08 PM
no decision has been made on acquisition, they are reportedly testing out two copies.
They test 105 and 125 version right now and 2 more will come in next month or so(30 and 120 version). Article i read talks about plans of constructing them under license at Kamaz factory.

geolocator
05-12-2012, 07:37 PM
Bulava secrets were given away by an engineer in Sverdlovsk area.(in Russian) Didn't found it in English so far.
http://top.rbc.ru/society/13/05/2012/650102.shtml

Khathi
05-14-2012, 06:02 AM
An interesting interview of the Kurganmashzavod's CEO Albert Bakov:

http://expert.ru/2012/05/11/generalnyij-plan/

Salient points:

1. BMD-4 was made exactly to VDV's specs, it's not accepted mainly because of Makarov's resistance to it.
2. BMP-3 wan't accepted because it didn't pass trials. They've modified the design and should resume production soon.
3. Ukraine is seen as a major competitor.
4. Acquisition of foreign arms is a powerful stimulant for the domestic industry.
5. Kurganets-25's layout is nothing new. Problems exist, but they are solvable.
6. Main problem is squeezing the required amount of armor and the frontal engine into the amphibious package — it gets very nose-heavy.
7. Another major task is the unmanned turret: military still require last-resort manual fire option.
8. First prototype will be made this year, then it'ss be evaluated by the military.
9. New BMP is designed to be modular from the outset, with the shorter variants such as BMD created by simple shortening of the chassis.

sepheronx
05-14-2012, 07:38 AM
An interesting interview of the Kurganmashzavod's CEO Albert Bakov:

http://expert.ru/2012/05/11/generalnyij-plan/

Salient points:

1. BMD-4 was made exactly to VDV's specs, it's not accepted mainly because of Makarov's resistance to it.
2. BMP-3 wan't accepted because it didn't pass trials. They've modified the design and should resume production soon.
3. Ukraine is seen as a major competitor.
4. Acquisition of foreign arms is a powerful stimulant for the domestic industry.
5. Kurganets-25's layout is nothing new. Problems exist, but they are solvable.
6. Main problem is squeezing the required amount of armor and the frontal engine into the amphibious package — it gets very nose-heavy.
7. Another major task is the unmanned turret: military still require last-resort manual fire option.
8. First prototype will be made this year, then it'ss be evaluated by the military.
9. New BMP is designed to be modular from the outset, with the shorter variants such as BMD created by simple shortening of the chassis.

Seems as this Makarov fellow is a real pain in the butt. His comments on the T-90A tank, his blatant outcry on the missile defence shield and now the BMD-4?

How did BMP-3 not pass trials? They are still in Russian armed forces use, and there is videos of them being used in Chechnya (recently). But if they fixed the issues and re-started production, then that is good. As for the Kurganets-25's problem, that is pretty basic. Hard to have heavier armor, frontal engine and being able to still be floatable, will be interesting to see designs. Ukraine being a major competitor seems logical. The development of T-84 Oplot has caught a lot of attention but really no fruition but BTR-3 on the other hand seems to be selling quite well!

Khathi
05-14-2012, 07:53 AM
Makarov seems to be an all-or-nothing type of guy. But with the largely stale waters of the defense industry (Bakov himself says about the need to motivate the industry, as it tends to rest on its laurels after any successful machine) maybe he's the right man. At least he gets to play a bad cop. ;)

BMP is a somewhat complicated story. Bakov means the last batch, which wasn't accepted during the 2011 acquisition cycle. It turned out that during the acceptance trials they either used a somewhat heavier shell during the trial shooting or whatever, but in the end the armor didn't held and a number of weak points was revealed. After they modified the design and conducted next shooting, still some weak points remained, but the acquisition cycle already ended, and thus KMZ failed the Gosoboronzakaz-2011. He says, though, that they've finally ironed out the issue and are going to roll out the contracted BMPs this year.

Also, from his words the amphibious capability without preparation is the single most absolute requirement. Military is willing to compromise on armor, speed and even armament, but they still want the new BMP to simply roll off the shore and get going whatever the cost. They do reportedly have some interesting ideas about balancing the chassis so it doesn't simply stay nose-down in the water, but there's nothing on how they did this.

_GDS_
05-14-2012, 02:53 PM
Problem is not to have armour and heavy front (thx to engine) and be able to float, but finding the cheap/easy/modifieable way which can float.
BMD-4 may not please the VDV, but BMD-4M does (as it's written on gurkhan's blog), though i doubt they will mass produce it for VDV. :(
It has sooo much potential...

GunshipDemocracy
05-14-2012, 05:35 PM
Also, from his words the amphibious capability without preparation is the single most absolute requirement. Military is willing to compromise on armor, speed and even armament, but they still want the new BMP to simply roll off the shore and get going whatever the cost. They do reportedly have some interesting ideas about balancing the chassis so it doesn't simply stay nose-down in the water, but there's nothing on how they did this.


like rear-mounted electric motors driving the rear wheels and front diesel engine acting as an electric generator?

GunshipDemocracy
05-14-2012, 05:40 PM
Problem is not to have armour and heavy front (thx to engine) and be able to float, but finding the cheap/easy/modifieable way which can float.
BMD-4 may not please the VDV, but BMD-4M does (as it's written on gurkhan's blog), though i doubt they will mass produce it for VDV. :(
It has sooo much potential...

A price tag might be one of reasons, from the other hand how do they suppose to build so many modern airborne IFVs till 2020 if not by manufacturing BMD-4M surely remains an interesting question.

GunshipDemocracy
05-14-2012, 05:48 PM
Lads some good news as well

http://english.ruvr.ru/2012_05_14/74675229/

"By 2020, the Russian Air Force is to procure some 90 cutting-edge super-maneuverable Su-35S fighter jets, Air force spokesman Vladimir Drik told Ria-Novosti today.By 2020, the Russian Air Force is to procure some 90 cutting-edge super-maneuverable Su-35S fighter jets, Air force spokesman Vladimir Drik told Ria-Novosti today."


http://english.ruvr.ru/2012_05_13/74613142/
"
According to CEO of Russia’s Almaz-Antei advanced arms makers Dr Vladislav Menshikov, his company continues work, started decades ago in the Soviet Union, to develop powerful airborne lasers capable of shooting down hostile aircraft and incoming missiles. Sources say a weapon of this kind can destroy targets travelling at altitudes of up to 40 kilometers.
Chief Editor of the Natsionalnaya Oborona (National Defence) journal Dr Igor Korothcenko is ‘moderately skeptical’:
"Laser weapons will catch on, but not before 30 to 40 years from now. The problem is that developing them is exorbitantly costly. In the near future, guided missiles will be doing the air defence job. In the meantime, Russia has made considerable progress in laser weapon development. Its work in this field is focused on powerful airborne laser guns."

Personally can't wait for Skif/Polyus 2 and rail guns...
"

AustinJ
05-15-2012, 08:58 AM
The Russian Navy’s ‘New Look’ Reform in 2009-2011 (http://mdb.cast.ru/mdb/2-2012/item3/article3/)
DmitriyBoltenkov

Moscow Defence Brief 2012


In 2008, when the Russian political leadership realized the need for radical transformations in the armed forces, the Russian Navy was essentially a much smaller version of its Soviet predecessor.

The reform of the Navy pursued the following objectives:

* Reduce the number and size of the central military command bodies

* Bring all the remaining Navy units to their full numerical strength

* Redeploy some of the units in accordance with new military threats

* Spin off and outsource non-military operations

* Improve combat training

* Reform and optimize the support and logistics system, and

* Bring in new ships, and rearm naval aviation and coastal units.

The authors of the reform wanted to achieve a situation whereby the Navy units could focus on combat training, with all the support and logistics operations outsourced to civilian contractors.

The reform of the Navy began well after the roll-out of similar transformations in the Army and in the Air Force. The first stage of that reform began in 2009 and left the core naval units to which the actual ships and submarines are assigned largely unaffected. It was completed by December 1, 2011, when the MoD launched the second stage, with serious transformations in the pipeline for the fighting core of the Navy.

First stage of the Navy reform in 2009-2011

New military districts

One traditional weakness of the Soviet armed forces was the lack of coordination and cohesion between the separate armed services. During conflicts each of these services would often end up fighting its own war. The Five Day War with Georgia in 2008 demonstrated the same weakness of the Russian armed forces. The Russian government responded by introducing an American-style system in which all the forces fighting in the same strategic theater take their orders from a single HQ. Four new strategic operational commands (designated as “Military Districts” to honor a long-standing tradition) were set up in 2010: the Western, Southern, Central and Eastern. The Baltic and Northern fleets of the Russian Navy are now subordinated to the Western MD, the Black Sea Fleet and the Caspian Flotilla are part of the Southern MD, and the Pacific Fleet takes its orders from the Eastern MD. Each Military District HQ now has a Navy department. Navy Admiral K. Sidenko has been appointed Commander of the Eastern MD.

The commanders of the separate armed services have retained a very limited remit, which includes building up the fighting ability of the armed service in question, training command staff and overseeing combat training. The commander of the Russian Air Force seems to have already found his own niche in the new command and control system of the Russian armed forces; the same cannot be said about the commander of the Navy, at least for the moment.

The strategic nuclear submarines on combat patrol still take their orders directly from the General Staff, just as they did prior to the launch of the reform.

In addition to subordinating the Russian naval forces to the new Military Districts, the reform has also resulted in a substantial restructuring and cuts in the central MoD departments, including the department in charge of the Navy.

Naval combat units

The structure of the Russian Navy’s ship and submarine units remained largely unaffected during the first stage of the reform. The only notable change was the decision to disband several units which had outlived their usefulness, such as the divisions to which the Navy had previously assigned decommissioned nuclear submarines.

There were also some optimizations in the command structure. The Northern Fleet’s 11th and 12th submarine squadrons were merged to become the Submarine Command. The HQ of the 18th Submarine Division was disbanded following the decommissioning of Project 941 (Typhoon class) SSBNs in 2010.

Finally, the status of the commanders of flotillas and naval bases was substantially reduced. Previously they held the rank of Vice Admiral; this has now been reduced to Captain 1st Rank.

Naval aviation

In 2009-2010 the Russian Navy’s air regiments and air squadrons were merged into airbases, mirroring recent changes in the Russian Air Force. The new airbases subsumed flight units stationed at one or several of the nearby airfields, as well as the attendant communications, radar and maintenance units. Thirteen such airbases were set up. The MoD has also created a new naval aviation training center in Yeysk, a port on the Sea of Azov, to replace the disbanded training center in Ostrov, near Pskov. There are plans to build a carrier deck simulator in Yeysk to train naval aviation pilots.

In 2010 the MoD brought into effect further air base optimizations. As part of the Baltic Fleet it set up the 7054th Air Base, which subsumed 12 individual units, including all the fighters, bombers, transports and carrier-based helicopters. Then in the summer of 2011 all the Tu-22M3 long-range bombers which served with the Naval Aviation were transferred to the Russian Air Force’s Long Range Aviation. The Baltic Fleet’s fighters and strikers were assigned to the Air Force’s 7000th Air Base in Voronezh. The Navy’s fighters stationed in the Kamchatka were assigned to the Air Force’s air base in Khurbin, to become a separate air group. Despite the reassignments, most of these aircraft units remained stationed at their old airfields. The only aircraft which are still assigned to Naval Aviation are the Su-24 strikers stationed in the Crimea; this has to do with the terms of the lease agreement with Ukraine for the Black Sea Fleet’s base on the peninsula. The Northern Fleet’s 279th Independent Naval Fighter Air Regiment (Su-33) has not been affected by the reform, either. By late 2011 some of the newly-created naval airbases were merged. The Baltic Fleet, the Northern Fleet and the Black Sea fleet now have only one airbase apiece (the 7054th, 7050th and 7057th, respectively). The Pacific Fleet has two, the 7060th and the 7062nd.

Coastal defense and marines

As part of the reform of coastal defense forces and the marines, all the skeleton-strength units have been disbanded. The Baltic Fleet’s coastal defense force in Kaliningrad now consists of a motor rifle brigade, a motor rifle regiment, an artillery brigade and a missile brigade. All marine units are now manned to their full war-time strength; several have been redeployed. The 61st Marine Brigade on the Kola Peninsula and the 3rd Marine Brigade on the Kamchatka have been reduced in size to regiments. In the Crimea the 810th Marine Regiment has become the 810th Marine Brigade. In Vladivostok the 55th Marine Division has been restructured to become the 155th Marine Brigade, although its actual manpower and strength have gone up. The Caspian Flotilla’s 77th Marine Brigade has been disbanded; there are now only two marine battalions left, one in Astrakhan, the other in Dagestan. The marine battalions themselves have become smaller; each now consists of only three companies instead of four. All marine units have also lost their tanks.

Coastal defense missile and artillery units have undergone only minor cuts; they now consist of two brigades, two regiments and an independent division. Their old missile batteries are being replaced with the new Bastion and Bal systems.

Combat support units

All combat support units are now manned to their full strength; several have been merged, and several reduced in size. Radio-electronic warfare regiments have become radio-electronic warfare centers. The Navy’s technical bases have been merged or subordinated to larger units. For example, all seven of the Northern Fleet’s technical bases on the Kola Peninsula have become branches of the 571st base in Severomorsk.

Logistics

The logistics services have undergone the most radical reforms of all the other Navy components.

Back in 2007 the Russian Navy’s ship repair plants became joint-stock companies; some of them are now part of the United Shipbuilding Corporation (OSK).

Many of the support and utility assets formerly owned and maintained by the separate Navy fleets or directly by the MoD have been transferred to the Oboronservis state-owned defense holding company. These include housing and utilities; central heating and power plants; communications, missile and artillery repair plants; hardware depots; civilian engineering operations and trading organizations. As a result the Navy is no longer responsible for any non-military services or utilities in military compounds; all of them have been subcontracted to commercial companies such as Slavyanka, Repair and Operations Directorate, and Power Grid.

The logistics services which took their orders directly from the Navy Command have also been reformed. A case in point is the arsenals and arms depots which were previously subordinated to the Main Navy Command’s missile-artillery directorate or mines and torpedoes directorate. These arsenals and depots were complex operations which stored, distributed, repaired and disposed of weapons and ammunition. Weapons and ammunition storage has now become the remit of the newly created technical weapons bases. All the other services have been subcontracted to commercial companies which have taken over many of the assets of the former arsenals and arms depots, and which have now become part of Oboronservis.

In late 2010 the Navy’s logistics service was merged with the weapons and rear operations service to become a single logistics and rear operations service. The size of the new service was substantially reduced, and many of the servicemen became civilian contractors.

In 2010-2011 the former auxiliary and rescue ship brigades and divisions were downsized into smaller squadrons; their servicemen have also become civilian contractors.

The catering, fuel supply, and clothing and equipment services which used to be part of the Navy’s separate fleets or central logistics services have been merged into versatile supply bases manned entirely by civilians.

The Navy’s various medical services have been merged under large military hospitals. For example, the Pacific Fleet’s 1477th Military Clinical Hospital now controls all of the fleet’s medical facilities, including four medical branches, one big clinical center and two smaller hospitals.

Many of the non-military functions previously performed by servicemen have been outsourced. In 2012 all catering, laundry and bathing operations will be subcontracted to commercial companies. Maintenance of the Navy’s cars, trucks and armor has been outsourced to Oboronservis.

Combat training

The Russian Navy’s training programs have been ramped up very substantially in recent years compared to the situation in the 1990s and early 2000s. Ships are spending a lot more time in the sea; the number of naval exercises has gone up, and naval aviation pilots are clocking in more flight hours. The Northern Fleet’s ships spent a total of 800 days in the sea in 2011; the figure for the Baltic Fleet is 300 days. The Black Sea Fleet performed 30 separate combat missions that same year. Helicopter pilots of the Baltic Fleet clocked in an average of 60 hours flight time. In the marines the situation with combat training also showed a substantial improvement.

There have been several joint exercises involving several types of armed services. The 7th Airborne Assault Division, which is stationed in Novorossiysk, regularly takes part in joint exercises with the Black Sea Fleet to practice amphibious landing operations. The same is true of the Army’s 200th Motor Rifle Division stationed on the Kola Peninsula.

The Navy was actively involved in large combined exercises of the Russian armed forces, including the West-2009, East-2010, Center-2011, East-2011, and others. The Russian Navy has also stepped up its participation in various international exercises.

The scenario of the East-2011 exercise, in which the Pacific Fleet took part, included many interesting elements; some of them were unique even by the Soviet Navy’s standards. One of those elements was the formation of a joint naval assault and amphibious landing force, which sailed to Kamchatka, landed a force at the local firing ranges and launched missiles against numerous targets. The Varyag missile cruiser then sailed from Kamchatka to the Mariana Islands, where it took part in the Pacific Eagle 2011 joint exercise with the U.S. Navy, and after that visited the Canadian port of Vancouver. Several Russian ships have been involved in the anti-piracy operation in the Gulf of Aden.

Recruitment and training

The Russian naval training establishments have also undergone a radical reform. Several of the Navy’s research institutes and training centers have been merged under the Naval Academy — Military Training and Research Center (VUNTs MVF VMA). It includes the Naval Academy, the Higher Specialized Officer Courses, five naval research institutes, three MoD research institutes (the 1st, the 24th and the 40th), the Nakhimov Naval School and the Kronstadt Naval Cadet School. The center used to take its orders directly from the Russian Navy, but in February 2011 it was subordinated to the MoD’s Education Department. In December 2011 the submarine training centers in Obninsk and SosnovyyBor also became part of the Naval Academy — Military Training and Research Center. There are plans to relocate the whole center to Kronstadt in 2015-2017, which will then become Russia’s equivalent of Annapolis.

Several other MoD centers also train officers for the Russian Navy.

In recent years there has been no recruitment of cadets to naval schools owing to the glut of fresh lieutenants trained in the previous years. Many of these lieutenants even have to spend their first years in the Navy serving in positions normally filled by warrant officers and able seamen. To illustrate, some 377 lieutenants entered service with the Northern Fleet in 2011, even though only 130 lieutenant-level positions were available.

There has also been a sharp fall in the number of people who leave the Navy immediately upon finishing their naval training. The reasons for that include much better pay and a notable improvement in naval officers’ living conditions in recent years. The standards of combat training have also improved substantially. Average pay in the Russian armed forces has been rising steadily since the launch of the reform. On January 1, 2012 the basic salary paid to some categories of servicemen doubled or even tripled.

A shortage of conscripts is one of the problems the Navy has in common with the other armed services (and not only in Russia). The Navy Command is therefore trying to encourage current and former conscripts to stay on as professional servicemen by offering them housing and relatively high salaries. The MoD has announced plans to increase the proportion of professional sailors serving under contract to 100 per cent for submarines and to 70 per cent for surface ships.

Second stage of reform from 2011

The second stage of the reform of the Russian Navy was launched on December 1, 2011; its focus is to reorganize the core units to which the actual ships and submarines are assigned.

One explanation is in order before we proceed. In the Soviet Navy, the 1st and 2nd rank ship divisions usually consisted of up to 20 ships in two or three brigades; each brigade included up to ten 1st or 2nd rank ships. The 3rd rank divisions (minesweepers, small missile and anti-submarine ships) consisted of 8-10 ships in two or three tactical groups.

As a result of post-Soviet cuts, by 2011 each 1st or 2nd rank ship division included no more than five ships. An average 3rd rank division has 3-5 ships, so it is capable of fielding only one tactical group. The upshot is that while the number of ships in service has fallen, the size of the command structures has remained the same.

The main objective of the second stage of the reform is therefore to optimize the structure of the ship units by reducing the rank of some of these units and completely disbanding others. It is important to note that the cuts will not affect the actual number of ships in service; the axe will fall only on the bloated command structures and HQs.

The following changes have been put into effect as of December 2011:

# The MoD has disbanded the HQs of the Baltic Fleet’s 12th Surface Ships Division and of the Black Sea Fleet’s 30th Surface Ships Division. The 128th Surface Ships Brigade and the 71st Assault Landing Ships Brigade, which used to be part of the 12th Division, have become independent. The same applies to the 11th Surface Ships Brigade and the 197th Assault Landing Ships Brigade, which were part of the disbanded 30th Division.

# The Pacific Fleet’s 44th Anti-Submarine Ships Brigade has been disbanded. Its ships have been assigned to the 36th Surface Ships Division. The 182nd Submarine Brigade, stationed in the Kamchatka, has also been disbanded. Its submarines have been assigned to the 19th Submarine Brigade in Vladivostok.

# The Northern Fleet’s 2nd Anti-Submarine Ships Division has been downsized to become the 14th Brigade. The 5th Minesweepers Brigade has been disbanded, and its ships assigned to the 7th Brigade.

# The small anti-submarine ship and minesweeper divisions of all the fleets of the Russian Navy are being downsized to tactical groups.

# The HQs of the White Sea naval base and of the Sovetskaya Gavan naval base area have been downsized to the level of base station commands.

More optimizations are expected in the Navy in the coming months.

GunshipDemocracy
05-16-2012, 09:35 PM
http://english.ruvr.ru/2012_05_16/74828078/

the beginning:
"
During the round table discussion regarding the current state and the process of re-equipment and the prospects of the Russian Air Force Konstantin Makienko, deputy director of the Center for Analysis of Strategies and Technologies, presented his report on the prospects of producing military aviation equipment for export and the use by the Russian Air Force.

The leading tendency of the next ten years will be the reorientation of the aviation industry from exports to the internal market. According to Makienko, it is linked to the drastic increase of the volume of aviation equipment purchased for the Russian Air Force as well as the expected concurrent drop in the external demand. "



but the end is interesting indeed:

"
In such circumstances producing a long-term strategy of developing the aviation industry after 2020 when the current 2020 program expires, becomes a matter of principle. With the current state of things in 2020 Russia will have only two competitive products with a good commercial potential – that is the T-50 heavy fighter and a family of trainer/light attack aircraft based on Yak-130. It appears that the development of the Russian aviation industry during this planning period will largely depend on the ability to solve two main tasks in the near future. The first task is to develop a competitive product (for the period after 2020) in the segment of commercial aviation. The second task is to develop a relatively simple and inexpensive combat aviation complex, or a «light» fighter plane that would be able to effectively compete with F-35.
"

So stealth successor of MIG-35?

BTW I am wondering why Russian do not really invest in drones. Just to have it for export (not mentioning developing technology) if they are not envisioned into local doctrine?

sepheronx
05-17-2012, 01:59 AM
They are investing in drones, you have read through this thread, right?

As for competitive aviation equipment: Hard to say. India and China are increasing their ability in manufacturing of such systems, but still, Russia has a competitive outlook in aviation indeed. T-50 and Yak-130 as mentioned, but there is also the MS-21 and other larger transport aircrafts. Not to mention A-100. There are other possibilities as well by Russia investing even more into production of avionics and providing options for countries who buy Chinese or Indian jets to be able to equip Russian avionics, etc.

As for the calling in need of an inexpensive combat aviation complex (light fighter) to combat F-35, I completely called it and had people like Merberkut call me an idiot.

African-European
05-17-2012, 05:01 AM
Russian Air Force gets first modernized An-124S

MOSCOW, May 17 (RIA Novosti) - The Russian Air Force has received three modernized Antonov An-124-100 super-heavy transport aircraft as part of an update program for its transport fleet, Air Force spokesman Col. Vladimir Drik said on Thursday."The air force has got three modernized Ruslan An-124-100s and four more are being updated at the Ulyanovsk Aviastar factory," he said.The main components of the modernization program for the An-124 are a new avionics suite and navigation system, increase the range by range 5,400 km, and a strengthened airframe. The aircraft will also get a new braking system allowing it to make 30 percent shorter landing runs. It will also get a new SRPPZ-2000 terrain warning awareness system."We plan to modernize another ten or so An-124s to An-124-100M standard," Drik said, adding the service will also get "up to ten new-build An-124-300 transports with an increase in payload of up to 150 tons."The largest transport aircraft in military service in the world, the An-124 is Russia's main long-range heavy transport aircraft, and is capable of carrying outsize loads thanks to its large nose and tail doors. It is also capable of landing on rough air*****s

http://en.rian.ru/mlitary_news/20120517/173502516.html

TheCorruptedOne
05-17-2012, 07:48 AM
I am definitely looking forward to seeing the Russian response to the F-35. Its export potential should be tremendous.

GunshipDemocracy
05-17-2012, 08:28 AM
They are investing in drones, you have read through this thread, right?

but still buying from Israel, what to me looks like extortion by Israelis. Anyway founds invested are not impressive though...




As for competitive aviation equipment: Hard to say. India and China are increasing their ability in manufacturing of such systems, but still, Russia has a competitive outlook in aviation indeed. T-50 and Yak-130 as mentioned, but there is also the MS-21 and other larger transport aircrafts. Not to mention A-100. There are other possibilities as well by Russia investing even more into production of avionics and providing options for countries who buy Chinese or Indian jets to be able to equip Russian avionics, etc.


Avionics is good ready products are better. The problem with SSJ-100 can have a negative impact on civil part of aviation ;( Maybe they can build more versions on Yak like Proryv or Light Combat Support plane?





As for the calling in need of an inexpensive combat aviation complex (light fighter) to combat F-35, I completely called it and had people like Merberkut call me an idiot.

Apparently Russian aviation industry analysts did not have a chance to read Metberkut analysis yet otherwise they night have change their minds rofl

metberkut
05-17-2012, 08:42 AM
I'm in London, FSB can't touch me, haha.

Want some tea?

:-P



No, seriously, any ideas about intended use?

- AWACS (doesn't seam likely)
- VKP type comms repeater (doesn't seem likely)
- MPA
- JSTARS

I like the MPA idea. Il-38 is getting replaced by Il-38N, but it would be good to have something new to replace Tu-142, although they are not that old.


AWACS would make no sense considering placement of the radars. It is more or less what the "R" suggests. It hasn't been taken picture of before in flight, because not all people are crazy. :-P


I doubt it's the MPA — there's no MAD boom present, and too many side-looking antennas that would hardly be useful for the maritime patrol, while for the JSTARS role it might hit the spot.

Yup.

PS: http://bmpd.livejournal.com/230071.html

PS2: sepheronx, i called you something (idiot or not, i dont remember and dont care) because you claimed they are working on light fighter NOW, and that it was in the 2020 funding. It wasn't, and as far as i am aware, it still isn't. See the difference? I never ever said that Russian Airforce (or the industry) doesn't *need* a light fighter. I said it is not being funded.

Khathi
05-17-2012, 08:42 AM
but still buying from Israel, what to me looks like extortion by Israelis. Anyway founds invested are not impressive though...
THE UAV problem in Russia stems from the fact that they were kinda forgotten by everyone in the 90es. Back in the Eighties the Russian heavy UAVs were pretty competitive, but already by that point the focus was shifting to the lighter, more compact devices, and with the heavier ones — to the geater ranges, AI elements and actual combat applications. By the Nineties the heavy domestic UAVs were grossly obsolete and lighter nowhere in sight. Russian engineers missed the whole generation or a couple, so now they have to play the catch-up, which isn't the most investment-friendly state of the industry. In fact, all the middle-range and heavier UAVs presented to the military in the early Noughties didn't satisfy them for one reason or another. So, for now, the MoD bids their time and buys the foreign UAVs to both fill the gap and allow the engineers to study the state-of-the-art so they'll be able to build their own.

African-European
05-17-2012, 11:37 AM
Russia to field new ground attack jet

The Russian Air Force will start receiving new ground attack aircraft based on the Sukhoi Su-25SM Frogfoot combat jets by 2020, Col. Gen. Alexander Zelin said on Thursday.“This new type of a ground attack aircraft has been included in the state arms procurement program,” Zelin, who is an aide to the defense minister, told a news conference in Voronezh (central Russia). “It will be put in service with the Air Force by 2020.”The new aircraft will be capable of carrying of a wide range of tactical weaponry and advanced radar and navigation equipment.It will feature elements of stealth technology and will be able to land on short runways.The new combat jet will eventually replace the modernized Su-25SM attack aircraft now entering service.Russia will continue to upgrade its outdated to the Su-25SM version, which has a significantly better survivability and combat effectiveness than earlier versions.The Russian Air Force currently has over 30 Su-25SM planes in service and plans to modernize about 80 Su-25s by 2020.Meanwhile, the Russian military has abandoned plans to develop a light attack plane based on Yak-130 combat trainer.Zelin said the prototype, dubbed Yak-131, had not met the requirements for enhansed protection of pilots.

http://en.rian.ru/mlitary_news/20120517/173508923.html

http://i1144.photobucket.com/albums/o486/kelly-holland/1601698171.jpg

sepheronx
05-17-2012, 01:07 PM
A new cas aircraft? cool! Let us hope they actually get significant numbers because it seems the upgrade for su-25 is pretty low and slow.

geolocator
05-17-2012, 01:52 PM
RIP.

MOSCOW, May 17 (RIA Novosti) – The launch of a Soyuz-U carrier rocket from the Plesetsk Space Center in northern Russia on Thursday was the last in its 40-year history, spokesman for Russia’s Space Forces Col. Alexei Zolotukhin said.
The Soyuz-U orbited on Thursday a Cosmos-series reconnaissance satellite to expand Russia’s Oko (Eye) orbital missile early warning network, which consists of about 70 satellites.

“The launch on May 17 of a medium class Soyuz-U carrier rocket from Plesetsk was the last for this type of launch vehicles,” Zolotukhin said.
The first launch of a Soyuz-U was conducted from the Plesetsk Space Center on May 18, 1973. A total of 434 launches have been carried out, orbiting about 430 spacecraft.
“The Soyuz-U will be replaced by Soyuz-2 and Angara-A3 medium class carrier rockets,” Zolotukhin said.


http://en.rian.ru/russia/20120517/173517900.html

artjomh
05-17-2012, 01:57 PM
RIAN is tripping balls.

It wasn't Oko early warning satellite, it was a Kobalt-M optical reconnaissance satellite. Last Oko was launched in March 2012.


Russian Soyuz-U launches Kobalt-M satellite

May 17th, 2012 by Chris Bergin and William Graham

In the first of three launches within the space of several hours, a Russian Soyuz-U kicked of a busy Thursday with the launch of the Kobalt-M spy satellite. Launch of the veteran rocket was conducted at launch pad 16/2 at the Plesetsk cosmodrome, with the lift off time given as 3:05pm GMT.

With an interesting appearance, the Kobalt-M is classed as a modernized version of the Yantar spacecraft. It is understood to be a military reconnaissance spacecraft by nature.

The spacecraft was developed by TsSKB Progress of Samara and manufactured by OAO Arsenal of St Petersburg, according to the Russianspaceweb site.

The design of the spacecraft is such that it has two small capsules on board, allowing it to return film back to Earth inside the main – cone-shaped – reentry vehicle. Kobalt-M satellites are typically launched into the 170 by 370-kilometer orbits with the inclination 62.8 – 67.2 degrees toward the Equator.

Very little is known about the spacecraft, given it’s military nature, although it is understood to have the classification of Cosmos-2450, and will be the last such spacecraft of this range to be launched.

http://www.nasaspaceflight.com/2012/05/russian-soyuz-u-launches-kobalt-m-satellite/

geolocator
05-17-2012, 02:16 PM
Strange, in the Russian variant they were saying about Kobalt-M with reference to a source... Then it's vanished. p-)

metberkut
05-17-2012, 02:17 PM
A new cas aircraft? cool! Let us hope they actually get significant numbers because it seems the upgrade for su-25 is pretty low and slow.
Nice tactic. Some mud slinging then you ignore when it has been pointed out you were raving about wrong thing.

Universals
05-17-2012, 02:20 PM
Elektro-L No.1 takes a stunning pic of the Earth

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/47436324/ns/technology_and_science-science/#.T7UzEEVYuqY

AustinJ
05-17-2012, 02:29 PM
Looking at the picture of Tu-214 aircraft from what i could make out its clearly a JSTAR type aircraft with AEW type capability due to use of Phased Array Antenna.

There are like 2 SLAR type Radar near the nose and behind the wings , that likely to probe in deep inside the area of interest using SAR/ISAR mode and scan the air , its clearly designed to avoid wings.

The one on the bottom behind the wings below the fuselage its designed to scan the ground below it , the SLAR type can also look behind , below .. the antenna behind and forward of the wing also can look on all sides.

The one just under the nose fuselage is intriguing ...its not a radar antenna could be SIGNIT/ELINT sensor pod or Optronic Sensors.

This bird clearly has near 360 * antenna coverage .....this is JSTARS for sure with AEW&C capability to add in if required.

Flamming_Python
05-17-2012, 02:34 PM
"
In such circumstances producing a long-term strategy of developing the aviation industry after 2020 when the current 2020 program expires, becomes a matter of principle. With the current state of things in 2020 Russia will have only two competitive products with a good commercial potential – that is the T-50 heavy fighter and a family of trainer/light attack aircraft based on Yak-130. It appears that the development of the Russian aviation industry during this planning period will largely depend on the ability to solve two main tasks in the near future. The first task is to develop a competitive product (for the period after 2020) in the segment of commercial aviation. The second task is to develop a relatively simple and inexpensive combat aviation complex, or a «light» fighter plane that would be able to effectively compete with F-35.
"

So stealth successor of MIG-35?

BTW I am wondering why Russian do not really invest in drones. Just to have it for export (not mentioning developing technology) if they are not envisioned into local doctrine?

This is nothing new (the LGFA project), MiG was working on something like this in the 90s. But this is a good confirmation nonthless that there is still interest in such an aircraft and that work may be taking place.

AustinJ
05-17-2012, 02:38 PM
So the new CAS is not the Yak-131 Light Attack but a new bird designed by Sukhoi ....... and a twin seater , this will be some where closer to JSK'ski but more optimised for ground attack.

GunshipDemocracy
05-17-2012, 04:48 PM
THE UAV problem in Russia stems from the fact that they were kinda forgotten by everyone in the 90es. Back in the Eighties the Russian heavy UAVs were pretty competitive, but already by that point the focus was shifting to the lighter, more compact devices, and with the heavier ones — to the geater ranges, AI elements and actual combat applications. By the Nineties the heavy domestic UAVs were grossly obsolete and lighter nowhere in sight. Russian engineers missed the whole generation or a couple, so now they have to play the catch-up, which isn't the most investment-friendly state of the industry. In fact, all the middle-range and heavier UAVs presented to the military in the early Noughties didn't satisfy them for one reason or another. So, for now, the MoD bids their time and buys the foreign UAVs to both fill the gap and allow the engineers to study the state-of-the-art so they'll be able to build their own.

Looks like plan but with 50mln dollars for the first phase UAV and 500mlns spent on Israeli products seems like reversed proportions to me. But OK it is just my personal opinion.

GunshipDemocracy
05-17-2012, 04:51 PM
So the new CAS is not the Yak-131 Light Attack but a new bird designed by Sukhoi ....... and a twin seater , this will be some where closer to JSK'ski but more optimised for ground attack.

Maybe Yak-131 will have another role? coordination of drones? fighing off drones? stand-off weapon platform ? export to low budget countries?

sepheronx
05-17-2012, 11:54 PM
Nice tactic. Some mud slinging then you ignore when it has been pointed out you were raving about wrong thing.

You just itch for a fight eh son?
No, you just cannot admit you were wrong when I was right about the possibilities ofa cheaper jet. Now you are going onto something completely different quoting me on my comment about the su-25.

But this isn't the place. If you believe you are as smart as you think, then you too would agree.

metberkut
05-18-2012, 11:18 AM
You just itch for a fight eh son?
No, you just cannot admit you were wrong when I was right about the possibilities ofa cheaper jet. Now you are going onto something completely different quoting me on my comment about the su-25.

But this isn't the place. If you believe you are as smart as you think, then you too would agree.

There are also possibilities about supersonic hovering plasma stealth jetfighter. Prove i am wrong. Great argument.

Btw, since you are still unable to grasp this, i will do the quoting. You said:



As for the calling in need of an inexpensive combat aviation complex (light fighter) to combat F-35, I completely called it and had people like Merberkut call me an idiot.

I was quoting that message not because of the content in that message, but more like OH HAI, because you first threw some mud in my direction then didnt answer on me correcting you, which was this:



PS2: sepheronx, i called you something (idiot or not, i dont remember and dont care) because you claimed they are working on light fighter NOW, and that it was in the 2020 funding. It wasn't, and as far as i am aware, it still isn't. See the difference? I never ever said that Russian Airforce (or the industry) doesn't *need* a light fighter. I said it is not being funded.

Comprehende?

artjomh
05-18-2012, 12:30 PM
Can't you both just go away?

Andy_UA
05-18-2012, 01:39 PM
http://img-fotki.yandex.ru/get/6305/154814723.3/0_68e86_333362f_L.jpg http://img-fotki.yandex.ru/get/6306/154814723.3/0_68e85_d207f47e_M.jpg



5000 ton , 120m in length and 16.5m width gift gave Yantar shipbuilers to the naval sailors on the Baltic Fleet's birthday. At the "Yantar" today a large amphibious ship was launched.

BDK is named in honor of Vice-Admiral Ivan Gren - during the Great Patriotic War, he commanded the artillery, naval defense of Leningrad.

The ship was laid in 2004. Because of unstable funding and staff shortages at the plant construction was delayed, but in 2008 situation has changed.

At the ceremony of lowering into the water were Governor Nikolai Tsukanov, Chief of Staff of the Baltic Fleet, Sergei Farkov, guests of honor of the holiday were the descendants of Vice-Admiral Ivan Gren.

BDK "Ivan Gren" - is one of the twelve ships, which are already under construction or
just preparing for their turn on the "Yantar" for the Navy.

http://kaliningrad.rfn.ru/rnews.html?id=83929&cid=

Maximmmm
05-18-2012, 02:27 PM
That's a pretty interesting paint job they gave it.

metberkut
05-18-2012, 02:51 PM
That's a pretty interesting paint job they gave it.
Yeah, wonder what is the reason. Is it primer?

Leo1
05-19-2012, 06:55 AM
So what's the reason that there's only going to be one ship like Ivan Gren? Wouldn't it make more sense to keep building that type, since they've built one already?

AustinJ
05-19-2012, 09:42 AM
Read the whole interview its interesting

Success depends on whether we choose the right marketing policy (http://www.ruaviation.com/docs/1/2012/5/17/60/)


Recently our industry has managed to increase the range of one of the most powerful systems – Antey-2500. Its maximum firing range was increased from 250 to 350 km. It is the world record. We will offer this system to one of the largest countries in this region.

There are medium- and short-range systems. For example, a new version of Tor system has been presented recently – Tor-M2.

At that there are three modifications: with crawling traction, wheels and with modular design. The firing range was increased by 3 km (the current operating radius is 15 km). The squadron formed by four four-channel Tor-M2Es may hit simultaneously 16 targets approaching from any directions at the range of up to 15 km and altitude of up to 10 km under any weather conditions and the time of day. The high automation level and unique algorithms for combat performance allow decreasing the workload on combat crew. Tor-M2E is the best system for rebuff of massed air threat. Pantsir S1 system is also in great demand. These are short-range systems.

In the medium-range category we are offering Buk systems. At present we have Buk-M2E with crawling traction and wheels. One division of Buk-M2E systems is able to hit simultaneously 24 targets flying from different directions at the range of 3 – 45 km and the altitudes from 15 meters to 25 km, under conditions of heavy enemy electronic countermeasures and firing countereffort. The critical distinction from the previous version (Buk-M1) is tracking of targets using phased antenna array, which increases the firing capabilities of the system four times. The system is effective even for hitting above-water targets and ground radiocontrast ones.

Fulcrum-35
05-22-2012, 10:48 AM
Russian navy ordered a first batch of Ka-27M

http://rusnavy.com/news/navy/index.php?ELEMENT_ID=15162

What are the main differences with the baseline Ka-27?

AustinJ
05-22-2012, 12:32 PM
Not by “Mistral” alone: new landing ship for Russian Navy (http://english.ruvr.ru/2012_05_22/75581505/)


The new large landing ship “Ivan Gren” has come off the production line of the “Yantar” plant. The ship, named after the famous Soviet Admiral and scientist-artilleryman, is the chief ship of Project 11711. Ships of the project, along with the French/Russian-made “Mistral” helicopter carriers, are to form the basis of the Russian Navy’s landing force in the near future.

Currently, the landing forces of the Navy consist of 18 large landing ships. The basis of this fleet consists of 15 ships from Project 775 constructed in Poland, and three ships from project 1171 “Tapir” built in the USSR in the 1960s.

Although the project of the new large landing ship has a number similar to its predecessor – 11711 – there is nothing left from “Tapir” in it. According to available information, a similar project number was assigned for purposes of secrecy.

The new large landing ship differs from its predecessors in its lesser radio visibility due to modified forms of add-ons. The design of the dock-camera and the bow ramp was modified in order to facilitate the landing of troops and enhance its security, whether it is conducted by means of boats, or directly on shore.

The “Ivan Gren” has been under construction for quite a long time, from 2004 to 2012. It is expected to start operating only in 2013. This delay in construction was due both to the uncertainty of the landing forces’ role in the structure of the Fleet, and the project’s incompleteness. The second reason is still the problem of today: before issuing an order for a large series of ships, the Navy intends to put the “Ivan Gren” to the test in order to make a decision concerning the equipment and armament of prospective large landing ships. Today the second ship of Project 11711 is at the initial stage of construction. The work began in 2010, but it is unlikely to be sped up before 2013-14 i.e. before the conclusions are made basing on the results of the lead ship’s tests. After that an order can be made for a series of ships, improved according to the test’s results.

Altogether, including the order for four “Mistral” universal amphibious ships (UAS) – each of which can replace two large landing ships in regards to the accommodation of troop capacity – the Navy needs approximately 9-10 ships from Project 11711. The state armament program for the period of 2011-2020 lays down plans for the construction of six such ships. The rest will probably be built after 2020.

However, the “Ivan Gren’s” fate is not quite clear yet. It is possible that after the tests the lead ship of the new project will be used as a military transport “with landing potential.” First of all, it depends on the kind of weapons that will be placed on the newly built ship.

The contract for the construction of two UAS “Mistral” in France and two more under license in Russia has caused a heated reaction in the West and in some post-soviet states – especially in Georgia and Baltic countries. Versions concerning the use of the new UAS in the Baltic Sea and the Black Sea were seriously discussed there. These publicly stated concerns, however, can be regarded only as “demonstrative actions”, because it is obvious that a 21,000 ton UAS with a sailing range of about 20,000 miles is not intended for sailing in “ponds” like the Black or Baltic Seas. The actual renewal of the landing forces in these theaters of military action means that large landing ships of average dimensions and range of sailing will be added to the armory.

These ships are able to land a reinforced company of marines (or a battalion, but without equipment), and to support the landing by means of artillery fire and multiple launch rocket systems. It is optimal to use them in conflicts, such as the August War of 2008. It should be noted that the UAS of project 11711 – alongside a larger accommodation of troops capacity – have a smaller sailing range than their predecessors, which suggests their use primarily in coastal zones.

The new UAS is not enough to maintain full-fledged assault forces of the Fleet. The marines of the Russian Navy need new armored vehicles, including floating ones, and landing boats, both conventional and on air cushions, which can be applied both from the board of the amphibious ships and on their own.

A renewal of the helicopter fleet is also badly needed. It is supposed to solve this problem by purchasing the upgraded Ka-29 (transport- combatant) helicopters and the latest Ka-52К (deck combat helicopters).

Meanwhile we are to wait for the results of the “Ivan Gren” tests. In the next two years the structure of the Russian Navy landing forces will become clear.

Az_esm
05-22-2012, 01:17 PM
So what's the reason that there's only going to be one ship like Ivan Gren?
To gave work. And to gave naval officers opportunity to have experience. And to have +1 new ship in not very young fleet.

Universals
05-22-2012, 01:21 PM
Not by “Mistral” alone: new landing ship for Russian Navy (http://english.ruvr.ru/2012_05_22/75581505/)

so there's a second Ivan green hull? Interesting.

AustinJ
05-23-2012, 06:01 AM
Seems Avangrad ICBM was successfully tested today

Strategic Rocket Forces successfully launched a prototype intercontinental ballistic missile (http://ria.ru/defense_safety/20120523/655811074.html)


"It is planned that the new ICBMs will increase the combat capabilities of the strike group in the Strategic Missile Forces Russian strategic nuclear forces, including through increased capacity created to overcome missile defense systems," - he added.

According to the Strategic Missile Forces, start was made to obtain experimental data on the accuracy of missiles made in the development of scientific, technical and technological solutions, to check availability and to determine the characteristics of its systems and assemblies.

Launching an ICBM was made May 23 at 10.15 from a mobile launcher. According to the Ministry of Defense, this is the first test launch of missiles, it conducted joint military calculations of the Strategic Missile Forces and Space Forces.

"The missile is created with the maximum use of existing and development of new backlogs and solutions obtained during the development of a fifth-generation missile systems, which significantly reduces time and cost to create it" - said Koval.

African-European
05-23-2012, 10:47 AM
Russia turns on new missile warning radar

Russia placed its new Voronezh-M long-range missile warning radar on duty in the Irkutsk region of Siberia on Wednesday, marking a major increase in its missile early warning system capability.."At 10:15 a.m. (5:15 a.m. Moscow time) on May 23, it was put on duty," said Lt. Gen. Oleg Ostapenko, the commander of Russia's Aerospace Defense Forces at the site."This unique station has massive capabilities and is a key link in carring out our strategic tasks given to us by the high command. It plays a key role in the missile early warning chain," he said at the opening ceremony for the Voronezh-M radar station."Once a second Voronezh-M is built, we will no longer have to rely on the Dnepr missile early warning system radars" he added.The Dnepr system was the Soviet Union's first generation phased-array anti-missile radar system. It was deployed at a number of peripheral sites in the USSR including Latvia, Kazakhstan and Azerbaijan. Russia lost use of these facilities when the Soviet Union collapsed, causing a loss of surveillance capability.With the introduction of a second Voronezh-M station, the system will have its coverage doubled to 240 degrees, covering an arc from India to the United States.The new Voronezh-M station can also be more quickly deployed to a new site and requires a smaller crew to operate it compared to previous generation stations. The radar station also uses 40 percent less energy.Former Strategic Missile Forces Chief of Staff Col. Gen. Viktor Yesin said the new Voronezh-M radar station covers the northeast of the U.S. and China.It can detect ballistic targets up to 6000 kilometers, while the older Dnepr radar can only detect them at up to 2500 kilometers, Yesin said.

http://en.rian.ru/mlitary_news/20120523/173620853.html

geolocator
05-23-2012, 01:48 PM
Please, tell me why Russia builds Voronezh-M in one place, Voronezh-DM in other, tells about a Voronezh-VP. It looks like a mess.

artjomh
05-23-2012, 02:44 PM
Please, tell me why Russia builds Voronezh-M in one place, Voronezh-DM in other, tells about a Voronezh-VP. It looks like a mess.

To you, perhaps...

VHF band radars provide extremely long scanning range, but at a cost of lower resolution. UHF band radars have smaller range, but higher resolution.

Russian military builds VHF (Daryal/Voronezh-M/Voronezh-VP) and UHF (Volga/Voronezh-DM) radars so that their fields of view are interspersed. An airborne object would first be detected by a VHF radar at extreme range, and as it comes closer, it can be identified by higher resolution UHF radars. SHF/X band radars then provide a firing solution to missile defence crews.

This provides more decision lead time to the military and politicians.

AustinJ
05-23-2012, 03:29 PM
The Metric/L-Band radar coverage makes sense but do these actually over lap at all locations ... i mean for every Metric Band coverage do they have L band radar that cover the same location/area , so its truly dual band radar looking at the same area of interest ?

The M is mentioned as having a range of 6000 km by some media what about DM radar do they have similar range ?

artjomh
05-23-2012, 04:04 PM
They are designed to overlap, but, obviously, not all sectors are covered so far.

The current configuration is (counting from Pechora counterclockwise):

VHF - UHF - VHF - UHF - UHF - UHF - UHF - VHF - VHF - VHF

Pechora - Olenegorsk - Lekhtusi - Pionersky - Gantsevichi - Armavir-1 - Armavir-2 - Gabala - Mishelevka-1 - Mishelevka-2

AustinJ
05-23-2012, 04:07 PM
Ok Thanks a diagram representation would be interesting but its good to know the idea is to overlap .......A Metric/L band radar is not just good for BM detection but also to detect cruise missile and fighter aircraft at long ranges.... it cant get better than this in present technology we have.

xav
05-23-2012, 04:17 PM
so there's a second Ivan green hull? Interesting.
For the record, back in October:
4 Mistrals won't be enough: Russian Navy likely to order several Project 11711 Ivan Gren class

A source within the Defense Ministry said, "The Navy needs at least 18 ships of this class. Say, four Mistrals will meet approximately 50% of the requirements and leave the rest to smaller ships like the Ivan Gren."
http://www.navyrecognition.com/index.php/news/year-2011-news/october-2011-navy-naval-air-force-news/128-4-mistrals-wont-be-enough-russian-navy-likely-to-order-several-project-11711-ivan-gren-class.html

metberkut
05-23-2012, 04:27 PM
Ok Thanks a diagram representation would be interesting but its good to know the idea is to overlap
I have seen one, have it on my HD somewhere, but cant find it.

artjomh
05-23-2012, 04:42 PM
Pavel Podvig had a couple of maps of early warning coverage, but they are pretty outdated.

http://russianforces.org/images/EarlyWarningRadarsRU200707small.jpg

http://russianforces.org/WindowsLiveWriter/TworadarsatArmavir_A0E5/RadarCoverageWest_2.jpg

The radar in Kazakhstan is non-operational, and some of the radars have a larger field of view (and obviously range).

The chart is also missing the radar in Kaliningrad (but think of it as an extra 110 degree sector 6000 km long).

This article should give an overview of how the system developed over time.

http://cisac.stanford.edu/publications/history_and_the_current_status_of_the_russian_earlywarning_system

metberkut
05-23-2012, 05:43 PM
The one i have seen was very different, inforgraphic, very nice one. (and it was rather recent, less than one year)

GunshipDemocracy
05-23-2012, 05:45 PM
ooooooooops Austin was first ;o)

was it Avangard?
http://www.deagel.com/Ballistic-Missiles/Avangard_a002719001.aspx

in English
http://english.ruvr.ru/2012_05_23/75671489/


Russia has effectively test-fired the prototype of a new intercontinental ballistic missile from the Plesetsk space centre, in northern Russia. This came in a statement by the Defence Ministry official in charge of the Russian Strategic Missile Forces, Vadim Koval.


According to him, the new missile will boost the operational capability of the Strategic Troops’ cutting edge, specifically due to its enhanced ability to penetrate enemy air-defence systems in the making. The missile designers are relying heavily on technology concepts formulated for the fifth-generation guided missile systems, to build the ICBM sooner and make it less costly.

artjomh
05-23-2012, 05:48 PM
There is also this one. But the angles on this one is pretty wrong too.

http://i.imgur.com/DkywT.jpg

geolocator
05-23-2012, 07:17 PM
179887

This one looks more real.

Mr_Blob
05-24-2012, 02:14 PM
About Voronezh-M/DM radar : http://www.armscontrol.org/act/2012_03/Cooperating_With_Russia_on_Missile_Defense_A_New_Proposal
Does anyone know whether D. Wilkening claim about Voronezh operating band is truthful ? And are his claims about the current state of the art in russian radar modules correct?
I have never seen a HD photograph of a Voronezh-DM and thus can't measure the spacing between radiating elements.

artjomh
05-24-2012, 02:40 PM
About Voronezh-M/DM radar : http://www.armscontrol.org/act/2012_03/Cooperating_With_Russia_on_Missile_Defense_A_New_Proposal
Does anyone know whether D. Wilkening claim about Voronezh operating band is truthful ?

A trained radio operator can, theoretically, determine the general band of a radar by its visual appearance, but I question the idea that he can determine operating frequency with that kind of accuracy.

Officially, Voronezh-DM operates in the Ultra High Frequency part of the spectrum (above 300 MHz). Exact frequency is unknown.


I have never seen a HD photograph of a Voronezh-DM and thus can't measure the spacing between radiating elements.

Best we have.

http://www.rtisystems.ru/_files/editor/image/anniversary/2000-2010/2009.JPG

http://militaryrussia.ru/i/284/610/0ddAW.jpg

Mr_Blob
05-24-2012, 02:54 PM
thanks for the pic. I also found one here with more details but completely distorted by perspective http://galerie.valka.cz/showphoto.php/photo/157477

Anyway If you have the dimension of the radar, we could make the 0.5,0.6 wavelenth spacing assumption and find out the operating frequency.

artjomh
05-24-2012, 03:00 PM
There is a door and a person on this photo, maybe you can extrapolate from that.

http://www.novosti-kosmonavtiki.ru/content/photogallery/gallery_173/images/IMG_1702.jpg

More here: http://www.novosti-kosmonavtiki.ru/content/photogallery/gallery_173/index.shtml

Maximmmm
05-24-2012, 08:32 PM
Seems like Kalibr is doing fine, the Dagestan just tested it.
http://en.rian.ru/mlitary_news/20120524/173655856.html