I challenge the entire idea that there is a need for a missile defense destroyer. What possible use such a ship will have? Where will it even fit in Russian naval strategy?Originally Posted by Flamming_Python
US Navy requires mobile ABM platforms because they are faced with many smal threshold enemies around the world. Russian enemies are either major states where missile defense are pointless and sub-threshold enemies which don't require technologically complex counter-capability.
Russian Navy still requires the samkind of capabilities it needed 30 years ago, since the strategy hasn't changed that much. It needs ASW to counter US submarines and mobile area denial platforms to counter the CSGs. Mobile missile defense platforms have no plac win current naval strategy.
BrahMos is 9 m long and those ships use a raised up superstructure.
You also have to consider the fact that 9M82 is 1,2 meters in diameter, which is 85% wider than Brahmos. Imagine a beast of that size on a vessel.
Kirov-sized would be the absolute minimum where S-500 would even make sense, which means that those vessels would be another batch of white elephants. If USSR could afford it, how can Russia.
Last edited by artjomh; 07-01-2012 at 03:52 PM.
Last OT post here. What's the best online (or print) source of info available in English on the S-300V/AN2500 system that you know of? That system and Gazelle are probably the two most interesting missile systems to me that Russia's ever put into service.
Carlo Kopp has a decent page on S-300V
http://www.ausairpower.net/APA-Giant...mozTocId912634
On Gazelle, there's DIMMI's website. It's in Russian, but there is a translation option on top.
http://military.tomsk.ru/blog/topic-350.html
Thanks! I knew about Kopp's site but SOC had said some of it was wrong so. . .*shrugs*. Hadn't seen the Gazelle site before.
artjomh , you are simply assuming the fact that S-500 would have dia greater than 1 m and would be 10-11m tall by just looking at the launcher ........launcher wouldnt tell you any thing as it could hold 2 missile or just one big missile or more.
Even assuming its a big missile they can also raise the super structure as they have done in case of brahmos launcher on Talwar class ..........if the dia is big then the new destroyer too is 3-4 times the displacement of Talwar and would be far bigger ship
There are too many variables to it and right now its all speculation.
Although i agree with you fully that Russian Navy hardly needs a Missile defence Destroyer ....over a well balanced Frigate and Corvette and ASW ships ......the challenge from NATO submarine force are far greater then those ICBM that needs to be defended by Missile Defence Destroyer which we really do not know how well it actually works and if it works at all.
Having land based ABM is fine for most situations , Unless there is some future scenario where defending some gulf/north american/african/indian state from ICBM/IRBM becomes a priority and missile defence destroyer can do that more rapidly and with far better mobility.
I suspect one of the motivation for Missile Defence Destroyer is because US is having similar ships with mobile ABM platforms and how can Russia lag behind.
Last edited by Andy_UA; 07-02-2012 at 04:50 AM.
^^ Looks fine , would suggest you put it in html format available via website or blogspot and then you can keep updating it as information is available or needs to be revised.
Could you use GoogleDocs? Dowloading from these websites is a chore on mobile devices.
Yet another one might be maneuvering hypersonic orbital/suborbital platforms carrying weapons.
then Google would know too much about Russian military programs ;o)
Great. This is what I needed. Tell me if it works - Link
Much better.
By the way, how did you get 64 Tu-95MSM? According to START data, there 63 deployed bombers.
Great stuff!
Russia Defense R&D down 50% since 2005
http://en.rian.ru/mlitary_news/20120703/174384885.html
WTF Russia is cutting R&D down and buying stuff abroad? or this is about how to reorganize channels for money spending?The Russian Defense Ministry has cut financing on research and development in the defense industry by almost a half, a member of the Military-Industrial Commission said on Tuesday. “In the framework of the state defense order, the financing of R&D has been reduced from 38% in 2005 to 18% in 2012,” Vladimir Pospelov told a meeting of Russian industrialists in Moscow.
Pospelov said the cuts had hampered the implementation of mid-and long-term R&D projects.
“Their completion has been delayed, which negatively affected the technology cycle for the development of new weaponry,” he said, adding that the military had folded a large number of R&D projects since 2009 as they became obsolete.
“As a result, the developers of weaponry run up debts and spend the funds allocated under state defense orders on paying them back,” the official said, adding that the Defense Ministry had to spend 2.8 billion rubles ($86 million) for these purposes.
Meanwhile, the Russian leadership has set modernizing the Russian Armed Forces as a priority for the next decade.
In line with the ambitious rearmament program until 2020, the government is planning to spend 20 trillion rubles ($614 billion) on purchases of advanced military equipment.
Deputy Commander of the Russian General Staff Maj. Gen. Igor Sheremet said in March that the R&D work on 400 defense-related projects was currently underway with an estimated value of 500 billion rubles ($15.5 bln).
Deputy Prime Minister Dmitry Rogozin, who oversees Russia’s defense industry, on Wednesday will present a bill on the on the establishment of an advanced military research agency at the lower house of the Russian parliament, the State Duma.
The new body is expected to boost the development of advanced weaponry and help streamline the arms procurement process in Russia.
Putin calls for new infantry equipment
http://en.rian.ru/mlitary_news/20120703/174376551.htmlRussian President Vladimir Putin called on the country's arms designers and manufacturers on Tuesday to begin work on new small arms, body armor and communications equipment for the infantry and airborne forces. "We need new solutions for equipping our soldiers, for small arms, individual communications and body armor," Putin said at a meeting in Sochi on the theme of the State Armaments Program and Infantry and Airborne Forces. "I call on you to start design and research work in these fields," he added.
Putin noted that research and development for the ground forces accounted for just ten percent of their equipment budget.
So with cuts in R&D Russians will develop new SCAR like AK?
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote