Thread: Russian Armed Forces News & Discussion thread

  1. #2461
    Senior Member metberkut's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    Norway
    Age
    24
    Posts
    2,559

    Default

    ^Interesting.

    But i thought the deal was actually 10 of each a bit back, not 8 of each? Or am i just remembering wrongly?

  2. #2462
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Posts
    1,522

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by metberkut View Post
    ^Interesting.

    But i thought the deal was actually 10 of each a bit back, not 8 of each? Or am i just remembering wrongly?
    Looks like 8 is the low goal if the yard can't work out it's construction issues and that if possible they'll bring it up to 10 each.

  3. #2463
    Banned user
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Posts
    620

    Default

    I don't think you are. I remember this also.

  4. #2464
    Senior Member artjomh's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Location
    London, UK
    Posts
    5,162

    Default

    Only 8 are financed.

    Someone in the government recently said "maybe 10", but the military has been noncommittal about this. One the one hand, they don't want to tell their bosses that they are idiots who don't understand procurement, on the other hand, they can't exactly wave a magic wand and make it 10.

    8 is a safe, firm number. 10 is just someone's random idea.

  5. #2465
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Location
    Amsterdam, The Netherlands
    Posts
    1,479

    Default

    [LEFT][*******#010000][FONT=Georgia]Russia to bargain for Gabala with scan with on alternatives

    Russia has been bargaining with Azerbaijan about a key station in its ballistic missile early warning system (BMEWS). Should the negotiations fail, the station may be pulled out and replaced by a new one to be built in Russia. This meets the recently endorsed new approaches to BMEWS radar field configuration. [/FONT][/COLOR][/LEFT]

    The growing appetite

    [LEFT][*******#010000][FONT=Georgia]The case in point is the currently modernized Daryal-type BMEWS radar station (RS) located in the vicinity of Gabala, Azerbaijan. For Russia, Gabala is of strategic importance as controlling the sector to the south of its borders. [/FONT][/COLOR]
    [*******#010000][FONT=Georgia]“The talks on Gabala continue. The first round was quite constructive,” Deputy Defense Minister Anatoly Antonov told RIA Novosti Tuesday. “Soon we will agree with our Azerbaijani colleagues on the dates when the Russian delegation can leave for Azerbaijan for further talks.” [/FONT][/COLOR]
    [*******#010000][FONT=Georgia]Earlier Kommersant reported with reference to its sources in the Defense Ministry that Baku wants to increase the annual lease payment from $7 to $300 million. Just a few months ago, its appetite did not extend beyond $15 million[/FONT][/COLOR]
    [*******#010000][FONT=Georgia]“This amount is exorbitant and totally unjustified; we will press for its considerable reduction. We still hope to come to an agreement,” a Defense Ministry source told Kommersant. According to another source, Russia might as well evacuate Gabala, “If Baku fails to moderate its appetite.”[/FONT][/COLOR]
    [*******#010000][FONT=Georgia]For now, Gabala has an essential role to play, watching the strategically important southern sector (including possible missile launches from the Indian Ocean), and registering Iranian missile launches (also significant in the current geopolitical situation).[/FONT][/COLOR]
    [*******#010000][FONT=Georgia]But a hypothetical and highly unlikely pullout scenario may still be on the cards, and then, as a stopgap, Russia will have to speedily commission the second stage of its new-generation RS near Armavir, Krasnodar Territory.[/FONT][/COLOR][/LEFT]

    A hole-ridden net as inheritance

    [LEFT][*******#010000][FONT=Georgia]But how has it come about that the Russian BMEWS is dependent on a foreign state’s whims?[/FONT][/COLOR]
    [*******#010000][FONT=Georgia]The disposition of BMEWS radars in the USSR obeyed the language of art. 6 of the Soviet-American Treaty on the Limitation of Anti-Ballistic Missile Systems (1972), which prescribed to deploy outward-oriented BMEWS radars solely in the periphery of each country’s national territory. [/FONT][/COLOR]
    [*******#010000][FONT=Georgia]This explains why the radar field came to include stations at Mukachevo and Mys Khersones, Ukraine; Gabala, Azerbaijan; Skrunda, Latvia; and Sary-Shagan, Kazakhstan.[/FONT][/COLOR]
    [*******#010000][FONT=Georgia]After 1991, this entire infrastructure was inherited by the newly independent countries that sprung up in the territory of the former USSR. Russia was left with one station near Olenegorsk, Kola Peninsula, one in Pechora and two abandoned projects – Mishelevka and Abalkovo – near Irkutsk. Oriented in the northwestern direction so that it might watch the airspace over Yakutia and beyond, Abalkovo, in addition to everything else, was being built in violation of the ABM Treaty, something that caused protracted squabbles with the United States.[/FONT][/COLOR]
    [*******#010000][FONT=Georgia]To plug the hole in the Western sector, the military command speedily put back into service and licked into shape the Volga RS at Gantsevichi, Belarus. It had been under construction since 1981 with an eye to meeting the challenge posed by U.S.-owned Eurostrategic Pershing-2 missiles. But after the signing of the Treaty on the Intermediate-Range and Shorter-Range Missiles (1987), it was no longer urgently needed to have the station and the project was allowed to drift. It again emerged as a priority after 1998: completed in a rush, the radar was put on combat duty in 2000. [/FONT][/COLOR][/LEFT]

    Voronezh to replace Daryal

    [LEFT][*******#010000][FONT=Georgia]Russia’s top military officials were greatly concerned about the situation where only the northern and northwestern sectors were protected, while the narrow sectors in the west and south were being leased and largely dependent on the stance of post-Soviet governments. [/FONT][/COLOR]
    [*******#010000][FONT=Georgia]The potential for funding the national nuclear missile forces was stretched to the utmost both in the 1990s and thereafter. The Kremlin knew only too well that the deterrent was the sole thing that ensured Russia’s independence and territorial integrity even while the rest of the country was openly enthusiastic about the newly found Western allies. This is why the radar-field problem was addressed at the earliest opportunity. [/FONT][/COLOR]
    [*******#010000][FONT=Georgia]The available BMEWS radars were in effect mammoth construction projects boasting huge reinforced-concrete shells, inside which active devices and equipment were installed. These ziggurats took a long time to build, which was followed by an equally protracted start-up period. Reorienting a station to another sector (let alone redeploying it to a different location) was out of the question. It was easier to blow it up and build a new one. [/FONT][/COLOR]
    [*******#010000][FONT=Georgia]A high depot readiness concept (HDR) was proposed as a new approach that envisaged the installation of easy-to-assemble frames for hanging large prefabricated radar modules. [/FONT][/COLOR]
    [*******#010000][FONT=Georgia]This made it possible to achieve three effects at once with the very first batch-produced Voronezh station.[/FONT][/COLOR]
    [*******#010000][FONT=Georgia]First, the construction time was curtailed, as were the construction costs, which is of no small importance under present-day circumstances. According to available data, the turn-key cost of one Voronezh installation is 1.5 billion rubles in 2005 prices. Moreover, it takes 12 to 16 months to assemble 23 prefabricated units on a prepared site. [/FONT][/COLOR]
    [*******#010000][FONT=Georgia]To compare: Daryal-type radar like the one at Gabala is made up of 4,000 units of equipment. Its cost in comparable prices would amount to 19.8 billion rubles and the time span required for its construction under the most favorable conditions is anywhere between 5 and 6 years. [/FONT][/COLOR]
    [*******#010000][FONT=Georgia]Second, the module approach provides for easy scaling and modernization. None of the former models lent themselves to modernization since numerous problems cropped up when it came to installing equipment and laying the service lines inside a shell. [/FONT][/COLOR]
    [*******#010000][FONT=Georgia]Third, a new-generation station can be disassembled and redeployed to a new location relatively quickly. That is not a sign of HDR radars’ new mobility, but an option like this can be easily contemplated several years in advance. [/FONT][/COLOR]
    [*******#010000][FONT=Georgia]High depot readiness morphing into full readiness[/FONT][/COLOR]
    [*******#010000][FONT=Georgia]Currently Russia is operating three Voronezh-type HDR radars: Armavir, Lekhtusi (near St. Petersburg), and, since recently, Kaliningrad (this one will become fully operational only in 2014). The fourth radar of the same type is under construction at Mishelevka near Irkutsk on the site of a demolished Daryal shell. [/FONT][/COLOR]
    [*******#010000][FONT=Georgia]The fifth radar will actually be the second stage of Armavir, which is Russia’s main hope for the hypothetical eventuality of having to withdraw Gabala from the BMEWS. The first stage is going to handle the southwestern sector, while the second stage, to be built directly behind Gabala and next to its twin, will control the southern and southeastern sector.[/FONT][/COLOR]
    [*******#010000][FONT=Georgia]In the meantime, the high depot readiness concept has been upgraded for more flexibility, with A.L. Mintz Radio Institute announcing its MARS project (Multifunctional Adaptive Radar System) also known as FDR RS (full depot readiness). [/FONT][/COLOR]
    [*******#010000][FONT=Georgia]This radar is being designed as a mobile and universal affair. As is cautiously specified, it is a “redeployable” model, which means that it is not a fully mobile vehicle-based radar, like those used by the air defense forces. Moreover, it should easily integrate with both the BMEWS and other related information systems involved in monitoring outer space, securing missile defense, and supporting non-strategic antimissile defenses, including ship-based components.[/FONT][/COLOR]
    [*******#010000][FONT=Georgia]Given this approach, Gabala will certainly retain its significance as an element of Russia’s BMEWS, but it will gradually lose its critical importance.
    [/FONT][/COLOR][/LEFT]

    The views expressed in this article are the author’s and may not necessarily represent those of RIA Novosti.

    http://en.rian.ru/analysis/20120302/171688248.html


    Upgraded Il-76 plane to make maiden flight in the summer

    [LEFT][*******#010000][FONT=Georgia]Russia’s modernized Ilyushin Il-76MD-90A aircraft, also known as the Il-476, will conduct its maiden flight by the end of June, Ulyanovsk-based Aviastar aircraft maker said on Friday.[/FONT][/COLOR][*******#010000][FONT=Georgia]The Il-476 is an extensively modified variant of the Il-76 freighter, with new engines, reinforced wing, modernized cockpit, and heavier payload. The aircraft will be primarily built for the Russian Armed Forces and Emergencies Ministry.[/FONT][/COLOR][*******#010000][FONT=Georgia]“Project 476 is our future,” Aviastar General Director Sergei Dementyev said.[/FONT][/COLOR][*******#010000][FONT=Georgia]Aviastar, which also manufactures super-heavy Antonov An-124 transport planes, expects to build up to ten of the Il-476 aircraft per year and is in talks with export customers including India and China as well as commercial customers.[/FONT][/COLOR][*******#010000][FONT=Georgia]China canceled a contract agreed earlier with Russia for delivery of around 38 Il-76 transport and Il-78 tanker aircraft, after TAPO, the Uzbekistan-based Il-76 airframe producer said it could no longer deliver the airframes as production had slowed.[/FONT][/COLOR][*******#010000][FONT=Georgia]Russia then had to move production to Aerostar in order to complete the Il-476 modification programs for the Russian Air Force.[/FONT][/COLOR][*******#010000][FONT=Georgia]The Russian Defense Ministry wants to buy up to 100 of the aircraft over ten years to replace existing Il-76s.

    http://en.rian.ru/mlitary_news/20120302/171691313.html[/FONT][/COLOR][/LEFT]

  6. #2466
    Member GunshipDemocracy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Location
    who´s hotter? Madeleine vs Natalia
    Posts
    964

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Sashko View Post
    That would be like buying Mercedes s600 to do furniture deliveries based on an assumption that you could potentially fit a couch in there, after throwing away the seats.
    Well it was just my educated guess why they might want to beef up ship active defenses? I thought about something like new version of Moskva helo carrier (Project 1123).

  7. #2467
    Member GunshipDemocracy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Location
    who´s hotter? Madeleine vs Natalia
    Posts
    964

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by YevgenyP View Post
    If even yes, doubt homemade ones can provide such level.
    it is a real shame for Russian Navy - especially that unmanned combat submarines would would add powerful component to Russian fleet with potential global reach...

  8. #2468
    Banned user
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Posts
    620

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by GunshipDemocracy View Post
    it is a real shame for Russian Navy - especially that unmanned combat submarines would would add powerful component to Russian fleet with potential global reach...


    Excuse me but an unmanned combat submarines with potential global reach ? are you kidding me ?

  9. #2469
    Senior Member xav's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Age
    33
    Posts
    13,296

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Rubick View Post
    Excuse me but an unmanned combat submarines with potential global reach ? are you kidding me ?
    DARPA is working on such project... unmanned submarines with 3+ months endurance to trail SSK/Coastal subs... (not armed however)

  10. #2470
    Banned user
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Posts
    620

    Default

    Delete this.
    Last edited by Rubick; 03-02-2012 at 06:22 PM.

  11. #2471
    Banned user
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Posts
    620

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by xav View Post
    DARPA is working on such project... unmanned submarines with 3+ months endurance to trail SSK/Coastal subs... (not armed however)
    Not the same thing as he suggests. Which is just stupid.

    unmanned underwater vehicle that are used by SSK or SSN for recon is one thing. Building a SSN and controlling it from freaking Moscow or what ever is another. It would need to be in shallow depth with it's mast out for that to be possible. Which would void the whole point of a submarine. Further more would you really want a unmanded nuke sub ?

  12. #2472
    Member GunshipDemocracy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Location
    who´s hotter? Madeleine vs Natalia
    Posts
    964

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Rubick View Post
    Not the same thing as he suggests. Which is just stupid.

    unmanned underwater vehicle that are used by SSK or SSN for recon is one thing. Building a SSN and controlling it from freaking Moscow or what ever is another. Further more would you really want a unmanned nuke sub ?
    Not entirely sir, I strongly recommend reading my post once more: with potential reach Current technology does not allow yet to safely build autonomous submarine but... Please let me draw your attention to the fact that the World does not end up in 2020. I hope

    Global reach - not necessairly means nuclear powerhouse, why not AIP? without all displacement needed for crew this might be enough with LADA class displacement sub to go neas LA, stay on bottom of the sea safely for months waiting for an order ...

    This is nice guarantee for peace

  13. #2473
    Banned user
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Posts
    620

    Default

    Oh, lord. How for starters are you going to controle it in real time ? Without having the sub in shallow depth with it's mast up ?


    Making a autonomous submarine is something that Russia could do today with ease. They practicly have already. But like I said controlling one submerged at operational depth from Moscow is not possible. Also you would never want a nuke reactor unmanned no matter how safe you make them.
    Last edited by Rubick; 03-02-2012 at 07:39 PM.

  14. #2474
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Posts
    2,274

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Rubick View Post
    Making a autonomous submarine is something that Russia could do today with ease. They practicly have already. But like I said controlling one submerged at operational depth from Moscow is not possible. Also you would never want a nuke reactor unmanned no matter how safe you make them.
    Well, during the Cold War unmanned reactors were routinely put on the radar satellites, because early surveillance radar comsumed ungodly amounts of electricity which no solar panels or RTGs could realistically supply, the only choice being lightweight compact nuclear reactors. There are upwards of half hundred of them still flying up there. Interestingly, neither Soviet, nor American nuclear satellites had ever suffered a serious accident.

  15. #2475
    Senior Member Universals's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    peace to this young warrior without the sound of guns
    Posts
    8,399

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Khathi View Post
    Well, during the Cold War unmanned reactors were routinely put on the radar satellites, because early surveillance radar comsumed ungodly amounts of electricity which no solar panels or RTGs could realistically supply, the only choice being lightweight compact nuclear reactors. There are upwards of half hundred of them still flying up there. Interestingly, neither Soviet, nor American nuclear satellites had ever suffered a serious accident.
    That's scary to think about.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •