TerraN_EmpirE
Tyrant King
Unless the Russians were to loose there Airbase, there is no real reason to being in the Kuz other then to play for prestige. Even then I doubt it.
Russian Military News, Reports, Data, etc.
- Thread starter tphuang
- Start date
The Buyan-M Corvettes, with their capabilities to launch either anti-ship, or land attack cruise missiles from their VLS are a way Russia has found to build that type of capability far cheaper than doing so on a Burke, or a Tico, or a Virginia class submarine.
Of course, there are only eight such missiles be platform (a 1,000 ton platform) and their range and sustainment are not great), where the US vessels can carry scores of missiles.
But they have developed and now demonstrated a capability nonetheless, and one has to respect the Russians for doing so, and then s\\demonstrating it to the world.
They have built and commissioned six of these for the Caspian Sea Flotilla. They are building more for the Black Sea Fleet. Tow of those have been launched and four more are building.
See:
Of course, there are only eight such missiles be platform (a 1,000 ton platform) and their range and sustainment are not great), where the US vessels can carry scores of missiles.
But they have developed and now demonstrated a capability nonetheless, and one has to respect the Russians for doing so, and then s\\demonstrating it to the world.
They have built and commissioned six of these for the Caspian Sea Flotilla. They are building more for the Black Sea Fleet. Tow of those have been launched and four more are building.
See:
Last edited:
I am busy putting together separate Flickr albums for the new, modern Russian vessels that are now coming out. They include:
Last edited:
Not to be confused Buyan M/21631 and Buyan/21630 without missiles in service in Caspian Sea Flotilla 3 and 3 also very soon two 21631 for Black Sea Fleet planned 9.
Yes but no also
Because VLS no reloading possible in Sea and as you ask only 8 maximum by ships then need time for go to port re supply etc.. and US Ships carry much more ofc about 20/30 as i think and you have yet say, an idea, no match.
About 3000 for 130 MSC/SSN and you have this number about for give an idea.
Then new capability but no comparison with USN and also USAF with AGM-86 and now much AGM-158A/B.
Very interesting get long range LACM because useful ofc vs different targets but mainly usefull vs air bases and especialy neutralize ennemy CAP before an attack with aircrafts, AA defences also in particular double digit Russian SAM in fact do SEAD missions.
Also CGN Nakhimov in modernization with about 8 ? of this UKSK VLS after can carry a very decent load
max about 60 theoretically but with SSM in fact about 20 LACM which remains a weapon more special and less numerous/common.
Last edited:
Jura The idiot
General
... related:
Russia Hoping to Export Three Sanction-hit Admiral Grigorovich-Class Frigates
source:
So, does this mean that the Russian Black sea fleet will keep the first three:
Admiral Grigorovich
Admiral Essen
Admiral Makarov
All three of those are already launched with two of them about to commission is my understanding.
Then the next three, two of which have already been laid down and are under construction, end up going to India?
Brumby
Major
Russian Strikes in Syria a Sort of Show-and-Tell of Unexpected Strength
An interesting article on how the Russian military has reconstituted itself under Putin and its ability to conduct modern warfare. It is not some backward military as some might still claim.
An interesting article on how the Russian military has reconstituted itself under Putin and its ability to conduct modern warfare. It is not some backward military as some might still claim.
Brumby
Major
Yes but no also
Because VLS no reloading possible in Sea and as you ask only 8 maximum by ships then need time for go to port re supply etc.. and US Ships carry much more ofc about 20/30 as i think and you have yet say, an idea, no match.
About 3000 for 130 MSC/SSN and you have this number about for give an idea.
Then new capability but no comparison with USN and also USAF with AGM-86 and now much AGM-158A/B.
Very interesting get long range LACM because useful ofc vs different targets but mainly usefull vs air bases and especialy neutralize ennemy CAP before an attack with aircrafts, AA defences also in particular double digit Russian SAM in fact do SEAD missions.
Also CGN Nakhimov in modernization with about 8 ? of this UKSK VLS after can carry a very decent load
The same problem of reloading VLS also applies to USN ships. One should also note that USN ships carry a variety of weapons in its VLS for different purposes and so the LRCM carried would also be limited. However comparison of this nature is apples and oranges because US ships are designed with different purposes in mind and so represent trade offs relative to the ships own intended mission sets.
I have a question though on the Russian design. On the surface, it does appear that they are able to pack a lot into a relatively small hull. However there are no free lunches. There is something that they are foregoing. I presume is range and sea going capability especially in heavy state. Presumably to pack a lot into the ship may mean that the design is not very stable in heavy seas condition. Am I right?