Russian Military News, Reports, Data, etc.

Deino

Lieutenant General
Staff member
Super Moderator
Registered Member
Sukhoi Superjet SSJ 100 . . .

Pardon to say so, but what has an image related to a civil regional airliner from 2010 with the topic???

Just to remind: Russian Military News, Reports, Data, etc.
 

timepass

Brigadier
Indonesia inks $1.1 bn deal with Russia to buy 11 jets...

Part-HKG-Hkg10116938-1-1-0.jpg



"Indonesia has inked a billion-dollar deal to buy 11 Sukhoi Su-35 jets from Russia, an official said Saturday.

The contract, signed by both countries' representatives in Jakarta on Wednesday, is worth a total $1.14 billion, Indonesia defence ministry spokesman Totok Sugiharto said."

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
 
while Jul 14, 2017
Turkey agrees to pay Russia $2.5B for S-400 missile systems, official says
Published 18 hours ago
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!


LOL noticed this topic in Russian Internet; most guys seemed to think it's something like this:
LOL!
now
Russia plans to sign contract to deliver second batch of S-400 systems to Turkey — source

More:
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!


 
Sunday at 11:15 AM
it's all over Twitter now
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!





Impressive power display by
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
! Second Arleigh-Burke class AEGIS guided missile destroyer enters the BlackSea in under 24hrs:
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
to Rota & on its 5th patrol in support of regional allies,
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
destroyer USS Carney DDG64 transits Bosphorus
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!


DWP-zqpW0AAGd0g.jpg

DWP-zqrX0AE6wGE.jpg

DWP-zqnW0AA-680.jpg

DWP-zqtXUAA71Jz.jpg
the story is Navy sends destroyers to Black Sea to ‘desensitize’ Russia
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

The Navy has deployed the guided-missile destroyer Carney to join the destroyer Ross in the Black Sea in a move that U.S. military officials told
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
is intended to “desensitize” Russia to the presence of American military assets in the strategically important region.

The deployment of the Carney marks the first time in four years that two American destroyers have operated in the Black Sea outside of scheduled exercises. The move comes as Russia continues to militarize Crimea, the peninsula it seized from Ukraine in 2014.

In recent years, the U.S. and NATO have accused Russia of sending troops and military hardware to Crimea, and there are now reports that submarines have been added to the mix.

Nevertheless, U.S. and NATO officials have insisted that they are not playing tit-for-tat with the Russians.

“Our decision to have two ships simultaneously operate in the Black Sea is proactive, not reactive,” said Vice Adm. Christopher Grady, commander of 6th Fleet, which oversees U.S. naval operations in the region. “The continued presence of the U.S. Navy in the Black Sea demonstrates our enduring commitment to regional stability, maritime security of our Black Sea partners, and the collective defense of our NATO allies,” he added.

The Black Sea sits between Eastern Europe, the Caucasus and Western Asia, and is bordered by several NATO nations.

The sea has long been a contentious region for U.S. and Russian military forces, but tensions spiked after the Russian annexation of Crimea. Since then, there have been
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
between Russian forces looking to assert their ownership of the region and U.S. forces asserting their right to operate in international waters and airspace.

The last time the U.S. sent a multi-destroyer security patrol to the Black Sea was during the 2014 Sochi Winter Olympics, shortly before the Crimea annexation.

U.S. warships have participated in multilateral military exercises in the Black Sea since then, including a recent trip for the annual
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
exercise.

The destroyers Carney and Ross are both equipped with the Aegis Ballistic Missile Defense System, which a U.S. defense official told CNN the Russians are especially sensitive to.

Both U.S. ships are forward deployed to Naval Station Rota, Spain, and regularly patrol the Mediterranean and the Black Sea.
 
I think I saw that vid somewhere in Russian Internet last week
Russia releases video of its modernized ballistic missile defense system
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

On Feb. 12, the
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
posted a video on its website showing the white desolation of the Kazakh steppes in winter. Suddenly, a bright red and grey plume erupted from the snow and arced away from the camera, off into the horizon. Details were scant, but the video claimed to show the successful test of a new Russian ballistic missile interceptor.

The interceptor was launched from the Sary-Shagan test site in Kazakhstan, which Russia leases. In a ministry statement, the deputy commander of Russia’s air defense forces, Col. Andrei Prikhodko, describes the system as a “new
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
anti-missile system” that completed its assigned tasks with “the specified accuracy.”

Little is known about the system, but it is possibly an upgrade of the Soviet-era A-135 missile defense system. The Defence Ministry didn't name the system shown in the test, but earlier proposed upgrades to the A-135 system were known as the A-235. The Defence Ministry claims the interceptor tested earlier this month has longer range, higher reach and more accuracy than current interceptors.

“It seems Russia has a program that will upgrade the current A-135 defense around Moscow,” said Pavel Podvig, an expert on Russia’s strategic nuclear forces. “The new interceptor that we’ve seen is probably part of this effort. But I would seriously doubt it would provide a radically new capability. My guess is that it is just an upgrade, not a new interceptor.”

The most interesting feature of Russia’s missile defense system, at least to Americans familiar with their government’s recent efforts to field effective ballistic missile defense systems, is that Russian missile interceptors are armed with low-yield nuclear warheads. There is some debate over whether or not the warheads are always loaded, or whether they are in storage.

“It is hard to tell whether or not this is the case,” Podvig said. “This doesn’t mean Russia relies on hit-to-kill or a conventional warhead, but it is possible the plan is to load nuclear warheads only when things are getting close to serious confrontation.”

And, Podvig noted, there is precedent: the Soviet predecessor A-35 anti-ballistic missile system was managed this way.

The nuclear approach is vastly different to the path chosen by the United States in the 1980s, which has focused exclusively on so-called conventional hit-to-kill missile interceptors — as well as some flirtation with lasers. The latest iteration of American ballistic missile defense is the Ground-based Midcourse Defense system in Alaska, which is designed to protect the entire United States from ICBM attacks.

The Ground-based Midcourse Defense system has been a controversial project, largely due to failures — though there have been some promising successes in recent years.

Proponents of the project claim the U.S. government has a responsibility to perfect the system. Opponents decry its cost, note its skittish performance and question the system’s potential utility. The GMD system is soon due for upgrades that advocates claim will address failures and expand its capabilities.

Russia has never shown great enthusiasm for missile defense. In the Soviet Union, missile defense efforts were pushed on the military by the defense industry, Podvig explained.

“The role of missile defense was never clearly defined. It was a system in search of a mission,” Podvig said. “In any event, everyone I’ve talked to in Russia (including those building missile defense systems) were quite skeptical (or, I would say, realistic) about the capability that [missile defense] can provide.”

But Russia’s capabilities are arguably more effective, in certain regards, than their American counterparts. While the
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
over reliably solving the physics problems of hitting a bullet with a smaller bullet, Russia is playing
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
. No need to be precise: Just get an interceptor close enough and detonate a small nuke.

And this approach is not something that Russia is pursuing for blanket coverage of its massive territory. Virtually all of Russia’s intercept capabilities are focused on Moscow, the beating heart of a strongly centralized social and political structure. Not too much is known about these defenses, but a line of nuclear-tipped interceptors is said to circle the city.

The fact that the interceptors are nuclear-tipped is rarely, if ever, explicitly mentioned in official statements and literature in Russia. While Russia may be interested in conventional hit-to-kill intercepts in the future, for now it will remain nuclear.

“[We] have to rely on less fancy stuff that gets the job done, thus the nukes. But folks are aware we would be blinded from the [electromagnetic pulse] once you detonate the interceptor,” said Vladimir Frolov, a Russian international affairs analyst. “So they are investing in ways to either minimize the yield or dispense with the nukes for a conventional proximity fragmentation warhead.”

But that would require an accuracy Russia has yet to demonstrate, and with which the U.S. continues to struggle.
 

FORBIN

Lieutenant General
Registered Member
9 Brigades here the training Bn have 4 TELs ( one Bde have 3 Bns ) a new to Kaliningrad and one other plus one new planned remains one Bde with SS-21
Total 136 SS-26 and 12 SS-21

Iskander’s Reach
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
 
Feb 4, 2018
this thread:
Nuclear Posture Review puts Russia firmly in crosshairs
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
now Out of Moscow: Washington got the basics of Russian nuclear strategy all wrong
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

When it comes to Russia,
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
(NPR) pulls no punches. Moscow’s military, specifically its modernized nuclear forces, are featured significantly throughout the report. the attention paid to other potential nuclear adversaries, like China, does not come close to that paid to Russia.

The core of NPR’s proposed footing vis-a-vis Russia rests on an understanding of Russian nuclear doctrine as offensive, rather defensive. Noted is Russia’s monumental advantage in terms of non-strategic nuclear weapons, which the report’s authors believe Moscow would use to escalate a conflict so as to intimidate the U.S. into backing down.

This assessment has been understandably controversial in Moscow, where officials have for years promised the nation’s sweeping nuclear modernization program was entirely defensive in nature. Indeed, former Russian ambassador to the U.S.,
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!


“We’ve been trying to listen to the explanations given for that, but to be honest we have not gotten a clear picture,” Kislyak said. “On top of that we get the sense that our American colleagues are looking at [low-yield] nuclear weapons more as a war fighting weapon than classical deterrence. It certainly creates additional questions.”

Kislyak’s remarks were little more than a softer version of a statement issued by the Russian Foreign Ministry on Feb. 3, when NPR was first released, which called the report “anti-Russian” and denied any strategy to lower the threshold for the first use of nuclear weapons and aggressive strategies. Russia has been actively asserting that Russia’s nuclear doctrine “clearly limits” the use of nuclear weapons to two hypothetical defense scenarios: in response to an attack on Russia or its allies using nuclear or other weapons of mass destruction, or in response to the threat of a conventional attack that could jeopardize existence of the state.

The statement continued to rail against the United States for hypocrisy, intent to develop non-strategic nuclear weapons for warfighting, rather than deterrence, and for mischaracterizing Russian doctrine. It concluded with a vague promise “to take into account the new U.S. plans and to take measures to enhance our security.”

This is probably just a rhetorical jab, common in most Russian statements.

“I don’t expect any radical changes in Russia,” says Pavel Podvig, author of the Russian Forces blog on nuclear issues. “It is certain that Russia will use this opportunity to justify its new programs, but it really doesn’t need the new NPR to do that. And it already has everything it needs.”

Indeed, while Russia has been investing heavily in nuclear modernization, these efforts have mostly been aimed at retaining existing capabilities or updating them to match modern needs. Much of Russia’s rearmament efforts have been focused rather on expanding conventional capabilities, such as the Kalibr cruise missile.

By and large, Russian analysts are confused by NPR’s assertion that Russia has adopted a so-called “escalate-to-de escalate” approach to nuclear weapons.

“I don’t think we have lowered our nuclear threshold,” says Vladimir Frolov, a foreign policy analyst in Moscow. “In fact, we are moving in the opposite direction, investing in long-range non-nuclear deterrence capabilities to give us more options before nuking you. Even then, I doubt Russia sees limited nuclear use in Europe as a viable option.”

The only thing about the NPR that truly bothers Moscow, Frolov says, is the lowering of the U.S. threshold for use of nuclear weapons in response to non-nuclear attacks, such as a cyber attack, “which is absurd.” Low-yield warheads on existing launch systems also bothers Moscow, because they wouldn’t know what kind of yield was thrown at them.

While these aspects of NPR might bother Moscow, the document’s understanding of Russia may be flawed. According to Podvig, “NPR got the basic Russian strategy wrong.” Rather than early use or escalate to de-escalate, Russia seeks to project uncertainty about its readiness and capabilities as a deterrent.

“From this point of view, there is not much in NPR that would affect that. Or, indeed, from any point of view,” Podvig said. “Whatever ideas Russia may have about nuclear use, I don’t see how a low-yield Trident warhead would change that.”

There is also an underlying assumption in NPR that Russia’s nuclear doctrine is offensive, that it would somehow be used in conjunction with a conventional attack to intimidate the U.S. and its allies into not responding to Russian aggression against another state. This may not be the case, as Russian doctrine explicitly envisions playing the role of defender.

“Some policymakers believe Russia has an offensive nuclear strategy, but there is nothing to support this since asymmetric escalation when you’re winning is not really credible,” says Michael Kofman, an expert on the Russian military at the CNA think tank in Virginia. “Rather, Russia has adopted NATO’s strategy of flexible response.”

What this means is that Russia, if attacked, would use nuclear weapons defensively, just as any nuclear armed state would. The idea that a nation could wage a conventional-only war against another nuclear power is, Kofman argues, an American fantasy. Russia will use nukes if losing a defensive war to the U.S. It is that simple.

“They want to deter Russia from using nuclear weapons to end a conflict preemptively; this seems to be an answer to an imagined problem that doesn’t exist,” Kofman says. “They are worried Moscow has contrived some easy out strategy, while on the contrary there is every indication that Russia has the arsenal for a large-scale deployment.”

In seeking to match Russia’s vastly larger capabilities in the realm of non-strategic nuclear weapons, NPR also appears to make a big trade: conflict between nuclear powers is deterred by the risk of nuclear escalation. If you invest in options for limited nuclear escalation, you actually make conflict more likely.

But, ultimately, this is not the biggest problem presented by NPR’s approach to Russia, Kofman argues. Rather, it is that NPR is a “case study” in how to not signal to adversaries. In Moscow, the document can be seen as evidence that Russia’s sabre-rattling has produced the desired result: fear of their might in the West.

“It is hard to read NPR and not feel that the United States is desperately afraid of nuclear weapons,” Kofman says. “It suggests their use by Russia would strategically alter the nature of any conflict, and thereby encourage further Russian investment in dual-capable means of delivery and non-strategic nuclear weapons.”
 
Top