Russian Military News, Reports, Data, etc.

TerraN_EmpirE said:

And the same holds in visa versa. The Russian Air forces have never faced off against the USAF USA and no SU27 has ever actually battled a F15.
So again it's academic.

Click to expand...

Actually the F-15 and the Typhoon have done very well against Flankers in actual full bull combat exercises, its all about energy management and not being "drawn in", the Phoon is extremely agile at very high altitudes and high speeds....

having said all that, I love the Flanker, and there's a lot of aerodynamic "magic" built into the Flanker....

Well yeah.
And I place the edge with the USAF. As they have had hands on with Flankers where the Russian Air forces have never had a chance to shake the stick of an Eagle.

The claim that

Dizasta1 said:

but Russia was and is fully aware of this. And logically they've addressed accordingly

Click to expand...

Is flawed by that fact.

The USAF knows what a Flanker can do. NATO Knows what Flankers and Fulcroms can do. Some current members still have them.
The Russians don't know what an Eagle can or a Typhoon for that matter, the last American fighter they had access to was the F5 from Veitnam and F14 from Iran. Perhaps a joy ride in a Venezuelan F16. But no F15. That's a huge knowledge gap to bridge.
Even if the Russians have aggressor squadrons flying against Flanker drivers of those aggressors don't know how an eagle fights that's a huge disadvantage in dissimilar air combat.

no one is disputing Russian equipment vs NATO, NAO has 30 times the budget Russia has

but Russian are gutsy and guts are enough

they have everyone in Europe spooked, and I am not a Russian supporter

asif iqbal said:

no one is disputing Russian equipment vs NATO, NAO has 30 times the budget Russia has

but Russian are gutsy and guts are enough

they have everyone in Europe spooked, and I am not a Russian supporter

Click to expand...

That's right, thanks to President Trump, Jens Stotenberg is happier than he's ever been,,,

In the days of Von Richtofen being gutsy could be a game changer, even WWII or Korea, but now everyone gets better training and only highly qualified people end up in the cockpit, the Russians and anyone else would be in trouble if they went up against NATO.... real trouble

Air Force Brat said:

That's right, thanks to President Trump, Jens Stotenberg is happier than he's ever been,,,

In the days of Von Richtofen being gutsy could be a game changer, even WWII or Korea, but now everyone gets better training and only highly qualified people end up in the cockpit, the Russians and anyone else would be in trouble if they went up against NATO.... real trouble

Click to expand...

Well, of course, Russia does not have the airforce to face NATO head on, nor even the US Air Forces. I was just talking about the original Su-27 situation at the time it came out.
Right now the situation has changed with the AIM-9X, IRIS-T, AMRAAM, Meteor, etc. Systems like the JHMCS. The latest generation Western engines. The Western powers are switching to AESA radars and Russia is lagging behind on that, because of their semiconductor manufacturing industry being in the state that it is, and them being behind on solid rocket fuel formulations.

However Russia still is a regional power capable of global power projection. Their main weakness is their Navy. But I consider their other systems to match up decently enough to provide them with an adequate defense. Given their budget limitations they had to make the most of what they had and I consider them to have successfully made the switch in the Army and Air Force to modern designs where it mattered the most. The strategic submarine forces also have been turned around.

The Su-57 will be part of the next generation platforms in the future. I think I have said this here before but I think it has capabilities in between both the F-22 and F-35.

Right now the Russian defense industry has been re-focused towards civilian products for import substitution. Because of the devalued ruble the Russians need to reduce their imports in order not to use as many foreign currency reserves. This means that all weapons programs in the Navy and Air Force over the next 5 years are quite possibly going to suffer from delays but this was a necessary step in order to force the industry to compete in the market against competitors which use more modern manufacturing techniques. To force the industry to modernize and get out of its comfort zone which has been military arms sales.

If, for some reason, oil&gas prices rise again, then Russia will be in a position where they will have developed and matured several weapons platforms like the Armata, Su-57, Yasen. They will have them primed for manufacture with most of the kinks and flaws ironed out. This means that once they have the capital available it will become possible to replace their existing weapons inventory at a rapid pace. This is akin to the situation of the Soviet Union in 1939.

Rising oil prices is not an impossibility given several factors. The USA's economic and military posture against Venezuela and Iran. The internal instability in present Saudi Arabia with their leader transition. The shuttering of noncompetitive drilling operations in Canada and the United States. Russia has an economic advantage not only in producing but in transporting energy that these other countries do not have. For example Canada has much higher extraction costs and a large fraction of their oil output is transported by train or truck to refineries in the US, mostly located in the Gulf Coast, driving up costs significantly. The pipeline projects in North America were severely delayed and Canada never invested in their own refining capacity. This in the current low-oil price scenario they are suffering. Hard. As the global economy cools down so will demand for oil. So I expect oil to come down even further over the next two years unless a war or something like it happens. After that there will be mass bankruptcies in the industry and oil prices will rise dramatically. When they do, so will natural gas and coal prices, as they are somewhat fungible to a degree.

Russia is outnumbered by NATO and its allies. But you have to remember one thing. The Russians have a country with ~150 million people but they never stopped conscription. Most of the NATO countries, including the USA, are based around volunteer forces and in case of the need for a rapid mobilization the amount of troops they could make available are a lot less than what Russia can field at any given moment. So in that regard their defensive posture is sufficient.

Modern Russia seeks not to repeat the mistakes of the Soviet Union and bankrupt itself with military spending. So it is natural that in the present macro-economic situation they prefer to invest in upkeep and upgrades rather than manufacturing whole new platforms. But contrary to the 1990s they have designed or are in the process of design and test of several platforms, so things are not quite as dire. Nor is the current level of readiness of the military forces.

For example the Russian Air Force has a more modern trainer aircraft, the Yak-130, than the USA has right at this moment with 100+ in service. This means they can train their air force much better than in the 1990s.

The last time america up against an adversary that had an Air Force to challenge it in the air, was back in Vietnam War. That was almost 50 years ago, and since then america hasn't had any real fight. The Russian Federation isn't the Soviet Union, it doesn't act unilaterally or irresponsibly. And it knows the value of alliances, as that is the only sensible way to confront hegemony. The Russian Aerospace Forces has gone through critical transformation, in terms of equipment modernization, personnel training, aircraft serviceability to operate at optimum performance. These changes were brought about with an approach toward fighting any war, in synergy with its allies.

This discussion started with a video posted where an american F-15 drew closer toward a what seem to be a Russian government aircraft. With all the talk of safety, dangerous flying and so on by america and nato. It was surprising to see USAF aircraft so close to (and which would've continued to try and get closer to the Russian government aircraft, if left unchecked), hence the RuAF Su-27 Flanker did what it was suppose to do. And that is to protect the government aircraft. The Su-27 Flanker positioned itself between the Russian government jetliner and the usaf F-15, before executing a flawless maneuver to push aside the approaching F-15. Forcing the intruder aircraft to bank away from its initial trajectory.

Bottom line, RuAF acted responsibly, deterred the USAF F-15 from getting any closer or remaining close to the Russian Government aircraft. Thus demonstrated the resolve of the Russian Federation, that they seek to exist independently, yet challenge any hegemonic behavior that threatens it. Indicative of a nation which doesn't seek war, but if the adversary sought to intimidate it, then the Russian Federation would defend itself with undeterred resolve.

So whatever the argument of how well equipped, better trained, or "we know how the Su-27 flies like in combat because we have trained against it" and stuff like that. That doesn't mean anything to a country which resolves to not be intimidated, and chooses to live independently and push back when hegemonic powers get out of line. In the end, Russia has demonstrated responsibility with rational approach and sought to build its relations with its allies, as equals, not in arrogance or with impunity.

In the end, it's not just about training, quality of equipment or personnel, but also standing on moral ground, with conviction and the will to defend its right to exist as an independent nation, without in intimidation or hegemony.

Thanks Dizasta for that response about the F-15 incident.

I have a question about the status of the Russian Navy aircraft carrier Admiral Kuznetsov. Is the ship presently laid up in a shipyard or has the re-fit continued? I've read some unsubstantiated reports that the Russians cannot repair the ship. I find that hard to believe. Anyone know the truth? Thanks for any answers.

What I have heard is that the water in the ship was pumped out and the holes have been more or less patched up. The Admiral Kuznetsov is probably moored somewhere close to where the incident happened. I have heard no information about the refit continuing in any degree.

Check this out.


I have also heard comments that the Russian government does not wish to refloat the sunken dock. So if they are to use an existing dry dock to repair it there aren't many options. One option, I think, is the at Kerch, Crimea. It built Panamax-class vessels and is rumored as a possible place to build Lider-class battleships.

Thanks for posting gelgoog. Any idea how old the aerial photo is? Because the foliage is green. Not much greenery where I live in the winter. Thanks.