Russian Military News, Reports, Data, etc.

Stealthflanker said:

Doesn't change the fact that the Satellites can and in-fact capable of tracking IR Emission from aircraft. Which seems hard for you to believe.

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

If you do the math however, you will notice one variable namely "Specific detectivity" or "D*" This is the response of the detector against certain wavelength. Now if we use your temperature of 1500K. This correspond to a wavelength of 1.932 Micron.

And what's the material for the detector ? I guess it's InAs (Indium Arsenide) Which could be part of its "Short" Wave sensor and 1.9 Micron is short.

View attachment 87348

Now let's see what's the D* for the material assuming its nitrogen cooled or maybe a peltier cooler is used. We can see the response for the material is about 5 * 10^11 cm-Hz1/2/W.

Assuming same size aperture... we get

View attachment 87349

Seems not a problem at all from Geosynch. It is however resolution might be the problem. It might know that some "IR event" occuring which similar as missile launch but not necessarily able to provide "clear picture". Your 1500K target is well detectable from Geo.

Click to expand...

I understand that we may be getting off topic, but this is an interesting discussion.

if we're looking at the details, then we should look into the details for everything. other than resolution I have many questions about the model. 2 stand out to me: the 1m2 emitter assumption and the ideal radiator assumption.

a real jet plume is not a solid 1m2 flat ideal emitter at 1500K throughout. there are 2 key differences.

1. a real jet plume is rapidly cooled as it expands from the nozzle. as you can see here, the peak temperature occurs only exactly outside the nozzle. the nozzle is unlikely to be visible. the plume is almost immediately cooled to a lower temperature even in the worst case scenario of a circular nozzle.



2. a real jet plume is optically thin (mean path length of emitted photon is far larger than the characteristic dimensions of the plume) while (see pg. 25-28).

, where τ is the optical depth and Bν(T) is the standard blackbody spectrum.

blackbody radiation only applies if τ >> 1 (optically thick), I(τ) ~ Bν(T) since exp(-τ) ~ 0. what does an optically thin emitter look like? not blackbody (see pg. 9). if τ << 1 then you can use Taylor expansion of exp(-τ) = 1+τ+τ^2/2+.... and simplify it down to 1+τ since if τ <<1, τ^2 ~ 0.

The equation then reduces down to I(τ) ~ τ*Bν(T) where τ << 1, thus I(τ) << Bν(T). Actual intensity is much lower than ideal blackbody.

So the calculator may be too simplistic to provide a correct answer in this situation, as it models an ideal blackbody radiator when a jet plume is not an ideal blackbody radiator.

FairAndUnbiased said:

So the calculator may be too simplistic to provide a correct answer in this situation, as it models an ideal blackbody radiator when a jet plume is not an ideal blackbody radiator.

Click to expand...

Well doesn't change the fact that DSP or the SBIRS can in fact detect the jet plume and more importantly during afterburner. and you seem entirely neglect sensor performance.

Stealthflanker said:

Well doesn't change the fact that DSP or the SBIRS can in fact detect the jet plume and more importantly during afterburner. and you seem entirely neglect sensor performance.

Click to expand...

if actual intensity I(τ) ~ τ*Bν(T) for the case of τ <<1 then the actual radiation intensity observed by the satellite is far lower than ideal blackbody intensity Bν(T), on the order of whatever τ is so it is not clear that it is the case. And even if τ <<1 does not hold, τ >> 1 has to hold for I(τ) ~ Bν(T).

let's see if that's the case. . 2 scenarios:

1. peak wavelength falls at 1.9 um absorbance band for water. T = 0.2, τ ~ 1.6
2. peak wavelength falls at 2.0 um outside the absorbance band for water. T = 0.9, τ ~ 0.1

it never holds that τ >> 1, the plume is always optically thin, thus the plume never emits at anywhere near ideal blackbody levels.

for a 2.0 um peak (or any peak intensity in an atmospheric window), the actual intensity of radiation is roughly 1/10th that of the ideal blackbody.

tonyget said:

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

The fifth package of European sanctions imposed on Russia in connection with the military operation in Ukraine imposes a ban on the supply of materials for the production of microcircuits, in particular silicon, to the country. In the Russian Federation there are deposits of this material and the production of silicon wafers. However, it is only suitable for special-purpose technologies, and wafers for civil electronics were purchased in Europe. Thus, the sanctions will hit only the producers of civilian products, but not the defense order, which the EU originally counted on.

"Kommersant" got acquainted with the list of goods prohibited for import from Europe to Russia in accordance with the fifth package of sanctions , published by the EU Council on April 8. The list includes raw materials needed for the production of microcircuits, in particular, silicon (containing at least 99.99% pure raw materials by weight) is one of the best semiconductors. A ban is also introduced on the supply of equipment for the production of microcircuits and quantum electronics. Imported goods were selected based on whether they contribute to the improvement of Russia's military and technological potential, the document says.

According to Kommersant's interlocutors in the microelectronics market, foreign manufacturers of equipment and materials for the manufacture of semiconductors have already stopped deliveries since the beginning of the conflict in Ukraine. We are talking about equipment (photolithography, etching installations, etc.) of European, American and Japanese production (ASML, Applied Materials, Canon).

But the fact is that silicon wafers for chips themselves are not produced in the Russian Federation, Kommersant's interlocutors say. According to them, raw materials ready for printing circuit boards were purchased just in Europe.

The manufacturer of Russian chips confirms that when creating processors according to 90 nm standards, companies use imported silicon: “After the direct ban was introduced, only China remains an alternative.”

The main consumer of silicon wafers for the further production of chips is the Mikron plant in Zelenograd. According to Kommersant's sources, the company has been trying for the past few years to replace European materials with Chinese ones. Micron declined to comment.

At the same time, there are silicon deposits in Russia, as well as companies involved in its processing. The largest Russian mining companies are considered to be the Silicon Group (Bryansk), Rusal Kremniy Ural (part of Rusal; located in the Sverdlovsk region) and Solar Silicon Technologies (Podolsk). According to the website of the Silicon Group, in addition to end devices (power modules, integrated circuits), the company also produces silicon wafers.

Silicon processing enterprises solve the problems of various sectors of the economy. Rusal Silicon Ural resumed the production of raw materials in July last year, but the manufactured products must be supplied within the company, where silicon is used to produce primary aluminum alloys ( see Kommersant dated July 5, 2021 ). Solar Silicon Technologies produces single-crystal and multi-crystal silicon wafers, primarily for the solar energy market. Also, NIIP Rosatom is engaged in the production of high-purity single-crystal silicon. The listed companies did not respond to Kommersant's request. The same was done in the Ministry of Industry and Trade.

All enterprises are interested not in silicon itself as a starting material, but in wafers, and in the case of microelectronics, their suitability depends on the purity of silicon, the quality of surface treatment, and the concentration of defects, said Arseniy Brykin, director of the Basis Consortium Association of Developers and Manufacturers.

There are manufacturers of silicon wafers in Russia, but they mainly provide the production of microcircuits and discrete semiconductors for special purposes, Ivan Pokrovsky, executive director of the Association of Russian Developers and Manufacturers of Electronics, explains: “For relatively modern products of the 180–90 nm level, they do not meet the technical requirements.”

As a result, only manufacturers of civilian products, such as Mikron and, if launched, NM-Tech, will suffer from sanctions. It is impossible to provide civilian production with Russian silicon in the near future, this will require significant investment and time, Mr. Pokrovsky believes. In addition, due to sanctions, Russian chip manufacturers have been cut off from Taiwanese factories ( see “Kommersant” dated April 6 ), and hundreds of thousands of processors already paid for simply run the risk of not reaching them.

Click to expand...

I would not say these sanctions affect only civilian products like Kommersant. But mostly civilian products yes. There are (some) Russian military chips made with silicon at Mikron and other fabs. However semiconductor fabrication tools were already sanctioned with prior US sanctions so nothing new here like they said. And it is true Russia presently does not manufacture silicon wafers of 200mm diameter. But wafers are not even the main stumbling block here. It will be chemicals. Regardless of what they do ban however, China produces every single thing. Russia's semiconductor industry is still stuck at KrF lithography and rather curiously that is precisely the cycle China has 100% reproduced. So good luck losing a client and not stopping Russian industry. There will be hickups to be sure but I doubt the Russian industry will stop in the short term. And sorry Europe, but China is the leader in PCB manufacture in the world. And I doubt they use European material inputs.

FairAndUnbiased said:

let's see if that's the case.

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

. 2 scenarios:

1. peak wavelength falls at 1.9 um absorbance band for water. T = 0.2, τ ~ 1.6
2. peak wavelength falls at 2.0 um outside the absorbance band for water. T = 0.9, τ ~ 0.1

it never holds that τ >> 1, the plume is always optically thin, thus the plume never emits at anywhere near ideal blackbody levels.

for a 2.0 um peak (or any peak intensity in an atmospheric window), the actual intensity of radiation is roughly 1/10th that of the ideal blackbody.

Click to expand...

and more historical perspective on Project "Slow Walker"


Also with book excerpt from "America's Space Sentinels" page 104-105.

Why KamAZ will not be able to produce even military equipment



It is no secret that the Russian KamAZ equipped heavy vehicles with a carrying capacity of more than 20 tons only with German 16-speed ZF gearboxes. But now, most likely, the manufacturer will stop the export of such units to Russia.

The fact that the ZF16 transmission was equipped with all, without exception, heavy all-wheel drive KamAZ trucks, is reminiscent of Military Review. At the same time, according to the publication, the Russian analogue - the KamAZ-161 checkpoint - has not been produced for a long time. And it is not possible to resume production, since imported components were abundantly used in this box.

Will KamAZ really have to curtail the assembly of many models, including the 63501 chassis, which was used to mount a variety of military special equipment?

Click to expand...

The production of eight-wheeled chassis 6560, which is transported by the Pantsir air defense system, may also stop, plus the Russian army will be left without a 6522 tank tractor. That is, the most sought-after trucks are under threat

On our own behalf, we add that the cargo auto giant has a certain number of European "sixteen steps". This means that for some time the production of dual-use products will be able to continue.
And then, obviously, "import substitution" will begin - either real or fictitious. In the latter case, the Chinese will certainly come to the rescue with their Fast Gear boxes - especially since they are assembled by a factory near Minsk.
As for civilian vehicles, KamAZ, as previously told by the AvtoVzglyad portal, began producing trucks,

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

- Ivanych (Vladimir Gostyukhin) and Sashok (Vladislav Galkin) cut through such a tractor without advanced electronics.
​

​

Chechen go full-auto on an AK-12 with suppressor...

Discussions on physics in military applications are interesting but this is not a place for them. Please open a dedicated thread for such information and it will benefit everyone. Here it creates confusion and chaos.

Returning to the topic...

How the economic fallout of the invasion of Ukraine influences and possibly prevents Russia's naval modernization

This will be boring numbers but the outlook that they provide is all but boring. I made a much deeper analysis for my own use but I don't have the space to present it here so it's the summary only.

Russia has five fleets: Northern (NF), Pacific (PF), Black Sea (BSF), Baltic (BF), Capitan (CF).

Russian warships on 01/04/22 (excluding amphibious and auxiliary) based on Alexander Shishkin's blog:

• FFC - Steregushchy-class derivatives (pr.20381/5/6)
• FSS - Grisha-class derivatives (pr.1124, pr.1331M)
• PGM - small missile craft (pr.12411, pr.1239, pr. 1234, pr. 21631, pr. 22800)
• other abbreviations standard

1. AVAILABILITY:
figure/figure - total ships/available ships i.e. not in long- or short-term repair (FSS, PGM excluded). Single figure - all available.

NF:
7/6 SSBN, 4/3 SSGN, 10/4 SSN, 5/2 SS
1/0 CV, 2/1 CGN, 1 CG, 5/2 DDG, 2 FFG, 6 FSS, 2 PGM

PF:
3 SSBN, 6/2 SSGN, 6/2 SSN, 8/7 SS
1 CG, 4/3 DDG, 4 FFC, 8 FSS, 14 PGM

BSF:
7/6 SS
5/4 FFG, 6 FFS, 3 OPV, 11 PGM

BF:
1 SS
1/0 DDG, 2/0 FFG, 4/2 FFC, 6 FSS, 15 PGM

CF:
2 FFG, 4 PGM

2. MODERN TECHNOLOGY:
figure/figure - denotes all ships vs. new designs commissioned after 2000.

NF:
7/2 SSBN, 4/2 SSGN, 10/0 SSN, 5/1 SS
1/0 CV, 2/0 CGN, 1/0 CG, 5/0 DDG, 2/2 FFG, 6/0 FSS, 2/0 PGM

PF:
3/3 SSBN, 6/1 SSGN, 6/0 SSN, 8/3 SS
1/0 CG, 4/0 DDG, 4/4 FFC, 8/0 FSS, 14/0 PGM

BSF:
7/6 SS
5/3 FFG, 6/0 FFS, 3/3 OPV, 11/4 PGM

BF:
1/0 SS
1/0 DDG, 2/0 FFG, 4/4 FFC, 6/0 FSS, 15/5 PGM

CF:
2/2 FFG, 4/3 PGM

The average age of older ships is above 30 years and they are all designs from late 1970s/ early 1980s with the exception of 2 (two) Neutrashimy frigates and 2 (two) modified Akula submarines. Some of the "modern" designs like Improved Kilo submarines, Gepard or Grigorovich frigates are using older platforms with newer systems. Fox example Grigorovich is Krivak with Fregat-M2M radar and Buk system.

This dire condition of the fleet was the reason why a major buildup was planned for 2020-2030. As an interim solution numerous modernizations were scheduled for older platforms that would stay in service until replacements were available - Delta IV, Oscar II, Akula, Udaloy.

The buildup included the following warships (and a number of auxiliary and patrol ships):

7 SSBN, 6 SSGN, 5 SSAN (Poseidon), 9 SS
8 FFG, 15 FFC, 16 PGM
2 LHD, 2 LST

However only the following vessels can be thought of as nearing completion or have been (launched):

3/1 Borei
3/1 Yasen
1/1 Belgorod
2/1 Lada
1/1 Imp.Kilo
2/1 Gorshkov
3/2 Steregushchy
1/1 Derzky
8/6 Karakurt
3/1 Buyan-M

The launching of a hull is particularly important for moving to another stage of work so only those vessels can be thought of as somewhat resistant to any sudden cuts of funding as the work can be stretched while still delivering some results, which would be difficult to achieve for any ship at an early stage.

The fleet which will be most affected by any sudden cut is Pacific Fleet which currently consist of very outdated vessels and was target of the most ambitious modernization.

In particular it's smaller vessels like Grisha and Nanuchka/Tarantul were to be replaced by modern multirole light frigates/corvettes - 6x 20381 and 6x 20385 respectively - apart from new Gorshkov frigates, Borei, Yasen and Belgorod/Khabarovsk submarines. Under the plan it was to become a small but modern and potent blue water force.

Those plans are likely to encounter major hurdle as funding for the navy will be traditionally of lowest priority with greatest attention given to the army, then the air force. Strategic forces will be funded but they only cover SSBNs.

This will put the PF as well as NF with only old modernized vessels which were modernized with 10-15 year service life in mind and as complementary to the new ships. For example modernized Udaloys would rely on air defenses from Gorshkovs and Gremyashchy ships. Similarly for NF the Kirovs don't have modernized air defense systems and were turned into a large anti-ship missile carrier with outdated S-300F and old radars.

Of the submarines all the Oscars and Akulas are nearing the end of their modernization (2023) but they are old designs with only updated sonars and combat systems to keep them working and in line with modern comms and new weapons. To emphasize the gap - last Imp.Los Angeles subs will end service around 2029-2031 and they are all-around better than almost all of the modernized Russian subs. With the introduction of Boreis and Yasens Russia was catching up to later Ohios and Imp.Los Angeles, not really taking over as they have advantages in only some aspects. More, more modern subs are necessary. In the conventional area the Imp.Kilos are a technological defeat - with poor performance, endurance and only slightly modernized combat systems.

The conclusion is:

1. To regain the basic capability of the navy outside of Baltic and Caspian seas Russia had to complete its planned buildup. To do so it had to avoid causing an economic crisis during this decade at all cost. It did the exact opposite.

2. Considering the amount of modern equipment and warfighting capability that Russia has lost an is losing in Ukraine (which it will have to replenish), the loss of frozen funds, no prospect for any material gains from the invasion and an economic position that will put it in a position to gain less, and not more, from remaining economic partners (China, India) I'm seeing the possibility of another "lost decade" (late 90s/early 00s) in maintenance and funding for the navy. If at the end of it Russia reinvents its naval strategy it will be saddled with completely obsolete ships at the end of their extended life. This is a mistake that you can make once in a century. Not twice within 30 years.

And just to point out how crucial other funding will be - Russia lost Su-35S over Ukraine. The N035 radar has been captured. Now the entire modernization program for ~90 Su-30SM as well as all radars on ~128 Su-35s have to be changed at a time when Russia was struggling with production of complex electronics even before the current sanctions. Navy (apart from SSBNs) simply isn't the priority anymore and priority treatment was what was needed to resuscitate it.

With tanks/artillery/missiles and aircraft/SAMs Russia at least has something to work with under duress because a lot has been prepared and bought in recent 10+ years. Navy was lagging and it was waiting for the leap ahead that was promised.

Today Russia carried out a test of a Sarmat ICBM from Pletesk