Apparently Su-57 has successfully conducted strikes against Ukrainian targets. Neither NATO AWACs nor Ukrainian S-300 is able to detect it.
Russian Military News, Reports, Data, etc.
- Thread starter tphuang
- Start date
The Russian Ministry of Defense showed the work of TOS-1A "Solntsepyok" in Ukraine.
The TOS-1A heavy flamethrower system is rightfully considered one of the deadliest weapons of the Russian army. The weapon is truly terrible as 24 rockets with a caliber of 220 mm. literally burn everything around. The thermobaric mixture of projectiles creates a cloud of explosive mixture and then undermines it. After detonation, the pressure rises sharply and then drops, the pressure drop leads to a guaranteed death of the enemy over an area of up to 40,000 square meters. TOS-1A "Sun" is a 2001 modification of the TOS-1 "Pinocchio" system developed back in 1980. The firing range of the installation is small, only 6 km, so the tactics of use, quick access to positions, strike and retreat from the front line. The shooting accuracy of "Solntsepek" is up to 10 meters. Readiness to open fire on a target from the moment the vehicle stops - 90 seconds. The crew of the car consists of three people. The installation was created on the basis of the T-72A tank and is equipped with a V-84MS diesel engine with an 840 horsepower. With. The speed on the highway is 60 km / h, the range is 550 km. In March 2020, Russia introduced a new missile for the TOS-1A with a range of 10 km.
The TOS-1A heavy flamethrower system is rightfully considered one of the deadliest weapons of the Russian army. The weapon is truly terrible as 24 rockets with a caliber of 220 mm. literally burn everything around. The thermobaric mixture of projectiles creates a cloud of explosive mixture and then undermines it. After detonation, the pressure rises sharply and then drops, the pressure drop leads to a guaranteed death of the enemy over an area of up to 40,000 square meters. TOS-1A "Sun" is a 2001 modification of the TOS-1 "Pinocchio" system developed back in 1980. The firing range of the installation is small, only 6 km, so the tactics of use, quick access to positions, strike and retreat from the front line. The shooting accuracy of "Solntsepek" is up to 10 meters. Readiness to open fire on a target from the moment the vehicle stops - 90 seconds. The crew of the car consists of three people. The installation was created on the basis of the T-72A tank and is equipped with a V-84MS diesel engine with an 840 horsepower. With. The speed on the highway is 60 km / h, the range is 550 km. In March 2020, Russia introduced a new missile for the TOS-1A with a range of 10 km.
this has been clear since 30 years ago, only the cognitive dissonance generates by memories of former soviet fleet made it possible for the series of fantastical dream ships periodically presented in model form by a russian navy whose aspiration became an end in itself to be take with any attitude other than bemused ridicule.
Russia can realistically hope to build a small number of reasonably competitive blue water submarines, or a small number of reasonably competitive blue water surface ships, but not both.
what is more, russia’s geography is not a face multiplying but a force reducing factor for its surface navy. only as a strategic deterrent is its submarine force relative less affected by its unique geography.
so between the two, it is clear which fits more of russia’s needs better.
Last edited:
They built diesel electric subs with longest range land attack missiles so why you think they can only made small number of surface fleets? Except waiting for engine and air defense system certification for naval. just to give hint Russian S350 has 12 missile per launcher vs 8 per launcher in South Korean version. Russian version always built to outperform
just look at ukraine report about Kh-22 missile that I posted in that thread which no one understood.
Retarded article dated June 1, 2022. The author clearly has not looked at the Russian naval industry for at least half a decade.
"Russian shipbuilders have not adopted practices such as the use of computer-aided design tools"
Bollocks. The Karakurt corvette for example was designed with CAD. And in fact they are even making CAD models of Soviet ships so upgrading and maintaining them will be easier. This is being done with the Admiral Nakhimov for example so upgrading Peter the Great should be faster.
"and the assembly of hulls from large prefabricated sections – practices that were adopted in the 1980s and 1990s in the West and which made shipbuilding significantly more efficient."
The Sevmash facilities recently completed an upgrade to build ships in blocks made of larger prefabricated sections. This included new cranes and facilities to move large blocks. They previously used smaller blocks. Zvezda shipyard in the Pacific builds ships in large blocks made inside enclosed facilities. If you only build small ships in single units it does not make sense to upgrade to large block construction. Sevmash is building the nuclear submarines in large serial batches and Zvezda has large orders for commercial ships. So they moved to block construction.
"This is compounded by bloated corporate structures in entities such as Russia’s United Shipbuilding Corporation, leading to inefficient practices such as the use of shipyards to both produce tools and construct vessels (rather than merely the latter task, as in Western countries)."
Actually the situation of naval shipyards in Russia substantially improved since the creation of USC. The shipyards used to lack the finances to perform upgrades to facilities and there was a lack of proper trained specialists to head facilities. With a joint ownership structure there is a unified cadre of trained specialists heading operations. Where each shipyard had its own design teams and technical leaders now these resources are unified. USC can also also raise capital much more easily than small individual shipyards. Tools are sometimes produced by USC but this is done at specialized tool making facilities. What this sounds to me is sour grapes that they couldn't stop Russia's shipbuilding industry because it doesn't depend on Western tools.
"Idiosyncrasies in Russian shipbuilding practices – for example, the use of 8x2m steel sheets for construction – augment costs and delivery times further, causing workload increases of 50–60% relative to those shipbuilders who adhere to international practices."
As if the US doesn't use non-standard shit to produce, well, everything from ships to aircraft.
"Other weaknesses of the shipbuilding ecosystem include ageing machinery – in 2013 It was estimated that roughly 70% of the equipment at Russian shipyards was obsolete – and ageing facilities."
Yeah. Using data from 9 years ago.
"In addition to these longstanding weaknesses, after 2014 Russia lost access to facilities in Ukraine such as those at Mykolaiv which were central to the production of gas turbine engines."
All have been replaced for eons already. And Ukraine was a pain in the ass in terms of delivering products on time anyway. Zorya-Mashproekt was less bad than some parts of the Ukrainian industry but it was not stellar either. There are still some issues with ramping up production of engines and associated components to scale but most of the issues seem to have been solved. The Admiral Golovko already has Russian engines. We will see how well the test campaign for that goes to see if they fixed all the issues or not.
"Finally, Russia may well be falling behind in its capacity to develop sophisticated components for future vessels. For example, it is generally accepted that newer Chinese radar systems such as the Type 346B AESA and the Type 382 PESA outperform Russian analogues"
China produces better naval radars than the US as well. So what.
"For example, Russia’s domestically produced M90-FR gas turbine engine generates 20MW of power – somewhat shy of the 35MW that would qualify it as a heavy duty gas turbine engine comparable to those on the Chinese Type 055."
Russia has currently no plans to make large gas turbine powered ships like the Type 055. The 20MW turbines are enough to make destroyers if you use four of them. What is the big problem? Some in the Russian industry want to make larger marine gas turbines but I do not know if the state funded that or not. The fact is Russia can make cruisers powered with nuclear reactors if they wanted to. The idea Russia "needs" large naval gas turbines to make large ships is bollocks.
"As Russia faces further financial constraints, it will need to decide both how much of the initially allocated funds can be released to the navy, and how much of those funds will be directed to the production of assets such as attack submarines rather than surface combatants."
Russia is much closer to finishing construction of their new strategic submarine fleet than the US is. Once the Borei class production tapers out then Sevmash can devote close to its entire production to attack submarines if the Russians want to.
"the Admiral Nakhimov – is undergoing refits that will see its radar upgraded and its VLS cells replaced to launch more modern P-800 missiles."
No. It is undergoing upgrades to fire the Zircon. Not just the P-800 Oniks. Again, it feels like I am reading a report from half a decade ago at best. Not something from last week.
"the Moskva was due to undergo upgrades but did not receive them for want of funding"
The Moskva's last large scale refit was done before Putin was President in the late 1990s. Yep that long ago. You can't compare the fiscal situation back then with now. Ever heard of the Asian Financial Crisis? The repair was funded by the Moscow municipality which is why the ship got that name.
"Finally, retaining older ships will be complicated by a limited number of facilities that can support repairs and refits of large vessels – exemplified by the loss of the sole dry dock capable of berthing Russia’s remaining aircraft carrier during its repairs in 2018."
He is posting this shit of an article days after the Admiral Kuznetsov was sent into their new dry dock. Amazing retarded writing. Russia didn't have this nine years ago, so of course everything must still be the same, kind of retarded argument. Why do they even bother paying these analysts if they just regurgitate crap from years ago and don't produce up to date reports?
"It is thus increasingly likely that Russia’s surface force will evolve into a green water fleet based around frigates and corvettes. The larger of these vessels – the Gorshkov-class frigate – can perform some of the tasks which might have been allotted to a destroyer, including limited power projection."
Retarded comment. Russia's surface force has been basically a green water fleet for over a decade already. Only now is it starting to move past that. But it will take increased production of frigates and larger ships to move back into blue water status.
"this will likely mark the end of any pretensions Russia has of possessing a blue water navy, and will be the final chapter in Gorshkov’s legacy."
Russia is currently building two helicopter carriers and five frigates. But sure keep ignoring that. And yeah, Russia supposedly can't build large ships, nor expensive ships, but it is building three 25,000 ton nuclear powered Project 22220 icebreakers, and one 69,000 ton nuclear powered Project 10510 icebreaker. Retarded article.
Last edited:
Well Rusi.. kinda not surprised. and you might want to add Justin Bronx too to the mix.
So, you liked it then?
I like knowing what the US establishment thinks are the capabilities of their opponents even if their reports are BS.
It had lots of details on obsolete information. It looks like the typical report these critters produce. They get an older report of theirs and change a paragraph to talk about the Mosvka sinking and sell it as a new report. I wish I got paid to do as little work as these people. Nice cushy Beltway job.
It was less bad than some of the reports on the Chinese navy. But given the wealth of data on the Russian naval industry you can find on the web, even on English language sources, it could clearly have been a whole lot better.
It had lots of details on obsolete information. It looks like the typical report these critters produce. They get an older report of theirs and change a paragraph to talk about the Mosvka sinking and sell it as a new report. I wish I got paid to do as little work as these people. Nice cushy Beltway job.
It was less bad than some of the reports on the Chinese navy. But given the wealth of data on the Russian naval industry you can find on the web, even on English language sources, it could clearly have been a whole lot better.
He say that?????? come on man, the Russians have been doing CAD kernels and CAD-CAE software for almost a few decades, is one of those areas that they may have an edge. Russia may not be the most likeable country right now but at least state the facts clearly.
Last edited: