dionisMOSCOW, January 15 (RIA Novosti) – The state will earmark 4 trillion rubles ($125 billion) for arms procurements by 2011, including 1 trillion rubles ($31 billion) in 2009, the Russian prime minister said on Thursday.
Vladimir Putin said the modernization of defense related enterprises would continue despite the global financial crisis.
“The modernization of defense industry enterprises as well as the development of modern weapons should continue,” he said.
He added that federal defense programs need to be reviewed and “streamlined,” in particular with regard to production volumes.
Russian Finance Minister Alexei Kudrin said earlier on Thursday the state had earmarked $10 billion for ‘core enterprises’ and defense-related sectors of industry.
Steady procurement seems to be in place now.
By 2015 as reports say, 50% of the entire military equipment will be replaced. We’ll be hopefully seeing a lot of new naval equipment in the process.
dionisThis is what i got from BR. Too big to post please check the site.
Well that’s a good link.
So they wanted were offered the Sea Dragon avionics suite, but it was too expensive – and supposedly inadequate. I don’t know where they got the idea or how testing was done, maybe the Russian subs they tried to track were too quiet. 😉 Sea Dragon, if you read the Jane’s excerpt, is a highly complex and powerful system.
The Indian aircraft were acquired in 1988, which makes them fairly old now. Maybe they were looking for a newer airframe? I’m not even sure if the Tu-142 is for sale at the moment.
dionisDionis, You said this
Then why is India buying P 8As instead of upgrading its fleet of Tu-142Ms :confused:
Political decision ?
I’m not so sure, how old are the Tu-142s in Indian service? How are their systems? I wouldn’t be surprised if the P-8 is more capable than the Tu-142 export model. It’s a question of avionics. Anyone have any information?
dionisThe “inadequate replacement” is the title :p
Hopefully in the next 2 years we’ll have info on the new heavy ICBM.
dionisSeverodvinsk
More Severodvinsk
Yes it’s a scale model, I wonder what they’ve been doing with it.
Any explanations?
dionisIts not about invading any country , I am not talking about War or Invasion.
Its about maintaining global presence to protect your interest and that of your allies , if need be influence event in the world if required by Military means.
To back up strong diplomacy , you need to have strong military , who can stand up to United States except for Russia , they are natural competitors so to speak 🙂
Diesel submarines can perform “ally” defense for Russia’s sphere of real influence quite well.
The Lada can launch Klub or other TT launched missile (SS-N-16 etc ) , but for Brahmos you need a VLS tube system like you have for Amur 950 , as of now Lada cant launch Yakhonat or Brahmos.
I’ll need a link before I buy that. I have provided a bunch already to the contrary.
The Borei are a priority because the Acoustic quietening and stealth of Delta 4 cant beat the USN modern SSN and ASW force for long , in the end there is no point of having a SSBN fleet if its not survivable.
And more over Russia has the flexibility to have 50 % of their deterrent at sea , all the reason to have a qualitatively and quantitatively credible force.
The Delta 4 can be in bastion and launch its missiles – no need to go out far at all. No USN is going to poke their nose around there without serious consequences.
Errm, yes, Borei are a priority, yet each vessel being deployed has new systems installed on it. And I can assure you they are not touched up sonars/etc that are 20 years old.
The Yasen being complicated makes it more expensive , which means not affordable in numbers , the Yasen may turn out to be Russias Sea Wolf which though Top Notch is simply not affordable in the numbers needed.
That is the key reason why Russia is planning to build a 6000 Ton SSN , that would be the SSN which will have numbers , I dont see Yasen SSGN if at all crossing the single digit production figure.
I think I’ve heard about the light SSN, but do you have a link?
Building 8 – 12 Yasen makes sense, anything else is a waste of money. I’m sure the Russians wont turn it into a Seawolf. American crap is always overpriced, hopefully Russia can maintain its price superiority for another decade.
It includes upgrading and building new assets and looking at new ways to do old things , Russia resources does not permit to build capability across the spectrum in numbers.
Each new vessel has new systems. How are you not seeing this as a given?
Most of the limited resources that Russia has now is spending on upgrading its Strategic Submarine fleet , the rest project are going on slowly.[/QUOTE]
Slowly or not, they are getting the latest systems developed in Russia.
The P-8A can sweep a larger area in a shorter time and the turn around time is much higher than any Tu-142M , Sensor and System suite is very advanced as well compared to SD upgrade of Tu-142M.
Again thats not correct among the new project Borei is one that has high priority , the remaining of these project are taking its times , perhaps with the exception of lada.
The Tu-142M can carry a larger payload and carry far larger sensors. A Boeing 737 mod just doesn’t cut it.
dionisNo. First, the real range of most of weapons is not of public domain. But, also, the SDB range you mentioned is max., while the HARM range in its “range-known” mode if considerably higher that in Target Of Opportunity (TOO) mode (also termed the HARM as Sensor HAS, which is a lock-on-before-launch mode) which was the most used mode up to now.
Wrightwing posted a link. I add another (from the manufacturer)http://www.raytheon.com/capabilities/rtnwcm/groups/rms/documents/content/rtn_rms_ps_hdam_datasheet.pdf
This says nothing about the HARM being shoot-down proof by short range SAMs. Or about a ranger larger than 110KM.
Since we are talking about a VLO fighter, the chances of AWACS, interceptors, etc are smaller than in case of a legacy fiughter, while ELINT platforms will need an emmiting attcker. But, as I said, it won’t be a piece of cake and the most dangerous aspect will be a strong networking of an IADS.
The more assets you have the better. A few unlucky angles and the VLO fighter is going to get detected. Once its position if given away, it’s going to get a lot of more focused assets looking its way.
——–
The APG-77/81 in LPI mode have limited range and power, so I wish them luck working perfectly against a good ECM system.
dionisNo- the RWR will detect a fire control radar before the fire control radar detects the target, so the Flanker won’t necessarily know your position. The radar energy travels further than its ability to detect targets, which is why the RWR/ESM will have the first detection advantage.
If the Flanker happened to fly within it’s detection range before turning its radar on, then it’d get your position before you could react. Of course the Flanker’s RCS might betray its position prior to it emitting anyhow, as AWACS or the Super Hornet’s AESA in LPI mode would have no difficulty spotting a Flanker.
And a Flanker would know about the AWACs on its RWR, and no LPI mode of the SH is going to detect the Flanker before it detects the SH!
LPI isn’t NPI, stop with this fantasy as well.
-I’m not assuming that the T-50’s radar is more capable than the APG-77(especially considering it will have been upgraded several times prior to the T-50 becoming operational)
-More power isn’t necessarily a good thing(the F-22 can operate in non-LPI mode and see targets much further away than in LPI mode, but in doing so, it alerts them to its presence).
-if the T-50’s RCS is higher, it will be detected first
Lower RCS doesn’t mean detected last. Sensors count. Another fantasy you seem to have.
It may have an 8 ton payload, but that’s gonna be internal and external stores. It won’t carry 8 tons internally.
The point is that the more energy that you’re radiating, the easier it is for ESM/RWR to detect you, prior to you detecting them. If a Flanker flies around with an IRBIS on max power, anyone within 600+km will most likely be aware of it, and change heading to stay out of it’s search volume.
Too simplistic of a scenario to even bother commenting on.
The Raptor’s LPI mode has a 125-150nm range
The Lightning’s LPI mode is 100+nm.
LPI is not NPI. You are getting annoying.
The Flanker on the other hand won’t detect them most likely until it’s within 10-30nm. The Flanker’s ECM won’t be on if it doesn’t know that it needs to be. AMRAAMs can be fired passively were the Flanker to be emitting radar or ECM. The Flanker’s best hope is using datalinks from another platform to vector it within IRST range, and conducting a passive attack.
Oh 10nm – 30nm wow! Might as well leave the radar guided missiles at home and go at it with just R-73M/R-74s. :rolleyes: Your number work truly amazed me, do you work for the MoD or DoD?
dionisThe latest HARMS have GPS guidance, and will continue heading to the last location the emission originated from.
Who cares? There is no guarantee the firing aircraft will get close enough to fire or that it will get through short range SAM cover.
ermmm….AWACS and Interceptors are going to have difficulty finding the F-35/22 as well. If EMCON is being used, there won’t be any ELINT to pick up. EWLRS may detect the F-35/22, but won’t be able to track or guide weapons.
Additionally, the F-35/22 will also be able to detect the EWLRS, and use tactics to avoid them(or attack them).
If an EWLRS picks up the F-35/22, they are as good as dead. A few calls or radio transmissions are you are going to have SAMs pointing at them, interceptors heading their way, etc.
If a SAM site is emitting, the F-35/22 will avoid it, or attack it from stand off.
You’re gonna need a lot of sites to have overlapping coverage.
As any formidable defense will.
The APG-77 will be operating in LPI mode, which won’t light up a RWR. That’s kind of the point of that mode, and the big advantage of using AESA vs. PESA/MSA radars.
Haha, you ok expert – it won’t just cause you say so right?
Any signal can be detected. Even if it isn’t consistent on the RWR of the Flanker, it will still alert the pilot.
dionisI am not sure how many Victor 3 are still operational , but assuming all still are , yes the Akula/Victor 3 are “broadly” comparable to LA
There are four “very late” model Victor III operation in the Northern Fleet that were built in the early 90s.
yes thats right “CERTAIN” operations , but for Global Reach and Capability you need what you need , there is no 2nd best option and there are no runner ups
When did Lada gain capability to fire Yakhonts , from what I know there is this Amur 950 which has been advertised to fire Yakhonts/Brahmos from their 10 VLS cells.
Is there any VLS capable Lada under development ?
Global reach? You need to stop making the RuN look like a wannabe USN. Seriously. The Russians aren’t invading Australia, South America, or North America in any long term scenario I assure you. A 45 day endurance if PLENTIFUL for anything around Russia, probably even the Middle East and Mediterranean. There is a clear line between overkill and reasonable Navy requirements.
http://www.warfare.ru/?lang=&linkid=1757&catid=307
Why are you surprised? The Amur is a monkey model Lada. Apparently, the Lada uses tube launched versions of t
They may be able to do this or that , but from the 2007 – 2015 plan as reveled by their media there is provision for 7 Borei ( 3 955 & 4 955A ) but provision for only 2 Yasen SSGN.
It would be nice if they can build 1 Yasen per year , but I dont see that happening
Austin, the reason this is – is that 7 Borei make the whole USN useless if you catch my drift. The Americans can’t touch the Russians as long as they have their nuclear deterrent – so why do you think Borei are the priority? The Yasen is supposedly several times more complicated than the Borei. It’s not 2015 yet, so I wouldn’t give up hope on the serial production of the Yasen. It’s simply not required yet.
No I am not , you are underestimating USN full spectrum ASW capability as they have it now or under development , they key word is “Full Spectrum”
There is no point in having a super silent Yasen or Lada , the capability needs to be broad , on ships , on ASW aircraft , on submarines , on aircraft and space component
something that US possesses and constantly under upgrade.It ofcourse doesn’t come cheap , but that gives US undeniable superiority in ASW Domain
Sorry I dont have the link , but I have the full interview with Yury Nikolaevich Kormilitsyn GD Rubin , who mentioned and I quote
If by full spectrum ASW you mean simply upgrading all assets – including ships, subs, airplanes to have ASW capability – then it would be fullish to assume the Russians aren’t following suit.
The strategic bomber fleet is getting an upgrade – so there’s a good chance the Tu-142M is going to have an upgrade looked into as well. I personally think the airframe is much better than any P-8 737 copy.
As far as submarine and ships go, they are clearly installing new sonar systems aboard Admiral Gorshkovs, Yasens, Boreis, Ladas, and whatever else comes out. So what’s the issue here?
You need to keep in mind that the Russia stretches halfway around the world. They will never need to have the overpriced “USN reach” – ever.
dionisThe launch aircraft still needs to detect its target before it can fire, and the Super Hornet, Rafale, and Typhoon aren’t going to be detected at 400km(or probably even 200km for that matter), much less the F-35 and F-22. Additionally, if the IRBIS E(or whatever the follow on is) is radiating out to 400km, even high RCS legacy fighter’s will detect it on their ESM/RWR systems before they’re detected. The only way they’d get caught off guard is if the Flanker/PAK FA was flying EMCON and getting datalink updates allowing them to get within the NEZ before emitting. In any event, carrying a few very large missiles is a very inefficient way to provide CAP. It’d be far better to have 10 AAMs with 100-150km ranges.
So what if the high RCS legacy fighter gets an RWR ping from an ultra long range radar? At this point, the Flanker then knows your position, and with ECM and a more powerful radar is going to shoot first no matter what you do, unless you run away. That is fine for the Flanker’s mission.
If this is a low RCS aircraft, and it gets a ping, there is no guarantee it will get a lock on the T-50 either, due to ECM and stealth. Now with a more powerful radar, and equivalent ECM systems – no matter what the F-35/F-22 do, there is a likely to be a 50-50 chance of shoot-down since firing ranges are going to be similar for each fighter (assuming*** that the PAK-FA sensors are more powerful, but the say F-22 is a bit stealthier). There is no real point comparing an F-35 or F-22 to the Su-35BM, since they are half a generation apart – at least on an individual basis.
While no one knows for sure, everything I’ve heard from Russian sources lead me to believe that the PAK FA will be in between the F-35 and F-22 in size.
As you said, we shall see.
Where are these sources?
I can point you to interviews in Russian that claim an 8 ton payload. If it’s smaller than a Flanker, that’s a hell of an airframe.
The IRBIS is hardly LPI. While LPI doesn’t mean NPI, is does mean the likelihood is very low that the RWR will know that there’s a hostile radar tracking the Flanker, etc….and this is a huge advantage when combined with a very low RCS.
No one said Irbis is LPI. Irbis is a raw power radar meant to ensure first lock and first shot with high ECM resistance.
At longer ranges, LPI is going to be pretty useless – correct me if I’m wrong – since you won’t be able to track due to lower power setting?, if you can even see something like the Su-35BM at around 150 – 180KM with an APG-77/81. Assuming you can see it, tracking will also be affected greatly by the heavy ECM on the Flanker. Don’t be surprised if even the Su-35BM’s RWR has already compensated for LPI qualities of radars.
dionisThis thread is about F 35, isn’t it?
Dodging corners? You incorrectly stated the ranges of the weapons YOU brought up.
That will work against “classic” HARMs, not against the GPS guided new version.
Evidence?
What’s the point to buy a $$ SA 300/400 and not use its radar? because, I repeat, when in SEAD-DEAD the F 35 will be silent, so no other way of detecting will work.
ermmm… AWACS, EWLRS, Interceptors, ELINT ?
Other SAM sites working together? One might be on, others off, etc.
F 35 is barely in service too.
Dodge #2?
Irbis is no APG 77 in term of LPI.
You don’t say? Yet, the APG-77, if it’s going to detect anything remotely stealthy, or even not, is going to be emitting, which means it will light up a good RWR.
dionisEven today SEAD-DEAD is performed silently by the F 16 CJ; they rely on the HTS (Harm targeting system) http://www.raytheon.com/capabilities/products/hts_e/that allow precise geolocation of the SAM radar, in order to launch the HARMS in the most effective mode-“range known”. I suppose that the F 35 would do better with its ESM suite. And even if the SDB has half the range of the HARM, the lower RCS will give the F 35 more survivability compared with legacy fighters.
SDB has the range of the HARM. Approx 110KM. For a legacy fighter this isn’t too good against a S-300P/PM/S-400 system. Not to mention the fact that Russian SAMs have counter-ARM capabilities. You aren’t going to geolocate a thing unless the radar is emitting, and if you had satellite scans from a 24 hours ago, there might be nothing there during mission time. Kind of the point of mobile SAM systems. Against a capable foe, you are potentially going to be up against other 5th gen and 4+ gen fighters and interceptors. Then all of the new gen EWLRS. Granted, no one is ever going to invade Russia, you can’t rule out a conflict else where that they would support heavily.
Anyway what peolpe tend to forget when assesing penetration capabilty of US (either legacy of VLO) fighters in a IADS, is that any large raid will be preceded by a swarm of MALDs. I bet that the operators of SA 300/400 will have an interesting time trying to sort it from the real targets…
The MALD is barely in service. Even then, good luck getting “hundreds” of them out.
It would be true if the “lower RCS” would use a torch’like radar such as Bars or Irbis. If it uses AESA, good lock for the Flanker pilot. It will be diffcult for the Flanker RWR to detect the AESA, and if the RWR doesn’t pick the signal, you carry those big wingtip jammers for nothing.
APG-77 or IRBIS, LPI isn’t NPI. Go figure. Especially if the aircraft are closer together since they are “blind” because stealth is oh-so-supreme.
Spare us of nationalistic BS. When did Russian fighters (even manned by Russian pilots) show such a devastating superiority? The big Su is a superb plane, but you don’t do it any good by dedicating poems.
Does your manhood feel threatened?
dionisWell the handful of 4th Gen Sub plus building supplements the large fleet of Improved LA that USN already has and operates.
Right, as the Improved LA is approximately as good as a Victor 3 or early Akula.
Conventional submarine is good for littoral and choke point operation , Lada is a good sub , but lada cant replace or compensate for a 4th Gen N submarine.
You have just contradicted yourself. The SSK is not always “littoral” only – and that’s the point. Kilos and Ladas are excellent for defensive operations. So yes, they can compensate for 4th Gen SSNs in CERTAIN operations. The Ladas, of course. They can be armed with Klubs/Yakhonts, heavy torpedoes, and are quiet. Their range is sufficient for defensive ops even in nearby conflicts that aren’t on Russia’s coast.
As of now from all reports we have not see any news of full scale production of Yasen , if at all what is known is only 2 Yasen will be produced between now and 2015, starting a production is not an easy task as well one needs a lot of commitment of huge resources over long terms , the necessary manpower and commitment by political leadership as well.
Yes, but post that, we can assume that with the Borei line well under way, they will be able to produce one Yasen per year. This is added to the capable Ladas.
You need to read upon USN Airborne ASW systems and how capable and effective it is to make you understand what they are made of, as far as SD goes the IN had great problems operationalising the system and it is quite ok , but it certain no match for US systems one of the main reason of IN to opt for P-8I
I feel like you are blowing this out of proportion. I need to see some links for numbers. I have never seen any vast superiority of US systems.
Infact from what we know Tu-142M career was most of the time not able to detect the Kilo during ASW exercises , the designer of the Kilo though thinks its speaks about the capability of the sub 😉
Link? Are you certain the Tu-142M operates systems of the same capacity as Russian ones?
dionisA Handful like Eight 4th Gen Subs ( 5 Virginia + 3 Sea Wolf ) in service , compared to just two Akula-2 in service which are know to be quiter than Improved LA .
So effectively the Russians have Zero 4th Gen Submarine (SSN or SSGN) and the two Akula hardly makes any difference in terms of overall fighting capability.
The Oscar 2 and Sierra I/II are at best third or 3 and half gen subs , not good as Akula 2 though, atleast the Sierra is being upgraded so after upgrade it may reach Akula 2 standards
In any future war the USN will prosecute any Russian SSGN or SSBN much before they get chance to do any serious damage.
Russian Airborne ASW system even with the newest Sea Dragon are quite low on the scale compared to the newest P-3C or the upcoming P-8A
The US ASW capability is not just limited to submarine superiority but across the wide spectrum of ASW domain.
The good news though is slowly but steadly the Russians are building up , like the new 7 Borei class( 955/944A) SSBN that is some numbers to add , though there is lack of clarity on SSN/SSGN part in terms of numbers.
But I doubt they will ( if ever) catch up with US ASW capability in decades ahead, US is investing huge resources as we speak to maintain a significant lead in ful spectrum ASW domain
The only advantage the US will have is being able to more effectively project power abroad (to countries that have rather shoddy defensive potential).
A handful is 4th gen subs really doesn’t offer the US the advantage you speak of. You are also quite amateurishly discarding the power of an SSK for defensive purposes. The Lada is in full production, and once the Severodvinsk is in full production there’s really only a numerical advantage that the US would possess.
If you have any evidence that the Sea Dragon is “inferior” to the US systems I’d like to see it.
Sign In
