[QUOTE=Austin;1320649]Condolence to the family of sailors and crew died in the accident 🙁

I join.

[QUOTE=Austin;1320649]Aqueous Film Forming Foam or AFFF system used to combat Class B fires on submarines by providing a barrier between the burning substance and oxygen uses a deadly Freon mixture which kills instantly.
This is totally wrong.
The freon type used in Russian subs is toxic, true, but only after some time (lasting from 4 min to 10 min depending on your breathing capacity). AND it is not a foam: it’s a gas, that looks like a liquid the first 10 seconds (heavier than ambient air).
The normal procedure is not automatic, it can only be activated manually with the breaking of several sealed switches. Molybden controls in the CP master the operation. The Nerpa has a new Molybden, maybe the Indians insisted on full auto, but that would be idiotic.
Every crew member has a personal PDU-2 breathing device, that should be carried with you at all times.
On the other hand, the sub was cramped: more than 200 hands (incl. factory and expert technicians). Civilians accounted for 17 deaths, military suffered only 3 casualties: that hints at panic and lack of experience among civilians.

I saw a picture of the MiG-31D based ASAT missile some month ago. It is larger than the F-15 based Vougth missile. Much larger than a R-37. No way a R-37 can have ASAT capability.

The MiG launched ASAT was intended to have much more capabilities as the SRAM Altair and the like. No wonder it’s larger. But it still did not work properly.

RSM55…

Norway’s P-3 Orion were dropping sonobouys along the PIM of the Russian Navy’s TG…why?, are they searching for a submarine?, is a submarine part of the deployment?

Yes.

You commented an special GRU boat (X-Ray maybe?) was part of the deployment…or maybe is just an Akula?
Do you have more info on this?? or your own opinion.

My own opinion is that a GRU boat would not travel there alone. And if I’d send something, I’d send a Sierra, as they are much more adapted to the hydro and acoustic conditions in the Caribbean. But they have probably chosen an Akula (Gepard?), AFAIK there is no official information on this.

The Russian public is irrelevant with regards to the Russian business/economy though. It’s true that there are fewer investors, but that doesn’t change the reality that Russian companies/banks/etc… have to face, and the devaluation of the Rubel, slowing down of the economy, increased inflation.

You’re not banned on Google, I suppose? 😀
On a more serious note, I think you’re undestanding the basic economic terms wrongly.

The Russian RTS index is one of the most volatile in the world because it is one of the most unrepresentative indexes in the world. Less than 8% of the Russian economic actors are present there, and not the most important (not all the state holdings, Rostech etc., not Gazprom, not Railroads, etc.). So when it plummets, it does not mean anything (same is true about its rise). It’s merely a indicator, and a weak one.

“Fewer investors”: not true and they are not represented by the RTS. Russia had a direct investment record high in 2008, incl. foreign investment.

“Devaluation of the rubel”: that’s totally wrong. Actually, they are struggling with a strenghtening of the ruble and a rise in wages with production level not catching up, which is constraining exports and provides for a steady inflation. They’d be actually very happy about the ruble devaluating a little.

The inflation is increasing, true (12% this year) but is fuelled by increased budget spending, lack of control and monopolistic structures. Wages are indexed quite smartly and economically, in fact.

And for all those who still write gibberish about the Russian economy “fuelled by petrodollars”: remember that the Russian budget is calculated with the oil price fixed at 60 USD a barrel and is therefore a very conservative budget. All the surplus is not directly re-invested in order to stem inflation and put into state currency and gold reserves. That’s the reason why the Russian state budget is one of the few in the world that can boast continual benefits and not deficits. As for the “petrodollars” cliché, remember that industry & services account for 80% of the Russian economy and their growth is much more responsible for the rise of the current GDP as the energy sector.

And let us stop this off-topical discussion.

Does anyone knows what ports will be visited?

Thanks in advance.

Tripoli is confirmed.

No Shkval is simply being made the whipping boy 😉

It was the Type 65 with its HTP fuel , improperly handled base and a leak in it which turned out to be the nemesis of Kursk.

Its time they banned such torpedoes , because any mishandling of it can be a major tragedy.

Not entirely true. The expert commission established that the primary explosion was due to a type 65 indeed, but the reason for the explosion was never clarified. During the expert inquiry (General Prosecutor’s office inquiry) they tested everything, dropped the torp, shot at it, made it leak, stamped on it shouting insults in Arabic 🙂 and it never exploded.
Another mystery is the reason why the main blast wave was directed backwards (blowing up the rear part of the torp launch tube and sending the lauch tube rear hatch several dozen meters behind, destroying equipment and sealed compartments) and not forward (the exterior hatch was found almost intact). It should have been the other way round.

Re: torps, wake homing etc.
The RuN does not (in my knowledge) pursue some new programmes re torpedoes. They are quite satisfied with the modernisation of the TEST and UGST series.
Concerning wake homing etc.: if you read my post carefully, the emphasis was not on wake homing but on “non traditional” methods, including (especially – I should have stressed that) low frequency detection.
This is currently the most promising research and application field, and its precursors are the SURFASS-LFA AN/SQQ-89, LFAS/ATBF2, ATAS, Vinyetka etc.
The other promising field the Russians are currently very keenly working on is bistatic / multistatic sonar integration. The AN/WQT-2 as a radiation source providing other assets with secundary detection abilities is a good example.

Basically, the navies of the world face the same revolutionary potential as the air forces, with 20 years or so delay:
Think of the sonar as a underwater radar, then you get the parallels:
– unimode monostatic, rather basic sonars till the end of WWII
– more advanced sonars on individual combatants till the end of the 50s/60s
– sensor integration and emphasis on passive location in the 60s/70s – till now
– integration of some few long-range static detection stations (SOSUS), still centralised (a evolution that has already been implemented in the air forces during WWII and the EW radar stations).

The future:
– decentralised long-range static active detection (like permanent radar station on the ground) coupled with passive sonar reception on individual combatants
– mobile decentralised long-range active detection (surface and sub-surface “AWACS”, providing other combatants with an enormous advantage in terms of combat capability and stealth (exactly like in the AF, where fighters can operate with their radars shut down and still get a homing)
– truly multistatic detection sonars (one surface/subsurface unit pinges for other forward positioned assets).

We see a clear tendency towards active-passive detection and the disappearance of purely passive detection that we’ve got till now primarily for security and stealth reasons.

….and the news has it that a Russian Warship Neustrashimy is hurrying there from the Atlantic. What, nothing seaworthy closer than that? Haven’t updated their maps with the Suez Canal? Inquiring minds want to know. Or is this just a result of the major cutbacks in the Russian blue water navy?

The Neustrashimy was due there since weeks, if not months, and it nothing to do with the recent incident, because, again, the ship is Ukrainian, the tanks are Ukrainian (ex-Sov.), and the deal (probably with South Soudan) is Ukrainian.

I guess my question is what is with the desire to be confrontational? Perhaps they can “afford” to be, but they’d be far better off economically if they weren’t.

OK, let’s put some things straight.

The Medvedev statements are a perfect example of journalism going from bad to worse partly because of defective translators.

1. Medvedev spoke of aerospace defense (vozdushno-kosmitscheskaya oborona), and never used the word “shield“.
2. “Aero-space defense”, or VKO in its Russian acronym, is a very old notion in Russia that is dear especially to the Russian Air Force to the expense of other military branches.
3. What we see here is a Russian-made version of typically American fights between the USAF, the USN, the Army and the Space Command over who, when and where should get the buck flowing.
4. According to what Medvedev said, the RuAF guys won the first round. VKO basically means an integrated space and air defense network, i.e. the fusion of AF (AF and PVO), Space Forces (VKS), Early warning (RSDN) and missile assets (partly VKS, partly Strategic Missile Forces, partly General Staff) under one command. Of course, the RuAF hopes to get that command.
5. There is no confrontation here. No one is talking about installing missile interceptors in Cuba or nukes in space.
6. “Space-based assets” means new early warning, intel etc satellites. Maybe the good old FOBS. That’s all.
7. They are not being confrontational. In their view, the US is being confrontational, since at least a decade.
8. May be you forgot it, but the only country who has a more or less functioning ABM system is not the US. And the first country who managed to intercept a ballistic missile warhead was not the US. So why should the Russians share their know-how with folks who can only hit a target when there is a beacon on it? 😀