I wonder if the Russians would be interested in the not-so-far future in integrating a more “ground-like” version of the S-400/500 system on their ships. It would easily rival if not exceed anything anyone would be fielding in service, especially with improvements to the current design.

In order to utilise that range you need to track the target with a bear that will be a sitting duck to any defending fighters. To what range can Flankers carry 6 anti-ship missiles? probably not far. What the hell is an Su-34?

You really need to stop posting here if you don’t even know what an Su-34 is! 😮

Assuming this is a nearby theater, which is almost granted realistically, those same “defending fighters” are targets for bomber escorts.

Aster 30, as with any active seeker missile, has a saturation point that is so high it makes any attempt at a virtual attrition calculation a very difficult proposal. PAAMS(S) with SAMPSON is allegedly capable of updating 12-16 missiles in the air simultaneously into seeker capture. Note that is different to TVM fire-channels as well as a TVM fire-channel cannot be released until the system registers a kill. PAAMS(S) is ‘pinging’ inbounds and assigning and updating missiles as long as the system has missiles to launch over a full 360 degrees coverage.

Simply put if I want to defeat a Type 45 I need to rethink saturation into something closer to attrition. Even having 8 tactical fighters launch 32 missiles simultaneously at T45 may not achieve the job as the first 12 shot Aster 30 salvo will take the skimmers at radar horizon and Asters ripple fire at second intervals. The time interval for missiles to cross the terminal phase 30km run in, even for a supersonic inbound, is enough for multiple salvoes to be fired.

When you consider that even developed nations entire air-launched standoff antiship missile stocks may only be a hundred weapons and they may only have a dozen strike fighters equipped to launch them suddenly being faced with a need to expend half of that inventory to defeat a single ship is a considerable problem to be solved if trying to programme a reliable attack strategy.

You’re assuming you’re going to have a perfect success rate against supersonic missiles of various types. The kill chance compared to even a subsonic weapon will be a magnitude lower, which makes a world of difference against heavy AShMs.

http://en.rian.ru/russia/20081014/117727246.html

MOSCOW, October 14 (RIA Novosti) – Russian strategic bombers have successfully completed a series of large-scale, week-long exercises, the Long-Range Aviation commander said on Tuesday.

The drills, part of the Stability 2008 strategic command and staff exercises, were conducted on October 6 through 12 under the command Col. Gen. Alexander Zelin, Air Force commander, involving over 30 warplanes.

“A total of 40 sorties have been flown with an aggregate of 300 flying hours clocked,” Maj. Gen. Pavel Androsov said.

The Stability-2008 maneuvers are being conducted in various parts of Russia and Belarus with the goal of practicing strategic deployment of the Armed Forces, including the nuclear triad, to counter potential threats near Russia’s borders. They started on September 22 and will last until October 21.

Russian strategic bombers, Tu-160 Blackjacks and Tu-95MS Bear-Hs, have flown with full combat payloads and launched all of their standard-issue cruise missiles for the first time in over two decades.

Tu-95MS and Tu-160 aircraft can carry six and 12 Kh-55 (AS-15 Kent) long-range cruise missiles, respectively.

The Air Force has said the scope of the exercise is unprecedented, involving the Tu-22M3 Backfire strategic bombers, air superiority fighters, interceptors and aerial tankers.

According to various sources, in addition to 16 Tu-160 bombers the Russian Air Force currently has 40 Tu-95MS bombers and 141 Tu-22M3 bombers in service.

So harpoons or some other AShM would be the best weapon to be used by aircraft in this scenario?

In the interest of potentially staying out of the range of the long range air defenses, I would say definitely.

Even better would be a submarine probably, assuming it can sneak past the SSNs that would operate with the Kirov.

I am expecting CSTO Navy under Russian command with 250million Population. Remember Russia control the transport routes/Natural resources/Wage growth difference to collapse several other countries in less than 10 years. Six aicraft carriers is just about right.

Which is approximately half of what the US runs, which is more than enough as a conventional deterrent to stop anyone. Hell, at the moment, the US wouldn’t dare engage in a conventional conflict with Russia no matter how much the American and NATO fanboys on here think the US will/can. The loss of life and assets is far too great.

Let stay in the present days. A carrier group formed by the Kuznetsov, the Peter the Great, 2 Sovremenny class destroyers, 2 Udaloy class destroyer, an Oscar II SSGN and an Akula SS can be matched by a single USN carrier Group? I don’t think so. The problem for Russia is that can build just one Group of such a composition. Nevertheless, this group should rule the sea from Kola to Greenland.

Throw in a Slava and Lada for good measure 😉

OK so, if I take you at your word, your comment was unrelated to the deployment then and just a spurious and shallow comment that lack detail and any real credibility?. OK – you say so pal.

They lack credibility and detail (which wasn’t included on purpose) in your eyes, which makes me care little.

Ships serve doctrine. Look it up. See if Kirov or Slava fits the bill.

They are both multi-purpose ships, and at the moment, are more than capable of defending Russia’s land mass in combination with the subs, aviation and ground forces.

….but you can hardly use them to attempt to patch up the dignity of the surface fleet?.

Sure you can, the Navy is a while unit, not a set of units, at least in my eyes.
The stand-off capabilities of all vessels are quite impressive for defensive purposes.

Yes Legenda was the surviveable part of the guidance system. Which new satellites?. When were they placed up?.

Hard to say, as these are very well state secrets. There’s 30 satellites which you still haven’t accounted for.

Thats on the proviso that your initial value for the number of satellites actually operational in orbit is the same as the number that are in orbit. Quite a stretch of the imagination. Satellite lifepans, in LEO, are more usually measured in months than in years. Some Russian recon assets thats actually days not months!. Nothing new and unrecognisable has been put up recently and there have been no mysteriously unscheduled launches to have carried these new assets into orbit….over to you to substantiate new ocean recon assets Echonine.

Again, you can’t account for those 30 satellites can you? I didn’t think so.

Also, in case you haven’t noticed, Russia isn’t under any immediate threat, so the guidance system POTENTIALLY NOT BEING UP (it probably well is), isn’t even a problem. If the US decided to poke its nose and get aggressive, with less than a week’s notice I’m sure any necessary guidance systems could be launched. This is simple logic.