Kalibr cruise missile launch. IMAGE: Russian Defense Ministry/TASS
During the past six years, Russia increased the number of land-, sea-and air-based carriers has risen by more than 12 times and precision cruise missiles by over 30 times, the Russian Defense Ministry’s newspaper Krasnaya Zvezda reported on November 6.
The newspapaer reported that Russia had achieved a breakthrough in supplying long-range precision weapons to the Russian Armed Forces.
“Now the Armed Forces have set up command and control bodies and special units tasked with planning the use of long-range precision weapons and preparing flight assignments for cruise missiles of all types of their basing,” Krasnaya Zvezda reported. “As a result, full-fledged groupings of precision weapon carriers capable of employing missiles against targets at a range of up to 4,000 km have been established.”
According to the report, warships armed with Kalibr cruise missiles make up the basis of these groupings in strategically important areas of the Baltic, Barents, Black and Mediterranean Seas. Furthermore, the defense industry continues deliveries of submarines and surface ships armed with Kalibr cruise missiles as well as Iskander-M tactical ballistic missile systems.
The paper adressed the next-generation precision weapon systems:
“They [weapon systems] include the Kinzhal airborne precision complex with a hypersonic missile designated to hit ground and sea targets, the Sarmat intercontinental missile system capable of attacking targets both through the North and South Poles and the Avangard complex armed with a boost glide vehicle.”
Krasnaya Zvezda reported that the Russian Armed Forces established a self-sufficient group of forces in the Republic of Crimea. This group includes a naval base, an army corps, an aviation division and an air defense division. The Black Sea Fleet, which is deployed there, includes state-of-the-art submarines and frigates armed with Kalibr cruise missiles. Coastal defense forces are equipped with Bal and Bastion coastal missile systems that guarantee the protection of the republic and secure the interests of Russia in the Black Sea region.
During the Defense Ministry’s board meeting on November 5, Chief of General Staff Valery Gerasimov revaled that Russia had launched 55 military spacecraft in five years, tightening control over launch sites for US ballistic missiles.
“During the five-year period, an orbital group was built up, 55 military spacecraft were launched and the new Angara space missile complex was created to take payload to all types of earth orbits from the territory of the Russian Federation,” Gerasimov said. “Further development of the system will make it possible to execute global continuous control over ballistic missiles launch sites.”
“Further development of the system will make it possible to execute global continuous control over ballistic missiles launch sites.”
He added that the created spacecraft group allows to provide communication, as well as reconnaissance, navigation and other information at the required level to the country’s military-political leadership and military authorities.
The Russian Military (excluding the Navy) has been completely rebuilt and modernized under Putin’s highly effective Presidency. Also, major advances have been achieved in lower cost niche applications such as missile technology, advanced torpedoes, submarines and interceptor fighters at a fraction of the cost of US equivalents. The weakest link in the Russian Defence Forces is clearly the Navy, which is now considerably behind China in its modernisation and sheer scale of its shipbuilding. It will take Russia decades to address this weakness as it’s now working from a low base what was allowed to fall into a state of total dilapidation from the Communist era (1980 when funds were increasingly scarce) to 2005. . Whilst a lot has been achieved, Russia faces major structural (high capital investment) changes required to build the desired warships and service them is suitably equipped shipyards and dry dock / support facilities.
Regards the navy, you are right in your comparison with China and I strongly believe that is due to Russia’s limited specialised ship building facilities. China is amazing and spewing vessels out here, there and anywhere. Together however, I am not sure if the Russian navy is that important at the moment.
Russia is head hunting the best from Nikolaev, they will help (it is a very pro-Russian city in Ukraine the main shipyards of USSR were there).
You make a good point.
Ships are a fast way to project power but they are increasingly vulnerable to very accurate missiles and the loss of a ships company will be particularly hard for the ‘Western Pansy Public’ to mentally cope with.
Russia’s smaller but hard hitting ships are the way forward I think. Big NATO ships need lots of ships just to protect them. Big NATO ships in a shooting war between equals are just mass graves :).
Russian naval ambitions were muted by the embargo of Ukrainian gas turbine power plants imposed on them, necessitating the need to develop a domestic counterpart, something they have been working on for the last 4-5 years, and there is light at the end of the tunnel as Grigorovich and Gorshkov class frigates are being delivered to the Russian navy and their numbers should increase through 2020. Yassen class subs should be completed and operational before 2027, while the fifth generation Husky subs will begin construction by 2023. Quite likely that super Gorshkov frigates and Linder destroyers will be constructed after 2020, once the gas turbine power plant are mass produced and the nuclear power units for the Lidder destroyers are finalized. Also coming out of a deep remodernization Nakhimov and Peter the Great along with Kuznetsov by 2023.
The important aspect of the Russian navy is that it can deploy a significant and deadly array of antiship missiles, especially hypersonic, including Zircon that makes the floating platforms of secondary importance.
The numbers are going to be far more impressive after the 2027 rearmament program ends.
In this World, at this time; we may not exist in 2027.
You are being pessimistic. You will exist in 2027.
not a sure thing to my opinion. either the world will explode or implode but no warranties we be around to witness the after effect.
Most of the WMD’s are in the northern hemisphere, most of the antagonists are in the northern hemisphere. The winds of the northern and southern hemispheres do not mix. That’s why so many of the rich and famous are buying land etc in southern countries. So most here might not exist in 2027, but those living in the southern hemisphere will probably be having a cold beer on a hot day like this.
For most species nature takes care of population control. Because man is no longer subject to the laws of nature, we have to devise our own methods of population control.
The winds of the northern and southern hemispheres do not mix.
better you check your wrong theory.
http://www.abc.net.au/science/articles/2008/09/29/2377123.htm
this is not about stratospheric damage. in 80-ties there were large studies. if nuclear war is in north hemisphere, them ALL Earth will be damaged. if would happen in southern hemisphere, in north part would be only limited damages
this article is not about soutern hemisphere war, but is also desribved, that in case of northern HS war would be destroyed the whole earth
https://www.bibliotecapleyades.net/ciencia/ciencia_uranium15.htm
Actually, a very good point.
What is meant by, ‘exerting continuous global control over ballistic launch sites?
Being able to monitor and surveil ICBM sites from space.
And presumably drop some sort of weapon on them.
Did FSB tell Nicuragua and Venezuela not to grant CG political asylum, based on assurances from good-CIA? Is it not time to re-evaluate the situation?
Build submarines, submarines, and more submarines. Anything above the surface and not supersonic is but a brick waiting to get shreded.
Being one dimensional limits your options, Germans tried to win the battle of Atlantic in both World wars using subs and failed.
Yes but in WWI and WWII submarines sank ships. Today’s submarines sink nations.
I am talking about conventional armed submarines, not those armed with nuclear weapons. Conventioanal submarines still are the most potent vessels to engage surface and transport ships. There has to be a balance between the surface fleet and the submarine force, they have to work in conjunction and spread the risk factor. Germany was doing great during early WW2 waging effective submarine warfare until some new discoveries in ASW warfare capabilities took their advantage away. Russian Ballistic missile subs are going to stay close to the Russian shore line to avoid aerial ASW and killer sub threat prevalent in the open oceans. The conventional nuclear and diesel power subs are to interdict any logistical flow across the Atlantic..
Ahh, your talking of trade blockades via submarine. Well the Chinese are making that redundant for Europe and Asia via the new silk road. The whole idea is to circumvent US naval power, very Sun Tzu of them, once completed, the US will be reduced to blockading itself.
US does not have the submarine force to impose the trade blockade, their sub force is around 60 and that includes their strategic nuclear armed subs. China on the other hand has multiple Russian kilo diesel subs that can match the US nuclear powered attack subs in maneuverability and acoustic silence and keep them busy.
US Virginia class, Los Angeles class, and Seawolf class submarines are attack submarines and designed to sink surface shipping, among other things.
They currently have 50 attack class subs, plus 18 Ohio class missile subs with more being built.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Submarines_in_the_United_States_Navy#Composition_of_the_current_force
Some of the subs are going to be retired, the Ohio class is part of the triad and cannot participate in shipping interdiction, 50 attack subs are not enough to handle the Russians and the Chinese in the Pacific, and the Russians in the Atlantic and elsewhere. A portion of these attack subs are meant to keep track of enemy SSGNs, lack of diesel powered subs limits the US sub capability.
It is important to remember that all this arming and re-arming is only and purely for defensive and peaceful purposes. Russia has never been and never wanted to be a hegemonial power. . No, Russia, much like the US and Israel is a country, an empire, that is built largely by settler-colonialism (spreading from such centers as Kiev and Moscow). It has colonialised the vast steps etc. all the way to the Pacific. In the West, she was always keen to devour its neighbours. So while I think NATO’s reckless aggression is wrong, Russia isn’t a peaceful country but intend on more than just defending its borders.