How would you save the Russian navy?

>>34936456
Get rid of the ramp

>>34936456

Someone tell them Rustoleum exists

I'd dissolve it. Save them the money that they so desperately need in other parts of their government

File: jIHYWdh.jpg (349KB, 1807x1384px) Image search: [Google]

349KB, 1807x1384px

Nice try Vladimir.

Russians are famously incompetent sailors, there's no saving the Russian Navy.

>>34936456
A

>>34936456
Russia doesn't have the money to save it. What it could do is decommission Admiral Kuznetsov and focus on modernizing frigates, destroyers, and submarines. Kuznetsov was built to serve a now defunct doctrine and it isn't worth refitting as the design will be totally obsolete by the time it leaves the dock again. Honestly the best thing the Russian navy can do is abandon all pretenses of being a blue water navy and focus on more reasonable and achievable goals.

>>34936488
This

Scrap and sell it all

>>34936540

This is a fair point. The way Russia's geography is laid out a big strong navy like the US has doesn't make a ton of sense. Some ships to patrol the coasts sure, along the lines of the US coast guard, but most of their power projection issues don't require a big navy, and the money spent on larger ships could be better spent on missiles along the borders

>>34936579

They could probably halve the Caspian sea fleet and get rid of most of their current ships that hasn't moved in years. Modernize and keep a quarter of the fleet they have now until their economy gets better.

>>34936540
A lot of their navy is focused on massive amphibious landings in Sweden

>>34936488
>>34936540
These. Russia doesn't have the money so it would be wise to stop funding what have now become prestige and vanity navies, things that only the Ameriyanks and the Chinese can afford to do to any impressive extent.

Not even the British can afford a proper big boy navy nowadays, so there really is no shame in dropping out of this race.

>>34936625
>>34936609

Nuke subs is definitely the one thing any nukeworthy country should keep around, so I could see them using the money from other scrapped ships to sustain those. France and the UK only have a handful of each, right? like 4-5 each if I remember, so as long as they stay about equal there it makes sense.

The Russian navy should have a cap of about 20,000 tons displacement for any one ship. Anything more is wasteful.

They don't need real blue-water capability, and they border most of the meaningful world. Their fleets do not need interoperability, or mutual support.

They are also in the unique position where they can fight from the opposite side of several straits, which makes them more powerful.

>>34936456
Why do they need a navy?

File: russian typical name.jpg (52KB, 500x375px) Image search: [Google]

52KB, 500x375px

>>34936623
Why don't they just become Muslim instead?

Anyone have a link to the article that details how assignment to the kuznetsov is considered a punishment because of how awful conditions on board are?

>>34936678

Things is at times a good ole' Cruiser or some sort frigate would be good for power projection. Cause you can't really stand on a beach to threaten someone then point out to an ocean with no visible ship in sight to say, "If you keep this up my ship is going to blow your ass to smithereens." And you wouldn't want to have a bunch of rescued people inside a sub making noise.

>>34937623
Is this from the ep where a bunch of different nations are trying to steal the fancy new Soviet labor tank?

>>34936456
Sell the surface fleet to India minus ice breakers. Start fresh from the ground up.

buy chinese

File: burningchurches.gif (491KB, 500x290px) Image search: [Google]

491KB, 500x290px

>>34936491
>Tsushima ensues
>Where they lost another 2/3rds of whatever was left

File: c398cfce-2b00-11e7-acff-d77f13c4971d_1280x720_131146.jpg (80KB, 1280x720px) Image search: [Google]

80KB, 1280x720px

>>34937831
>tfw China made a second Kuz knockoff from scratch with bigger crew quarters and mess than the Liaoning because Soviet living quarters were too claustrophobic and inhospitable even by Chinese standards

>>34936499
FUCKING

>>34938137
RAMP

>>34936456
I think they would be better served with a few LPD's and any of their Helicopter options.

About the only reason I can see the Admiral trudging on is as an evaluation vehicle for marine aircraft export. But even then that seems excessive.

>>34936491
Really want to see breakdown of that battle in memetext.

Sell it all to India at inflated prices and buy a new one from China.

>>34936456
>How would you save the Russian navy
Give them more money. Their ships sit derelict and rusting cause they can't afford to drive em around.

Anything with a ski ramp (and/or British) is garbage.

>>34936609
Wtf is the purpose of the Caspian fleet anyway? All I ever hear of them doing is being used as a missile battery for putting ordnance into Syria.

>>34936540
>>34936579
>>34936678
I think these 3 anons nailed it. Obviously the submarine capabilities should remain at a high level especially in the Arctic and adjacent areas. Everything else is secondary. Basically, Russia is already doing what is necessary for her naval needs. New SSNs, SSBNs, and FFGs are coming online. A new replacement for the kirovs and kuznetsov are not necessary

File: 1500944272323.jpg (37KB, 600x600px) Image search: [Google]

37KB, 600x600px

>>34938403
>not even close to baitworthy

>>34936472
Only true answer.

It's not a good Navy if it's not aesthetic.

Make it's mission costal defense with boomers for force projection.

Peter was wrong!
Russians shouldn't into water.

File: 1457916797995.jpg (6KB, 216x234px) Image search: [Google]

6KB, 216x234px

>all those pro-russian and anti-russian posts ...

/k/ can not into discussions

why bring up any valid arguments, when "muh dad can beat up yours" works every damn time

>>34937966
Yes, including a mossad spy dog.

File: Wing In Ground Effect Amphibious Assault Concept 4.png (180KB, 322x253px) Image search: [Google]

180KB, 322x253px

>>34936456
Get rid of everything that is not an ekranoplans, then proceed to build more ekranoplans. Then sell ekranoplans to other countries so you can make moreekranoplans.

>>34938905

>Circumcising your carriers and giving your aircraft mobility scooters because they are too fat to fly on their own

they need more ports in order to save the navy

Sell everything and just buy loads of merchant ships. Pick off escorting destroyers with merchant ships. Finish off carrier with ashms.

>>34936491
>Oryol sinks in the harbour before they even leave
>Oryol fired 500 shells and hit nothing
Two Oryols?

>>34939552
It was refloated.

>>34939566
Should've stated it, since he made a point of Oryol sinking and later wasting half a thousand shells on nothing.
Ah whatever.

>>34936456
Build more ports. Start from there.

>>34936456
Divert funds from the Navy to the other relevant and effective branches like Army and Air Force.

>>34939583
does he need to tell you how it gets from one place to another too? Ships that sink in port are almost always refloated unless something catastrophic happens like the powder going off

File: IMG_0220.jpg (94KB, 800x533px) Image search: [Google]

94KB, 800x533px

>>34939160
*blocks your path*

>>34936456
Have them learn how to make a submarine that is modular enough to replace nuclear fuel instead of entire reactors.
Clean the rust off the decks of their fleet for aesthetics and hygiene.
Improve radar lock range for their s400s

File: IMG_1701.jpg (54KB, 560x315px) Image search: [Google]

54KB, 560x315px

More anti-ship missles.
Less ships.

>>34940872
Also they should focus on area denial rather than force projection.

>>34940850
While they're designed to fly at 10m/30feet for maximum efficiency, most of the russian GEV designs were quite capable of flying around 30m - 100 foot altitude without a significant loss of fuel efficiency. If you had to, they were capable of being taken up to altitude - in the case of the "lun" ekranoplans, their claimed maximum altitude was 24,000 feet - though that is rather obviously with a significant hit to fuel efficiency.

if you've got 24,000-foot ocean swells, you're in a lot more trouble than just your ekranoplan being hit by the megatsunami from an asteroid impact.

File: Kirov-class_battlecruiser.jpg (1MB, 2660x1780px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 2660x1780px

More missile cruisers
Entire fleet of missile cruisers

>>34936456
Reduce its size to better match the Russian economy.

>>34941155
What size would best match the Russian economy?

>>34941165
nonexistent

>>34941165
I can't say off hand. I'd look at other nations with a similar sized economy to see how large of navy can be supported. Use that as a starting point. Also, retaining their Boomer fleet should remain a priority.

File: 090717-F-0289B-222.jpg (2MB, 2100x1500px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 2100x1500px

>>34940872
>pic is USAF X-51
>they didn't even edit out the DoD insignias
That's pretty shit-level bait right there.

>>34936456
Stop having aspirations for blue water capability. Accept that Russia is not even a shadow of the Soviet Union and move on. To that end, your fleet becomes extremely simple - you want SSKs, keep your SSBN fleet small, Destroyers and Frigates are the basis of your surface fleet with a smattering of cruisers, focus on ASW and anti-ship stuff, your need for trying to keep up with the US in land strike and aviation is non existent until the country grows both economically and politically. While being able to show the world 'LOOK WHAT OUR NAVY IS DOING IN SYRIA' is all well and good for morale and propaganda, it changes nothing of what national priorities really are - all your potential near and mid term adversaries don't require anything like the Soviet fleet of yesteryear so stop trying to build it back up. Focus on professionalism and maintenance and then you'll see a much improved capability from a smaller force.

>>34936456
Put it out of its misery.

File: Tu-142.jpg (331KB, 1600x1273px) Image search: [Google]

331KB, 1600x1273px

>>34940885
I fully agree with this.

If you don't have overseas interest, you don't need force projection.

Since they have a huge area of land and air to protect, area denial is key.

What else can they do?

1. Sell and scrap legacy ships, oldest first. If their oldest units aren't as useful and will consume money and valuable manpower to keep them somewhat ready for deployment, only to be moored in harbor anyways, why keep them?

2. Sell or scrap carriers. The Soviet navy, and successor Russian navy were never into carriers. The Kuznetsov Is their only carrier, and it;s not even that good. China would probably buy it up if their CATOBAR carrier gets delayed, and if not, India would like it because they're building up a fleet of MiG-29K as well.

They still have a Kiev class, but they don't have any STOVL jets because the Yak-38 was a bust and the Yak-141 was cancelled in testing. They have no need for this vessel. India could have probably bought it because they had Sea Harriers but retired them in 2016.

3. Again, >>34940885 is right. To build on that point:
Consolidate their fleet into fewer types. They don't need three types of DDG and two types of CG and two types of Frigate and so on. One Cruiser type, one Destroyer type, one attack sub, one SSBN, one Corvette type if they want, one Flat-top Landing craft with amphibious assault features, one logistics type if they want, and that's it. Make the Destroyer a modular type, so you can swap out SAM, AShM, Intel, and Anti-sub modules. Build a lot of the cheaper ones and make them multi-purpose. Maximize cost-efficiency.

4. Put the smartest and most-experienced senior officers in charge and retire the politically-favored ones. This was true in the Soviet era, and that fact has not changed today. This is a problem not unique to Russia, though.

5. Keep the Tu-142s and other cruise-missile bombers. They have a firepower and anti-sub/anti-ship capacity that acts in their favor.

>>34936456
as much as i love russian(soviet) doctrine and the way there ships look
russia is no soviet union and they should scrap or sell kuznetsov kirovs slavas sovremennyys
there is even a single kashin in the black sea fleet a ship from 1967!

there is little use for ships like that also for dozens of different classes of coastal ships
get rid of old cold war shit including old subs get some new frigates and destroyers for anti pirate work and launching cruise missiles into syria or w/e shithole country
something like 5-10 destroyers and 10-15 frigates for northern and pacific fleets
5-10 frigates and some corvettes for black and baltic fleets keep like 20-25-30 subs and thats it

Money, which will come soon assuming nothing changes in Syria and Ukraine.

>inb4 what does that has to do with Russians funding their navy

basic geopolitics m8.

>>34941178
I laugh every time I see a vatnik post the image, its great.

File: 7e1.png (757KB, 706x608px) Image search: [Google]

757KB, 706x608px

>>34938116
> too claustrophobic and inhospitable even by Chinese standards

How could something that bad? Feral dogs roaming engineering? Showers electrocuting entire watches?

>>34938116

its more like the chinese needed extra space for the video games and junk food

>>34943184
For how little they care for human life, last I checked starvation and gang rape weren't major concerns in the Chinese military.

>>34936456
It's the Royal Navy that needs saving.

>>34943121
Why? It's just a random image some retard photoshopped to "illustrate" his click-bait blog post probably.

>>34939313

>Assmad non-Cuntry too poor to have a state of the art catapult

Lmaoing at your life

>>34943554

Only navies who are able to sail without getting rekt by merchants every month are allowed to post in this thread.

>>34943594
How about one that isn't btfo by warm water?

>>34938116

China actually has a long history of prioritising comfort in their dwellings.

>>34943614
wrong country.

>>34943632
Just don't go outside, the air tastes terrible.

>>34943653

In Beijing, and even then it feels no different to London or LA - although is chemically worse.

They do have the humidity working against them though.

>>34943681
LA and London are shit cities though.

>>34936456

Focus entirely on subs and missile frigates. They don't need anything else. People saying BUT DEY NEED DIS are forgetting that 90% of Russia is inaccessible by ocean and their primary reason to have a navy is defensive, meaning submarines and large frigates are better than any other ship.

They don't need destroyers either. There's literally nothing a destroyer does as a brown water vessel that a frigate cannot do nearly/equally as well for Russia and frigates aren't entirely helpless in a Syria style scenario where a destroyer is pointless and expensive to deliver the same sort of effect.

>>34943614
Was that because of an American part? damn, they can't do anything right.

>>34938626

I guess if Iran were ever to get uppity they can attempt a half assed amphibious landing on Iran's northern coast.

Scrap the entire russian navy until they learn how to manage ship force maintenance.

Until the russkies learn2maintenance their entire fleet is living on borrowed time until theyre back at drydock iron oxide generators.

>>34936456
That's a beautiful picture.

saved

First I'd stop the constant feud with the West for a bit in order to ease sanctions, diversify the economy so more money can be funneled into the navy and Russia's shipbuilding/naval schooling infrastructure. After that it's focus on submarines (both diesel and nuclear) missile cruisers and some amphibious assault ships.

Russia can use the amphibious assault ships as a practice platform to keep to eventually build a new class of Russian Carriers

>>34936487
>Rustoleum
Looks like they heard of it, but interpret it all wrong.

>>34944196
The only thing that would ease sanctions is a complete withdrawal from Crimea.

>>34944584
I guess the sanctions ain't coming off then. I definitely would not give up Crimea.

>>34943288
Because I see it posted by genuine vatniks and retards on /k/ all the time

>>34941174
Using GDP by PPP, it'd have a navy comparable to Indonesia, Brazil, or Germany.

>>34943700
They also need a major investment, or at least refocus, on land-based naval aviation in the Black, Caspian, and Baltic Seas.

>>34943594
We are testing shipping interdiction by suicide.

Next step, aircraft carriers!

File: carrierflagx.jpg (2MB, 2392x3229px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 2392x3229px

>>34944068
Here ya go. Freshly finished.

>>34936456
I wouldn't join the Russian military. I don't want to get raped.

>>34936456
all memes aside though kutzy isnt bad, shes just an old girl near the end of her life. she did well considering what happened to the others

>>34936456
Take it away from Russia

>>34943734
They were engines built for cold water use, the RN was just dumb enough to think it'd be a good idea to put in a destroyer that would likely see use in the Mediterranean and Middle East.

>>34946751
only 2 carrier without ramp. Is ramp the futur ?

>>34944584
you dont have a say in that

File: 239.jpg (75KB, 1024x526px) Image search: [Google]

75KB, 1024x526px

>>34946751
wew

File: zFP4xxf.jpg (202KB, 1920x1080px) Image search: [Google]

202KB, 1920x1080px

>>34936472
Ding Ding Ding

>>34939044
trouble is that there was a period of intense pro-Russian shilling during the election (largely Trump supporters from /pol/ trying to make Russia seem "based" with maybe a few vatniks from middle east general feeling more competent than usual) which led to huge amounts of garbage Russian propaganda being dumped on this board (Even including Ukraine denial as well as the large scale shilling of PAK-FA, Armata, and the Kuznetsov as well as anti-F-35 nonsense). They're mostly gone (or contained in /meg/) now but there's still a reflexive pushback against anything vaguely pro-Russian because nobody on this board wants the dark days of summer '16 back again

>>34936472
and replace it with what? It can't take a catapult because a) no Russian aircraft equipped to use one and b) the Kuz' deck was never designed to accommodate one (for example you'd have to remove the Granit missile tubes completely and reengineer most of the space below decks)

>>34949455
tell me that's edited
please, god

>>34949513
yeah it's edited. If you look at the top it was originally something to do with tsunamis

File: CVzyxfUWEAA8aeX.jpg (44KB, 600x412px) Image search: [Google]

44KB, 600x412px

>>34936456
Holy fuck is that thing burning coal?

>>34949530
Wave height for the Boxing Day Tsunami IIRC

>>34949530
>>34949541
thanks
y'know, I read the address at the top, but it's just too goddamn early to put simple stuff like that together

File: 1945.webm (1MB, 640x360px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 640x360px

>>34949495
As a Russian I feel an urgent need to shill for Russia. Isn't it kinda normal?

>>34946751

>on Thai Carrier
>look for well deck
>find another anchor

>>34939342
Best current strategy against the US.

>>34949632
Da, positive heroism means you'll be paid generously in rubles, komrade

>>34949632
source on webm?

Looks like a Chinese movie?

File: 1502320665531.gif (1MB, 205x223px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 205x223px

>>34949635

Criminally underrated post.

>>34949818
https://youtu.be/Ccn0hgi231Y?t=16m54s

>>34949868
Why is the skirt on the Russian female soldier so short?

>>34949887
Communism

File: soviet fan service.jpg (128KB, 483x640px) Image search: [Google]

128KB, 483x640px

>>34949889

wtf I love communism now.

>>34943681
Except in LA and London you can see for more than 300 feet. Even if the air there is utter fucking trash.

>>34949868
Good Movie btw.

File: 1159696-large.jpg (133KB, 1024x802px) Image search: [Google]

133KB, 1024x802px

I honestly wish the Cold War went on for one more year just so the Yak-141 could have entered service

>>34949455
250PPM?!
Sea Gulls in Indian Ocean will have diarrhea

>>34949530
>>34949541
I can't say for sure. Cuz PPM(parts per million) is indeed a concentration unit rather than some height unit.

>>34949868
damn, wet dream for a rice famer

>>34943632
The bunker exercise where they had to call in musicians and cheerleaders explains everything.

>>34936456
Invest everything in submarines, including AA submarines to deal with helicopters and aircraft; don't scrap the surface navy arbatrily, but phase out surface combatants and replace them with logistics vessels for the subs. Russia's surface navy, while well designed in terms of the actual vessels relative to when they were launched, is both ill-maintained and inefficient.

>>34938116
So white...

>>34946751
>the indian one is in an ocean of shit
dat authenticity

File: Yakovlev_Yak-43.png (13KB, 497x337px) Image search: [Google]

13KB, 497x337px

>>34950355
>We'll never see an arms race producing the Yak-43 and F-35 in the late 90s