The Admiral Kuznetsov
Posted on 08/22/2007 8:23:04 AM PDT by sukhoi-30mki
Challenges ahead in Russia's bid to become a naval power
22 August 2007
Michael Richardson
RUSSIA's naval chief recently said his fleet would get six new aircraft carriers with nuclear propulsion in the next 20 years as part of a major expansion and modernisation of Russian maritime power. Admiral Vladimir Masorin added that three of these carriers and their naval escorts would be assigned to Russia's Pacific fleet while the remainder would serve with the northern fleet in European waters. While some analysts dismiss such talk of rebuilding a Soviet-type force with global reach as nationalistic bluster ahead of parliamentary elections in Russia later this year and a presidential poll in 2008, Russia's plans for a stronger navy appear serious.
In the latest flexing of Russia's resurgent military muscle, President Vladimir Putin said on Friday that the Russian air force would resume regular, long-range patrols by nuclear-capable bombers over the world's oceans, including the Pacific, after a 15-year hiatus.
Russia's naval modernisation program will have repercussions in Asia, not least in China where debate in high-level political and military circles over whether to go for aircraft carriers the most visible and impressive form of maritime power projection has been under way for some years. India, which has history of tension with China over Pakistan and other issues, is building a increasingly advanced naval force of surface combat ships, submarines and associated weapons, just as China is doing. But India already operates a small aircraft carrier and plans to have at least two carriers in service in the next few years.
So the Russian move in this direction could help tip China towards carrier operations, despite the very high costs involved. It would also confirm US and Japanese concerns that China's military ambitions reach well beyond the recovery of Taiwan, by force if necessary. Other East Asian countries are inclined to give China the benefit of the doubt, at least publicly, over the stated purpose of its naval build-up. With carriers joining the Chinese navy, they too would also have to recognise that China was acquiring the capability to enforce territorial and other disputes with Asian neighbours as well as protect its increasingly far-flung interests around the globe.
As the Chinese economy has grown to be one of the biggest in the world, dependence on secure access to markets and natural resources, particularly metals and fossil fuels which are in short supply in China, has become a key driver of the country's strategic planning. At present, China can neither protect its foreign energy supplies nor the sea routes on which they travel, including the Malacca and Singapore straits in South-East Asia through which at least 75 per cent of Chinese crude oil imports transit in giant tankers from the Middle East and Africa.
Similar arguments to justify aircraft carrier operations are advanced by the proponents of sea power in Russia and India, as they have been in the US, France and Britain. For example, Masorin called last week for Russia to establish a permanent naval presence in the Mediterranean to protect its strategic interests in the area. He had earlier announced Russia was building new bases in its Far East territory for surface ships and missile-armed submarines.
Russia's oil and gas exports, now fetching record prices, are financing its military modernisation, along with arms sales to China, India and other buyers, many of them in Asia. Russia is estimated to be earning more than $US1billion ($A1.25billion) every two days from its energy exports. The bulk of this money goes to the state budget and accounts for more than 60 per cent of revenue.
Mr Putin, who comes from a naval family, appointed Masorin two years ago with instructions to revive the navy, badly neglected since the collapse of the Soviet Union in 2001. The Russian Government recently approved a re-armament program to 2015. Of the $240billion allocated for the project, 25 per cent will go into building new ships.
Russia already builds some advanced submarines and surface combatants. Last year, it laid the keel for a new class of frigate intended for long-range operations.
However, Russia faces a huge task if it is to implement the plans outlined by Masorin. Its navy has about 300 surface ships, but most are ageing vessels designed to operate close to shore. It currently has no shipyard big enough to build the aircraft carriers that are planned. By contrast, the US has about 280 ships in its navy. But their advanced technology, size, range and lethality make America the world's leading maritime power.
The problems facing Russian naval builders were underlined recently with the announcement of a three-year delay in construction of a $1.9billion aircraft carrier for India. Indeed the naval expansion ambitions of both India and China depend to a significant degree on the success of Russia's military modernisation. The two emerging Asian giants rely on Russian weapons and technology in key sectors of their navies.
Chinese naval engineers first started their hands-on study of an aircraft carrier in 1985, when China bought the obsolete Australian navy carrier, HMAS Melbourne. However, if China decides to develop a carrier for training and eventual operation, it may use the Varyag, a Kuznetsov-class Soviet carrier that was only 70per cent complete when the Soviet Union broke up. It was bought by a Macao company in 1998 and is now in the Chinese port of Dalian. China would need help from Russia to bring the Varyag into service and provide deck-based fighters such as the Su-33 Flanker. Just getting the Varyag, or some other carrier design, to sea as an operational warship could cost at least several billion dollars and take until until 2015 or longer.
Although the Russian plan for a new class of six carriers sounds impressive, they would probably be smaller than the 12 aircraft carriers in service with the US navy today. Most are nuclear-powered Nimitz-class vessels.
Each is over 332m long and carries 85 aircraft. They are the largest warships in the world, displacing 82,000t with a full load.
Their replacements, the CVN-21 class of carrier, will be even bigger when the first of them enters the US navy in seven or eight years.
It is a reminder that while China, India and Russia are each building naval capacity, they have a giant gap to close if they ever hope to match the US in carrier power projection.
Michael Richardson is a former Asia editor of the International Herald Tribune, and a security specialist at the Institute of South-East Asian Studies in Singapore.
The Admiral Kuznetsov
http://www.geocities.com/capitolhill/lobby/3020/jones.html
John Paul Jones in Russia!
In 1788, Russian Empress Catherine II (The Great) appointed him rear admiral in the Russian navy. He took a leading part in the Black Sea campaign against the Ottoman Turks.
Our new CVN-21 carriers will be two generations ahead of this hulk.
Okay, that explains it.
I wondered why Vlad was kicking off the arms show in India...
He is simply racheting up tensions in the world with the er...bear patrols for the express purpose of selling arms.
I’m glad that the Russians aren’t embarking on a commensurate buildup of submarine forces. That would be a REAL cause for concern.
Guns, tanks, gunboats and even a couple of old fighter jets are not difficult for a nation to obtain and maintain. Even the Taliban had a couple of jets. Major warships such as modern cruisers, carriers, submarines and other support vessels are tremendous capital investments that can only be afforded by nations with strong economies (that generate the real revenue to build and maintain such ships). Throughout history, the size of the fleet has directly correlated to the political, economic and military strength of a nation.
By building up the fleet, Russia is trying to state to the world, in no uncertain terms, that she is belongs among the elite.
we really need to get the world off the dependence on oil.
Russia does, in fact, belong among the elite. Alas, not the military elite - rather, the elite of the world’s economic basket cases. In that category, Russia holds a position right up there at the top of the list with Somalia, Ethiopia, Burma, Congo, and Zimbabwe. I, personally, would maintain that if Russia’s leaders really wish to establish their nation as an economic powerhouse, they would be well served to take a page from the playbook of a nation which manages its funds with greater acumen - such as Ecuador, or even Mexico.
Yes because the submarines are starting to clutter the bottom of the sea...
The Russians view the Chineses as lowly paid slaves who will work very hard for the little money they can get and the russians has an inbred sense of superiority over the chinese.
Meanwhile the Chinese view the Russians as pure thugs, gangsters and lazy drunk bastards with a few good weapon designers & engineers sprinkled in for good measure. Overall the Chinese view the Russians as a country of people that would rather steal than work for their money.
I have several Russian clients and one of them pointed told me that they do not wish to have anything with other russians since they are very very corrupt & evil people. I do not share information among them.
ping
Very good. I do not view China and Russia as direct threats (just annoyances) because they do not posses the type of engines (economies) necessary to compete with the West. The policy decisions being made by Moscow and Beijing indicate that they will not build the type of economic engine that would enable them to build a military machine capable of challenging NATO without starving their own people.
Post or FReepmail me if you wish to be enlisted in or discharged from the Navair Pinglist.
This is a medium volume pinglist.
“Our new CVN-21 carriers will be two generations ahead of this hulk.”
Our CV-21’s are basically an evolution of the Nimitz class, mainly to save costs. We’re not as far ahead as you think.
I worked for the Navy a few years ago, and have some familiarity with many of the new features of the CVN-21 class. One big change will be the new electromagnetic launch (as opposed to the bulky steam catapult system) system. Also, there are upgrades to the recovery system, and much of the electronics and communications. I understand that there are improvements in other areas that I was not privy to as well.
The old Soviet carriers were not equal to our Nimitz class in any event.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.