Via Rio Novosti...
Mistral-class helicopter carriers, which Russia plans to buy from France, will be armed with Russian Ka-52 Alligator helicopters, Air Force Commander Colonel General Alexander Zelin told the Ekho Moskvy FM station on Saturday.and...
The Russian military has said it plans to use Mistral ships in its Northern and Pacific fleets.Read the whole thing here. One thing is certain, Georgia and the other small European countries near the sea should be concerned.
Many Russian military and industry experts have questioned the financial and military sense of the purchase, and some believe that Russia simply wants to gain access to advanced naval technology that could be used in the future in potential conflicts with NATO and its allies.
In April, the head of the Federal Service for Military and Technical Cooperation, Mikhail Dmitriev, said the Mistral deal would be concluded by the end of the year.
If Gates et all still wonder about the use of a marine corps, he should wonder why Russia is trying to copy it.
ReplyDeleteBut the fact of the matter is of course that Russia wants the know-how of building ships, period. The old Soviet Red Banner Fleet consisted of ships build according to Communist ideology, which resulted in abysmal crew comfort (no onboard water purification for drinking water, but fire hazard officer-only sauna's instead) single purpose, use and discard strike platforms.
Useless in the modern era.
I am concerned that NATO naval survivability (battle damage) engineering will be compromised.
We're not at war with Russia, as the French keep saying, but it still makes me nervous.
And after these sales, what's next...?
Sorry, this is actually non related to this subject but I was wondering if you guys heard anything in the States about a secret deal that's been discussed between the US and Romanina government about the purchase of two used Los Angeles class attack submarines. The info came via a Romanian military blog http://resboiu.wordpress.com, where the topic stated that recently the Romanians argued that these ships could be used against a Russian Mistral in case of deployment in the Black Sea. The ideea seems to be old news but the topic resurfaced when the details of the missile shield were discussed. As I said, this could be just another web rumour.
ReplyDeleteThe chance that the US would sell a 688 SSN abroad are somewhere between zero and not much I'm afraid. Selling nuclear (propulsion) tech is a big, Big, BIG no-no across the Atlantic.
ReplyDeleteAnd Israel and Taiwan would've been first in line at that.
Nice try, but no way.
I think Romania has a better chance buying subs from France, Italy or Germany; an AIP sub would be much more effective in the Med and Black Sea than a nuclear one.
Well, this seemed rather unreasonable for me too. Zero chances, at best :-). Apparently, when they first heard about the request, the american side was so stunned that they could not provide an answer. The Romanian side wanted to make part of this deal the current Kilo in our navy for study purposes. As I said, it's just a rumour but I was wonder not about the succes of such of proposal but for its existance.
ReplyDeletewell lets be real about a couple of things here.
ReplyDeleteRomania is turning into one of our more important allies in Europe.
much like the Netherlands, they're punching way above their weight in terms of military power and i personally like the innovation i'm seeing there.
but just from looking at it from a Romanian perspective, i just don't see it happening because they've been so practical about their defense buys. modernized tanks instead of buying a handful of new ones that wouldn't get used...upgraded helicopters that perform quite well...you get the picture.
i think the people that would actually kill such a deal probably are in the Romanian Defense Dept and not in the US.
Marcase. It's probably a neuanced issue. Consider that the Russians have always been capable warship builders. Speaking for myself, having served in the artic as an infantry team leader, I know the amazing amount of comfort and basic resources a solider can sacrifice without having any real impact on well beeing and combat prowess.
ReplyDeleteSol. On my fav issue of the F-35, if you haven't already, check out: http://www.f-16.net/f-16_forum_viewtopic-t-14430.html
B. Bolsøy
Oslo
Hello,
ReplyDeleteRomania side wants to give "Delfinul" submarine from Kilo class in exchange of one (some sources/rummors says 2) second hand nuclear attack submarine from USA, and to pay some money.
At the begining, when one of the ex-defence secretary announced that, he did not specify if american submarine will be Sturgeon or Los Angeles class.
Indeed, on my blog someone said quoting his source from Romanian MoD that it is Los Angeles, and from time to time we ask again about this deal.
Maybe our leaders want to scarry russians and theyr future Mistral ships of the Black Sea Fleet.
Anyway, i want at least one Andrasta. Maybe 3. :)
hey resboiu!
ReplyDeletei'm surprised by your Ministry of Defense wanting a Los Angeles class.
they would be very expensive to operate and their effectiveness in the confined water would be "problematic".... now as far as the Andrasta is concerned that would be perfect and would scare the Russians like nothing else.
thanks for stopping by.
@Solomon
ReplyDeletesecond hand nuclear attack submarine from USA in Black sea with inexperienced Romanians inside would "scare the Russians like nothing"??!?
You are delusional buddy!
thanks for making me laugh !
no Anonymous, you're delusional.
ReplyDeletethe US and Romanian military are working together like almost no other in Europe. additionally the Romanians have been reaching out to the Israeli's and the British SAS/SBS.
if you're not up to speed on current events (which you aren't) then all this would have slipped your notice.
lastly if the Romanians were to acquire subs from the US then you can bet that they would be highly trained and as far as the subs being second hand, what of it? many nations including the US are modernizing ships, planes and tanks that would have been discarded in the past.
thanks for stopping by Anonymous but you know nothing.
Well, the German Navy wants to sell some U209s, they'd be cheaper and even more adapted to operations in shallow waters.
ReplyDeleteRegarding the Mistral deal: Do you really thought the Russians wouldn't put attack helicopters on their ships? Also, didn't the French say that they won't deliver the ship with weapons and command and communications equipment? As for the Baltics, the Russian Navy, even with a Mistral, would find it extremely difficult to face off the combined NATO/EU naval and air forces. They'd rather invest their money in new submarines and corvettes, if they'd be really interested in dominating the Baltic Sea.
well NATO didn't step in to help Georgia during the last crisis. NATO is more political than a military entity.
ReplyDeleteexcept for old Europe, its practically useless for the new members.
as far as them arming the Mistral, oh yes, I always believed they would put attack helicopters on them, but the KA-52 is arguably the most advanced of its type flying today. its a provocation. the Russians know it and so do we. this announcement was unnecessary.
lastly the Russians have said that they want the advanced electronics that come with the Mistral included in the package. that's why i'm so against the sale. if it was plain vanilla ship then cool, but giving them the keys to the advanced comms and such means that the Chinese will eventually get it too. Domino effect and all.
Personally, I think it's just a rumor and i don't put much stock in it. However, recently and more precisely after the incidents between Turkey and Israel, there has been an increase in the cooperation between Romania and Israel, including the common exercise during which a CH-53 helo was lost killing all passengers. There are voices who say that these purchases, including the postponed aquisition of US F-16's are meant to strenghten Romania in view of a possible war with Iran waged by the US-Israeli alliance. This is actually an official statement made by our president.
ReplyDelete"well NATO didn't step in to help Georgia during the last crisis. NATO is more political than a military entity"
ReplyDeleteRead your own comment again please.
Since when NATO is " more political than a military entity"?!?
Really nonsense!
Why should NATO step in on the side of Georgia when Georgia is not a NATO nation
ReplyDeletewhen a so-called military entity has more headquarters troops than combat then its a political entity.
ReplyDeletewhen its first combat deployment is a failure then its more political than military.
when member nations are incapable of deploying its forces to fight a primitive opponent then its more political than military.
get real Anonymous, you're sounding like a think tanker...you like the idea of NATO so much that you can't see its warts.