From:
http://nvo.ng.ru/realty/2009-07-03/1_vmf.html?mthree=1
Sorry if some words or phrazes are not making sence but is google translated.
Russian Navy ships in overseas
OPK is not able to provide the military fleet
During the opening ceremony of the Fourth International Naval Salon IMDS-2009 in St. Petersburg on 24 June this year head Russian Navy Admiral Vladimir Vysotsky made some very noteworthy statements. «Our position is - no matter how developed the country's economic developments, we intend to increase significantly the composition of our fleet - he said. - I think pointless to invest billions in repairing old ships, which prosluzhat of the force 10 years ». «New ships should be built with the expectation of at least 40-50 years», - has added head.
At the same time, Admiral Vysotsky said that does not preclude the procurement of warships abroad. Apparently, this phrase should be the key.
Let's look at the current state of the Russian fleet. Exclude those PKK CH, which are better seen when discussing the problems of the Strategic Nuclear Forces.
To date, Russian Navy includes (subject to the deviations of 1-2 units of the continuing write-off ships), 29 Plan, 19 diesel submarines, 1 aircraft carrier, 6 cruisers, 8 destroyers, 11 large and 29 small antisubmarine ships, 7 patrol boats, 15 small missile ships, 28 missile boats, 36 trawler, 21 amphibious ship.
Given that this is - of all four fleets and the fleet scattered in 5 isolated theater is very small. However, the situation is even worse because of the atomic number 15 and 3 diesel submarines, 2 cruisers, 3 destroyers, 3 BOD, 14 IPC, 2 MRK, 6 missile boats, 9 and 9 trawler landing ships are under repair or conservation. Because the repair of our Navy ships returned to the system is extremely rare. More often it goes to Cutting. What has been quoted above, and confirmed the head Visotsky. So really, we have 14 multi-Plan, 16 diesel submarines, 1 aircraft carrier, 4 cruisers, 5 destroyers, 8 BOD, 15 IPC, 7 patrol boats, 13 MDR, 22 missile boats, minesweeper 27, 12 landing ships.
If we consider the situation of individual fleets, it is absolutely terrible. This is especially true Tofail, which potentially resists tofu United States and powerful fleets of Japan and China, and in case of war because of the geographical environment has almost no ability to grow at the expense of other fleets. Today, on the Pacific Ocean in our structure, Plan 7, 7 P, 1 cruiser, 1 destroyer, 4 BOD, 5 IPC, 3 MRK, 7 missile boats, 8 minesweeper, 4 landing ship (these forces are divided on the seaside and the Kamchatka flotilla, between the main bases are 2,5 thousand km). At least part of the surface Tofail and Americans, and Japanese, and Chinese are simply neglected. However, and once the giant Northern Fleet today is in line 9 Plan, 6 P, 1 aircraft carrier, 2 cruisers, 2 destroyers, 3 BOD, IPC and MRC, 2 and 7 trawler landing ship. In general, it is not even pulling on the flotilla.
And those remaining ships off quickly, because only about three dozen ships and boats became operational in 90 years (almost all of them were completed and put back in the Soviet period), but in an era of «reviving bygone relics of the Armed Forces», that is, since the early 2000's, the Navy received only 4 new units. Everything else was built back in the USSR and now has developed its own resource.
The current shipbuilding program is that it can without exaggeration be non-existent. We will not now discuss the situation with «Bor» without «maces». Perhaps this story will one day be called the «scam century», but I have already said too much. In addition, it is better to discuss in relation to the Strategic Nuclear Forces.
Today, our fleet can expect to receive in the foreseeable future Plan 1 pr 885 «Severodvinsk», 3 submarines Ave 677 «St. Petersburg», 1 patrol boat (frigate) ave 20350 «Admiral Gorshkov», 3 corvette (corvette) Ave 20380 (parent ship «Stereguschy» entered into the BB last year). These are the ships, which are either under construction or being tested (the latter, however, applies only to the parent submarine Ave 677).
«Severodvinsk» is located on the shipyard since 1993 (!) Years. Perhaps this year, he eventually comes to water. Promised even tab the second Plan of this type. «St. Petersburg» was founded in 1997, was built 10 years 2 years could not get out of the stage of testing because, apparently, serious technical problems. «Stereguschy» built (from a bookmark to enter in order) 7 years. The following ships of this series, even on official statements of naval leadership will join the Navy earlier than 2011. And if «Severodvinsk» - the ship is indeed difficult (although 16 years on the stocks - it is prohibitive in any case), the smaller ships classes «St. Petersburg» and «Stereguschego», do something, you need «cuff» few pieces in a year otherwise they build just does not make sense. If a large-scale terrorist operations by the army just does not give the expected results, as well as in the case of only law enforcement agencies, each based on 6-7 years, then ...
In general, if you compare all the figures - the state of the fleet, the ratio of the rate of cancellation of the existing ships and building new ones, it becomes quite clear: Russian Navy is in a state of irreversible collapse. In 10 years there will be less than 50 units (on a boat to the cruiser), which is unacceptably low, even for a «small fleet» Type BF and ChB. The current disaster is comparable only to what happened to the fleet during the Civil War and its subsequent collapse. Even during the oil and gas boom in 2000's Navy actually did not receive anything, now, during the period of severe crisis, no doubt - the fleet will die in the coming years. This is not an assumption, it is a fact. We are not at the edge of the abyss, we fall into it, and the bottom is already near.
The command of the fleet, apparently aware that the situation is hopeless. And trying to find a solution. Of course, now laid to erect a statement that in the coming years the situation will be even better (although like so much better to nowhere). But the reality of this does not change. Hence the idea of the purchase of ships abroad.
If the ships purchased abroad, which means that the money they have (especially considering the fact that foreign ships obviously more expensive home). Consequently, our military is not able to provide its own fleet of ships or on the quantity nor the quality, the case is not about money. The point is that the MIC irretrievably lost technology and personnel.
In addition, it is understandable that you can only acquire the ships in the West. Alternatives simply do not (even China and India are still buying boats from us). Thus, we find it in the full political and technological dependency. An interesting result of the multi-year anti-Western hysteria and tales about how «Russia faces with tribes».
In this regard, we should mention about the history with the acquisition of Israeli bespilotnikov. Tel Aviv vparil we frank old. But this is Israel, a country that occupies a special position on a number of issues of world politics. This is the only Western country, is always fully supports the actions of Russia in Chechnya. Less is known that during the NATO aggression against Yugoslavia in 1999, Israel was clearly on the side of Belgrade. After last year's events in South Ossetia, Tel-Aviv closed military-technical cooperation with Georgia. Nevertheless, modern weapons, he has shared with us. What is expected from countries - members of NATO? Moreover, if Moscow continues to come in antinatovskoy hysteria. And if so requested by «enemy» sell its latest weapons. But, perhaps, and they have some old sell. Not forgetting, of course, put his e «favorite», precluding the use of ships against them.
Actually, the words Chief Vysotsky - this sentence the whole policy of recent years. Economic, foreign, military. And, consequently, those who carried out this policy into practice.
My only comment is about Vysotsky's phraze that "istead of modernizing older units is better to construct new." Well, if Vysotsky believes that Steregushyy corvettes could effectively replace cruisers and destroyers he should be fired from his post immidiately.
![[linked image]](http://graphics8.nytimes.com/images/2008/11/06/world/06russia01-600.jpg)
