Russia's navy is falling apart

CCIP · 08-25-15, 11:47 AM

I think it's overstating things a bit, particularly as far as dependence on Ukraine for heavy machinery (there is some truth to it, though). The real problem is the scope of the Russian government's ambitions, which is at odds with the resources they have and the infrastructural problems they face. Geography makes Russia's navy incredibly complicated to keep up by default. But truthfully, the numbers of big ships are not really a measure of effectiveness. Russia doesn't need ships like the Kuznetsov, for one. The recent announcement that they're looking to build direct replacement for the Kirovs is madness and for their own good, it better not actually happen. The order of Mistrals was a smart one, but then they had to go and mess up the politics.

In truth, things are not universally bad. The Northern Fleet's infrastructure has gradually improved and it seems like they're gradually getting submarines back to where they need to be. The Black Sea fleet, relatively speaking, is probably at its strongest ever - and in that sense, the annexation of Crimea has only helped. In the Pacific, I think Russia resigned to not having to be a player for the moment. They do have a few things to work out in the Baltic though. Otherwise, it's not a big change from Soviet times. Russia never had an effective blue water navy, and this remains true today. All their attempts to correct it have been expensive and incredibly flawed.

What Russia needs is a reality check. They need to stop trying to play the role of empire and temper their military ambitions to their actual resources. Then they would be doing more than fine. But it would also be foolish for anyone to assume that the Russian navy has no bite left.

08-25-15, 11:47 AM	#3
CCIP Navy Seal Join Date: Apr 2005 Location: Waterloo, Canada Posts: 8,700 Downloads: 29 Uploads: 2	I think it's overstating things a bit, particularly as far as dependence on Ukraine for heavy machinery (there is some truth to it, though). The real problem is the scope of the Russian government's ambitions, which is at odds with the resources they have and the infrastructural problems they face. Geography makes Russia's navy incredibly complicated to keep up by default. But truthfully, the numbers of big ships are not really a measure of effectiveness. Russia doesn't need ships like the Kuznetsov, for one. The recent announcement that they're looking to build direct replacement for the Kirovs is madness and for their own good, it better not actually happen. The order of Mistrals was a smart one, but then they had to go and mess up the politics. In truth, things are not universally bad. The Northern Fleet's infrastructure has gradually improved and it seems like they're gradually getting submarines back to where they need to be. The Black Sea fleet, relatively speaking, is probably at its strongest ever - and in that sense, the annexation of Crimea has only helped. In the Pacific, I think Russia resigned to not having to be a player for the moment. They do have a few things to work out in the Baltic though. Otherwise, it's not a big change from Soviet times. Russia never had an effective blue water navy, and this remains true today. All their attempts to correct it have been expensive and incredibly flawed. What Russia needs is a reality check. They need to stop trying to play the role of empire and temper their military ambitions to their actual resources. Then they would be doing more than fine. But it would also be foolish for anyone to assume that the Russian navy has no bite left. __________________ There are only forty people in the world and five of them are hamburgers. -Don Van Vliet (aka Captain Beefheart)