Military Porn...

 ... from Rosoboronexport. 

Is this the best combat helicopter in the world? Yes.
 

What Makes A Navy?

One may ask, and the proper answer will be: people--first, and then--ships. Both are crucial but here is a funny thing, which many still cannot wrap their brains around. Especially true for West's media "experts" whose tactical-operational and technological horizon is limited to iPhones and Clanciesque meaningless cliches. Here is an example from CNN:

It’s a growing problem that has United States naval commanders scratching their heads: How to keep up with China’s ever-expanding fleet of warships. Not only is China’s navy already the world’s largest, its numerical lead over the US is getting wider, with the head of the US Navy warning recently that American shipyards simply can’t keep up. Some experts estimate China can build three warships in the time it takes the US to build one. It is just one of the concerns, alongside Beijing’s increasing aggression in the South China Sea and around Taiwan, that’s likely to be weighing on the mind of US Defense Secretary Lloyd Austin as he joins top military figures from across the region at this weekend’s Shangri-La Dialogue in Singapore. The chance of a breakthrough on any of those issues this weekend appears slim, not least because China has pointedly rejected a US proposal for Austin to meet his Chinese counterpart Li Shangfu at the forum. But experts who spoke to CNN before the summit say a potential solution to one of them – the Chinese fleet’s numerical advantage – is within reach, if the US is prepared to think outside the box. Washington, they say, has something Beijing doesn’t: Allies in South Korea and Japan who are building some of the highest spec – and affordable – naval hardware on the oceans. Buying ships from these countries, or even building US-designed vessels in their shipyards, could be a cost-effective way of closing the gap with China, they say. Their warships are “certainly a match for their (Chinese) counterparts,” says Blake Herzinger, a research fellow at the United States Studies Center in Australia, while Japan’s warship designers “are among the world’s best,” says Carl Schuster, a former director of operations at the US Pacific Command’s Joint Intelligence Center in Hawaii. 

The tone of the piece reeks of desperation and of... a complete detachment from the realities of naval warfare of 2020s. The US is impressed by PLAN's, indeed impressive, Type 055 DDG.  

These are elegant warships which pack a massive punch in terms of land-attack salvo or... anti-shipping missiles. With 13,000 ton full displacement these are really cruisers rather than destroyers, albeit today this distinction is notional. They carry a whopping 112 VLS cells and are equipped with HHQ-9 AD system which is a navalized fusion of Russia's S-300 and Western technology. Plus, and here is an important distinction, it carries YJ-18 anti-shipping missile (a Chinese knockoff of Russia's 3M54 Kalibr) and, allegedly, hypersonic ballistic anti-shipping missiles YJ-21. We will omit here discussing YJ-21 issue because there is precious little about its actual capabilities, if one discounts some short video of its test. 

But in any case, these ships DO carry a shitload of anti-shipping missiles and that is what matters in the end. And here is the point. CNN appeals to... South Korean "match" called Sejong the Great:

But some Western analysts say the Type 055 may have a peer in South Korea’s Sejong the Great-class destroyers. At 10,000 to 12,000 tons displacement, the Sejongs are slightly smaller than China’s Type 055s, but they have more firepower, with 128 VLS cells and weapons that include surface-to-air, anti-submarine and cruise missiles. The three Sejongs, which cost about $925 million each, are the pride of the South Korean fleet. “With this one ship, (the South Korean Navy) can cope with multiple simultaneous situations – anti-aircraft, anti-ship, anti-submarine, anti-surface – and defend from ballistic missiles,” the country’s Defense Media Agency says. Retired South Korean Adm. Duk-ki Kim, the first person to captain a Sejong, says it’s more than a match for China’s Type 055. “China is focusing on quantity and price competitiveness rather than the quality of its vessels,” Kim, now vice president of the Korea Association of Military Studies, told CNN. 

Didn't we hear this before (highlighted in yellow)? Let's take a look at Sejong the Great. Oh, boy!

Then we take a look at this "match" to PLAN's Type 055 specs and lo and behold! It is the same as it looks because it is yet another iteration of nearing obsolescence venerable (all flights) US Navy's Arleigh Burke-class DDGs. Same good ol' Aegis, same good ol' AN/SPY-1D and same... 16 subsonic anti-shipping missiles SSM-700K which are iterations of subsonic anti-shipping Harpoons and other analogues in NATO which are outpaced and outranged by any modern anti-shipping missile in Russian or Chinese arsenals. 

While naval warfare is a very complex matter and involves much more than SuWa (Surface Warfare) it is precisely in this crucial field where Sejong the Great is not just NOT the "match" to PLAN's Type 055, but not even in the same league because same as vaunted  Patriot PAC3 which performed dismally in 404, Aegis ships can only perform defense against slow flying (subsonic) targets and maybe, just maybe, against easy tactical-operational ballistic one. Against salvos of supersonic anti-shipping missiles, not to speak of hypersonic ones--they are useless. In this case of a missile exchange between Type 055 and Sejong the Great, the latter wouldn't even know what hit it, because Type 055 enjoys here an overwhelming advantage, especially with good over-the-horizon targeting. 

Some admirals in the West (and Asia) are easily impressed by platforms--big, imposing, nice looking. Nothing wrong with the aesthetic part of it, I am the same way myself--I love beautiful ships. But the term "platform" should be engraved into the minds of real warriors--platforms are called such because, in the end of the day, for all other supremely important issues, such as propulsion, signal processing, ECM et al, the reason platforms exist is to carry weapons. And in terms of strike weapons South Korean "match" is not even in the same league as Type 055. As is the whole Western naval weapons' arsenal, with NATO and its Asian allies falling behind in modern strike weapons behind Russia and China not by years, but generations. 

In the end, even this corvette packs so much striking power that it is even not necessary to compare. 

It is four times smaller than Sejong the Great, yet it still has better air defense than Aegis and it can launch 8 Zircons in a salvo. So, when speaking about "matches" it is only natural for claimants to offer serious counter-arguments and not some amateurish BS and platform-centric military porn. Or, as they say among serious people: either put up or shut up.

A Little Bit Of MIlitary Porn.

Nothing is wrong with showing some moderate amounts of military porn. SMO is on track. The conclusion with 3M14 Kalibr launches--this is how salvo looks like. 

Well, dealing with VSU DRG is also well represented. Some news of hospitals in Kharkov being overwhelmed with 200s and 300s, including very many foreign "volunteers".

Military Porn For a Weekend.

 No comments: 

Mighty Ducks.

Peter The Great In All Its (His) Glory. Military Porn Post.

Some videos are just worth posting, albeit my heart-racing moment are good ol' Pr. 1124 ASW ships doing their thing. 

Admiral Nakhimov with Zircons and Kalibrs is next. Then Peter the Great goes for the same refit. These are the last mastodons of "visual" navies, granted that even Peter the Great without upgrade can launch enough to sink anything out there. 

P.S. FYI. Deputy Commander of Northern Fleet Vice-Admiral Oleg Golubev, he graduated a year after me from the same naval academy. Their class was famous for Zaitsev and Kaderli, but I am not sure even Mel Brooks would be up to a task of shooting a comedy about that event. I may tell the story at some point of time))) 

Following The Trends.

Associated Press reports: 

MOSCOW (AP) — A revised version of Russia's national security strategy says that it may use forceful methods to respond to unfriendly actions by foreign countries, a top Kremlin official said in remarks published Monday, Nikolai Patrushev, the secretary of the presidential Security Council, said that the document foresees that Moscow could take “symmetric and asymmetric measures to thwart or avert unfriendly actions that threaten the sovereignty and territorial integrity of the Russian Federation.” In an interview published Monday by the government daily Rossiyskaya Gazeta that those “primarily will be special economic measures, but also coercive forceful methods if necessary."

I understand that it may come as a surprise to many West's journos, but national security of any country has a massive military (that is forceful or violent) element to it. After all, let's recall how the United States under the pretext of "national security" did this. Remember?

Russia has resources and will to use them if she deems threats to national security worthy of application of violent means. Nothing new in that at all, but emphasis on this issue is incredibly important. 

Будущее России помимо материального благополучия ее граждан зависит и от того, как нам удастся сохранить духовность и нравственность, традиции, передать молодому поколению память о героическом прошлом их предков. Для нейтрализации угроз, связанных с искажением истории, с разрушением базовых морально-этических норм, с попытками внедрения чуждых идеалов и ценностей в области образования, культуры, религии, в Стратегии сформулирован новый стратегический национальный приоритет "Защита традиционных российских духовно-нравственных ценностей, культуры и исторической памяти".

Translation:  The future of Russia, in addition to the material well-being of its citizens, also depends on how we manage to preserve spirituality and morality, traditions, and pass on to the young generation the memory of the heroic past of their ancestors. To neutralize the threats associated with the distortion of history, with the destruction of basic moral and ethical norms, with attempts to introduce alien ideals and values ​​in the field of education, culture, religion, the Strategy formulates a new strategic national priority "Protection of traditional Russian spiritual and moral values, culture and historical memory ".  

As the strategic truism goes--want the enemy to surrender its country, bring up its youth. Here is Brittany, speaks about this issue. 

And here is a counterpoint. Russia held few days ago a celebration of the 5th Anniversary of creation of Russia's Yunarmy (Youth Army) which grew today to an paramilitary organization numbering 810,000 kids and continues to grow. Here is Sergei Shoigu addressing kids of Yunarmy few days ago at the celebratory event called High Five and I can tell you one thing--these kids already know how to shoot, how to handle weapons, some, actually, already jump with parachute and are closely acquainted with military organization. 

For these kids, from the early age, service and military routine are normal part of their upbringing from 8 years of age. It is more than just about weapons, topography, battlefield first aid and things of this purely military nature--it is about certain moral and spiritual imperatives much of which go back in history to the Great Patriotic War. That means the sacrifice for the country, for friends, for loved ones, in a larger scheme of things. This is national security at its most fundamental level. Here, the combined West has nothing to offer to be even counted as a competitor, unless it is a degenerate woke pseudo-culture or critical race theory. Good luck with trying to promote this BS in Russia. 

In related news, Russia marked the 288th anniversary of the Northern Fleet and watching modern Russian military programming I cannot but finally admit to myself--boy, Russia finally learned how to make a really effective military porn. 

That, in itself, is also a major pillar of national security. It is another indicator of Russia's political elite being able to recognize global trends and react to them. As Pepe Escobar notes today:

The Western spin before Putin-Biden is that it might herald some sort of reset back to “predictability” and “stability” in currently extra-turbulent US-Russia relations. That’s wishful thinking. Putin, Patrushev and Lavrov harbor no illusions. Especially when in the G7 in London, in early May, the Western focus was on Russia’s “malign activities” as well as China’s “coercive economic policies.” Russian and Chinese analysts, in informal conversations, tend to agree that Geneva will be yet another instance of good old Kissingerian divide and rule, complete with a few seducing tactics to lure Moscow away from Beijing, an attempt to bide some time and probing openings for laying out geopolitical traps. Old foxes such as Yang and Patrushev are more than aware of the game in play. What’s particularly relevant is that Yang-Patrushev laid the groundwork for an upcoming Putin visit to Xi in Beijing not long after Putin-Biden in Geneva – to further coordinate geopolitically, once again, the “comprehensive strategic partnership”, in their mutually recognized terminology. The visit might take place on July 1, the hundredth anniversary of the Chinese Communist Party – or on July 16, the 20^thanniversary of the China-Russia Treaty of Friendship. So Putin-Biden is the starter; Putin-Xi is the main course.

So, when Karine Jean-Pierre states that the summit is not a US gift to Russia and that the summit will go on despite Russian (of course, Russian) hackers' now, allegedly, taking some meat packing plant in the US, one has to remind her that it is exactly the other way around. Russians were literally stalked by the US in order to agree to this summit, but, hey, whatever tickles one's ego. Do not expect any significant results from this upcoming summit other than spin in the US media. As long as the hot war could be avoided--good. Russia has a lot of business with China, the relations with who are becoming openly allied. The US is not a part of this arrangement. It cannot be.