What Is Russia's Navy Doing? Can They Help Defeat Ukraine? 

Eating microwave meals every day is a depressing thought And washing dishes takes literally seconds. Not really worth the plastic waste

Sorry but the Z being poured over the chicken was interfering with my tinfoil hat .its a metaphor the poor bastards.

@@hayleyxyzthis is what you wanted to talk about? 😅

You do realize buyan m class can use the Russian cannal system? Russians have changed their strategy, that's why there is no new large surface ships.

I pointed that out to some Vatniks. They didn’t get it. Amazingly obtuse bunch.

So excusing that one, how many do they have left in the fleet in the Black Sea?

​@jackthorton10 I believe HI Sutton claimed 5, whereas this video claims 6. By HI Suttons numbers 4 are the Improved Kilo class capable of Kaliber launches while one was a test best old kilo called the alrosa used to test pump jet propulsors. She is likely not in use and can't fire kalbir So after the loss of 1 that leaves 3.

Yeeeaaaa....when you "improved"....are they really? And improved....... from what.....to what? (insert a million jokes of your choice here, because everyone else is)

@@Cody38Super they are actually pretty good. I am not one to shill Russian stuff, but IF they maintain their subs, they are quite quiet and capable for an SSK What use are they in the Ukraine war? Well missile platforms with the advantages people already mentioned and useful to sink shipping and have rhe deniabilty to claim it was a mine. Deployment of inflitration teams and that's about it. So far the loss of one has been the biggest news from their preformance. In otherwords they seem to be more of a liability than an asset, currently.

yeah this one was rapid fire and switched lists quickly, I really dont have a better grasp of their fleets after this sadly, other than the idea they are old, limited in modern capability, not improving

This video would have benefitted from actually answering the tittle: What Is Russia's Navy Doing? Because the video clearly doesn't answer that. It's just a list of assets. No exploration of any strategy or operations.

​@@HeliosLegionmaybe don't bitch about free content?

They do not want them. New shipyard facilities can make even bigger ships but Russia is not eager to make them.

Totally obsolete ...

The Moskva was built in the Ukraine, Russia cannot replace it since they don't have the ability to make engines big enough for a Cruiser!

@@khiem1939 The Moskva was a museum piece. Why would you bother?

​​​​@@abrahamdozer6273They're not talking about replacing the moskva by building an exact copy of another slava class cruiser, you doofus. They're just saying the capabilities of building such size ships in the black sea does not exist in Russia, and such ships were built in Ukrainian shipyards during soviet times which Russia does not have. And even if they did have shipyards of such size elsewhere, they wouldn't be able to sail it into the black sea due to the montreaux convention.

LoL, In a hot war with NATO, UK is a 2 rockets state, as explained on russian TV, choice is either UK wish to become a radioactive swamp or desert. Russia has over 100k kilometers of sea border, well after 2022 a couple more. Ships you are so confused of are vital for russian millitary doctrine and last, russia is not wasting money on aircraft cariers and generaly, loads of corruption and peacetime robbery has been cut off in russian military and MIC.

Don't worry. As time passes many surface ships will be upgraded to submarines 😇

And even their submarines are rather... more like fish to a nato shark.

Well russia submarine really are just use for mobile missle platform anyways , basically were they put their nuclear icbm, really naval ship are just used as power projection or intimidate foreign forces, with the exception of the us no one realy use their navy aside from marinetime patrols and crusie missle battery so their no point for the Russian to built one especially as they historically suck at building one, their literally horror story about the near constant bad luck they have with warships since they started building them

It is called massive corruption, the West is not immune but they have it in spades.

Even if they had tried right now, they wouldn't even have been able to get any additional naval assets into the black sea due to the montreaux convention. And before the types and size of ships you could get into the black sea before the war is still limited. Hence why the loss of the moskva is more damaging than just losing a large ship; they lost a large ship in the black sea with no shipyard capabilities in Russia's black sea territories to build a replacement with a similar size in the black sea, as all the old soviet ships of such size as the Moskva were built in Ukrainian shipyards.

Lol. They did. They moved half their northern and Baltic fleets before invasion. A lot of them are already gone, just to name a few «Саратов», «Всеволод Бобров», Новочеркаськ, «Оленего́рский горня́к». And half a dozen smaller ones

Kamchatka?

I understand after 1905 that the admiral of the Baltic Fleet has an automatic binocular launcher fitted to his ship in case of the sighting of torpedo boats.

@@kleinweichkleinweich Ah. Kamchatka and fleet of ghost torpedo boats. Tricky things are ghost torpedo boats.

No. Submarines cannot do most naval tasks. As to blue water navies, there really aren’t that many, and even fewer operate in every ocean. Currently only France, Britain, US, Canada, and Russia operate in all oceans regularly. China, Germany, Italy, Japan, South Korea, and a couple others in theory all have more limited all ocean capabilities. That’s going by memory, I may have forgotten someone.

​@@waynesworldofsci-tech I don't believe the question was: "Can submarines perform all naval missions" The question was: "Do countries like Germany or Finland need blue-water navies" In other words, what naval capabilities does a country need, and what vessels provide those capabilities? IMHO there is no clear answer to that question, because what a country "needs" is subjective and debatable. Anyway, neither Finland nor Germany has a blue-water navy, so that already somewhat answers the question.

@@a5cent Germany’s navy is technically capable. The ships are large enough, and they have sufficient replenishment ships. Finland is Baltics and North Sea.

@@waynesworldofsci-tech Yeah. I think the real question is what the mission profile looks like for Germany's navy. Germany's navy can operate globally, but AFAIK they aren't intended to actually fight naval battles on the other side of the world. They focus more on protecting international shipping, crisis and disaster interventions, evacuation of German citizens abroad.... that sort of thing. Germany can't deploy a naval fleet to an area that makes a political/military statement the way the UK or France could. Nor do they want to be able to do that.

Frigates are still needed as a show of force and to participate in NATO plans for air defense, often as a part of a US carrier group. I agree that new subs, with VLS tubes and AIP are particularly lethal in the smaller waters like the Baltic. Or South China Sea.

and at 5:50 those lines on deck.

@@buryitdeep You can tell those are well run ships...

No navy means no targets what's your point. clown

They've launched hundreds of cruise missiles into Ukraine... what else should they be doing?

U guys tend to Forget Ukraine had a Good Navy that was either destroyed or Taken To be Used By Russia themselves

Ukraine had a good navy lol. I heard all kinds of propaganda? But thats a new one

@@justamoroccandude2588 They scuttled a Frigate so that the Russians couldn't use it. It was a really small navy after they scrapped out the rusting hulks that they inherited from the Soviet Union. Whatever Ukrainian units Russia managed to make use of doesn't amount to much. Maybe, you could name one or two for us?

It’s a land power, the manpower advantage they had against neighbors is slowly eroding too. The inevitability of time.

Dude, did you see a map? They literally have open access to the Atlantic and Pacific oceans while also direct access to the Black, Caspian, and Baltic seas. The myth that they dont have access to open water is just delusional.

They manpower advantage was much more significant in the Russian Empire and Soviet Union days. How many countries in Europe are willing and able to stomach as many casualties as Russia and Ukraine have sustained? Both countries have hundreds of thousands of men of the front line. I am pretty confident that Poland would stand up to Russia if invaded but I doubt countries like Germany would. @@abdiganiaden

@@lanciadr Did you ever bother to check the nearest Atlantic port with railroad to Moscow? It is 1000 km away and it was getting completely frozen during winters which was the whole reason why St Petersburg was captured and built from scratch in 18th century. Population difference with Europe wasn't that severe but with other countries it was, for example in 1914 there were only 10 million Turks while russian empire had 164 million population. So they and Entente powers really thought they could capture straits and invade Anatolia but ofc they still couldn't..

​@lanciadr they have to sail through nato water unless they go out of the Eastern ports thousands of miles away from their main infrastructure or go through north the Arctic which is not possibleall year round. The only reliable port is the Pacific which is isolated from both the heart of Russia and areas Russia has key interests.

They didn't have the money.

Putin Russia is dying he knows it's

They did kind of successfully pull off an amhibious landing, which supported their offensive to capture the land bridge to Crimea. Ukraine lost parts of its older vessels in a last ditch effort to prevent any such landings. I believe they scuttled their ships after minelaying operations. The war started suddenly and from a situation unlikely to recur. Other, western navies should take a note about how these things can start unfolding.

Russia has rarely taken its navy seriously. Even at the height of the cold war it ended up falling behind US, French and British ships. Just like WW1 and WW2 any modernization will come too late and with too many cut corners. Even its sub program which is given better attention then its surface fleet has only had cruise missile submarines since 2013.

@@Belgua_ZOV Correct, there is no naval engagement as the Ukranian navy is virtually non-existant. The Ukrainians are utilizing their Neptune missiles as a area denial off the coast of Odessa and Nikolayev.

It is an important element for hampering shipping to Odessa, a crucial economic lifeline. They cannot fully block it because of the threat of Ukraine's own anti-ship missiles, but it is enough to cause economic pressure and acting as a fleet in being.

I came to say this as well. 3 frigates, 7 corvettes, at least 4subs, numerous other patrol boats and such. The Caspian fleet is up to date and will practiced, since they've been firing Kalibr into Syria for the last decade or so. The Black Sea fleet wasn't nearly as modernized or ready.

@@jagx234 They can also make ships in the Caspian/Volga area if turkey closes the strait to Russia

@@Belgua_ZOV so, why has Russia moved it’s fleet farther away exactly? Might it have something to do with Ukraine having a lot of success against Naval targets and the risk to the ships being too great?

@@Belgua_ZOV So, as of early November, eleven ships destroyed and another six damaged is fiction?

@@Belgua_ZOV more ships have joined since! Oh deary me.

Japan, UK, France all have solid navies. China has pretty big navy, but it has no naval history so hard to say if it isn't a paper tiger. Of course none of these compare to US navy quantitatively, but they don't need to, for their purpose.

​@@justADeniAlmost all of Europe besides the Baltic states, Albania, Belgium, montenegro, Croatia, and Slovenia all have good navy's because they all have multiple warships that work.

​@@justADeniwhen china invade the usa and take over will it still be considered paper tiger 😂 get ready for it coming sooner then you think don't take my word it a prophecy consider it a judgement for america

@@loli_uwu3784 cope harder lmao 🤣

@@justADeni not coping bro you have no idea

This video doesn't even answer what the Russian navy is doing. It is just counting assets and pretty vaguely. It doesn't answer what strategy they are following. It doesn't explore if the Russian fleets is using their Black Sea fleet to attack targets inside Ukraine. It doesn't answer if they are mining the Black Sea. It doesn't answer if they are hampering Ukraine's shipping and to what extend. It doesn't answer if and how they are dealing with Ukrainian drones. It doesn't answer what naval aviation is doing. I'm actually quite disappointed with this one.

that's more an excuse than an answer. problem is, they can't maintain the ships they have because of corruption, inept leadership, and lack of funds and building more ships would be hard since they lost the expertise to do it at scale. They did try using their navy earlier in the war, they got curb stomped. Much like they won't use their aircraft in their intended roles because of how precious each aircraft is to Russia, they couldn't risk the attrition.

Look, at this point it's tradition for Russia to have a shitty navy

How are they gonna defend thier ports and route for them to export their food then?

Russia has wanted to be a great naval power since the 19th century, yet they have no warm water ports other than in Syria to operate one from that can't be bottled up in an instant. Vladivostok is about to become Chinese again (that ought to sink a part of the Russian Navy) and Konigsberg will return to being European pretty soon as the Russian Federation devolves in the wake of this military catastrophe.

​@@abrahamdozer6273Wishfullthinking 😂

They still pose a huge threat though they can be out numbered but not out guned remember status 6 nuclear missle

@@icemanzwYeah if they take care of their nukes as well as they take care of their navy it's not a problem at all.

In the Caspian Sea only.

Has no chance these days. China can challenge the US the pacific though, especially near Chinese shores.

@@EatMyShortsAU only near Chinese shores… as far as they exert air dominance

Honestly, I can't see a time when that would be true, maybe in the late 60s or early 70s, but that is a stretch.

​@@winstonchurchill5892your in for a rude awakening when you see russia take over the usa

Oh mah god its the man behind the entire internet's music

Tactical automatic air cooling system.

Moskva was (probably) a one-off event of early war incompetence. They haven't actually lost any ships to the naval drones. The one transport hit has already been repaired. And long-range missiles hitting ships being serviced in dry dock isn't proof the ships or the navy in question is bad.

The Krashuka 4 ew system was captured by the allies.

Submarines are hard to maintain, especially to keep them really quiet.

@@NeuroScientician … I’m aware they are. Any ability to threaten the West in naval power in with their submarines. It’s the crown jewels. It should be where the navy prioritizes money and talent

I think the worst is that it relies on a tugboat due to regular major failures. You only need to sink the tugboat to disable the whole carrier.

Don't forget the 3 or 4 jets they lost in 2018 during operations off of Syria...

The Royal Lifeboat service are alerted to the next time that the listing, belching hulk chug-chug-chugs through the Channel in a show of their awesome force projection.

There is a VALID reason why it belches SMOKE, that's for their tug boat FLEET to find them!@@abrahamdozer6273

Yet they barly do anything

Baltic fleet would be useless. No way that they could do anything in that small dishwater sink where you can shoot antiship missiles even from land to cover whole sea, not to mention nato navies and airforces. If Ukraine can sink black sea fleet ships without navy even at naval bases, what could happen in Baltic.

@@ghansu I did not say they are more powerful than what the video stated, only that they have quite a few more ships than what he mentioned in the video.

The Baltic is a NATO lake.

@@Belgua_ZOV In theory, and according to the Russians. But the Russian ships are definitely out of range to interdict Ukrainian commercial shipping.

you are in for a rude awakening

@@paavali1896 cope harder rusobot :D

@@paavali1896 Feel free to wake us up whenever, nerd

@@paavali1896 Russia has become a joke, a shadow of it's former self. It hurts to watch to be honest, the Kusnetov is a perfect metaphor for the state of Russia today.

@@gregnacius3707 🤣😂

That is not what they do anymore. They cannot srop ukraines trade, they cannot fire missles at ukraine anymore. They basicly Traped in Port

They launch Kalibrs every week

😂 they ran out of missiles 2 years ago 😂

Their current BSF flagship, the Makarov, returned to Sevastopol along with a few other launchers for russia's big winter missile campaign (which is currently underway)

The SSBN's are in a better state than most. The Borei's are quite new and should finish off replacing all of the Delta IV's by 2030ish...with 12 in service. But...the real story is their SSGN and SSN fleet....Of the 7 x Oscar II Class SSGN only 4 are operational, and they're all getting old...the Russian's have 4 Yasen Class SSGN, and are aiming to build 12 in total by 2030ish. But SSN's? Noting new in construction or design at present....and realistically they won't be able to build any until the Yasen and Borei Class are finished in 2030, which means the 13 SSN they have left, which are a mixture of Sierra, Victor III and Akula subs will have to carry on....and most were built in the late 80's/90's...they weren't great when they were built compared to US/UK boats. The average age of their SSN's is 30 years old....with at least 10 years to start to be replaced (if it happens, and it would take 10 years to replace them all..). In comparison the UK has just 1 SSN over 30 years old, the USN has 11 Los Angeles Class that are over 30 years old (remember the Russian figure is the average age...). All of the US/UK subs have their replacements under construction at the moment... And the subs are the best looked after part of the Russian Navy....Russian Naval Aviation is effectively dead now....no ASW aircraft under 40 years old with no replacement in the offing...same with helos...

Eh can't fault the Chinese military for that. The CCP is not going to prioritise commercial shipping off the cost of Yemen, over its territorial disputes in south east asia. Turns out if you fuck with 7 different countries at the same time it ties up your navy.

Russia just does not have the economic muscle to do very much.

Didn't USA spend billions on a new class that are absolute junk? We have to wait 5-10yrs for upkeep, dry dock.

I wouldn't say it was strong in the sense that the US navy is strong. The Soviet navy could never win a stand up fight with the US. It was designed to fire off a lot of big (Diagonal tubes on Slava Class) anti-ship missiles in a saturation attack on carrier battle groups and run.

I don't think that the Russians considered for a second that they would be waging a war in Ukraine right now. Kviv was to fall in a few days and the Russian military is invincible ... through the vodka fog of perpetual propaganda about the awesomeness of themselves.

The intended task was to stop grain exports from Ukrainian ports. Didn’t work.

@@olli1407 the 439th guards rocket brigade in kherson, along with various volunteer formations and air defense have been the primary attackers of the Odessa port primarily using shaheds 136, S300s, and kalibrs (being air launched). Ukraine's grain exports are down by 51%. The fact it has been halved shouldn't be celebrated as a victory. You should really do more research before you comment.

​@olli1407 how?? Their now going through NATO waters. Its not like russia can speed into their waters and start grabbing/sinking ships

Didn’t know they have ships there