tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7991917726704497295.post4707133442291851905..comments2023-11-17T09:04:49.898-05:00Comments on Russian Navy Blog: Even the Russians know they suck, Part IRussian Navy Bloghttp://www.blogger.com/profile/02119671832425902500noreply@blogger.comBlogger1125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7991917726704497295.post-36857664214622026052010-03-04T15:06:49.551-05:002010-03-04T15:06:49.551-05:00Any representative of any navy sent to do a crossd...Any representative of any navy sent to do a crossdeck visit of .....let's say, an "ideologically non-aligned" nation's warship (unless he was flag rank or higher) would be given the same instructions: record everything you see and hear, regardless whether you think it's important. Your information will be analyzed by higher authority and by individual Subject Matter Experts, and WE'LL decide what's important. Therefore, taking the time to write down the cleaning routine is not necessarily a measure of its importance, nor a reliable admission of self-suckiness on the part of the navy that collected the information. Ditto the ship's interior lighting routine, and other standard observations.<br /><br />I was part of a tour of the MARSHAL SHAPOSHNIKOV (same class as the CHABANENKO) alongside in Vladivostok, when I visited there with HMCS VANCOUVER. Although she looked like she'd seen hard use, interior-wise, I wouldn't say she was dirty or poorly-maintained at all, and I'd like to think we have fairly high standards for both. Everybody remarked on the dangerous slipperiness of the upper decks (no non-skid coating) which would make linehandling in rough seas (such as might be experienced during underway replenishment) much more hazardous than it needed to be, but that would be an easy problem to resolve.<br /><br />Russian naval electronics and weaponry are generally less sophisticated and clumsier than their western counterparts. However, this reflects intended operation by conscripts who sometimes receive limited training, and are rarely specialists. Again, not a reliable indicator of relative suckiness, but of national and military policy. Russia continues to work toward an all-volunteer force, although poor pay will likely remain a demotivator. That's one area where they DO suck. I note that the less-sophisticated systems had generally very good reliability compared with technological pieces of wizardry that were often capricious to operate. There's little value in a technological advantage that won't do what it's supposed to when you turn it on. I also noted a few interesting departures from conventional thought, such as the inclusion of submarine-style periscopes on the bridge - these allowed full field-of-view outside visual monitoring in a contaminated NBCD environment without the requirement to open any doors or hatches.<br /><br />Doctrinal influences often result in navies doing things differently, but significant variations in things like crew comforts and watch routines leading to an analysis that the navy concerned is "sucky" should be limited only to those areas rather than an impression of overall incompetence. That'd be a mistake.Markhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05958639916363280998noreply@blogger.com