Venezuela strikes £500m deal to buy Russian submarines

#1
http://www.guardian.co.uk/venezuela/story/0,,2103589,00.html

President Hugo Chávez is poised to buy at least five submarines from Russia in a £500m deal that will alarm the White House and confirms Venezuela as a growing military power in the region.

Mr Chávez is expected to sign the deal during a trip to Moscow next week. According to Kommersant newspaper, Venezuela has agreed an initial contract to buy five Project 636 diesel submarines, and four Project 637 Amur submarines at a later date.
 

Bouillabaisse

LE
Book Reviewer
#2
They'll have to move sharpish to train up their senior people for the crews then. Any old fool can buy a submarine but its the use of them that's tricky. And I suggest that even Chavez will be gone by the time they're delivered and operational.

Oh and for those interested the "Amur" class is known in Russia as the "Lada" class. I beleive the NATO designation for spotters is "Skip." :twisted:
 
#3
50mill a sub.... lets hope he doesn't get stiffed with huge servicing contracts beacause they can't negotiate a contract :)
 

Bouillabaisse

LE
Book Reviewer
#4
I would assume that the £500m is for the 1st 5 boats, so £100m per boat, but still pretty good. Perhaps we should be thinking about it for the RN.
 
#5
Project 626 boat is 'The quietest submarine' according to this source

http://www.military.com/Content/MoreContent1?file=SubSpecial_Kilo

The Project 636 is actively promoted for the world market by the Rosvoorouzhenie state-owned company. This submarine has improved range, firepower, acoustic characteristics and reliability. Visually distinguished by a step on the aft casing, the length of the hull is extended by two frame spacings (2 x 600 mm). The additional length permitted increasing the power of diesel-generators and mounting them on improved shock-absorbing support, and reducing twofold the main propulsion shaft speed. Owing to these improvements, the submarine speed and sea endurance were increased, while the noise level was radically decreased.

The low noise level of the submarine has been achieved with the selection of quiet machinery, vibration and noise isolation and a special anti-acoustic rubber coating applied on the outer hull surface.
 
#6
And us military contractors are as we speak speeding to the pentagon with plans for a 12 billion dollar anti submarine system :D
 

Bouillabaisse

LE
Book Reviewer
#7
Sergey, You might want to discuss its quietness with the Germans, Swedes or French, since their diesel boats are pretty good. The Kilo strength is in the price and teh political statement it sends.
 
#8
They'll have to move sharpish to train up their senior people for the crews then
Who says the crews have to be Venezuelan to get them operational?

Plenty of ex-Red Banner Nort..... ooops Russian Navy bods knocking about who I imagine would jump at the chance to practice their old trade again.
 

Biped

LE
Book Reviewer
#9
Kilo class subs have been around for a while, and even though they may have been improved, are old news compared to modern western subs.

If the US goes up against Venezuela, I doubt the septics will have too much bother finding and neutralising them.

I think what the septics are doing is generally trying to sound worried and blowing some hot air around because of the belligerence of Chavez towards the US. The subs are certainly no threat to the US.
 
#10
I beg to differ VERY STRONGLY about Kilo class subs being 'the Lada's of submarines'....
 
#11
And you only have to look at the success rate of Chilean SSKs against the US Navy in exercises to question Biped's comment about the level of threat these could pose.
 
#12
Biped said:
Kilo class subs have been around for a while, and even though they may have been improved, are old news compared to modern western subs.

If the US goes up against Venezuela, I doubt the septics will have too much bother finding and neutralising them.

I think what the septics are doing is generally trying to sound worried and blowing some hot air around because of the belligerence of Chavez towards the US. The subs are certainly no threat to the US.
Biped, suppose that our American friends would like to impose something like naval blocade of Venezuela. How difficult would be such an operation with and without Venezuelan submarine fleet?

Let's regard this situation: American warship detains a tanker with Venezuelan oil and 'unknown' submarine sinks it.
 

Bouillabaisse

LE
Book Reviewer
#13
the_matelot said:
I beg to differ VERY STRONGLY about Kilo class subs being 'the Lada's of submarines'....
I never said they were. I was merely observing that the Russians have chosen an unfortunate name for their newer class of diesel boat (L following K in the alphabet and all that). Very difficult to have real credibility at a naval conference when you're threatening your enemy with a Lada :D

As to the US dealing with a Venezuelan sub threat - its all about the resources you throw at it. A battlegroup exercise in the Pacific would not have the same level of aircraft cover as a real shooting war in the southern Carribean. Lots of MPA coverage means dead boats - they have to snort and that'll kill them.
 
#14
KGB_resident said:
Biped, suppose that our American friends would like to impose something like naval blocade of Venezuela. How difficult would be such an operation with and without Venezuelan submarine fleet?

Let's regard this situation: American warship detains a tanker with Venezuelan oil and 'unknown' submarine sinks it.
You know Sergey, for a mathematician (am I right?) you have an unusual tendency towards theorising, which with you is usually a cover for coat-trailing. However, going with your supposition, I suggest that were such a scenario to happen, Chavez - like similar South American 'big men' - would have his arse handed to him on a plate (see Cubans in Angola, Argentines in the Falklands...). Regardless of their place on the political spectrum, leaders such as Chavez are inevitably found out to be posturing windbags when someone actually calls their bluff. History is littered with the political careers of such blow-hards.

Rhetoric has a habit of falling apart when confronted by reality.

Chavez will provide a cheap thrill for the anti-American left for a while longer, but it will all end in tears.
 
#15
read a theory more chavez spends on arms more spams talk bollocks about the "threat"
= price of oil going up = chavez has more cash to buy toys :twisted:
 
#16
Well, strategic factors aside, you can move a lot of bugle in even a small submarine, certainly enough to keep the toilet cubicles in Miami and New York´s night clubs well populated for years to come.. :D
 
#17
gallowglass said:
KGB_resident said:
Biped, suppose that our American friends would like to impose something like naval blocade of Venezuela. How difficult would be such an operation with and without Venezuelan submarine fleet?

Let's regard this situation: American warship detains a tanker with Venezuelan oil and 'unknown' submarine sinks it.
You know Sergey, for a mathematician (am I right?) you have an unusual tendency towards theorising, which with you is usually a cover for coat-trailing. However, going with your supposition, I suggest that were such a scenario to happen, Chavez - like similar South American 'big men' - would have his arse handed to him on a plate (see Cubans in Angola, Argentines in the Falklands...). Regardless of their place on the political spectrum, leaders such as Chavez are inevitably found out to be posturing windbags when someone actually calls their bluff. History is littered with the political careers of such blow-hards.

Rhetoric has a habit of falling apart when confronted by reality.

Chavez will provide a cheap thrill for the anti-American left for a while longer, but it will all end in tears.
Hi Gallowglass, nice to conversate with you again. Example of Cuba shows that almighty USA are not so almighty as many think. Also our American friends are mired in Iraq and Afghanistan. Occupation of Venezuela would be a very hard task, in fact impossible. Bombing would be ineffective if oilfields would not be bombed and in this case outcome would be disasterous.

What really USA can do, how the Americans can press Venezuela? There is only one way - naval blockade, that would contradict Interantional Law and thus Venesuela would have a legetimate right to defend own interests.

Israel attacked American warship while USA were not hostale toward Israel. So, Venezuela could try the same scenario. Why not?

New Venezuelan submarine fleet would seriously bound American capabilities to threat Venezuelan interests.

In more wide context it should be noted that more and more countries are building their military potentials to make possible American invasion (that is a very real threat now) unthinkable - Algeria for example.
 
#18
CarpeDiem said:
And you only have to look at the success rate of Chilean SSKs against the US Navy in exercises to question Biped's comment about the level of threat these could pose.
Kilo SSKs in the hands of good submariners would move things well beyond Lada performance. The Iranians have got three, although according to the Federation of American Scientists two were Project 877EKM (an export type).

Hugo's navy could certainly keep the Americans distracted (unfriendly subs in their backyard), best they look for signs of specialist berthing facilities in Cuba.
 

Attachments

#19
KGB_resident said:
Hi Gallowglass, nice to conversate with you again. Example of Cuba shows that almighty USA are not so almighty as many think. Also our American friends are mired in Iraq and Afghanistan. Occupation of Venezuela would be a very hard task, in fact impossible. Bombing would be ineffective if oilfields would not be bombed and in this case outcome would be disasterous.
Howdo Sergey. Cuba is still under Fidel's 'control' because the US decided not to swat him, and only survived due to Soviet backing and now survives (in a manner of speaking) due to Venezuelan backing. As a system Cuba has been an abject failure (unless of course you're a Michael Mooreite, taken in by the showcase 'world class medical care' system). Do you honestly believe that the US wouldn't have invaded Cuba had it really wanted to? (or wouldn't do so now?).

"Occupation of Venezuela would be a very hard task, in fact impossible." Really? And you base this sweeping strategic summation on what exactly? The proven fighting abilities of the Venezuelan Armed Forces? Chavez's rhetoric? The 'popular militia' he has now formed? The 'undoubted' fraternal assistance Chavez would receive from his leftist supporters in Bolivia and Cuba? General rule of thumb regarding Central and South American militaries Sergey - be they left or right wing, they're only good at killing their own people, but don't actually expect them to fight a real war.

KGB_resident said:
What really USA can do, how the Americans can press Venezuela? There is only one way - naval blockade, that would contradict Interantional Law and thus Venesuela would have a legetimate right to defend own interests.

Israel attacked American warship while USA were not hostale toward Israel. So, Venezuela could try the same scenario. Why not?
Venezuela is not Israel Sergey. The US is hardly restricted to a naval blockade (which I imagine would be ineffective anyway).

KGB_resident said:
New Venezuelan submarine fleet would seriously bound American capabilities to threat Venezuelan interests.

In more wide context it should be noted that more and more countries are building their military potentials to make possible American invasion (that is a very real threat now) unthinkable - Algeria for example.
The "[n]ew Venezuelan submarine fleet" will look very nice I'm sure - lots of fists punching the air in socialist fervour as it is launched, accompanied by frantic Latin martial music, with puff-chested (and recently promoted) Chavista grandees, bedecked with medals, in attendance....and the Americans would still carve them to pieces if it came to it.

I'm sorry to burst your bubble Sergey, and further add to your post-USSR woes, but if rinky-dink states such as Venezuela, Bolivia, Cuba and Algeria (and whatever rag, tag, and bobtail I may have left out) are what constitute the new anti-American bloc, then the only threat to the US is that it may collectively suffer apoplexy at the thought of these clowns.
 
#20
gallowglass said:
KGB_resident said:
Hi Gallowglass, nice to conversate with you again. Example of Cuba shows that almighty USA are not so almighty as many think. Also our American friends are mired in Iraq and Afghanistan. Occupation of Venezuela would be a very hard task, in fact impossible. Bombing would be ineffective if oilfields would not be bombed and in this case outcome would be disasterous.
Howdo Sergey. Cuba is still under Fidel's 'control' because the US decided not to swat him, and only survived due to Soviet backing and now survives (in a manner of speaking) due to Venezuelan backing. As a system Cuba has been an abject failure (unless of course you're a Michael Mooreite, taken in by the showcase 'world class medical care' system). Do you honestly believe that the US wouldn't have invaded Cuba had it really wanted to? (or wouldn't do so now?).

"Occupation of Venezuela would be a very hard task, in fact impossible." Really? And you base this sweeping strategic summation on what exactly? The proven fighting abilities of the Venezuelan Armed Forces? Chavez's rhetoric? The 'popular militia' he has now formed? The 'undoubted' fraternal assistance Chavez would receive from his leftist supporters in Bolivia and Cuba? General rule of thumb regarding Central and South American militaries Sergey - be they left or right wing, they're only good at killing their own people, but don't actually expect them to fight a real war.

KGB_resident said:
What really USA can do, how the Americans can press Venezuela? There is only one way - naval blockade, that would contradict Interantional Law and thus Venesuela would have a legetimate right to defend own interests.

Israel attacked American warship while USA were not hostale toward Israel. So, Venezuela could try the same scenario. Why not?
Venezuela is not Israel Sergey. The US is hardly restricted to a naval blockade (which I imagine would be ineffective anyway).

KGB_resident said:
New Venezuelan submarine fleet would seriously bound American capabilities to threat Venezuelan interests.

In more wide context it should be noted that more and more countries are building their military potentials to make possible American invasion (that is a very real threat now) unthinkable - Algeria for example.
The "[n]ew Venezuelan submarine fleet" will look very nice I'm sure - lots of fists punching the air in socialist fervour as it is launched, accompanied by frantic Latin martial music, with puff-chested (and recently promoted) Chavista grandees, bedecked with medals, in attendance....and the Americans would still carve them to pieces if it came to it.

I'm sorry to burst your bubble Sergey, and further add to your post-USSR woes, but if rinky-dink states such as Venezuela, Bolivia, Cuba and Algeria (and whatever rag, tag, and bobtail I may have left out) are what constitute the new anti-American bloc, then the only threat to the US is that it may collectively suffer apoplexy at the thought of these clowns.
I'm fine and hope you and mrs.Gallowglass are OK. As I see you slightly disaree with me. So I would like to comment my points.

Iraqi war hilighted some weak points of American military machine. It is too expensive, helpless against insurgents, guerillas. Morale of American army (then a war looks senseless) uses to go lower and lower rapidly. American generals are not the best in the World (softly speaking) with few exceptions that rather prove the rule. Also American army is not big enough for a war with really strong enmy. Vietnam where American military broke its teeth proved it. Cuba was not invaded for one simple reason - the American would be defeated.

There is also another side of the problem. It is a political will. Now hardly any American politician that has chances to be elected as a president would unleash Iraqi-scale war - it would be too dangerous for his (her) political future. Now USA is entering into long enough period of relatively peacefull development. Much time is needed to cure Iraqi wounds.
 

Top