China apparently seeking "Ka-50, MRLs and subs" from Russia next

[Chrom]

The Russian will sell anything to anyone. The chinese will purchase whatever they do not already own or have better of. They'll simply copy it and move on..

Yes, given enough money - anything to anyone. But this enough level raised a lot in the past 5 years. This is my point.

 

[Viktor]

Russia is already losing a big part of the Indian market to the Western firms. They're hoping to get the Chinese to pay higher price for the IL-76 but it's not working & unless they can better meet the PLA's tech requirements & sell cheaper, I don't see them making any sale.
There were some 'talk' of them selling further Sov cheaply to PLAN to settle some debts but that went nowhere. I think they'll actually need to pay PLAN to get them to get more of the old Sov to put it mildly.

Well Russia has as a matter of fact increased military sales to India + India has agreed to participate in Brahmos/PAK-FA/MTA project with Russia.

Imagine only last year they decided to buy 340 T-90 tanks + 1000 on licence production + whole other buntch of stuff.

Now with Russia defence budget increasing at 20% a year and with record hight defence sales abroad (with China acounted for 7% only for Al-31FN engines) Russia does not need to seel its advanced military stuff and ToT so cheap anymore ...even with those mutch increased prices they are still cheaper than western ones.

And now with China-Tibet killings and mutch escalation ahead China can forget about lifitng arms embargo and will be forced to continue buying Russian equipment at hihger prices or risk faling behind in military capabilities as its military industrial complex is still not able to produce complex things on its own.

 

[crobato]

China is already self producing much of what it needs and it isn't buying Russian stuff anymore and the lifting of the embargo was unlikely to begin with. The last thing China is buying for itself are the AL-31FN, and that may not be renewed this year. The only other thing its buying are RD-93s for the JF-17 but that's for Pakistan. The historical record has shown that since the end of 2004, China has not logged any sale of Russian military equipment other than S-300s, which also has not been renewed.

 

[Schumacher]

...... The historical record has shown that since the end of 2004, China has not logged any sale of Russian military equipment other than S-300s, which also has not been renewed.

Yup, so hard to convince some who prefer wishful thinking over facts & figures. One can only hope they don't hold their breath while waiting for the next sale.

 

[whodunit]

China is already self producing much of what it needs and it isn't buying Russian stuff anymore and the lifting of the embargo was unlikely to begin with. The last thing China is buying for itself are the AL-31FN, and that may not be renewed this year. The only other thing its buying are RD-93s for the JF-17 but that's for Pakistan. The historical record has shown that since the end of 2004, China has not logged any sale of Russian military equipment other than S-300s, which also has not been renewed.

Its producing what the Russians have sold. There have been no advancements made by the Chinese on their own.

 

[crobato]

Its producing what the Russians have sold. There have been no advancements made by the Chinese on their own.

Really? The Chinese J-11B have their own radar, ECM, MAWS, cockpit avionics, radar reduction measures, flight control systems, that are not related from the Su-27. The JH-7A, J-10 and JF-17, all of whom has much more Western influences, have nothing related to the Russians at all except for the engines. None of the Chinese modern navy ships, all with significant radar reduction measures, have any relationship with the ships the Russians sold to China, which is only the Sovremannies. Even the Chinese submarines have basic fundamental differences from the Kilo.

 

[Firehorse]

Since you mentioned the Kilo class SSK, I wonder if they still need to procure parts for them from Russia- I've seen mentioned that they had or still have some problems maintaining them. In your estimate, will they buy more Russian-made subs in the future?

 

[crobato]

The 8 newer ones should be covered by some service contract. As for the four older ones, the two 877s and two 636s, they all went into a major refit in a closed dock in Shanghai. Instead of being upgraded based on the Russian proposal, it seems very likely that these four subs were simply "indigenized".

The fact that Chinese shipyards also got another four Kilos---old Russian ones that were sold for scrap---meant by now, they would have known every crook and cranny about the subs, since when you sell a ship for scrap, you have to package the blueprint with it.

Will they buy more Kilos? No not at all. These subs have serious issues, like lack of flank sonars. Klubs didn't seem to impress, and it would be better for PLAN to have all their subs standardize on the YJ-83, and they probably refitted the four older Kilos to this. The Lada has issues with its trials; Indonesia's interest to purchase them has been countered by offering Kilos instead. Another is that the PLAN's SSK requirements are growing in size, which means they need to put a lot of things inside them. The Songs are already around 75m in length, and the Yuan seems like another 3m added to that at least. That's quite big even for modern SSKs, proof of that you can measure Songs using Google Earth. I think their displacement values are understated. The Kilos are stuck at 66m, and the largest Amur proposal is only about that size.

 

[Firehorse]

The fact that Chinese shipyards also got another four Kilos---old Russian ones that were sold for scrap---meant by now, they would have known every crook and cranny about the subs, since when you sell a ship for scrap, you have to package the blueprint with it. .. Another is that the PLAN's SSK requirements are growing in size, which means they need to put a lot of things inside them. ..

When did they get those 4 subs intended for scrapping? This is new to me! So, they had an agreement not to scrap them, or are they disassembling those to learn how they are built? Could you elaborate on what those current SSK requirements are, as opposed to what Kilos can deliver? Also, could their locally produces subs' length increase be atributed to an AIP plug?

 

[crobato]

When did they get those 4 subs intended for scrapping? This is new to me! So, they had an agreement not to scrap them, or are they disassembling those to learn how they are built? Could you elaborate on what those current SSK requirements are, as opposed to what Kilos can deliver? Also, could their locally produces subs' length increase be atributed to an AIP plug?

That was sometime earlier in the decade. The CDF has pictures of the subs all lined up. I think they got scrapped, and they don't look to be in a good condition. Don't think it was worth making them run again. Tearing up those ships would have opened a lot of internal information about those subs you can't get even if you own them. I think that's how China is able to refit the operational Kilos they have by themselves.

Subs like the Song and the Yuan use indigenously developed sonars, and part of the suite includes flank sonars which are used in both types. Flank sonars need a minimum size to work properly and for a smaller SSK sized sub, you need to put the diving planes on the sail so the flow and noise from the planes won't interfere with the flank sonars. Only if your sub is big enough like SSNs, can you put retractable bow planes and flank sonars together with less danger of interference. But for a sub the size of a Kilo and with retractable bow planes, that's not a good layout for flank sonars. This is the reason why in the Amur/Lada, they moved the diving planes to the tower. The Chinese knew that from the beginning when they put the diving planes in the tower on the Song.

Also when you're bigger, you can put more stuff to begin with, more sound insulation, more batteries, more sensors, more electronics, and simply more space for the crew to live with less stress. The Kilo is a very cramped ship. For a sub of that size, a lot of its internal volume is used up on the buoyancy reserved between the inner and outer hulls. So you get a small sub with an even tinier inner sub inside it.

I'm not sure if the Kilos have a TAS either. The fact they lopped off the vertical top fin makes me wonder. One way to put a towed sonar on it would be on the lower hull or the tip of the lower fin. But the Russians have standardized on a small slim TAS that is installed on top of the upper vertical fin, forcing an oddball situation on the Kilo which has no upper vertical fin. Furthermore, the Chinese have a small slim TAS that is very similar to this new Russian design, and its being retrofitted on the upper tail fins of all existing subs from Songs to Jins, which leaves the question how they plan to put it on the Kilo.

I believe its the Yuan that has the AIP component, not the Song. The Song's relative large size comes partly having three engines and most probably having a lot of batteries. Internally from the videos shown, the inside of the sub is well decked with computer systems and workstations.

 

[Firehorse]

Thanks, but I wonder how many operational Kilos in the PLAN now? So, they are manufacturing parts for them after reverse-engineering those they scrapped? Also, I wonder if it would be feasible to insert AIP plugs in them? In you opinion, will they be in a position to start producing new subs for export any time soon?

 

[Viktor]

Well I think Crobado you are greatly overestimating China military potential to build inovative weapon systems.

I will say few things.
-> J-11B ( copy of Russian Su-27)
-> J-10 (Izrael and Russian help)

In fact from the begining to the end China has not so far menaged to produce not a single plane without someones help or inteference, copy-paste, stealing etc. It is still not able to field its own produced jet engines witch design is btw being greatly influenced by US and Russian engines.

China has developt some subsystems but witch quality is highly questionable and can not compeate with US,EU and Russia ... I read that even ***** want Italian radar system for their FC-1 or J-10 can remember what (or perhaps both)


-> China recently even bought few Su-33 .. so I guess copy-paste version can be expected.
-> air-to-air missiles (Russia, Izrael and S.Africa)
-> Z-10 (S.Africa)
->Artilery (not all but US Paladin copy and Russia smerch copy as well as that WZ-2 using copy Russian frog missiles)
-> Air defence ... all Russian systems .. S-300PMU1/2 , Tor-M1 and Shilt/Buk even China KS-1A could not menaged to produce without greatly Russian help. Mostly China has done is copy-paste Russian S-300 and US Patriot in its HQ-9 I think is called and still based on old 5V55 missile and bad radar system

->The way I see it China has menaged to produce lots of navyl systems on its own being now third shipbuiding country in the world is expected so but still Russian knowledge hes entered even there .. Shilt-1 air defence system .. copy pasted HQ-9 and S-300. When I sow that Type 51C and Type 52 C it was one bit LOL .. where did they placed those radars .. meaning sea skimmers will score a hit without any doubt ... that all says mutch about China inexpirience with advanced weapon systems ... Type 094 looks exactly like Delta-4 and being successor to Type 092 witch makes so mutch noise do not belive Type 094 will be that mutch better meaning Russian help was or will be needed as many inteternet sources indicated ...

-> China is not able to produce its own bomber still using copy-paste old Russian
->China is still not able to produce helo on its own .. Transport planes are no where to be found (wanted to buy Russian), areal refuling, AWCS (mostly foreign) etc bla bla

-> China even copy Kh-31A Russian antiradiation missile ..
-> Its Yuan SSK is greatly influenced by Kilo class/Lada

Dont get me wrong I dont think China is doing bad. I could name lots of China home made system that are excellent but still China has long way to goo before being able to produce systems on its own. During last 50 years Russia and US developt hudge military industrial complex with witch no one can compeate and it would be foolish to expect any state can close such gap in 10 years or soo.. its just unrealistic by any standard.

But in comparison with India, China is doing mutch beter with its own capabilities.

 

[crobato]

Well I think Crobado you are greatly overestimating China military potential to build inovative weapon systems.

I will say few things.
-> J-11B ( copy of Russian Su-27)
-> J-10 (Izrael and Russian help)

In fact from the begining to the end China has not so far menaged to produce not a single plane without someones help or inteference, copy-paste, stealing etc. It is still not able to field its own produced jet engines witch design is btw being greatly influenced by US and Russian engines.

J-11B had the entire Su-27 airframe redesigned and strengthened, which is why it can handle a 10,000 flight hour life compared to the 2000 flight hour life of the original plane. The radar, the avionics, the cockpit, the ECM, the MAWS, the engine and engine controls, the flight control system, the brakes, the IRST---everything else is Chinese. In fact, originally, the J-11B was supposed to use some Russian parts to speed up production, but Sukhoi has stopped the sending of such parts. As a result, the J-11B, now serially beng produced and entering service---has even replaced the last few Russian components with Chinese ones, so they can entirely build the aircraft without any imported component.

The J-10 only shares the general configuration of the Lavi. But it is a new airframe. Its bigger, heavier, has quite different lines, wing aspect and design, rudder designm, intake and intake tunnel design.

Both planes have electronics and radars are Chinese sourced.

China has developt some subsystems but witch quality is highly questionable and can not compeate with US,EU and Russia ... I read that even ***** want Italian radar system for their FC-1 or J-10 can remember what (or perhaps both)

I don't see how Russian quality is better now, since the PLA preferred copying rather than buying Russian originals that are constantly defective.

-> China recently even bought few Su-33 .. so I guess copy-paste version can be expected.

China did not buy Su-33.

-> air-to-air missiles (Russia, Izrael and S.Africa)

China only bought PL-8 long time ago. Never bought missiles from S. Africa. Only bought missiles from Russia because that is part of the Su-27 contract. But note, Chinese did not regard Russian missiles very highly because they preferred not to integrate them on their own fighters like the J-10.

-> Z-10 (S.Africa)

Unlikely. The design is not the same.

->Artilery (not all but US Paladin copy and Russia smerch copy as well as that WZ-2 using copy Russian frog missiles)

Sorry, but Chinese MLRS and artillery are not the same as the US or Russian either.

-> Air defence ... all Russian systems .. S-300PMU1/2 , Tor-M1 and Shilt/Buk even China KS-1A could not menaged to produce without greatly Russian

KS-1A never had any Russian help and certainly not with its all in one array. China never bought Buk, and only has bought a few Tor M1s.

The Chinese only acquired 12 S-300PMU1/2 systems and have not ordered for more. At least they actually liked this system, compared to the others.

help. Mostly China has done is copy-paste Russian S-300 and US Patriot in its HQ-9 I think is called and still based on old 5V55 missile and bad radar system

How bad is the radar system? The Chinese are able to deploy an all in one radar system like the MPQ-53 well ahead of the Russians which still required seperate arrays to do dedicated functions for the S-300. Only with the S-300PMU-2 the Russians are able to deploy an all in one radar system, but the Chinese acquired such a radar system from the Russians but that was years after they developed the HQ-9 and put the 052C in service.

Actually the Chinese made such orders early when they don't have their own developments yet, but the Russians take so long to deliver that the delivered systems themselves were overtaken by the Chinese developments during the time span. Hence why the Kilo 636EM was only received two years after the first Yuan started trials. Why the 956EM was only delivered to China after the 052C started trials two years before. These things were supposed to be there before the Chinese developments appear. It was quite embarrassing to see Cold War style, unstealthy naval ships, each paid with a hefty sum of 800 million US dollars, against a fleet of now sleek and stealthy PLAN surface combatants. The Sovs now stand out in like a sore thumb.

->The way I see it China has menaged to produce lots of navyl systems on its own being now third shipbuiding country in the world is expected so but still Russian knowledge hes entered even there .. Shilt-1 air defence system .. copy pasted HQ-9 and S-300. When I sow that Type 51C and Type 52 C it was one bit LOL .. where did they placed those radars .. meaning sea skimmers will score a hit without any doubt ... that all says mutch about China inexpirience with advanced weapon systems ... Type 094 looks exactly like Delta-4 and being successor to Type 092 witch makes so mutch noise do not belive Type 094 will be that mutch better meaning Russian help was or will be needed as many inteternet sources indicated ...

The Chinese are able to take it beyond Russian knowledge.

HHQ-9 for example. The Chinese were able to attain 360 degree sensor fusion of all four arrays. So they're able to combine Aegis like techs with S-300 and Patriot like techs. The Russians still use a single faced system like the RIF-M. Compared to the RIF-M, the HHQ-9 has full 360 degree vision and can engage more targets in all directions at once. Wonder why the Chinese have not ordered RIF-M ever since? In China they criticize why they have to build ships with the RIF-M.

HH-16. The Chinese managed to make a hot launched VLS system and put it in operation in at least four ships and counting, when the Russians don't even a prototype of VLS Shtil-1.

The Chinese were able to make their Type 730 CIWS without Russian help. The Chinese only got Kashtans with their 956EM when that ship was received long after the 052B went into service.

Delta IV still uses two reactors, two shafts which makes them especially noisy. The 094 is not that quiet either but at least, it only has one reactor, one shaft, to make the noise. At least the Chinese systems do not have the reliability issues to require secondary reactors and shaft for redundancy.

-> China is not able to produce its own bomber still using copy-paste old Russian

True, but the Tu-16 happens to be a good basic design. The Chinese actually refused to buy Tu-22s even after these were offered. The Chinese attitude to the bomber is that its nothing but a flying truck. Its the systems within that counts. Those H-6s are carrying cruise missiles that don't like anything like Kh-55s.

->China is still not able to produce helo on its own .. Transport planes are no where to be found (wanted to buy Russian), areal refuling, AWCS (mostly foreign) etc bla bla

Why bother trying to create an all new transport plane when for such utility reasons you can just acquire? Afterall, do you need to have an all new design for a truck? Actually the platform is not as important as you think, its the systems within.

China now has two flights of KJ-2000s, when Russia does not even has a single A-50 with electronic steering in operational status. You have to buy Israeli Phalcon to put it on top of the Mainstay.

China now has in operation, various flights of Y-8 High News, aircraft dedicated for ELINT, ECM, ISAR, C31 and targeting purposes.

-> China even copy Kh-31A Russian antiradiation missile ..
-> Its Yuan SSK is greatly influenced by Kilo class/Lada

The only thing the Yuan has in common with the Kilo is just the nose. I don't see how the Yuan is greatly influenced by the Kilo once you study the design further. Its built around the Song for one thing, and its bigger than the Kilo or Lada. Furthermore, the Yuan entered trials two years ahead of the Lada, and is now in serial production. The Lada is having problems with its trials.

The Yuan also uses Stirling AIP, that's something the Russians don't have. The Russians use fuel cell AIP on the Lada which is inspired from German technology.

The configuration of the Kilo is actually very different from the Yuan. The proportions are not the same for one, with the Kilo's tower much more centered in the hull, has no top rudder and uses retractable diving planes. The Yuan's tower is more forward, has four flank sonars per side, and has planes in the tower, with a standard four fin tail.

Dont get me wrong I dont think China is doing bad. I could name lots of China home made system that are excellent but still China has long way to goo before being able to produce systems on its own. During last 50 years Russia and US developt hudge military industrial complex with witch no one can compeate and it would be foolish to expect any state can close such gap in 10 years or soo.. its just unrealistic by any standard.

Actually the Chinese now produce a lot of systems of their own, the speciality especially on the electronics side, thanks to their electronics industry. Even if some of the systems have things that were learned from the Russians, Israelis, Europeans or Americans, they don't use any components from any of the four. The mastery of technology is in the level that they can produce these components from scratch, from their own factories. It means its deep enough to make improvements of these systems, and use it as a springboard to the next generation. They would of course, still like the opportunity to be able to view foreign systems, in order to refresh and expand their knowledge and do comparisons. But essentially they are now on their own.

 

[Gollevainen]

Quote:
->Artilery (not all but US Paladin copy and Russia smerch copy as well as that WZ-2 using copy Russian frog missiles)

Sorry, but Chinese MLRS and artillery are not the same as the US or Russian either.

Ehh..few corrections. Chinese have no "paladin" copy in its artillerysystems. I think you were refering to the new PLZ05. That particular system most likely features a gun based on the PLL01, a chinese copy of famous Austrian orgin GNH-45. Othervice the turret shows so much resamble to the Russian MSTA 2S19 and according to some sources chinese indeed used the autoloader system of the very same system in PLZ05. About the targeting and aiming devices, none can say anything spesific. The automotive parts are from the earlier PLZ45 and are fully chinese orgin.
Of the chinese artillery in general, indeed all of the guns and howitsers are either direct copies of soviet orgins or derivations and mixtures of those. (the PLL01 is an odd exeption)

The Chinese were able to make their Type 730 CIWS without Russian help. The Chinese only got Kashtans with their 956EM when that ship was received long after the 052B went into service.

Not quite. Type 730 is based on the french apportive SAMOS CIWS system which apparently was sold to china after being rejected by the french themselves. So yes no russian involvement, but french instead.

 

[XaNDeR]

crobato you seem very confussed , China can not compare too any country if you count the tehnology , they are at least 30 years behind the most advanced country's and nothing you say or think is gonna change that , look at their army for god sakes its so old its almost falling apart , only 38th and 39th GA are somewhat modern.

 

[crobato]

You're the one seriously confused. The PLA added about 200 to 300 or a division's worth of ZTZ-99/99G and between 3000 to 4000 ZTZ-96/96G tanks in the last ten years or so. Not to mention more than that in terms of IFVs and other vehicles. How many new tanks have the Russian army added in the last ten years?

Not quite. Type 730 is based on the french apportive SAMOS CIWS system which apparently was sold to china after being rejected by the french themselves. So yes no russian involvement, but french instead.

Goll, the connection to the SAMOS is rather tenously based on appearance, much like the Goalkeeper. The parts where the 730 resembles with SAMOS and the Goalkeeper, is the turret and the gun, which in both the case of SAMOS and Goalkeeper were both US sourced anyway. So in reality what the Chinese copied was the Avenger gatling gun. The closed loop tracking systems are indigenous.

 

[tphuang]

Not quite. Type 730 is based on the french apportive SAMOS CIWS system which apparently was sold to china after being rejected by the french themselves. So yes no russian involvement, but french instead.

no, this is what I wrote on it on my 054A article

Now, back to Type 730 CIWS. Interestingly enough, it uses different fire control system than Goalkeeper and Seamos. Goalkeeper uses one radar to search and another radar to do the engagements. Seamos uses Infrared seeker to do search and TV tracking camera to do the engagements. By comparison, I believe Kashtan uses one radar to search and engages with radar or TV tracker. Type 730 combined the strength of Goalkeeper and Seamos by using TR-47C to do searching and using the combination of TV tracking camera, infrared tracking camera and laser rangefinder to do the engagement guidance. It is certainly not cheap to add all these extra "eyes" to the system, but certainly makes the tracking/engagement of Type 730 better than the other two.

I don't think it's copying anything, but it definitely true inspiration from Seamos and Goalkeeper and other systems. I don't think there is anything wrong with using existing systems as points of reference.

crobato you seem very confussed , China can not compare too any country if you count the tehnology , they are at least 30 years behind the most advanced country's and nothing you say or think is gonna change that , look at their army for god sakes its so old its almost falling apart , only 38th and 39th GA are somewhat modern.

lol, have you taken a look at the naval technology between China and Russia? There are many subsystems and whole systems that China has at the current time, that the Russians just don't have. Of course, Russians still has certain advantages, but nobody would've been able to claim this 10 years ago.

Things of the top of my ahead in favour of China in aerospace + naval:
1. heavy torpedoes in Yu-6
2. medium range AAM PL-12 or R-77
3. Beidou - more accurate than Glonass
4. AESA AWACS - Russians have none
5. surveillance aircraft - generally Chinese ones use more modern radar
6. PGMs - a more complete package with SGBs, more accurate LGBs
7. ground attack missiles - KD-88 + YJ-91 over kh-31, kh-29/59
8. light weight anti-ship missile - YJ-83 vs kh-35
9. LSDs - 071 vs Ivan Rogov class
10. naval stealth technology
11. Aegis like system with MFR + CeC on 052C
12. gas turbine - QC-70/128 with 185/260 in pipeline compared to non-existent for Russia
13. 2D/3D air surveillance radar
14. naval radar
15. light weight helo
16. anti-air UCAV

I left out individual platform like fighters, frigates and destroyers since that's a little harder to quantify.

 

[Grand Danois]

Errr. The GLONASS spec was written to what Soviet technology could achieve in the 70s. Hardly a benchmark of 2008 technological prowess. Rather a continuation of the same standard.

Accuracy is also measured in terms of coverage and the constellation needed for 10m accuracy just has not been deployed yet. This is not really a matter of technology, but rather about the time-line of the Beidou launches.

I'm not usually pointing out what is and is not indigenous - it is not important if the tech is mastered, however it is interesting if the view is to trace the heritage and paths of technologies. In this case it seems that the critical tech - the atomic clocks - are imported from from Switzerland (of all places).

As to what is deployed of technology and what is latent... deployment depends on the expenditure on new platforms. Though deployment is a very tangible parameter of tech prowess it should be considered in context.

 

[tphuang]

Errr. The GLONASS spec was written to what Soviet technology could achieve in the 70s. Hardly a benchmark of 2008 technological prowess. Rather a continuation of the same standard.

Accuracy is also measured in terms of coverage and the constellation needed for 10m accuracy just has not been deployed yet. This is not really a matter of technology, but rather about the time-line of the Beidou launches.

I'm not usually pointing out what is and is not indigenous - it is not important if the tech is mastered, however it is interesting if the view is to trace the heritage and paths of technologies. In this case it seems that the critical tech - the atomic clocks - are imported from from Switzerland (of all places).

As to what is deployed of technology and what is latent... deployment depends on the expenditure on new platforms. Though deployment is a very tangible parameter of tech prowess it should be considered in context.

It's not my problem that the Russian technology hasn't advanced that much since the Soviet break up.

As for Beidou, only 7 satellites are needed for regional coverage and achieving the desired accuracy in this region and that will be accomplished by this year. And the accuracy for PLA is less than 1m according to Chinese reports.

I'm not clear on what you are saying with technology/latent.

 

[Grand Danois]

It's not my problem that the Russian technology hasn't advanced that much since the Soviet break up.

As for Beidou, only 7 satellites are needed for regional coverage and achieving the desired accuracy in this region and that will be accomplished by this year. And the accuracy for PLA is less than 1m according to Chinese reports.

I'm not clear on what you are saying with technology/latent.

Any indication of how this is achived? It depend on the clocks.

Latency of technology example: Russia hasn't really introduced any new major surface combatants since the SU. Thus even though Russia is perfectly able to field "naval stealth" it has not done so for other reasons. This is context and describes latency. Technology can advance although not deployed.