Military Forum for Russian and Global Defence Issues


    Role of Soviet Νavy in the 80s

    Share

    TR1
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 5840
    Points : 5892
    Join date : 2011-12-06

    Role of Soviet Νavy in the 80s

    Post  TR1 on Fri Aug 10, 2012 9:36 pm

    Mindstorm, can you elaborate your thoughts on Lehman?

    Thanks!

    Mindstorm
    Captain
    Captain

    Posts : 737
    Points : 920
    Join date : 2011-07-20

    John Lehman and the Western view of Soviet Navy in 1980s

    Post  Mindstorm on Sun Aug 12, 2012 4:58 pm

    TR1 wrote:Mindstorm, can you elaborate your thoughts on Lehman?

    Thanks!


    My though or opinions have no importance at all ,here i limit myself at refer the military historical facts as seen from the Soviet point of view; the subject obviously would require a very, very extensive coverage ,but today i have a bit of work-free time and i will attempt to cite ,in brief, some of the central points of the question.

    John Lehman, after its promotion to Secretary of US Navy in 1981, immediately begun a surprising and very deep reformulation of US Navy's stance, size, composition, positioning and principles of operation toward an significantly more "aggressive" philosophy ,with patrols patterns and high concentration of NATO naval units very near URSS's controlled sea sectors and buffer zones outside Soviet Navy's "sanctuaries".

    Within less than an year and half from Lehman promotion at Secretary of the Navy in Reagan Administration - after an initial distrust by part of Soviet generals of the effective actuation of a similar [b]clearly suicide plan by part of a new appointed Secretary so young ,inexperienced and moreover devoid of any specific technical knowledge
    - the new Secretary became quickly one of the most "beloved" Western figure and a sort of unexpected blessed gift occurred in URSS favour.
    Among other of its "creative" gems remain also its [in]famous proposal to eventually contrast a Soviet offensive in Europe opening an opposing ground front ,firstly with a successful landing operation in...... Russia Far East and ,then, fighting theirs half-Earth long way toward Moscow through Siberia Razz Razz Razz (no surprise that among the jokes on it one the most common sounded about : "Pray the God to preserve Secretary Lehman in spirit ,in health and.....in charge" Laughing Laughing )


    Those are some of the grave information lacking which ,at the beginning of '80 years, had lead to those suicide decisions :

    1) US military authorities had very scarce information, if any, on the real capabilities and concept of operation of the new series of elements of RORSAT, Upravlyaemyi Sputnik - Aktivny (US-A ) [satellites Kosmos-1176 ,Kosmos 1249 and subsequent] and EORSAT Upravlyaemyi Sputnik - Passivny (US-P) [satellites Kosmos 1220 ,Kosmos 1260 and subsequent] put in orbit just in those years.

    2) NATO Command ,at cause of what described in point one and of warped parameters on the weapons mounted on Soviet ships/submarines and "sleeping" layers of the new active bottom sea mines penetrated in western dossier, had practically no clue on the real average time of designation and range of engagement of allied unities by part of Warsaw Pact's air/sea/undersea based elements and....Ground Missile Forces.

    3) US military authorities had no idea of the dept of exposure and extension of the NATO's Navy key data compromission by part of Walker/Withworth 's spy ring (ironically just John Lehman was forced to admit some years after that in those years URSS was aware of the position of NATO submarines and ships practically all time Rolling Eyes )


    Those are some of empiric factors linked to the Lehman's Navy doctrine :


    1) The backbone of NATO [b]Navy surface elements become stationed practically on a permanent basis well within engagement range of both First and Second "ring" of long range Soviet bombers (and very often outside coverage of ground based NATO Air Force) and virtually all Soviet submarines and ships armed with P-500 and P-700 missiles !!!


    2) NATO Navy Surface AND Submarine Force was denied suddenly the Dispersion factor that had worked up to this point as a strong complicating element for Soviet Forces to pin point theirs position and follow theirs movements ,restricting of several orders of magnitude the search area by part of Soviet air and space based sensor systems (element that togheter with the outstanding capabilities offered by the new RORSAT/EORSAT elements and the data on position ,patrol areas and SOSUS coming from Walker/Withworth 's spy ring created a truly critical as unknow situation for NATO Navy security)

    3) The very high concentration in few sectors of both nuclear powered attack and ,even more, US submarines with strategic ballistic missiles created a situation capable to put in enormous risk the entire bulk of NATO strategic delivery capabilities.
    Unknow to majority of common people ,in fact, is the notion that submarines ,and in particular westren-built ones, are fatally (at cause of the natural medium element where submarine operate - water, a shock wave conductor literally thousands of times better than earth and hundreds better than air - and the peculiar low deepth's limit and lack of titanium double hull) several hundreds of times more vulnerable to thermonuclear explosions in respect to Silo based or ground mobile ICBMs up to the point that the owning of even only a very rough positional coordinate of several dozen of km are more than sufficient to destroy them ,also in group, before those submarines would get any chance to retaliate (theirs times of reaction and delivery are very low for strategic standards) ; the precise delivery ,just in those years ,in plain sea of 15Zh53-2 IRBM's RV had a precise validation aim.....
    From what just said amyone can easily infere that Submarine only factors of protection in a full thermonuclear war scenario are : Undetectability, Dispersion and Depth .


    About this third point (and some references to previous ones )and the situation of those years you can read here :

    http://www.policyarchive.org/handle/10207/bitstreams/9551.pdf




    Best regards.


    Cyberspec
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 1946
    Points : 2117
    Join date : 2011-08-08
    Location : Terra Australis

    Russian maps suggest Soviet subs cruised Canadian Arctic

    Post  Cyberspec on Thu Dec 06, 2012 6:16 am

    Interesting...

    Arrow http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/national/russian-maps-suggest-soviet-subs-cruised-canadian-arctic/article4180292/

    KomissarBojanchev
    Lieutenant Colonel
    Lieutenant Colonel

    Posts : 993
    Points : 1148
    Join date : 2012-08-05
    Age : 19
    Location : Varna, Bulgaria

    Re: Role of Soviet Νavy in the 80s

    Post  KomissarBojanchev on Sun Apr 14, 2013 10:30 pm

    A question about the cold war: were US carrier groups to be attacked by single soviet subs or would they be teamed in wolf packs? Would the carriers be attacked by the slower quitter sierras or by the very fast but noisy alfas? What purpose would kilos serve would they just go on coastal patrols in the Baltic sea and fjords or would they intercept NATO atlantic convoys?

    GarryB
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 15490
    Points : 16197
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    Re: Role of Soviet Νavy in the 80s

    Post  GarryB on Mon Apr 15, 2013 10:22 am

    Attacks on carrier groups would be coordinated and would involve a range of weapons and platforms. 650mm torpedoes would be launched early in the attack and would start hitting ships just after the first missiles had arrived with the intent that with the second wave of missiles which would mostly be ARMs would result in ships turning to meet the threat making themselves vulnerable to torpedos by manouvering to engage the incoming missiles.

    Subs like the Sierra and Akula and Alpha would have the role of finding and destroying their western equivalents, as well as sinking transports and support ships. The SSGNs will be engaging enemy carrier groups.

    The Kilos and Tangos would protect Russian Naval waters and ports from NATO SSN infiltration and engage any attempt at landing ground forces.


    _________________
    “The West won the world not by the superiority of its ideas or values or religion […] but rather by its superiority in applying organized violence. Westerners often forget this fact; non-Westerners never do.”

    ― Samuel P. Huntington, The Clash of Civilizations and the Remaking of World Order

    KomissarBojanchev
    Lieutenant Colonel
    Lieutenant Colonel

    Posts : 993
    Points : 1148
    Join date : 2012-08-05
    Age : 19
    Location : Varna, Bulgaria

    Re: Role of Soviet Νavy in the 80s

    Post  KomissarBojanchev on Mon Apr 15, 2013 2:24 pm

    The only modern soviet SSGNs during the 80s were the Oscar class and they were in a small number, while all other SSGNs were obsolete. Would it have been actually impossible for SSNs to substitute the Oscar in its duties when needed?

    TR1
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 5840
    Points : 5892
    Join date : 2011-12-06

    Soviet Navy in Cold War

    Post  TR1 on Mon Apr 15, 2013 8:35 pm

    KomissarBojanchev wrote:The only modern soviet SSGNs during the 80s were the Oscar class and they were in a small number, while all other SSGNs were obsolete. Would it have been actually impossible for SSNs to substitute the Oscar in its duties when needed?

    That's like saying the entire US navy save the few Ticonderoga ships in the mid 80s was obsolete.
    The 17 Project 670/670M boats had a useful anti-ship capability, and there were also the older Project 675 missile boats. These were old-school, but 14 of them were modified to use the mighty Bazalt and Vulkan missiles, giving them a potent stand-off capability.

    Flyingdutchman
    Lieutenant
    Lieutenant

    Posts : 557
    Points : 577
    Join date : 2013-07-30
    Location : The Netherlands

    Ulyanovsk class Aircraft carrier

    Post  Flyingdutchman on Wed Mar 19, 2014 3:14 pm

    I already asked this to TR1 but i'll make a thread of it because love these ships.
    If youre having any pictures of the Ulyanovsk please post them here.


    And i saw something that seemed so stupid to me:Were they planning to put granit anti-ship missiles in the runway of the ulyanovsk class?

    http://www.jeffhead.com/Russian-Carriers/Rus-cv-21.jpg

    http://www.ljplus.ru/img4/h/i/himmelwerft/ulyanovsk.gif

    GarryB
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 15490
    Points : 16197
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    Re: Role of Soviet Νavy in the 80s

    Post  GarryB on Thu Mar 20, 2014 1:48 am

    The Granit equivalent in the USN is the Harpoon.

    With the Granit the Soviet Carrier could get to 700km range and launch a barrage of Granits and then turn and leave the area with the Granit flying at mach 2.5 all the way to the target.

    If the Kh-35 had been used instead an Su-33 would have had to have taken off and flown 500km to get the same effect... and even then a Granit has more impact with a 7 ton missile carrying a payload that weighs more than a Kh-35 (750kgs vs 600kgs) hitting at supersonic speed is not really comparable.

    Pretty much the Granit is an anti ship missile with the aircraft flight already included in the missile that can be launched any time and in all weather while the aircraft on the U are for protecting the ships of the fleet... not risking their airframes trying to penetrate an AEGIS screen.


    _________________
    “The West won the world not by the superiority of its ideas or values or religion […] but rather by its superiority in applying organized violence. Westerners often forget this fact; non-Westerners never do.”

    ― Samuel P. Huntington, The Clash of Civilizations and the Remaking of World Order

    Flyingdutchman
    Lieutenant
    Lieutenant

    Posts : 557
    Points : 577
    Join date : 2013-07-30
    Location : The Netherlands

    Ulyanovsk CBG vs Nimitz CBG

    Post  Flyingdutchman on Wed Jul 16, 2014 1:57 pm

    Hey guys,

    I was wondering wich of these 2 Carrier Battle Groups would you give the edge when facing eachother in an empty ocean:



    1 Ulyanovsk class with: 25 SU-33, 20 MIG-29K, 8 YAK-44E, 20 KA-27PL

    1 kirov class

    1 slava class

    3 udaloy class

    1 sierra-class submarine


    Facing:

    1 nimitz class with: 24 F14 tomcat, 24 f 18 hornet, 12 A6-E, 6 E-2C, 4 EA-6B, 10 S-3A vikings, 6 seahawks.

    3 arleigh Burke class

    2 ticonderoga class

    1 Los Angeles class

    Flyingdutchman
    Lieutenant
    Lieutenant

    Posts : 557
    Points : 577
    Join date : 2013-07-30
    Location : The Netherlands

    Soviet navy in Cold War

    Post  Flyingdutchman on Sat Jul 26, 2014 4:30 pm

    Hey guys,

    I am currently reading the book "Red Storm Rising" and the attack on NATO is in the planning stages and they're Talking About enforcing a naval blockade in the Atlantic.

    Do you guys think Russia could enforce a succesfull naval blockade in the mid 80s in the atlantic?
    And how would ships like the Kirov, slava and especially the kiev class be used?


    Flyingdutchman

    Austin
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 5681
    Points : 6087
    Join date : 2010-05-08
    Age : 40
    Location : India

    Re: Role of Soviet Νavy in the 80s

    Post  Austin on Sun Jul 27, 2014 8:17 am

    I dont know how effective and large was the Soviet Navy was.

    But any blockade then as it is now by any party would be an act of war , so any blockade would easily escalate into war by the two parties.

    Flyingdutchman
    Lieutenant
    Lieutenant

    Posts : 557
    Points : 577
    Join date : 2013-07-30
    Location : The Netherlands

    Re: Role of Soviet Νavy in the 80s

    Post  Flyingdutchman on Sun Jul 27, 2014 10:02 am

    Yes, the plan was that they were already having war with the west.

    Werewolf
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 5391
    Points : 5640
    Join date : 2012-10-24

    Re: Role of Soviet Νavy in the 80s

    Post  Werewolf on Sun Jul 27, 2014 10:06 am

    Flyingdutchman wrote:Yes, the plan was that they were already having war with the west.
    ^

    Blockade in wartime?

    What kind of blackade are you talking about.

    Blockading just the sea ways with ramming with one ship the ones you try to keep away or sea bloackade of civilian transporters or even offensive blockade with sinking ships if necessary, because the last point would make sense in actual war between those parties and that would not be sea blockade but just a battlefield or develope to one, imo.

    Flyingdutchman
    Lieutenant
    Lieutenant

    Posts : 557
    Points : 577
    Join date : 2013-07-30
    Location : The Netherlands

    Re: Role of Soviet Νavy in the 80s

    Post  Flyingdutchman on Sun Jul 27, 2014 10:30 am

    Werewolf wrote:
    Flyingdutchman wrote:Yes, the plan was that they were already having war with the west.
    ^

    Blockade in wartime?

    What kind of blackade are you talking about.

    Blockading just the sea ways with ramming with one ship the ones you try to keep away or sea bloackade of civilian transporters or even offensive blockade with sinking ships if necessary, because the last point would make sense in actual war between those parties and that would not be sea blockade but just a battlefield or develope to one, imo.


    A naval blockade were they would sink ships That try to break through.
    Especially suppliers coming from the US and naval vessels aswell.

    Hannibal Barca
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 1219
    Points : 1241
    Join date : 2013-12-13

    Re: Role of Soviet Νavy in the 80s

    Post  Hannibal Barca on Sun Jul 27, 2014 10:50 am

    Back in the days of ww1 and ww2 submarines where cheap and easy to produce. During the 70s 80s where already hugely complicated.
    Although Soviets topped at some 200 nuclear submarines I don't think they could afford to have them around in Atlantic month after month, anti submarine warfare is too good now
    let alone that US had an about similar submarine navy.
    Surface ships are a joke, I bet they will not even leave harbor in such scenario. The only reason why Germans send Tirpitch and Bismark abroad was that strike aircraft at the time had a radius of about 300km and radars where non existent else, even by then a ship under air raids was a dead meat.
    Anyway submarine fleets was not indented to work as blockade or hunter-killer force but more like missile/torpedo carriers with stealth characteristics to heat land bases or infrastructure (satellites?), transatlantic wires and if lucky some capital ship like AC carries. Using Akulas to put down merchant ships 1/10th it's cost and 1000 more in numbers is idiocy.

    Flyingdutchman
    Lieutenant
    Lieutenant

    Posts : 557
    Points : 577
    Join date : 2013-07-30
    Location : The Netherlands

    Re: Role of Soviet Νavy in the 80s

    Post  Flyingdutchman on Sun Jul 27, 2014 11:01 am

    How usefull would a carrier be in such a scenario?

    GarryB
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 15490
    Points : 16197
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    Re: Role of Soviet Νavy in the 80s

    Post  GarryB on Sun Jul 27, 2014 12:49 pm

    The Atlantic is enormous... you could impose a blockade around a small island like Cuba, or Germany like the US and UK did respectively in the 1960s and 1914-1918 WWI period, but to say you are going to blockade the Atlantic is like saying you are going to use a finger to stop the water flowing down the Volga river...

    All they could really do is declare any civilian shipping to be banned and sink it as they come across it.

    A few 130mm shells through the bridge of the enemy ship would do the job most of the time but it would make rather more sense to block the Med and the Persian gulf to interrupt the supply of oil to the west.

    Perhaps a coup in Egypt and an alliance with Iran to sink oil tankers.

    the main problem is that the soviet navy was never intended for global operations and global conquest like the UK and then US navies were. A single Echo class sub could be very effective with anti ship missiles and torpedoes at sinking civilian transports and oil tankers but it would be a very inefficient use of such assets.


    _________________
    “The West won the world not by the superiority of its ideas or values or religion […] but rather by its superiority in applying organized violence. Westerners often forget this fact; non-Westerners never do.”

    ― Samuel P. Huntington, The Clash of Civilizations and the Remaking of World Order

    DJJerome
    Private
    Private

    Posts : 1
    Points : 1
    Join date : 2014-08-06

    Re: Role of Soviet Νavy in the 80s

    Post  DJJerome on Wed Aug 06, 2014 12:58 pm

    Dear Mindstorm,

    During my research for my upcoming master's thesis I came across your comments regarding US maritim strategy during the 1980s. There you make the argument that US planning was "suicidal" for a number of reasons.
    As I'm looking into US strategies aimed against Soviet A2/AD strategies in the 1980s and those against the PRC today, I would be interested if you had other sources than the one provided to back your claims. In particular regarding Soviet satellite capabilities, sub capabilities, and general soviet naval doctrine?
    Do you by any chance have any access or knowledge of declassified soviet documents on the matter? Western sources are of course readily available.

    Best regards

    Flyingdutchman
    Lieutenant
    Lieutenant

    Posts : 557
    Points : 577
    Join date : 2013-07-30
    Location : The Netherlands

    Re: Role of Soviet Νavy in the 80s

    Post  Flyingdutchman on Fri Aug 29, 2014 4:39 pm

    I have a few questions.

    1: Was the plan to fit the Uyanovsk class with bow sonars?

    2: in the early 1990s the su-27k was prefered above the mig-29k, so would the Ulyanovsk class have been constructed, would the Mig-29k have ever seen deployment or even deck landings and launches aboard the Ukyanovsk?

    3: was the plan to base one of the ulyanovsk class in the pacific?

    4: were the ulyanovsk class catapults able to launch fighter aircraft ( su-33 ) aswell or was it just for the YAK-44?


    Thanks alot,


    Flyingdutchman

    mack8
    Lieutenant Colonel
    Lieutenant Colonel

    Posts : 923
    Points : 983
    Join date : 2013-08-02

    Soviet navy unbuilt projects article

    Post  mack8 on Fri May 08, 2015 12:35 am

    Gents,

    Found this very, very interesting transcription here, unfortunately that seems to be a pay site, i was wondering if anyone knows if that transcript is available anywhere to copy and run it through a translator (i can make the technical details, but still) that would be great, not to mention getting all those ship diagrams!

    http://lib.rus.ec/b/388180/read

    I came across it while looking for anything having to do with soviet carriers, which is my most recent obsession lol.

    Thank you.


    mack8
    Lieutenant Colonel
    Lieutenant Colonel

    Posts : 923
    Points : 983
    Join date : 2013-08-02

    Re: Role of Soviet Νavy in the 80s

    Post  mack8 on Sun May 10, 2015 11:14 pm

    Nevermind, found what i was looking. For anyone interested, here it is, 31 pages in all:
    http://mreadz.com/new/index.php?id=676&pages=1

    nastle77
    Junior Sergeant
    Junior Sergeant

    Posts : 137
    Points : 179
    Join date : 2015-07-25

    ASuW excercises during soviet times

    Post  nastle77 on Sat Aug 01, 2015 7:44 pm

    I have read that the Soviet navy conducted many excercises with SSGN, SSN, ASM equipped bombers, ASuW cruisers/destroyers primarily aimed at targeting SAG of NATO

    Is there a source someone can recommend ( in English sadly I'm illiterate ) about these
    or better post some details here

    Thanks

    nastle77
    Junior Sergeant
    Junior Sergeant

    Posts : 137
    Points : 179
    Join date : 2015-07-25

    Milan Vego on soviet navy

    Post  nastle77 on Fri Aug 14, 2015 5:31 pm

    What is the opinion of the members here on Milan Vego who wrote the book "soviet naval tactics" and an expert on the issue

    Is he an objective unbiased source ?

    nastle77
    Junior Sergeant
    Junior Sergeant

    Posts : 137
    Points : 179
    Join date : 2015-07-25

    Soviet doctrine on using tactical nukes at sea

    Post  nastle77 on Wed Sep 23, 2015 5:54 pm

    Any source on this in English esp the tactics used to encounter western SAG , whether CVBG or simply DD based

    I was reading Milan Vego book on soviet naval tactics but it is largely silent on these issues

    Soviets had a number of ASM, SSM and SAM on board their ships nuclear armed and the whole design of ships seem to be geared towards a nuclear conflict at sea where they can potentially even the odds against more conventionally superior western navies

    Here I'm interested primarily in the ASUW tactics , the SSBN were a different issue which cannot be used for any tactical roles or even nuclear attack on other naval warships

    Sponsored content

    Re: Role of Soviet Νavy in the 80s

    Post  Sponsored content Today at 5:08 am


      Current date/time is Sun Dec 11, 2016 5:08 am