Ηistory of Soviet Navy

Interesting...

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

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?

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 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?

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.

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

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.

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

Hello
I wanted to know how many Tarantul III were operational by 1990 and if they were from the beginning armed with SSN-22 sunburn missiles

Thanks

nastle77 wrote:Hello
I wanted to know how many Tarantul III were operational by 1990 and if they were from the beginning armed with SSN-22 sunburn missiles

Thanks

Check here:
http://russianships.info/eng/warfareboats/project_12411.htm

SSN-21 Granat ( sampson) cruise missile



By 1990 which of the soviet Subamrines carried this missile ?

"The new Akula-class submarine, launched in September 1986, was the first class to receive the new missile. It was later fitted to the Sierra I/II class and eight Victor III's "

This blurb I found on Wikipedia and I know that One yankee class was modified to carry it as well

Does anybody know if this information is accurate ?

nastle77 wrote:SSN-21 Granat ( sampson) cruise missile



By 1990 which of the soviet Subamrines carried this missile ?

"The new Akula-class submarine, launched in September 1986, was the first class to receive the new missile. It was later fitted to the Sierra I/II class and eight Victor III's "

This blurb I found on Wikipedia and I know that One yankee class was modified to carry it as well

Does anybody know if this information is accurate ?

Do you really need to create a separate article for each of your questions, nastle77?

To answer your question, Victor III (a modified version, not all of them), Mike, Akula, Yankee Notch (3 were modified) and Sierra II carried Granat.

Wikipedia is inacurate. Sierra I never carried Granats, only torpedoes and rocket-torpedoes.

nastle77 wrote:SSN-21 Granat ( sampson) cruise missile



By 1990 which of the soviet Subamrines carried this missile ?

"The new Akula-class submarine, launched in September 1986, was the first class to receive the new missile. It was later fitted to the Sierra I/II class and eight Victor III's "

This blurb I found on Wikipedia and I know that One yankee class was modified to carry it as well

Does anybody know if this information is accurate ?

A single Pr.671, the K-323, was also fitted with the RK-55 missile.

http://www.military-today.com/navy/kara_class.htm

A single gas-turbine exhaust funnel dominated the large superstructure. On the ship's stern was a helicopter landing pad with a hangar partially recessed below the flight deck. To stow the ASW helicopter the hanger roof hatch and doors had to be opened; the helicopter was pushed in and then lowered to the deck via an elevator.

The ship's Shtorm (SA-N-3 Goblet) and Rastrub (SS-N-14 Silex) ASW missiles have secondary anti-ship capabilities, the former having a 25-kiloton nuclear warhead available in place of the normal 150-kg HE type. At the height of the Cold War it is believed that all Soviet ships with dual-capable weapon systems had at least 25 per cent of their missiles equipped with nuclear warheads while at sea.

Trying not to start too many new threads

These questions about Kara class

1-Is it true the SAN-3 had nuke warheads ? WHat were they used against a group of aircraft ? another ship ? since its a dual role missile

2-Did really soviet dual role weapons have 25 % nuke warheads at sea ?

Can the helicopters on the Kara class be also used for guidance for cruise missiles like the SSN-3a/b of other ships ?

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 ?

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

US ASUW Skills have been pretty bleak . Told you already . No idea about Russia asw skills .

Just wanted to see if any English language sources are available for this , e.g the ships involved in escorting the Cubans to angola and to safeguard the supplies to MPLA
Most specifically about a Kresta II cruiser Admiral Makarov which apparently provided fire support for the MPLA would be awesome if any details of this operation are known

What was the soviet doctrine for use of TNW ( tactical nuclear weapons) in naval warfare during the late cold war
I have not seen any work in English dedicated to this subject but passing references here or in other books articles

from what I can understand the following POTENTIAL uses

1-Attack enemy naval bases with TNW tipped cruise missiles

2-Use of TNW torpedoes to attack western SSBN and SSGN

3-Use of TNW tipped AS-4 by naval aviation Tu-22/16 to attack enemy SAG

4-Use of TNW tipped SAM against enemy aircraft

5-use of TNW tipped ASW rockets against subs by ASW ships


Is this true ? were the TNW a regular feature of soviet naval excercises ( mock use of them ofcourse) and were they serious about first use of TNW at sea , to counter their inferiority against superior western navies ?

any work/article in English dedicated to that will be appreciated

Sorry, can't help you with articles, but I have read in western literature that it was suspected that one role for the nuclear armed torpedoes was to fire one from a distance at a western port to take out the entire port.

Reportedly 1/4th of all major weapons on Russian ships were nuclear armed... from large calibre guns (ie 130mm), to large SAMs and of course anti ship and anti sub weapons.

^ appreciate it nevertheless
I suspect naval TNW have a higher chance of being used in anger than those on land.Plus the inferiority of the individual ships may bemore than compensated if they can get even one hot against a western SAG
What are your thoughts ?

Most of the western literature I read in the 80s thought that any nuclear conflict would likely start at sea simply because most vessels were likely equipped with nuclear weapons and when you know the enemy has nuclear weapons too it becomes a case of use it or lose the ability to use it...

Of course the naval component of WWIII was considered secondary and largely for the Soviets an opportunity to affect the US's ability to send troops and equipment to europe, and to launch SLBMs from safe areas.

With no lines of communications or main transport links the Soviets would not really be effected by their entire navy disappearing overnight.

Wanted to start this discussion
At the height of its power in the cold war in the 1980s the soviet navy was primarily a Sea denial navy or Sea control navy ?

Please present the arguments in favor of either one

Soviet Union aka Russia was always a global sea denial Navy.