Russia Defence Forum

Would you like to react to this message? Create an account in a few clicks or log in to continue.

Military Forum for Russian and Global Defence Issues


+66
kvs
ALAMO
Broski
Kiko
Backman
mnztr
Rodion_Romanovic
LMFS
dino00
Labrador
Hole
hoom
Luq man
wilhelm
miketheterrible
T-47
Big_Gazza
Benya
Singular_Transform
Isos
franco
KiloGolf
Giulio
Tsavo Lion
kopyo-21
GarryB
airstrike
Dima
JohninMK
Werewolf
eehnie
max steel
ult
artjomh
nastle77
Svyatoslavich
Cucumber Khan
d_taddei2
PapaDragon
GunshipDemocracy
Flanky
magnumcromagnon
Kyo
chicken
Stealthflanker
Cyberspec
Mike E
mack8
medo
flamming_python
calripson
GJ Flanker
Viktor
AlfaT8
runaway
George1
TheArmenian
Austin
Flyingdutchman
Corrosion
Hachimoto
KomissarBojanchev
SOC
TR1
Admin
sepheronx
70 posters

    Russian Naval Aviation: News

    Tsavo Lion
    Tsavo Lion

    Posts : 5685
    Points : 5673
    Join date : 2016-08-15
    Location : AZ, USA

    Russian Naval Aviation: News - Page 21 Empty Re: Russian Naval Aviation: News

    Post  Tsavo Lion Tue Dec 22, 2020 12:15 am

    https://vz.ru/society/2020/12/21/1076391.html

    some readers' comments agree with what I was saying.
    Rodion_Romanovic
    Rodion_Romanovic

    Posts : 1492
    Points : 1480
    Join date : 2015-12-30
    Location : Merkelland

    Russian Naval Aviation: News - Page 21 Empty Re: Russian Naval Aviation: News

    Post  Rodion_Romanovic Tue Dec 22, 2020 5:22 am

    Tsavo Lion wrote:https://vz.ru/society/2020/12/21/1076391.html

    some readers' comments agree with what I was saying.

    It is also correct the consideration of the importance of the coordination of carrier aviation with the ship operation, and the experience in naval operation of the ship captain. In the US navy, both the ship captain and the executive officer (also a captain by rank) must be naval aviators (usually F18 pilots (formerly also F14)). What happen is that if selected for command they need to do a special school for nuclear ship operation (a 6 months school called Naval Nuclear Power School) and then they return in a carrier as Prospective Executive officer and observe the iteration between the commanding officer and the executive officer, before taking the place of the XO for 18 months.
    If that was successful they are sent to command a large ship to gain experience (usually marine transport or oiler), since they are not career surface officer.

    Finally only after that they become prospective commanding officer of a naval carrier (and still keep in active flight status).

    This is important to ensure that the CO and XO are experienced in naval flight operation and to avoid problems.

    I remember having read of some bad consequences in a british aircraft carrier several decades ago, when the ship captain (a surface officer without any aviation experience) ignored the requests and the suggestion of the chief air group (the commander of the ship air wing).

    In the case of Russia, probably they should try to do the same... e.g. take 3 or 4 of the experienced mig 29k and su33 pilots and give them a naval surface command training and possibly put one or two of them in command of a large replenishment ship for a year or two.

    I know that they have very few naval aviator, but that is important.

    In the meanwhile try to find some way of training more pilots and keep them qualified, e.g with some exchange program with the indian navy (sending a few pilots to do take off and landings from the indian carrier and inviting indian pilots in the training facilities in saki and yevsk...
    GarryB
    GarryB

    Posts : 31018
    Points : 31544
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    Russian Naval Aviation: News - Page 21 Empty Re: Russian Naval Aviation: News

    Post  GarryB Wed Dec 23, 2020 12:22 am

    Yeah, you could argue that having someone who used to fly planes controlling the ship and the carrier group would be good, but you could turn that around and say having pilots run your carriers groups will result in an air focus that might get your ships sunk by submarine attack.... surely the carrier commander should be a submarine captain because a sub captain has a better appreciation of the vulnerability of ships to subs and the vulnerability of ships and subs to aircraft too.

    Essentially the doctrine and training for all commanders should be rich and varied and not rely on certain experiences to be had for it to be appreciated.

    They don't need to be sub captains to appreciate the threat submarines represent, so needing them to be pilots would not be that critical either.

    Also the requirements for airpower in the british and us navies are different from the Russian navy... in the Russian navy the carriers are essentially an extension of their IADS... their air defence network... it has recon functions but most of the time it is airborne early warning and combat air patrol that can go out and inspect suspicious things... in war time if you don't want to risk a manned aircraft sending out a naval S-70 with an optical targeting pod perhaps could be sent out to the midst of a group of air targets.... if they turn out to be Tomahawks and are heading towards the fleet it can start tracking them and perhaps take down some with onboard air to air missiles... if they are a flight of F-35s it can try and get as many as it can and also sound the alarm...

    Essentially the targets will be IDed as hostile if they open fire or are missiles in route to the group... if they are 20 hot air balloons in a race in the middle of nowhere... well carry on...

    The point is that with aircraft you can go and have a look without risking an entire ship...

    With simulator technology what it is today pretty much all Russian commanders should get simulated experience using air power with their surface fleet and fellow air qualified commanders can try and attack them with air power to find weaknesses in their plans and tactics and it can all be reviewed and discussed later on so there is no excuse for commanders to under use their air power...
    Hole
    Hole

    Posts : 4660
    Points : 4648
    Join date : 2018-03-24
    Age : 45
    Location : Merkelland

    Russian Naval Aviation: News - Page 21 Empty Re: Russian Naval Aviation: News

    Post  Hole Fri Dec 25, 2020 5:17 am

    Inside Il-38N
    Russian Naval Aviation: News - Page 21 Eqeilp10

    GarryB, franco, George1 and LMFS like this post

    Rodion_Romanovic
    Rodion_Romanovic

    Posts : 1492
    Points : 1480
    Join date : 2015-12-30
    Location : Merkelland

    Russian Naval Aviation: News - Page 21 Empty Re: Russian Naval Aviation: News

    Post  Rodion_Romanovic Fri Dec 25, 2020 7:19 am

    GarryB wrote:Yeah, you could argue that having someone who used to fly planes controlling the ship and the carrier group would be good, but you could turn that around and say having pilots run your carriers groups will result in an air focus that might get your ships sunk by submarine attack.... surely the carrier commander should be a submarine captain because a sub captain has a better appreciation of the vulnerability of ships to subs and the vulnerability of ships and subs to aircraft too.

    Essentially the doctrine and training for all commanders should be rich and varied and not rely on certain experiences to be had for it to be appreciated.

    They don't need to be sub captains to appreciate the threat submarines represent, so needing them to be pilots would not be that critical either.

    Also the requirements for airpower in the british and us navies are different from the Russian navy... in the Russian navy the carriers are essentially an extension of their IADS... their air defence network... it has recon functions but most of the time it is airborne early warning and combat air patrol that can go out and inspect suspicious things... in war time if you don't want to risk a manned aircraft sending out a naval S-70 with an optical targeting pod perhaps could be sent out to the midst of a group of air targets.... if they turn out to be Tomahawks and are heading towards the fleet it can start tracking them and perhaps take down some with onboard air to air missiles... if they are a flight of F-35s it can try and get as many as it can and also sound the alarm...

    Essentially the targets will be IDed as hostile if they open fire or are missiles in route to the group... if they are 20 hot air balloons in a race in the middle of nowhere... well carry on...

    The point is that with aircraft you can go and have a look without risking an entire ship...

    With simulator technology what it is today pretty much all Russian commanders should get simulated experience using air power with their surface fleet and fellow air qualified commanders can try and attack them with air power to find weaknesses in their plans and tactics and it can all be reviewed and discussed later on so there is no excuse for commanders to under use their air power...
    they just need to be trained in anti sub warfare, as any competent ship officer.

    However the main purpose of an aircraft carrier is to be a moving airfield for the air wing, thus is beneficial that the CO and the XO are experienced naval aviators.

    For the same reason the commander of an air force base is an air force pilot.  

    Of course, that means that some of the naval aviators will have to go into surface command school, and have some experience commanding a ship with large displacement (e.g a Oiler, replenishment ship, or even an amphibious transport ship).

    Where is the problem in that? Furthermore while good pilots can can keep their wings until late in their career, active combat pilots are normally younger men.

    Not all of the good naval pilots will become Instructor,  test pilots or chief of air group.

    Some of them will leave the service or will end up in a non flying role within the armed forces.

    Anyway, Russia needs to train more naval aviators and keep the one they have in the navy structure and with an active flight status (and current with their takeoff and landings from a carrier).

    Maybe they could try to give carrier experience also to the navy pilots of land based fighters (the navy has 22 su30SM). They could include in their training also carrier qualification flights from a mig29k or a su33 and refreshers every 6 months.

    Russia could also build additional carrier capable su25 for training purposes of new naval aviators,
    to ease a bit the needs of mig29k and su33.

    Just only for this reason the Admiral Kuznetov is fundamental.

    The two simulators in Saki and Yevsk are extremely important, but they cannot fully substitute actual carrier experience.
    Tsavo Lion
    Tsavo Lion

    Posts : 5685
    Points : 5673
    Join date : 2016-08-15
    Location : AZ, USA

    Russian Naval Aviation: News - Page 21 Empty Re: Russian Naval Aviation: News

    Post  Tsavo Lion Fri Dec 25, 2020 12:36 pm

    Russia could also build additional carrier capable su25 for training purposes of new naval aviators, to ease a bit the needs of mig29k and su33.
    Navalized cheaper trainer planes on board a real flight deck with rump on a towed barge in the Azov, Caspian or Black Sea could be safer & less risky for pilots to train on before going on deployments.
    GarryB
    GarryB

    Posts : 31018
    Points : 31544
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    Russian Naval Aviation: News - Page 21 Empty Re: Russian Naval Aviation: News

    Post  GarryB Fri Dec 25, 2020 8:26 pm

    However the main purpose of an aircraft carrier is to be a moving airfield for the air wing, thus is beneficial that the CO and the XO are experienced naval aviators.

    In western navies that moving airfield provides air defence but also attack functions too.... for the Russian navy the primary attack function comes from missiles... anti ship and land attack.

    With 4,500km range land attack cruise missiles why would they need dedicated attack aircraft to penetrate enemy airspace with strike and fighter and support aircraft when an attack on a target could be achieved with a single cruise missile...

    The US and UK and French navies are different from the Russian Navy and the use of aircraft carriers in the Russian Navy will be different.

    In a sense in the west the aircraft carrier is the core of the carrier group and provides air defence and long range attack functions, while the cruisers and destroyers carry the surface to air missiles and radars to defend the carriers.

    The Russian carriers are there to defend the cruisers and destroyers and submarines of the Russian fleet and are present to improve the defence of those surface ships... not the other way around.


    For the same reason the commander of an air force base is an air force pilot.

    But the commander of an air force base does not control the entire military district... in Russia the army commander is ultimately in charge on the land with the air force providing services of air defence and air strike against the enemy... but the airfield commander does not direct the land forces... just like at sea they wont direct the naval surface and sub surface forces either...


    Of course, that means that some of the naval aviators will have to go into surface command school, and have some experience commanding a ship with large displacement (e.g a Oiler, replenishment ship, or even an amphibious transport ship).

    Wouldn't it be easier to have ship captains do a weekend course flying drones....

    Where is the problem in that? Furthermore while good pilots can can keep their wings until late in their career, active combat pilots are normally younger men.

    Not all of the good naval pilots will become Instructor, test pilots or chief of air group.

    Some of them will leave the service or will end up in a non flying role within the armed forces.

    Anyway, Russia needs to train more naval aviators and keep the one they have in the navy structure and with an active flight status (and current with their takeoff and landings from a carrier).

    How many naval pilots want to command ships?

    I would think most would want to fly planes and helicopters....

    Over the next few years the role of manned aircraft will likely diminish... manned fighters wont need enormous flight ranges to protect the ships they are operating with and AWACS just need to operate near the carriers they are protecting. For longer range recon missions or perhaps even strike missions against countries with poor air defence capacity... which is most of them... a few drones with cheap dumb bombs and a few self defence AAMs could probably replace all the extra air platforms needed for a manned strike package... and MALE and HALE recon aircraft can be smaller and lighter and cheaper and with better range and speed without people on board.

    Maybe they could try to give carrier experience also to the navy pilots of land based fighters (the navy has 22 su30SM). They could include in their training also carrier qualification flights from a mig29k or a su33 and refreshers every 6 months.

    The Su-57 is reported to be able to be used in an unmanned configuration and the new LMFS might be the same... meaning pilots might sit in carriers controlling aircraft in the future...


    Russia could also build additional carrier capable su25 for training purposes of new naval aviators,
    to ease a bit the needs of mig29k and su33.

    They now have two land based carrier training facilities and the Kuznetsov itself... I think training more aircrew should not be too much of a problem...

    The two simulators in Saki and Yevsk are extremely important, but they cannot fully substitute actual carrier experience.

    They accurately simulate the physical experience much better than any flight simulator, but I would expect newer aircraft designs like Su-57 and LMFS should be able to make landing almost automatic anyway... they should be the easiest aircraft to fly... it is more like they will be managed than flown really.

    Navalized cheaper trainer planes on board a real flight deck with rump on a towed barge in the Azov, Caspian or Black Sea could be safer & less risky for pilots to train on before going on deployments.

    At one time they had no land based training facilities.... right now they have more land based facilities than sea based ones, which should allow training to the required standards easily enough.

    Tsavo Lion
    Tsavo Lion

    Posts : 5685
    Points : 5673
    Join date : 2016-08-15
    Location : AZ, USA

    Russian Naval Aviation: News - Page 21 Empty Re: Russian Naval Aviation: News

    Post  Tsavo Lion Fri Dec 25, 2020 8:58 pm

    Nothing beats the real thing- even with 2 NITKAS operational 24/7/364, w/o a 2nd TAKR/CV, a training CV will prepare pilots & deck personnel better for deployments. It'll also shorten the time needed for pilots' real carrier flight ops qualifications.
    franco
    franco

    Posts : 4495
    Points : 4527
    Join date : 2010-08-17

    Russian Naval Aviation: News - Page 21 Empty Re: Russian Naval Aviation: News

    Post  franco Sat Jan 09, 2021 9:04 am

    The Russian naval aviation will adopt the Kinzhal hypersonic missiles, the Izvestia TV channel reports. They will go to the 98th mixed regiment as part of the Northern Fleet on the Kola Peninsula and to the 317th Pacific Regiment in Kamchatka. The Kh-47M "Dagger" hypersonic missile has a range of up to 2,000 km and a speed of Mach 10-12. A converted MiG-31K fighter is used as a carrier. The Aegis missile defense system will not cope with the Daggers. MiGs of Russian naval aviation armed with "hypersound" are capable of repelling any enemy, Izvestia.ru reports. "Dagger" is the latest Russian aviation missile system (ARC), which includes the MiG-31K carrier aircraft and a hypersonic missile. The world learned about the presence of this weapon in Russia in March 2018, and on May 9 of the same year, two MiG-31K fighters with Dagger complexes took part for the first time in the aviation part of the Victory Parade in Moscow. The complex's hypersonic missiles are capable of striking both stationary objects and surface ships: aircraft carriers, cruisers, destroyers and frigates. ARK "Dagger" is an aviation version of the "Iskander" complex. The debut demonstration of the Russian hypersonic aviation missile kit (ARC) "Dagger" took place at the International Military-Technical Forum "Army-2020". This happened within the framework of the static display of aviation equipment at the Kubinka airfield of the Army-2020 aviation cluster. The Russian Aerospace Forces was first demonstrated by the ARC "Dagger" as part of the MiG-31K carrier aircraft with tail number 89 and the "Dagger" rocket, according to VTS "Bastion".

    LMFS and Hole like this post

    LMFS
    LMFS

    Posts : 3921
    Points : 3923
    Join date : 2018-03-03

    Russian Naval Aviation: News - Page 21 Empty Re: Russian Naval Aviation: News

    Post  LMFS Sat Jan 09, 2021 5:44 pm

    Link to the news above:

    https://iz.ru/1105644/dmitrii-boltenkov/kinzhal-v-nozhnakh-kakie-preimushchestva-kompleks-dast-vmf

    Interesting:

    Thus, it seems that the future air regiments will consist of at least two squadrons, one of which will play the role of air defense and protection of the MiG-31K, and the other will include the MiG-31K carriers themselves.


    So one sqd MiG-31BM and one MiG-31K thumbsup

    franco likes this post

    GarryB
    GarryB

    Posts : 31018
    Points : 31544
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    Russian Naval Aviation: News - Page 21 Empty Re: Russian Naval Aviation: News

    Post  GarryB Sun Jan 10, 2021 3:09 am

    Nothing beats the real thing- even with 2 NITKAS operational 24/7/364, w/o a 2nd TAKR/CV, a training CV will prepare pilots & deck personnel better for deployments. It'll also shorten the time needed for pilots' real carrier flight ops qualifications.

    Outside of war time the Kuznetsov spends most of its time in training. The conflict in Syria actually gave them the added bonus of using C4IR resources and planning missions as well as sending aircraft. The sending aircraft didn't last long because of arrester gear issues, but all the planning and management went on on the carrier including likely using satellites and other assets like drones or special forces on the ground to check battle damage results and evaluate missions and decide if a follow up mission is needed or not... and any change in plans or munitions are needed to make the repeat attack more effective.

    With two ground based training centres, a soon to be back in the water carrier and likely quite a few computer based simulators they have plenty of potential when it comes to training pilots... rotary, fixed wing and drone pilots.

    Thus, it seems that the future air regiments will consist of at least two squadrons, one of which will play the role of air defense and protection of the MiG-31K, and the other will include the MiG-31K carriers themselves.

    So one sqd MiG-31BM and one MiG-31K

    Makes a lot of sense because the potency of the aircraft and missile makes the airfield they operate from a very high priority target for stealthy missiles and other secret attacks. Hope there are Pantsir/TOR S-350/S-400 batteries there too.
    Tsavo Lion
    Tsavo Lion

    Posts : 5685
    Points : 5673
    Join date : 2016-08-15
    Location : AZ, USA

    Russian Naval Aviation: News - Page 21 Empty Re: Russian Naval Aviation: News

    Post  Tsavo Lion Sun Jan 10, 2021 11:31 am

    Outside of war time the Kuznetsov spends most of its time in training.
    I doubt it- from what I heard over the years, after spending a few weeks/months at sea, it stays the rest of a given the year in port or in the yard.
    The AW gets even less training as it's based on the Kola with bad weather most of the time.
    That's why IMO they should be all based in Crimea or Novorossiysk, with much better weather, big Zaliv Shipyard, & NITKAs nearby.
    GarryB
    GarryB

    Posts : 31018
    Points : 31544
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    Russian Naval Aviation: News - Page 21 Empty Re: Russian Naval Aviation: News

    Post  GarryB Sun Jan 10, 2021 11:07 pm

    I doubt it- from what I heard over the years, after spending a few weeks/months at sea, it stays the rest of a given the year in port or in the yard.

    When it had only tired old Su-33s from the 1980s then yeah... there was not much they were doing with it... now it has a new air group of modern fighters they will want to play with their new toys.

    The AW gets even less training as it's based on the Kola with bad weather most of the time.

    They have to train in the places they will be operating... no point going to a lake to practise because they wouldn't get it... no aircraft carriers allowed.

    Operating in poor weather is more important than operating in good weather... train like the mean to fight.

    That's why IMO they should be all based in Crimea or Novorossiysk, with much better weather, big Zaliv Shipyard, & NITKAs nearby.

    The purpose of the carriers is mobile air power to support large ship operations... how many carrier groups will they base in Tartus?

    And what would be the point of operating a carrier group in the Med... it would be like the US wanting to send a carrier group to the Caspian Sea... way too vulnerable to enemy land based air power.... they would be very quickly crushed...

    The focus is the Arctic and the Far East. Screw Europe.
    Tsavo Lion
    Tsavo Lion

    Posts : 5685
    Points : 5673
    Join date : 2016-08-15
    Location : AZ, USA

    Russian Naval Aviation: News - Page 21 Empty Re: Russian Naval Aviation: News

    Post  Tsavo Lion Mon Jan 11, 2021 12:26 am

    GarryB wrote:They have to train in the places they will be operating... no point going to a lake to practice because they wouldn't get it... no aircraft carriers allowed.-it's still a TAKR, not a CV with only an AW as an offensive weapon.

    Operating in poor weather is more important than operating in good weather... train like the mean to fight.- there's plenty of poor & less then ideal weather in the Black & Med. Seas in fall/winter & spring; for the new pilots honing their skills, good flying conditions r safer.

    The purpose of the carriers is mobile air power to support large ship operations... how many carrier groups will they base in Tartus?- the Adm. K is mostly a training ship, & it was & will be sent to E. Med. Sea many times anyway.

    And what would be the point of operating a carrier group in the Med... it would be like the US wanting to send a carrier group to the Caspian Sea... way too vulnerable to enemy land based air power.... they would be very quickly crushed...- on it's way there or open Atlantic, it'll need to transit narrow N. Atlantic near Norway, GIUKG, the N. Sea, the English Channel, & Gibraltar, which will make it no less vulnerable to enemy land based air power & subs. Adm. K will have a CGN & SSN/GN escorts + the support of land based aviation from Syria, Libya, & Egypt.
    The Caspian has no strait to get in it, but the Black Sea does, & unless the Montreux Convention is annulled, CVNs can't go there.


    The focus is the Arctic and the Far East. Screw Europe.
    until they get at least 2 more CV/Ns, the focus can only be on safe training & exercises with occasional deployments to the Med. Sea.
    LMFS
    LMFS

    Posts : 3921
    Points : 3923
    Join date : 2018-03-03

    Russian Naval Aviation: News - Page 21 Empty Re: Russian Naval Aviation: News

    Post  LMFS Wed Jan 27, 2021 5:37 pm

    Naval Su-30SM in Crimea armed with Kh-31, ready to attend Donald Cook in case of need Wink

    Russian Naval Aviation: News - Page 21 EsunpX8XEAAuCyP?format=jpg&name=large
    Russian Naval Aviation: News - Page 21 EsunpxUXMAMRh4R?format=jpg&name=large
    Russian Naval Aviation: News - Page 21 EsunqH5W4AUcnze?format=jpg&name=large
    Russian Naval Aviation: News - Page 21 EsunqhDXAAE_OId?format=jpg&name=large

    franco, medo, George1, dino00, kvs, PapaDragon, zepia and like this post

    GarryB
    GarryB

    Posts : 31018
    Points : 31544
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    Russian Naval Aviation: News - Page 21 Empty Re: Russian Naval Aviation: News

    Post  GarryB Thu Jan 28, 2021 5:44 am

    -it's still a TAKR, not a CV with only an AW as an offensive weapon.

    It is a CV, its strike component is 12 Granit long range anti ship missiles.

    - there's plenty of poor & less then ideal weather in the Black & Med. Seas in fall/winter & spring; for the new pilots honing their skills, good flying conditions r safer.

    The Kuznetsov is a CV and can't access the Med from the Black Sea and vice versa.

    - the Adm. K is mostly a training ship, & it was & will be sent to E. Med. Sea many times anyway.

    It will become primarily a training ship when there are alternative carriers... right now it is the best air defence Russia can provide for its ships on overseas operations.

    Russian Naval Aviation: News - Page 21 Screen13

    .- on it's way there or open Atlantic, it'll need to transit narrow N. Atlantic near Norway, GIUKG, the N. Sea, the English Channel, & Gibraltar, which will make it no less vulnerable to enemy land based air power & subs. Adm. K will have a CGN & SSN/GN escorts + the support of land based aviation from Syria, Libya, & Egypt.

    What narrow N Atlantic?

    Compared with the tiny Black Sea which has half its borders with HATO friendly countries, the straights that lead to the med... dominated by a HATO country, and then the entire length of the Mediterranean sea with HATO countries along the entire length to the north... the north atlantic is an open sea with plenty of empty space... and easy access.

    unless the Montreux Convention is annulled, CVNs can't go there.

    Which makes any CVN operations there redundant.. and counter productive because it is already in range of Russian based air power and ground launched missiles.

    until they get at least 2 more CV/Ns, the focus can only be on safe training & exercises with occasional deployments to the Med. Sea.

    They can't base the Kuznetsov in the Black Sea and they wont base it in Tartus... they will either base it in the Pacific Fleet to support the new helicopter carriers that will be based there to beef up Russian forces near the Kuriles or it will go to the North Sea Fleet with the second two new helicopter carriers they will make after the first two...
    Isos
    Isos

    Posts : 8030
    Points : 8014
    Join date : 2015-11-06

    Russian Naval Aviation: News - Page 21 Empty Re: Russian Naval Aviation: News

    Post  Isos Thu Jan 28, 2021 5:55 am

    They can't base the Kuznetsov in the Black Sea and they wont base it in Tartus... they will either base it in the Pacific Fleet to support the new helicopter carriers that will be based there to beef up Russian forces near the Kuriles or it will go to the North Sea Fleet with the second two new helicopter carriers they will make after the first two...

    Well now they have the northern routes to connect Pacific and northern fleets. So we will see the Kuznetsov do the trip quite often if they use it for not only training.

    That will be true also for the helicopter carriers and Kirov cruisers.

    IMO they could open a new base at mid-way between Murmansk and Vladivostok.
    Tsavo Lion
    Tsavo Lion

    Posts : 5685
    Points : 5673
    Join date : 2016-08-15
    Location : AZ, USA

    Russian Naval Aviation: News - Page 21 Empty Re: Russian Naval Aviation: News

    Post  Tsavo Lion Thu Jan 28, 2021 12:33 pm

    GarryB wrote:
    -it's still a TAKR, not a CV with only an AW as an offensive weapon.
    It is a CV, its strike component is 12 Granit long range anti ship missiles. The Kuznetsov is a CV and can't access the Med from the Black Sea and vice versa.
    -it's a hybrid, but since it has LR AShMs, the AW isn't its primary weapon, therefore it's not a true CV. The K in TAKR stands for "Kreyser" or "cruiser" in English. Cruisers can go to/from the Black Sea. All Kiev TAKRs were built in Nikolayev & transferred to N & Pac Fleets.

    - the Adm. K is mostly a training ship, & it was & will be sent to E. Med. Sea many times anyway.
    It will become primarily a training ship when there are alternative carriers... right now it is the best air defence Russia can provide for its ships on overseas operations.- since now & in the foreseeable future there are no alternative carriers, it's a training ship by default.
    What narrow N Atlantic? - Norway, Iceland, UK & Greenland surrounding it r all in NATO; the USN 2nd fleet is going to have subs, ships & aircraft there as it did in the cold war, if not more.
    unless the Montreux Convention is annulled, CVNs can't go there.
    Which makes any CVN operations there redundant.. and counter productive because it is already in range of Russian based air power and ground launched missiles.- In the European theater, the Med. Sea is where the VMF CVNs will be operating anyway & most of the time when not in training.
    until they get at least 2 more CV/Ns, the focus can only be on safe training & exercises with occasional deployments to the Med. Sea.
    They can't base the Kuznetsov in the Black Sea and they wont base it in Tartus...
    If they don't base it in the Black Sea, they will waste more $. I partially agree with those who say it's useless- only that it's operationally useless in the N. Fleet. The only benefit of having it there is to show the flag while sailing past Norway, UK & France in the N. Atlantic. Even at that, its black smoke & a tug led to a lot of ridicule.
    GarryB
    GarryB

    Posts : 31018
    Points : 31544
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    Russian Naval Aviation: News - Page 21 Empty Re: Russian Naval Aviation: News

    Post  GarryB Thu Jan 28, 2021 8:23 pm

    IMO they could open a new base at mid-way between Murmansk and Vladivostok.

    The new North Sea Trade Route will be good for those ports along that route because ships can stop off and get supplies, or minor repairs etc.

    If they start building rail lines down from those northern ports to the main line across Russia then it will be even more flexible.

    New airfields are appearing there, and new ports and new naval bases are likely too.

    -it's a hybrid, but since it has LR AShMs, the AW isn't its primary weapon, therefore it's not a true CV.

    Its primary weapon is not anti ship missiles used to sink enemy ships... its primary weapon is to fly AEW helicopters and fighter aircraft to defend the surface group from enemy air attack. The anti ship missiles are secondary... just like the self defence SAMs and guns it carries.

    It is a CV.

    A Kiev class carrier with most of the front of its deck covered in weapons is a hybrid cruiser/aircraft carrier... in fact it is rather likely that the Granits will be replaced with UKSK launch tubes and will end up carrying anti submarine missiles or even land attack missiles instead... there is no need for the K to carry large numbers of attack missiles because it will be operating with Kirovs and Yasens that carry a whole lot more missiles with the Kirovs to be replaced by probably slightly smaller ships with probably rather more missiles.

    The K in TAKR stands for "Kreyser" or "cruiser" in English. Cruisers can go to/from the Black Sea.

    I know, but the K is not a cruiser, it is an air defence carrier...

    Turkey let the Kiev and Kuznetsov and Ulyanovsk class ships leave the Black Sea but I doubt Russia would want to nor would Turkey allow them to go back in and out on a regular basis operationally... except for very occasional repairs.

    All Kiev TAKRs were built in Nikolayev & transferred to N & Pac Fleets.

    And all left and didn't go back except for repairs because Nikolayev was their only yard able to handle such ships, but now Nikolayev is not part of Russia so there is no reason to send any carrier of any type into the Black Sea.

    - since now & in the foreseeable future there are no alternative carriers, it's a training ship by default.

    No... the reverse is true... they have two land based training facilities, and it is their only carrier so without any alternative carrier to do the job of defending Russian surface ships away from Russian airspace then it is their air defence carrier. After they have built one CVN and put it to sea then the K might be relegated to training only, but operationally all aircraft carriers anywhere in the world cycle through operational and training and upgrade/overhaul. Even when on operation they will be training for all sorts of situations including flooding compartments and fires etc etc... just like any other ship in any other navy, because otherwise on any trip it would be a bit boring and monotonous.

    - Norway, Iceland, UK & Greenland surrounding it r all in NATO; the USN 2nd fleet is going to have subs, ships & aircraft there as it did in the cold war, if not more.

    So what... are you suggesting there are no HATO subs and ships in the Med and Black Sea?

    The Norway Iceland UK and Greenland gap is fucking enormous, and the US putting all of its fleets ships and submarines wont stop Russian ships sailing through there to get to the north atlantic...

    - In the European theater, the Med. Sea is where the VMF CVNs will be operating anyway & most of the time when not in training.

    Why?

    It would make more sense when they have CVNs and the Kuznetsov to operate away from Europe... they can head down into the Atlantic and visit countries in Central and South America and Africa, or they can transit their own NSR and head through the Pacific to central and south america, Asia, the pacific ocean and the other side of Africa and the middle east...

    The Med is full of hostile enemy states called the EU... a few ships or subs might visit Egypt and other countries there like Syria but not carriers groups... just not necessary.

       
    If they don't base it in the Black Sea, they will waste more $.

    They can't base it in the Black Sea, it is a carrier. The entire Black Sea is an enclosed lake covered mostly by HATO or hostile countries... Russian land based air power would be stretched but should be able to defeat any HATO surface force operating in the Black Sea... they certainly wouldn't benefit from having an aircraft carrier there.

    Having the Kuznetsov there would also mean having the two upgraded Kirov cruisers there too and the new helicopter carriers and the Slava class cruisers with upgrades... because they would all be part of the same surface action group... that is too big a force to keep in the Black Sea... even if in times of tension it managed to get to Tartus it would lack the air support from Russia and be jammed between the hostile forces of Turkey and Israel... but also all of HATO...

    In comparison, operating in the Northern Fleet it would be ideal to sail north with the support of ice breakers and submarines and could use its air power to attack US AEGIS class cruisers trying to intercept Russian ICBMs and bombers on their way past towards the US.

    When there is no war happening it could say either to the Pacific or Atlantic ocean to visit countries around the world and promote Russian interests.

    Which would be a damn site more useful than pissing around in the Med.

    The only benefit of having it there is to show the flag while sailing past Norway, UK & France in the N. Atlantic.

    I would say the regular visits to newly independent Scotland might lead to a few sales of Su-35s and S-400 and TOR systems to the new country...  Twisted Evil

    Remember it is in their national anthem... rebellious scots to crush...
    Tsavo Lion
    Tsavo Lion

    Posts : 5685
    Points : 5673
    Join date : 2016-08-15
    Location : AZ, USA

    Russian Naval Aviation: News - Page 21 Empty Re: Russian Naval Aviation: News

    Post  Tsavo Lion Thu Jan 28, 2021 9:41 pm

    GarryB wrote:
    -it's a hybrid, but since it has LR AShMs, the AW isn't its primary weapon, therefore it's not a true CV.
    Its primary weapon is not anti ship missiles used to sink enemy ships... its primary weapon is to fly AEW helicopters and fighter aircraft to defend the surface group from enemy air attack. The anti ship missiles are secondary... just like the self defence SAMs and guns it carries. It is a CV.- since it has LR AShMs which r more destructive than its planes, while officially designated as a TAKR, not CV or aircraft carrier, the Turks have no legal reason to block its movements in peacetime. If need be, it could sail with just helos to the Med. Sea & get its fighters flown in there via Iran & Iraq.
    in fact it is rather likely that the Granits will be replaced with UKSK launch tubes and will end up carrying anti submarine missiles or even land attack missiles instead...- their types r not relevant, if the AW isn't the only offensive weapon on board.
    The K in TAKR stands for "Kreyser" or "cruiser" in English. Cruisers can go to/from the Black Sea.
    I know, but the K is not a cruiser, it is an air defence carrier...- it's also a cruiser capable of sinking warships & hitting land targets w/o using its aircraft.
    Turkey let the Kiev and Kuznetsov and Ulyanovsk class ships leave the Black Sea but I doubt Russia would want to nor would Turkey allow them to go back in and out on a regular basis operationally... except for very occasional repairs.- the Ulyanovsk wasn't finished & got scrapped; the Adm. K can go there for repairs & stay there as a training ship to save $ & to avoid possible future embarrassments.
    All Kiev TAKRs were built in Nikolayev & transferred to N & Pac Fleets.
    And all left and didn't go back except for repairs because Nikolayev was their only yard able to handle such ships, but now Nikolayev is not part of Russia so there is no reason to send any carrier of any type into the Black Sea.- there is Zaliv yard that can substitute for it & the 1 in Kola.
    - since now & in the foreseeable future there are no alternative carriers, it's a training ship by default.
    No... the reverse is true... they have two land based training facilities, and it is their only carrier so without any alternative carrier to do the job of defending Russian surface ships away from Russian airspace then it is their air defence carrier. After they have built one CVN and put it to sea then the K might be relegated to training only, ..- as the sole TAKR, it's to valuable to risk sending it that far; the VMF will have other surface ships with S-400/500s & land based aviation to support a naval group.
    - Norway, Iceland, UK & Greenland surrounding it r all in NATO; the USN 2nd fleet is going to have subs, ships & aircraft there as it did in the cold war, if not more.
    So what... are you suggesting there are no HATO subs and ships in the Med and Black Sea?- no, but there r AFBs & Bastion AshMs the Russians can use in BS & the E. Med. region to help the Adm K.

    The Norway Iceland UK and Greenland gap is fucking enormous, and the US putting all of its fleets ships and submarines wont stop Russian ships sailing through there to get to the north atlantic...-but farther south there's Bemuda-Labrador-Azores-Portugal quadrangle it must pass through. The NATO subs, ships & aircraft won't loose the VMF CBG, even if they don't use their own CV/Ns to track it. The Gibraltar is also an ideal ambush site.

    - In the European theater, the Med. Sea is where the VMF CVNs will be operating anyway & most of the time when not in training.
    Why? It would make more sense when they have CVNs and the Kuznetsov to operate away from Europe... they can head down into the Atlantic and visit countries in Central and South America and Africa, or they can transit their own NSR and head through the Pacific to central and south america, Asia, the pacific ocean and the other side of Africa and the middle east...- sure, but is it going to be worth it? For visits, other big ships can be used with the same results.
    The Med is full of hostile enemy states called the EU... a few ships or subs might visit Egypt and other countries there like Syria but not carriers groups... just not necessary.- for the "real world" training, I expect them to continue sending the Adm. K & future CVNs there.

    If they don't base it in the Black Sea, they will waste more $.
    ..The entire Black Sea is an enclosed lake covered mostly by HATO or hostile countries...- the CV-16/17 r also deploying to the SC Sea bathtub with hostile Vietnam, Philippines & Indonesia on its shores armed with Soviet/Russian/US fighters, besides the USN &/ their allies patrolling it. the BS Fleet is now even better protected in Crimea than the S. Sea Fleet on Hainan.
    Russian land based air power would be stretched but should be able to defeat any HATO surface force operating in the Black Sea... they certainly wouldn't benefit from having an aircraft carrier there.- they would by having it closer to Med. & Red Seas, NITKAS, & in the better climate, all of which will save $ on maintenance, repairs, & transits.
    Having the Kuznetsov there would also mean having the two upgraded Kirov cruisers there too and the new helicopter carriers and the Slava class cruisers with upgrades... because they would all be part of the same surface action group... that is too big a force to keep in the Black Sea...-if need be, those ships can come from the N. or Pac. Fleet. in fact, if it stays in the E. Med., more smaller escorts with only 1-2 DDG/CGs could be enough.
    even if in times of tension it managed to get to Tartus it would lack the air support from Russia and be jammed between the hostile forces of Turkey and Israel... but also all of HATO...- it will have enough air support from Syrian & Egyptian based VKS aircraft.
    avatar
    mnztr

    Posts : 1222
    Points : 1256
    Join date : 2018-01-21

    Russian Naval Aviation: News - Page 21 Empty Re: Russian Naval Aviation: News

    Post  mnztr Sun Jan 31, 2021 3:45 pm

    LMFS wrote:Naval Su-30SM in Crimea armed with Kh-31, ready to attend Donald Cook in case of need Wink


    Probably better to use a couple of torpedos and blame it on old naval mines. How come non-black sea nations are allowed to sail warships into the black sea. Can Turkey not ban them? After all what legit military interest could non-black sea nations have there?
    GarryB
    GarryB

    Posts : 31018
    Points : 31544
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    Russian Naval Aviation: News - Page 21 Empty Re: Russian Naval Aviation: News

    Post  GarryB Mon Feb 01, 2021 1:04 am

    - since it has LR AShMs which r more destructive than its planes, while officially designated as a TAKR, not CV or aircraft carrier, the Turks have no legal reason to block its movements in peacetime.

    The Russians have no legitimate reason to want to send it in to the Black Sea... their new CVNs will operate in the Northern Fleet and the Pacific Fleet, so having basing facilities for an entire carrier group (ie the carrier itself and all the crusiers and destroyers that will be operating with it) in the Black Sea makes no sense at all.

    If need be, it could sail with just helos to the Med. Sea & get its fighters flown in there via Iran & Iraq.

    But why?

    What is this amazing and important mission it needs to get done in the Med?

    In the Northern fleet and the Pacific Fleet it can patrol the new NSR and also sail to places in the Atlantic and Pacific ocean, which means a lot more potential client an customer states. Sailing the Med, well there is Syria and Egypt and that is about it... sailing down the African and Central and South American Atlantic coasts offers dozens of interesting countries to visit that wont threaten or have a panic attack about Russian ships sailing international waters the way the EU pussies do.

    - their types r not relevant, if the AW isn't the only offensive weapon on board.


    Of course the types are relevant, if they are all self defence anti sub weapons then it does not have offensive arms and is a CV.

    - it's also a cruiser capable of sinking warships & hitting land targets w/o using its aircraft.

    Its primary armament is aircraft for air defence of a surface group of ships. It has secondary self defence weapons because its aircraft are not intended for strike missions... their new corvettes have strike weapons able to sink ships and attack land targets... are they cruisers too... especially the ones with a Helicopter landing pad and hangar...?

    - the Ulyanovsk wasn't finished & got scrapped; the Adm. K can go there for repairs & stay there as a training ship to save $ & to avoid possible future embarrassments.

    The Adm K cannot get repairs in the Crimea... it is too big, and they wont fix it at Nikolyev either... it is at Murmansk AFAIK being repaired... it had just been in Syria... if they want to operate it from the Black Sea then why is it not getting repairs done there now?

    If they are not upgrading it there why would they base it there or repair it there at any time in the future?

    .- there is Zaliv yard that can substitute for it & the 1 in Kola.

    Even if they could... they aren't.

    .- as the sole TAKR, it's to valuable to risk sending it that far; the VMF will have other surface ships with S-400/500s & land based aviation to support a naval group.

    You just contradicted yourself... if the K is too valuable to risk sending it away from land based aviation and air defence systems then it is worthless.

    As you say keeping it close to Russian waters means you might as well use land based air defences and air power, and not being able to send it anywhere else restricts Russian surface ships to Russian waters or makes them vulnerable to surprise air attack around the world with no carrier support.

    A carrier too valuable to use is of no value at all.

    So what... are you suggesting there are no HATO subs and ships in the Med and Black Sea?- no, but there r AFBs & Bastion AshMs the Russians can use in BS & the E. Med. region to help the Adm K.

    The land based air power and air defence systems make the Admiral K redundant in the Black Sea and the Med.... it would be useless there except for further training in Syria and it can reach Syria by sailing from the Northern Fleet base where it is currently under repair.

    .-but farther south there's Bemuda-Labrador-Azores-Portugal quadrangle it must pass through. The NATO subs, ships & aircraft won't loose the VMF CBG, even if they don't use their own CV/Ns to track it. The Gibraltar is also an ideal ambush site.

    During peace time who gives a fuck. During war nuke them and they wont be ambushing anything.

    - sure, but is it going to be worth it? For visits, other big ships can be used with the same results.

    What other big ships? Any Russian surface group operating far from Russia will include Cruisers and likely destroyers and an aircraft carrier or two. Having carriers will make any ships on the trip much better protected and more aware of the aircraft and surface objects around them... instead of wondering what those blips are on the radar, they can send out aircraft to have a look. Peace of mind, if it is nothing and early warning of an attack if it is not nothing.

    - for the "real world" training, I expect them to continue sending the Adm. K & future CVNs there.

    They have tested their aircraft and planning systems against a real world threat... they might want to test a few new weapon types and perhaps a few new tactics, but they are not going to keep the K there for more than a couple of weeks at best.

    - the CV-16/17 r also deploying to the SC Sea bathtub with hostile Vietnam, Philippines & Indonesia on its shores armed with Soviet/Russian/US fighters, besides the USN &/ their allies patrolling it. the BS Fleet is now even better protected in Crimea than the S. Sea Fleet on Hainan.

    Land based aircraft and missiles and air defence systems and presumably new MiG-31K units with Kinzhal missiles means Russia controls the Black Sea and anything floating in it can be killed with the push of a few buttons.

    They have no need for a carrier in the Black Sea, and only occasionally in the Med if at all.

    - they would by having it closer to Med. & Red Seas, NITKAS, & in the better climate, all of which will save $ on maintenance, repairs, & transits.

    Having a carrier in the med makes no sense... a carrier for Russia against HATO countries is meaningless.

    Saving money means nothing if it is no where near where you want it operationally... and if Gibralta is such a trap then there is no point entering the trap.

    Sailing carrier groups past the UK will be much more fun than hovering near Syria or Israel.

    .-if need be, those ships can come from the N. or Pac. Fleet. in fact, if it stays in the E. Med., more smaller escorts with only 1-2 DDG/CGs could be enough.

    YOU DON'T GET IT... the Carrier IS the escort... it is supposed to be escorting the surface ships... not the other way around... if it is only operating with a couple of little ships then they don't need carrier support.

    Carrier support would be useful for a 6 month trip of Venezuela with a couple of helicopter landing ships to practise with Maduros troops or Cuban forces... or maybe even let Argentina have a look at your new helicopter landing ships... they might see a future potential use for them perhaps... hint hint hint.

    it will have enough air support from Syrian & Egyptian based VKS aircraft.

    What do you think its purpose is if it must rely on ground based aircraft and air defence systems?

    Probably better to use a couple of torpedos and blame it on old naval mines. How come non-black sea nations are allowed to sail warships into the black sea. Can Turkey not ban them? After all what legit military interest could non-black sea nations have there?

    The rules are pretty clear, ships belonging to navies that are non black sea nations can only remain for up to 21 days or something and then have to leave. No ships more than 15,000 tons are allowed to enter, which means air carriers too.

    During the 8 8 8 conflict the US was really pissed off that Turkey did not allow it to send in all the ships it wanted to send, but Turkey has been a good follower of the rules and Russia really has nothing to complain about really... Turkey sticks to the rules and is impartial because it works well for both Russia and Turkey when the rules are applied fairly and even handedly... which is what Turkey is doing.
    Tsavo Lion
    Tsavo Lion

    Posts : 5685
    Points : 5673
    Join date : 2016-08-15
    Location : AZ, USA

    Russian Naval Aviation: News - Page 21 Empty Re: Russian Naval Aviation: News

    Post  Tsavo Lion Mon Feb 01, 2021 12:44 pm

    GarryB wrote:
    - since it has LR AShMs which r more destructive than its planes, while officially designated as a TAKR, not CV or aircraft carrier, the Turks have no legal reason to block its movements in peacetime.
    The Russians have no legitimate reason to want to send it in to the Black Sea... their new CVNs will operate in the Northern Fleet and the Pacific Fleet, so having basing facilities for an entire carrier group (ie the carrier itself and all the crusiers and destroyers that will be operating with it) in the Black Sea makes no sense at all. ..
    The land based air power and air defence systems make the Admiral K redundant in the Black Sea and the Med.... it would be useless there except for further training in Syria and it can reach Syria by sailing from the Northern Fleet base where it is currently under repair. ..and if Gibraltar is such a trap then there is no point entering the trap.
    -they may have more reasons to send them to the Red Sea & the Indian Ocean & even the W. Pac. to keep NATO navies in check there, & from the BS it will be a lot closer, avoiding the English Channel & Gibraltar.

    sailing down the African and Central and South American Atlantic coasts offers dozens of interesting countries to visit..-the VMF isn't a cruise line to entertain its sailors & airmen!

    - their types r not relevant, if the AW isn't the only offensive weapon on board.
    Of course the types are relevant, if they are all self defence anti sub weapons then it does not have offensive arms and is a CV.-they'll have ASh/LACMs too, unlike non-VMF CVNs.

    - it's also a cruiser capable of sinking warships & hitting land targets w/o using its aircraft.
    Its primary armament is aircraft for air defence of a surface group of ships. It has secondary self defence weapons because its aircraft are not intended for strike missions... their new corvettes have strike weapons able to sink ships and attack land targets... are they cruisers too... especially the ones with a Helicopter landing pad and hangar...?-ur syllogisms stink! transposing the issue on corvettes is grasping for straws; with ASh/LACMs & AW, a TAKRN has 2 main weapons, & isn't a CVN- enough hairsplitting!

    - the Ulyanovsk wasn't finished & got scrapped; the Adm. K can go there for repairs & stay there as a training ship to save $ & to avoid possible future embarrassments.
    The Adm K cannot get repairs in the Crimea... it is too big, and they wont fix it at Nikolyev either...  it is at Murmansk AFAIK being repaired... it had just been in Syria... if they want to operate it from the Black Sea then why is it not getting repairs done there now?-If they are not upgrading it there why would they base it there or repair it there at any time in the future?-ask the VMF press service, but IMO they didn't have time & after the floating doc sunk decided to expand the 2 old docs into 1. the Zaliv docs can also be expanded: 'If u build it, they'll come". Later, Ukraine may implode & the Nikolaev yard may be revived.

    .- there is Zaliv yard that can substitute for it & the 1 in Kola.
    Even if they could... they aren't.-I won't bet on it.

    .- as the sole TAKR, it's to valuable to risk sending it that far; the VMF will have other surface ships with S-400/500s & land based aviation to support a naval group.
    You just contradicted yourself... if the K is too valuable to risk sending it away from land based aviation and air defence systems then it is worthless.-not if it's used for training & to show the flag, & not in the Western & Southern Hemispheres.
    As you say keeping it close to Russian waters means you might as well use land based air defences and air power, and not being able to send it anywhere else restricts Russian surface ships to Russian waters or makes them vulnerable to surprise air attack around the world with no carrier support.-Exactly! as u said dozens of times, w/o fixed wing AWACS that needs CATOBAR, it'll be a sitting duck. By ur logic, India & PRC could also send their STOBAR CVs to S. America & S. Africa to show how tough they r on the high seas, damn the RN, FN, & the USN above all.
    A carrier too valuable to use is of no value at all.-training, trials, & HADR ops r as important as goodwill visits to nations in the adversaries' backyards that take loans & never able to pay them back.

    .-but farther south there's Bemuda-Labrador-Azores-Portugal quadrangle it must pass through. The NATO subs, ships & aircraft won't loose the VMF CBG, even if they don't use their own CV/Ns to track it. The Gibraltar is also an ideal ambush site.
    During peace time who gives a fuck. During war nuke them and they wont be ambushing anything.-unleashing an escalating nuclear exchange? there's a reason Russia is developing LR non-nuclear arms.

    - sure, but is it going to be worth it? For visits, other big ships can be used with the same results.
    What other big ships? Any Russian surface group operating far from Russia will include Cruisers and likely destroyers and an aircraft carrier or two. Having carriers will make any ships on the trip much better protected and more aware of the aircraft and surface objects around them... instead of wondering what those blips are on the radar, they can send out aircraft to have a look. Peace of mind, if it is nothing and early warning of an attack if it is not nothing.- they'll have helos, UAVs & IL-38s with A-50/100s supporting them. The NATO ships may also follow them within the visual/radar range- any hostile air action will sign their death sentence.

    - for the "real world" training, I expect them to continue sending the Adm. K & future CVNs there.
    They have tested their aircraft and planning systems against a real world threat... they might want to test a few new weapon types and perhaps a few new tactics, but they are not going to keep the K there for more than a couple of weeks at best.-which gives even less reason to sail from Kola instead of Crimea; as mentioned above, they may spend a lot longer in the Indian ocean. Indeed, if the VMF keeps strong presence there, India will see that relying on the US & playing them vs. PRC is a dead letter.

    - they would by having it closer to Med. & Red Seas, NITKAS, & in the better climate, all of which will save $ on maintenance, repairs, & transits.

    Sailing carrier groups past the UK will be much more fun than hovering near Syria or Israel.-the VMF isn't a canoe club for any1 to have fun in; the VKS bombers can fly near it anytime & scare the shit out of the RAF & RN.

    .-if need be, those ships can come from the N. or Pac. Fleet. in fact, if it stays in the E. Med., more smaller escorts with only 1-2 DDG/CGs could be enough.
    YOU DON'T GET IT... the Carrier IS the escort... it is supposed to be escorting the surface ships... not the other way around... if it is only operating with a couple of little ships then they don't need carrier support.
    Carrier support would be useful for a 6 month trip of Venezuela with a couple of helicopter landing ships to practise with Maduros troops or Cuban forces... or maybe even let Argentina have a look at your new helicopter landing ships... they might see a future potential use for them perhaps... hint hint hint.-Russia has a lot more on its plate in its own backyard than to play USN style war games in US & UK backyards. she should be content in controlling the Arctic & its other waters, at least for the foreseable future.

    it will have enough air support from Syrian & Egyptian based VKS aircraft.
    What do you think its purpose is if it must rely on ground based aircraft and air defence systems?-in its current form, it defeats its combat purpose.
    ..Turkey has been a good follower of the rules and Russia really has nothing to complain about really... Turkey sticks to the rules and is impartial because it works well for both Russia and Turkey when the rules are applied fairly and even handedly... which is what Turkey is doing.- u just confirmed an extra reason/utility for/of having the Adm K. in the BSF!
    GarryB
    GarryB

    Posts : 31018
    Points : 31544
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    Russian Naval Aviation: News - Page 21 Empty Re: Russian Naval Aviation: News

    Post  GarryB Mon Feb 01, 2021 6:20 pm

    -they may have more reasons to send them to the Red Sea & the Indian Ocean & even the W. Pac. to keep NATO navies in check there, & from the BS it will be a lot closer, avoiding the English Channel & Gibraltar.

    Why avoid the English Channel or Gibraltar?

    Why piss away money chasing around HATO navies, Russian ships have better things to do, and basing carrier groups in the BS is not going to happen.

    They wont even have helicopter carriers there...

    The Pacific fleet would be the best place to send a carrier group to the Indian ocean, or a visit to Mexico or plenty of other countries...

    Stuck in the med really limits the countries they can visit... it would be like buying a campervan and parking it across the road and down a block from your house.

    -the VMF isn't a cruise line to entertain its sailors & airmen!

    No it isn't. Its job is to spread Russian influence and reach around the world to more than just the biased and bitter countries of the west.

    Boosting trade links will be an important job for the navy and in that respect they can really help gain interest in Russian products and resources.... without having to kill anyone.

    .-they'll have ASh/LACMs too, unlike non-VMF CVNs.

    non VMF CVs and CVNs have anti ship and land attack missiles too, they just launch them from aircraft.

    Most of the missiles on the Kuznetsov will be SAMs, and next in terms of numbers will be anti sub an anti torpedo weapons... much of the time they might not even have anti carrier missiles because honestly they don't need them... it would make more sense to send a Corvette with 8 Zircon missiles, than push forward with your carrier to launch 12 Granits. Or indeed a Yasen class SSGN with 32 Zircons could get much closer to an enemy carrier group.

    with ASh/LACMs & AW, a TAKRN has 2 main weapons, & isn't a CVN- enough hairsplitting!

    The primary purpose of the Kuznetsov is to provide air based AWACS or AEW aircraft and fighter aircraft to protect ships of the Russian state. The SAMs and other missiles and weapons carried on the ship are merely for self defence. It would never be used as a missile ship that attacks a target with missiles alone like perhaps a cruiser would, but these days a Russian cruiser will have rather more anti ship and land attack missiles than the 12 carried by the K.

    -ask the VMF press service, but IMO they didn't have time & after the floating doc sunk decided to expand the 2 old docs into 1. the Zaliv docs can also be expanded: 'If u build it, they'll come". Later, Ukraine may implode & the Nikolaev yard may be revived.

    Even of the Ukraine went on bended knee and begged Putin to be friends and come back and use Ukrainian ports and businesses I doubt he would say yes, and even if he did Nikolayev is screwed... they put a grain silo in the middle of the main dry dock so it can't be used to build or fix large ships any more.

    It would be cheaper to just build a new big shipyard... and they have done that in over places in Russia.

    Fuck Ukraine... but Russia didn't... it was the US and the EU and the Ukraine that did it.

    -I won't bet on it.

    The K is not in the Black sea getting its upgrades.... it is in Murmansk... if there were any plans to base and maintain and operate the K from the Black Sea or Tartus then that would be the place they would send it for its upgrades and repair surely...

    -not if it's used for training & to show the flag, & not in the Western & Southern Hemispheres.

    Screw the west... it will hopefully be showing the Russian flag all round the rest of the world, creating contacts and links and hopefully trade and military alliances...

    -Exactly! as u said dozens of times, w/o fixed wing AWACS that needs CATOBAR, it'll be a sitting duck.

    First of all the Ka-31 is not ideal but can detect sea skimming targets out to 250km and they could operate 10 of them on the carrier if they wanted good radar coverage. Obviously fixed wing cat launched AWACS aircraft would be vastly superior, and comments about the upgrades being made to the carrier seem to suggest some new experimental cat system is being fitted for testing, but even without that it is much better than no aircraft support.

    If a ship detects a flying target 600km away from the ship group it can do nothing about it. With a carrier it can launch a flight of four MiG-29KR fighters to fly out to investigate and see what is going on.

    That is called situational awareness and it is worth its weight in gold when trying to make decisions.

    Instead of shooting down Iranian airliners because they saw a radar blip and thought it was an F-14 they could have asked for aircraft to investigate the radar contact.

    Of course officially they said the local carrier pulled back their fighters because the US ship was being aggressive and he was worried about his own aircraft, but I suspect it was more a case of he know the AEGIS cruiser was inside Iranian territorial waters and in actual fact Iran would have every right to send an F-14 to investigate and shoo them away.

    By ur logic, India & PRC could also send their STOBAR CVs to S. America & S. Africa to show how tough they r on the high seas, damn the RN, FN, & the USN above all.

    First of all yes, damn the RN and FN and USN... they don't own the sea, and second yes, India and China should start exploring the world and finding there are other countries out there... countries that want to improve trade and have good relations with countries other than the three bullies you already mentioned.

    -training, trials, & HADR ops r as important as goodwill visits to nations in the adversaries' backyards that take loans & never able to pay them back.

    Using loans to make small countries buy their weapons (they rarely give loans for anything else) at ridiculous rates is a western thing. The Russians can look at each country they visit and determine a way they can help each other. Some countries might benefit from a floating nuclear power station that they could hire or lease... other countries might have some mineral or energy wealth they can't extract themselves but western countries want to take too much of the pie.

    Sometimes they just want a new market to sell their fruit or other product.

    -unleashing an escalating nuclear exchange? there's a reason Russia is developing LR non-nuclear arms.

    When responding to an ambush... an unprovoked attack... hell yes nuke the bastards...

    - they'll have helos, UAVs & IL-38s with A-50/100s supporting them. The NATO ships may also follow them within the visual/radar range- any hostile air action will sign their death sentence.

    Supporting them with Il-38s and A-50/100... even a Tu-142 wont have the range to support Russian ships in the Pacific or Atlantic and even if they did... what support can they offer? They are not fighters nor interceptors.

    -which gives even less reason to sail from Kola instead of Crimea; as mentioned above, they may spend a lot longer in the Indian ocean.

    You are not getting it... carriers are about long sustained trips away from friendly waters... sailing past the UK and Gibraltar is a good thing... they can't go from Crimea because you wont get an entire carrier group at Sevastopol...

    Indeed, if the VMF keeps strong presence there, India will see that relying on the US & playing them vs. PRC is a dead letter

    Ahh, don't take that hogwash at face value... India is not stupid... it doesn't want a war with the US, but it does want western companies to take their factories and production out of China and move them to somewhere that is more west friendly but has cheap abundant labour.... they want the economic boost the west gave China.

    -the VMF isn't a canoe club for any1 to have fun in; the VKS bombers can fly near it anytime & scare the shit out of the RAF & RN.

    Join the navy and see the pier...

    -Russia has a lot more on its plate in its own backyard than to play USN style war games in US & UK backyards.

    THAT IS IT... Russia is not allowed a sphere of influence... it is not allowed a backyard... but it is not allowed in Americas backyard or UKs or Frances I presume...

    she should be content in controlling the Arctic & its other waters, at least for the foreseable future.

    Isolation and no trading with anyone except through us... I can see why the west would like that but what exactly is in it for Russia?

    -in its current form, it defeats its combat purpose.

    They tested and evaluated it in Syria and it has been getting upgrades and improvements based on those tests and evaluations... I would say when they leave the repair shop they will want to give it a good test and a few big long trips to fully fit it out.

    The last thing they will want to do is skulk around Russian waters hiding from shadows.

    - u just confirmed an extra reason/utility for/of having the Adm K. in the BSF!

    Rubbish. Any aircraft carrier in the Black Sea is trapped and dead meat. And for what... the air power it can currently provide is vastly inferior to the air power land based units could provide via A-50 and A-100 soon, and Su-35s and Su-34s and Backfires and MiG-31Ks...

    Putting the Kuz in the BS would be stupid.
    Tsavo Lion
    Tsavo Lion

    Posts : 5685
    Points : 5673
    Join date : 2016-08-15
    Location : AZ, USA

    Russian Naval Aviation: News - Page 21 Empty Re: Russian Naval Aviation: News

    Post  Tsavo Lion Mon Feb 01, 2021 8:58 pm

    GarryB wrote:
    -they may have more reasons to send them to the Red Sea & the Indian Ocean & even the W. Pac. to keep NATO navies in check there, & from the BS it will be a lot closer, avoiding the English Channel & Gibraltar.
    Why avoid the English Channel or Gibraltar?-if nothing else, NATO may just declare them a live fire exercise area, forcing the CBG to go around Scotland, reducing the RF coffers. ..they can't go from Crimea because you wont get an entire carrier group at Sevastopol...
    Why piss away money chasing around HATO navies, Russian ships have better things to do, and basing carrier groups in the BS is not going to happen. They wont even have helicopter carriers there...-anything like that can happen in Russia. Now they'll have a base in Sudan & access to Indian bases. Wouldn't it be good for Russia to contain the USN not only the North, but in the South too? To the Turks, they can say that their Adm. K. or a future TAKRN must go to Zvezda yard in Vladivostok for repairs. There's plenty of room in Crimea & Novorossiysk to base the entire CBG in the BSF.
    The Pacific fleet would be the best place to send a carrier group to the Indian ocean, or a visit to Mexico or plenty of other countries...-only if they get at least 1 new TAKRN in commission & assign it in the Pac. Fleet.
    Stuck in the med really limits the countries they can visit... it would be like buying a campervan and parking it across the road and down a block from your house.- they can use the Suez Canal to go to S. IO & even S. Atlantic/Pacific, if need be.
    -the VMF isn't a cruise line to entertain its sailors & airmen!
    No it isn't. Its job is to spread Russian influence and reach around the world to more than just the biased and bitter countries of the west.- I hope they'll succeed! Or should I write suckseed, siring their kids with local girls?
    with ASh/LACMs & AW, a TAKRN has 2 main weapons, & isn't a CVN- enough hairsplitting!
    ..but these days a Russian cruiser will have rather more anti ship and land attack missiles than the 12 carried by the K.- it may get more new smaller Ms, & it doesn't matter if it has less than other ships- if it's a TAKR, it's not a true CV & restrictions in the BS won't apply. The Turks know batter not to rock that boat.
    -ask the VMF press service, but IMO they didn't have time & after the floating doc sunk decided to expand the 2 old docs into 1. the Zaliv docs can also be expanded: 'If u build it, they'll come". Later, Ukraine may implode & the Nikolaev yard may be revived.
    Even of the Ukraine went on bended knee and begged Putin to be friends and come back and use Ukrainian ports and businesses I doubt he would say yes, and even if he did Nikolayev is screwed... they put a grain silo in the middle of the main dry dock so it can't be used to build or fix large ships any more.- as Ukrainian Cossack Getman B. Khmelnitsky said: what was once built by human hands, can be destroyed by human hands.
    -I won't bet on it.
    The K is not in the Black sea getting its upgrades.... it is in Murmansk... if there were any plans to base and maintain and operate the K from the Black Sea or Tartus then that would be the place they would send it for its upgrades and repair surely...-that may still change, as discussed above.
    -not if it's used for training & to show the flag, & not in the Western & Southern Hemispheres.
    Screw the west... it will hopefully be showing the Russian flag all round the rest of the world, creating contacts and links and hopefully trade and military alliances...-today, the Skype can connect people faster than the VMF & VKS. China has business links all over the Globe w/o its PLAN visiting every backwater.
    -Exactly! as u said dozens of times, w/o fixed wing AWACS that needs CATOBAR, it'll be a sitting duck.
    If a ship detects a flying target 600km away from the ship group it can do nothing about it. With a carrier it can launch a flight of four MiG-29KR fighters to fly out to investigate and see what is going on.
    -why can't a CGN/CG launch a UCAV from its tubes after its Ka-31s detected a threat? Their S-300/400/500s can shoot it down just as well as MiG-29KRs, if not better.
    By ur logic, India & PRC could also send their STOBAR CVs to S. America & S. Africa to show how tough they r on the high seas, damn the RN, FN, & the USN above all.
    First of all yes, damn the RN and FN and USN... they don't own the sea, and second yes, India and China should start exploring the world and finding there are other countries out there... countries that want to improve trade and have good relations with countries other than the three bullies you already mentioned.-again, they can use Skype & diplomats, no need for gunboat diplomacy anymore.

    -training, trials, & HADR ops r as important as goodwill visits to nations in the adversaries' backyards that take loans & never able to pay them back.
    Using loans to make small countries buy their weapons (they rarely give loans for anything else) at ridiculous rates is a western thing.- the debts of USSR got burned Russia too, & not only with weapons sales.
    -Russia has a lot more on its plate in its own backyard than to play USN style war games in US & UK backyards.
    THAT IS IT... Russia is not allowed a sphere of influence... it is not allowed a backyard... but it is not allowed in Americas backyard or UKs or Frances I presume...-for its own good, before it goes in others' backyards, it better get her own house & yard in order.
    - u just confirmed an extra reason/utility for/of having the Adm K. in the BSF!
    Rubbish. Any aircraft carrier in the Black Sea is trapped and dead meat. And for what... the air power it can currently provide is vastly inferior to the air power land based units could provide via A-50 and A-100 soon, and Su-35s and Su-34s and Backfires and MiG-31Ks...
    Putting the Kuz in the BS would be stupid.
    The USN has a CVN & its escorts in Japan forward deployed, & it won't use them in the Sea of Japan/Okhotsk, or E. China Sea in any war with the RF, NK or the PRC. In port, they r as vulnerable to RF, NK, & PRC aircraft & missiles. (FYI, I was on a CV-63 moored in Yokosuka in 2008 when a NK BM flew over Japan, & learned about it from TV, with no alarms given).
    But today, other ships & aircraft on/over the sea can protect them. So, the Adm K. or TAKRN in the BS can stay in port or be moved in a more secure area until the shooting stops.

    Sponsored content

    Russian Naval Aviation: News - Page 21 Empty Re: Russian Naval Aviation: News

    Post  Sponsored content


      Current date/time is Mon Oct 25, 2021 10:12 pm