Russian Naval Aviation: News

KiloGolf wrote:Going through the thread and reading on Russia's ASW/MPA fleet, it seems they're only left with a dozen of Tu-142s and another dozen (or two?) of Il-38s. How/when exactly did the drop the ball? Huge capability gap in a field where they can't afford to be complacent. Countries like Japan do better than that. And Russia's territorial waters/EEZ are not exactly small, world's 3rd longest coastline and all that jazz

Even in USSR times ASW aviation and maritime patrol was a weak spot. Japan is doing it ALOT better actually, at peak they had 120 ASW fixed-wing aircraft. Even now they have about 80.

Militarov wrote:

KiloGolf wrote:Going through the thread and reading on Russia's ASW/MPA fleet, it seems they're only left with a dozen of Tu-142s and another dozen (or two?) of Il-38s. How/when exactly did the drop the ball? Huge capability gap in a field where they can't afford to be complacent. Countries like Japan do better than that. And Russia's territorial waters/EEZ are not exactly small, world's 3rd longest coastline and all that jazz

Even in USSR times ASW aviation and maritime patrol was a weak spot. Japan is doing it ALOT better actually, at peak they had 120 ASW fixed-wing aircraft. Even now they have about 80.

It seems there are no of such planes in the Black Sea and possibly even Baltic.
Not sure what were/are they thinking. USN, MN, RN, SwRN and NATO SSKs are having a free ride all over. Not to mention ROKN and JMSDF in the Pacific.

Literally hundreds of subs
Last time a Tu-142 was seen near the Med was one that was tasked with ELINT/SIGINT over Syria, i.e. not even performing its primary mission (as if they had ASW assets to spare).

Are these planes still good at searching submarines ? It's already hard for a sub to detect another sub.

In the Black Sea and Baltic they would be destroyed quickly from long distances by a fighter. NATO Aircraft can do shoot and run tactics too.

In pacific and in the north, they have something like SOSUS that will detect aproching subs so no need to have lot of them. Japan's P-8 will be destroyed at 300 by a Su-35 easily too if it operates near Kurils.

Isos wrote:Are these planes still good at searching submarines ? It's already hard for a sub to detect another sub.

In the Black Sea and Baltic they would be destroyed quickly from long distances by a fighter. NATO Aircraft can do shoot and run tactics too.

In pacific and in the north, they have something like SOSUS that will detect aproching subs so no need to have lot of them. Japan's P-8 will be destroyed at 300 by a Su-35 easily too if it operates near Kurils.

They are very good at detecting subs if they are given... area in which sub is to be expected, lets put it that way, so that is the reason why you need them in decent number.

So are all kinds of transport, AWACS, air tankers, liners, ELINT platfroms etc etc, that does not mean you should stop using, building and developing them.

ASW aviation is more of defensive than offensive measure, thats why aircraft are often doubled as "ASW and maritime patrol". US has SOSUS too, yet they operate huge amount of ASW platforms other than that, SOSUS cant destroy subs and track them though their path, it can tell you where they crossed the line.

KiloGolf wrote:

Militarov wrote:

KiloGolf wrote:Going through the thread and reading on Russia's ASW/MPA fleet, it seems they're only left with a dozen of Tu-142s and another dozen (or two?) of Il-38s. How/when exactly did the drop the ball? Huge capability gap in a field where they can't afford to be complacent. Countries like Japan do better than that. And Russia's territorial waters/EEZ are not exactly small, world's 3rd longest coastline and all that jazz

Even in USSR times ASW aviation and maritime patrol was a weak spot. Japan is doing it ALOT better actually, at peak they had 120 ASW fixed-wing aircraft. Even now they have about 80.

It seems there are no of such planes in the Black Sea and possibly even Baltic.
Not sure what were/are they thinking. USN, MN, RN, SwRN and NATO SSKs are having a free ride all over. Not to mention ROKN and JMSDF in the Pacific.

Literally hundreds of subs
Last time a Tu-142 was seen near the Med was one that was tasked with ELINT/SIGINT over Syria, i.e. not even performing its primary mission (as if they had ASW assets to spare).

Russia has huge sensor network around it shores.

It using nuclear batteries to poser the sensors and communications suites.

Singular_Transform wrote:

KiloGolf wrote:

Militarov wrote:

KiloGolf wrote:Going through the thread and reading on Russia's ASW/MPA fleet, it seems they're only left with a dozen of Tu-142s and another dozen (or two?) of Il-38s. How/when exactly did the drop the ball? Huge capability gap in a field where they can't afford to be complacent. Countries like Japan do better than that. And Russia's territorial waters/EEZ are not exactly small, world's 3rd longest coastline and all that jazz

Even in USSR times ASW aviation and maritime patrol was a weak spot. Japan is doing it ALOT better actually, at peak they had 120 ASW fixed-wing aircraft. Even now they have about 80.

It seems there are no of such planes in the Black Sea and possibly even Baltic.
Not sure what were/are they thinking. USN, MN, RN, SwRN and NATO SSKs are having a free ride all over. Not to mention ROKN and JMSDF in the Pacific.

Literally hundreds of subs
Last time a Tu-142 was seen near the Med was one that was tasked with ELINT/SIGINT over Syria, i.e. not even performing its primary mission (as if they had ASW assets to spare).

Russia has huge sensor network around it shores.

It using nuclear batteries to poser the sensors and communications suites.

Negative, Soviet installations of the type are long out of serviceable lifespan, i doubt if any are active as of this day.

Russians claim they are atm developing such system, under Almaz-Antey shroud: http://www.navyrecognition.com/index.php/news/defence-news/2016/september-2016-navy-naval-forces-defense-industry-technology-maritime-security-global-news/4334-russia-developing-sosus-type-sonar-system-to-protect-territorial-waters-in-the-arctic.html

There is this but its believed RuNav was not the customer: http://concern-agat.ru/en/production/hydroacoustics-hydroacoustic-equipment/mgk-608e-passive-stationary-sonar-system

Isos wrote:Are these planes still good at searching submarines ? It's already hard for a sub to detect another sub.

In the Black Sea and Baltic they would be destroyed quickly from long distances by a fighter. NATO Aircraft can do shoot and run tactics too.

In pacific and in the north, they have something like SOSUS that will detect aproching subs so no need to have lot of them. Japan's P-8 will be destroyed at 300 by a Su-35 easily too if it operates near Kurils.

Yeah ASW aircraft are the alpha and the omega of ASW warfare, in conjunction with good numbers of SSNs/SSKs and ASW frigates. The good thing with aircraft patrolling is that they can deploy sonobuoys on demand and work in conjunction with naval surveillance UAVs like the Triton. This is probably more important during peacetime as with enough platforms one can know their opponent's sub deployments, possibly down to the last vessel. Russia lacks the numbers in all three fields. Also... There's only about 50 Su-35s with a plan for 100, if they're tasked to bring down 100 or so of JMSDF's ASW/MPA assets, then well... lets just say they'll be misused and ultimately wasted.

GarryB wrote:

Negative, Soviet installations of the type are long out of serviceable lifespan, i doubt if any are active as of this day.

Wrong.

The Russians maintain several sensor arrays... in fact a mini sub maintaining one of those arrays got stuck and had to be rescued a while back.

At least they have more ASW aircraft than the UK...

They have recently given all their aircraft upgrades with variations of sea dragon.

Not to mention they also have a reasonable fleet of SSKs which can also hunt enemy subs.

What i know for sure that Pacific installations are out of order since 1995-6. or so. Having SSKs is all fine, having ASW aircraft is however far more convenient for defensive roles, and as many as possible when we are at it.

Well UK enjoys having ASW assets of other nearby countries "working for them". Russia does not.

They have Ka-27 too which can deploy sonars and torpedos.

George1 wrote:Russia's next naval (ASW) helicopter options:

1. Ka-52
2. Ka-31
3. Ka-60
4. New design

http://sputniknews.com/military/20160514/1039618244/russian-navy-ka52-ka60.html

To remember about the question.

Militarov wrote:

Singular_Transform wrote:

Russia has huge sensor network around it shores.

It using nuclear batteries to poser the sensors and communications suites.

Negative, Soviet installations of the type are long out of serviceable lifespan, i doubt if any are active as of this day.

Russians claim they are atm developing such system, under Almaz-Antey shroud: http://www.navyrecognition.com/index.php/news/defence-news/2016/september-2016-navy-naval-forces-defense-industry-technology-maritime-security-global-news/4334-russia-developing-sosus-type-sonar-system-to-protect-territorial-waters-in-the-arctic.html

There is this but its believed RuNav was not the customer: http://concern-agat.ru/en/production/hydroacoustics-hydroacoustic-equipment/mgk-608e-passive-stationary-sonar-system

Russia continue the old CCCP military doctrine, means : detection and C&C is the most important.

Between 1990-2010 Russia hasn't bought new airplane, but bought a lot of radars, each of them costing as much as a new aircraft.

Do you think that they had a lot of radars to detect any type of aircraft, but they hasn't got any sensor network under the ice of arctic?

eehnie wrote:

George1 wrote:Russia's next naval (ASW) helicopter options:

1. Ka-52
2. Ka-31
3. Ka-60
4. New design

http://sputniknews.com/military/20160514/1039618244/russian-navy-ka52-ka60.html

To remember about the question.

Minoga will eventually replace Ka-27 family in the "heavy" naval helicopter role. Ka-60 is an option for smaller displacement ships.

GarryB wrote:

What i know for sure that Pacific installations are out of order since 1995-6. or so.

So why would the Russian navy be operating mini subs around the aerials of a hydrophone array that had not been operational for the previous decade?

On August 5, 2005 AS-28, under the command of Lieutenant Vyacheslav Milashevskiy, became entangled with the aerial of a hydrophone array off the coast of the Kamchatka Peninsula, in Berezovaya Bay, 70 km southeast of Petropavlovsk-Kamchatskiy, Kamchatka Oblast.

Just looking at the work the Army and Air Force has done I would suspect the Navy started by upgrading their C4IR capabilities...

Well UK enjoys having ASW assets of other nearby countries "working for them". Russia does not.

Hahahahaha... tell them that... I am sure that will make them feel much better.
If that is the case why don't they save even more money and retire Trident Subs and Aircraft Carriers... the US has plenty of those... surely they would share in war time...

Removing parts of it? Repairing it? I would not know.

There was report few years back (cca 2013), refering to underwater detection line somewhere in North Sea that still exists but there was no mention of any other similar facility being still active. Now, they might be reintroducing, repairing or even placing new ones, but as of this moment i dont think any is currently operational, except i suppose that one Northen fleet still has. I would assume Pacific-Baltic system of a sort would be their first priority rather than Northen.

Well, see, UK is in such position that it has Spain, Portugal and France under-next to it and whole bunch of countries above it that operate own maritime patrol and ASW aircraft fleets, often even US Orions reside in the UK. Also they ordered P-8s to refresh their ASW wing for future. Liked we it or not, NATO countries are well connected grid.

Well, UK did not cease having ASW aircraft, they just reduced their number compared to Cold War, its doubtful they would ever completely remove any type of military hardware, except strategic bombers which they already did.

Militarov wrote:

Hahahahaha... tell them that... I am sure that will make them feel much better.
If that is the case why don't they save even more money and retire Trident Subs and Aircraft Carriers... the US has plenty of those... surely they would share in war time...

Removing parts of it? Repairing it? I would not know.
[/quote]

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/europe/6927395.stm
Russia plants flag under N Pole

It was in 2007.

Maybe it is an interesting infromation , but the lomov ridge shallow enought to be used as seabed sonar platform.

Means that in 2007 they installed / repaired underwater sonar system on the north pole. As the most plauible reason why they sent a nucelar icebreaker and a few mroe ship there : )

An interesting question , why russia has deep sea tianium mini subs? for oceanogrphy purposes.



http://www.hisutton.com/Analysis%20-Russia%20seeks%20submarine%20advantage%20in%20Arctic.html

Singular_Transform wrote:

Militarov wrote:

Hahahahaha... tell them that... I am sure that will make them feel much better.
If that is the case why don't they save even more money and retire Trident Subs and Aircraft Carriers... the US has plenty of those... surely they would share in war time...

Removing parts of it? Repairing it? I would not know.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/europe/6927395.stm
Russia plants flag under N Pole

It was in 2007.

Maybe it is an interesting infromation , but the lomov ridge shallow enought to be used as seabed sonar platform.

Means that in 2007 they installed / repaired underwater sonar system on the north pole. As the most plauible reason why they sent a nucelar icebreaker and a few mroe ship there : )

An interesting question ,  why russia has deep sea tianium mini subs? for oceanogrphy purposes.



http://www.hisutton.com/Analysis%20-Russia%20seeks%20submarine%20advantage%20in%20Arctic.html

From what i am aware those missions had nothing to do with underwater cables or sonar systems, it was bunch of missions that were used to collect proof of Artic being on continental shelf of Russia which would allow them to pledge claim on its resources.

Now they might, would, could, maybe, what if... did something regarding underwater cables too, but nothing on major scale yet, thats for sure. I expect them to refresh instalations of this type in Baltic first.

Militarov wrote:

From what i am aware those missions had nothing to do with underwater cables or sonar systems, it was bunch of missions that were used to collect proof of Artic being on continental shelf of Russia which would allow them to pledge claim on its resources.

Now they might, would, could, maybe, what if... did something regarding underwater cables too, but nothing on major scale yet, thats for sure. I expect them to refresh instalations of this type in Baltic first.

So, you think that they maintaining midget deeps sea subs and special purpose nuic subs to plant flags to the seabed?

The seabed mission actually showing that the RU MIL spent a lot of money to maintain this capability .

For what?



So, do you have confirmed information about example the Chinese sea island chain monitoring stations?
Or the Chinese monitoring stations?


This stuffs are waaay out of any sight, means that there is next to zero information about them.

Singular_Transform wrote:

Militarov wrote:

From what i am aware those missions had nothing to do with underwater cables or sonar systems, it was bunch of missions that were used to collect proof of Artic being on continental shelf of Russia which would allow them to pledge claim on its resources.

Now they might, would, could, maybe, what if... did something regarding underwater cables too, but nothing on major scale yet, thats for sure. I expect them to refresh instalations of this type in Baltic first.

So, you think that they maintaining midget deeps sea subs and special purpose nuic subs to plant flags to the seabed?

The seabed mission actually showing that the RU MIL spent a lot of money to maintain this capability .

For what?



So, do you have confirmed information about example the Chinese sea island chain monitoring stations?
Or the Chinese monitoring stations?


This stuffs are waaay out of any sight, means that there is next to zero information about them.

If you are talking about Mir-Mir2 and newer derivates, those are mostly used for scientific research of various kinds and assistance in rescue operations i actually think mechanical hands were removed from those.

Underwater cables are mostly being layed by surface cable-laying ships, submersibles are sometimes used for tapping or repair but most of the time its job for cable laying ships.

GarryB wrote:

Removing parts of it? Repairing it? I would not know.

So you don't know what they were doing in August 2005 when a mini sub got snagged in the array... which they blamed at the time as being caught on fishing nets BTW, but you do know the operational status of all Russian Navy listening arrays.

There was report few years back (cca 2013), refering to underwater detection line somewhere in North Sea that still exists but there was no mention of any other similar facility being still active.

Yeah, because normally they include the GPS locations of all the secret listening posts they use to gather intel with...

Now, they might be reintroducing, repairing or even placing new ones, but as of this moment i dont think any is currently operational, except i suppose that one Northen fleet still has. I would assume Pacific-Baltic system of a sort would be their first priority rather than Northen.

You don't think... can you stop expecting us to agree with your assumptions until you actually know one way or the other.

Well, see, UK is in such position that it has Spain, Portugal and France under-next to it and whole bunch of countries above it that operate own maritime patrol and ASW aircraft fleets, often even US Orions reside in the UK. Also they ordered P-8s to refresh their ASW wing for future. Liked we it or not, NATO countries are well connected grid.

So if they are so well off in regards to allies why would they purchase P-8s... I mean if they are at no disadvantage not having their own ASW MPAs...

Well, UK did not cease having ASW aircraft, they just reduced their number compared to Cold War, its doubtful they would ever completely remove any type of military hardware, except strategic bombers which they already did.

They replaced their Nimrods in service... with nothing. The equivalent to Russia retiring its Il-38s and Tu-142s and introducing... nothing.

Of course Mr double standard says that means the UK is OK and Russia is in deep shit as usual...

Actually... i belive SOSUS atm has GPS recievers that are accessible by civilian structures too for maritime research. So.... yeah?

As i said already those subs are not used for cable-laying, at the best are used for observation of the cable state or some assistance during repair. Cables are layed by cable-laying ships, list of which we have, so if someone cared that much could check their deployments last few years and see where they were active.

They forced maritime patrol role from Nimrods onto C-130s for now and C3I onto Sentries for now till adequate replacement gets selected, but seems it will be role taken by P-8s we mentioned above.

UK is not trying to position itself as superpowere, Russa is. While tiny Japan triples your ASW/maritime patrol capabilities its sort of funny, but if its okay, sure, dont mind me i am just thinking loud.

Militarov wrote:
Actually... i belive SOSUS atm has GPS recievers that are accessible by civilian structures too for maritime research. So.... yeah?

As i said already those subs are not used for cable-laying, at the best are used for observation of the cable state or some assistance during repair. Cables are layed by cable-laying ships, list of which we have, so if someone cared that much could check their deployments last few years and see where they were active.

They forced maritime patrol role from Nimrods onto C-130s for now and C3I onto Sentries for now till adequate replacement gets selected, but seems it will be role taken by P-8s we mentioned above.

UK is not trying to position itself as superpowere, Russa is. While tiny Japan triples your ASW/maritime patrol capabilities its sort of funny, but if its okay, sure, dont mind me i am just thinking loud.

So, basic geography:
Best part of the Russian coastline covered with ice during wither, and best part of the sea around Russia covered all year long as well.

So maritime patrol air-planes useless on the 30-80% of the sea , depending on season.

Means that example a poseidon P-8 useful only to hunt polar bears with the torpedoes and sonabouys. Maybe it can hit them on the head, and entertain the bored crew.


The only way to collect data about enemy submarines ( with say 120 tomahawk rocket) is to plant passive sonar onto the seabed.

By quick calculation Russia has 8 million sqkm EEZ , it needs something like 1000 passive sonar to cover ALL of this area.


The area needs no more than 80 000 km of cable ( way less actually, it is lazy and rough calculation)
The cable network is the most expensive part of the story, the sonars cant cost more than 3 billion $( actually one sonabuy cost less than 5000 $, so the 3 billion maybe a bit stretch by one magnitude) .

The cabling can't cost more than 8 billion, but is is maybe one magnitude more than the real cost.

It means the whole sensor network cost less than four helicopter carrier, and more capable, considering the helicopter carrier can't operate on ice.

Actually no ship/submarine can get close to the shores by more than 700 km.

All that the system needs is torpedo/rocket carrying platform , see bastion/kilo/nuc subs around arctic.


Additional information: it is pretty hard to use cable laying ship on the ice : p.

And actually you need a pair of hands to connect the sonars to the cabling.And the sonar cables needs directional laying at least perpendicularly from the data collector.

Militarov wrote:UK is not trying to position itself as superpowere, Russa is. While tiny Japan triples your ASW/maritime patrol capabilities its sort of funny, but if its okay, sure, dont mind me i am just thinking loud.

No, I do not agree with Russia trying to position itself as superpower. Going to a multipolar world, means that there are not superpowers. The current trend is more about the decline of the US as superpower, than about the raising of new superpowers. A multipolar world means a world of regional powers.

Singular_Transform wrote:

Militarov wrote:
Actually... i belive SOSUS atm has GPS recievers that are accessible by civilian structures too for maritime research. So.... yeah?

As i said already those subs are not used for cable-laying, at the best are used for observation of the cable state or some assistance during repair. Cables are layed by cable-laying ships, list of which we have, so if someone cared that much could check their deployments last few years and see where they were active.

They forced maritime patrol role from Nimrods onto C-130s for now and C3I onto Sentries for now till adequate replacement gets selected, but seems it will be role taken by P-8s we mentioned above.

UK is not trying to position itself as superpowere, Russa is. While tiny Japan triples your ASW/maritime patrol capabilities its sort of funny, but if its okay, sure, dont mind me i am just thinking loud.

So, basic geography:
Best part of the Russian coastline covered with ice during wither, and best part of the sea around Russia covered as well.

Means that the maritime patrol air-planes useless on the 30-80% of the sea , depending on season.

Means that example a poseidon P-8 useful only to hunt polar bears with the torpedoes and sonabouys.  Maybe it can hit them on the head, and entertain the bored crew.

It means that the only way to collect data about enemy submarines ( with say 120 tomahawk rocket) is to plant passive sonar onto the seabed.

By quick calculation Russia has 8 million sqkkm EEZ , it needs something like 1000 passive sonar to cover ALL of this area.
I

The area needs no more than 80 000 km of cable ( way less actually, it is the lazy and worst calculation)
The cable network is the most expensive part of the story, the sonars cant cost more than 3 billion $( actually one sonabuy cost less than 5000 $, so the 3 billion maybe a bit stretch) .

The cabling can't cost more than 8 billion.

It means the whole sensor network cost less than four helicopter carrier, and more capable.

Actually no ship/submarine can get close to the shores by more than 700 km.

All that the system needs is torpedo/rocket carrying platform , see bastion/kilo/nuc subs around arctic.


Additional information: it is pretty hard to use cable laying ship on the ice : p.

And actually you need a pair of hands to connect the sonars to the cabling.And the sonar cables needs directional laying at least perpendicularly  from the data collector.

I am not sure how maritime patrol looks in your mind but ice has nothing to do with it, you have regular maritime patrol flights around Alaska. ASW is wartime operation most of the time, maritime patrol in peacetime is often conducted by aircraft that even lack any offensive capability.

P8 has surface search radar, SIGINT equipment, acoustic sensor system which can use sonobuoy but is not limited to them and Advanced Airborne Sensor (thats an actual designation) and there is actually system developed to deal with ice interfearance, problems with which actually delayed project for a while due to hardware issues.

Noone ever went and started laying cables in january in North Sea, that would be just silly and very dangerous, and even if they did, it would be done with help of icebreaker, all equipment is being assembled on the cable laying ship, attached and placed into sea as they lay the cable.

Not even at the peak of USSR there was that much underwater line placed i am afraid.