Russian Naval Aviation: News

GarryB wrote:

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

Why would fixed structures like SOSUS need GPS receivers?

Or are you suggesting it is a mobile array whose position shifts and it needs to keep a record of its own location...

That would be like needing a GPS receiver for your house... I can understand wanting one for your car... but for something that is not mobile it is a bit of a waste of time and money.

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.

Deep submergence RESCUE vehicles are for cable tampering and surveillance... they are not used to lay cable.

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.

So they can't rely on their allies assets after all?

UK is not trying to position itself as superpowere, Russa is.

The UK is not giving up its seat on the UNSC... I would say it believes itself to be a superpower... though not the dominant one of course.

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.

I don't have an ASW capabilities... and Japan is an island that would be very vulnerable to a Russian sub launching a cruise missile attack from a thousand kms distance. The US is an island too. But the strange thing is that while the UK is an island its ASW capabilities are even weaker than russian defences... to the point of being pathetic... yet you turn your nose up at the Russian defences and give excuses for the UK. I guess it must be stockholm syndrome... perhaps when the UK starts giving you its old fighter planes and the next time Russia bombs Serbia you might reverse your opinion... or not.

The Russians on the other hand could simply ignore its sea lines of communication and defend its own areas and be fine from Sub threats... not invulnerable but also not able to be defeated by them.

So, Russians tempering own underwater cables? Good call.

No, SOSUS is fixed installation, however US is using dozens of contractors and research institutions that work and use it or do maintenance etc. Now, using charts in this age would be abit unpractical to say at least, missing its positoin by 300m is not a small thing. Also its not out of question for such cables to move abit or get covered partially by sand or corals i suppose, after all its seabed its everchanging. Its just far simplier for navigation. Fiber optic lines today are even dig in partially into sand which was not the case back in time. Biologist use today damn thing to track whales and orcas...

So yeah, GPS or low frequency emmiters are the thing since it was declassified.

Yess.. but Japanese coast is "stacked up", its all there. Russian coast is basically a line, its immense. In ideal situation they would need like...5 or 6 times more maritime patrol aircraft than Japan. To switch coasts Japanese maritime patrol aircraft needs to fly 100 miles, Russian to switch from Baltic to Pacific would need to land 4 times for fuel.

Maritime patrol is not exclusive for military applications, its used for iceberg tracking, observing weather, search and rescue, maritime research of many kinds...

I said... they can afford to reduce number of platforms, and that they can afford it, i never said they are going to completely remove maritime patrol. And same case as with Japan, UK is fairly small island, there are not huge stretched coastlines, aircrat can cross whole UK i 2h.

GarryB wrote:Japan is an island that would be very vulnerable to a Russian sub launching a cruise missile attack from a thousand kms distance.

It wouldn't matter as the Russian Pacific fleet can barely keep a couple or so of Oscar II on deployment at anytime. Same number of SSNs in those seas. This is too low of a number to be of significance for an industrial and Naval/ASW power that Japan is. And Soryus can really sail quite far out to keep things in check underwater, if needed.

Militarov wrote:
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.

So, the Poseidon ha two detector: one maritime radaar, and a pile of sonabouys.

As it seems by your comment the sonar actualy can't see too much thing above ice, the sunobouy is useless above ice as well.

So, a maritime patrol aircraft can only detect an icebreaker , but nothing else,

The P-8 hasn't got a MAD, because of the high altitude.

And there is no magic wand the can show a submarine under the ice from a 12 km altitude aircraft.

So, this kind of aircraft has very limited utility for russia.

Best part of the russian EEZ is under permanent ice.So you have to use submarines.

KiloGolf wrote:

GarryB wrote:Japan is an island that would be very vulnerable to a Russian sub launching a cruise missile attack from a thousand kms distance.

It wouldn't matter as the Russian Pacific fleet can barely keep a couple or so of Oscar II on deployment at anytime. Same number of SSNs in those seas. This is too low of a number to be of significance for an industrial and Naval/ASW power that Japan is. And Soryus can really sail quite far out to keep things in check underwater, if needed.

Russian pacific fleet can cover the whole japan island even from the home port with rockets.

Additionaly quite big part of the sea around japan covred by the russian air defense , os not so much chance for a maritime patrol aircraft.

Singular_Transform wrote:

Militarov wrote:
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.

So, the Poseidon ha two detector: one maritime radaar, and a pile of sonabouys.

As it seems by your comment the sonar actualy can't see too much thing above ice, the sunobouy is useless above ice as well.

So, a maritime patrol aircraft can only detect an icebreaker , but nothing else,

The P-8 hasn't got a MAD, because of the high altitude.

And there is no magic wand the can show a submarine under the ice from a 12 km altitude aircraft.

So, this kind of aircraft has very limited utility for russia.

Best part of the russian EEZ is under permanent ice.So you have to use submarines.

That actually depends how thick is the ice, i belive IEER can work on ice too if its not extremly thick which is rarely on open ocean.

When its about MAD i belive Indian and UK P-8s will have it, while USN opted aganist it seems partially because they want to introduce new type of sonobouys called MAC which pulse for prolonged period of time till onboard battery runs off. And seems they want to keep MAD sensors on ASW helicopters and future ASW UAV-s rather than P-8s, looks that idea is that UAVs should do low altitude search and P-8s high altitude search, however 12km altitude sounds abit too high for me, i belive average altitude from which it will be operated is more like 6-8km.

So, Russians tempering own underwater cables? Good call.

What are you talking about?

Russian subs maintain their own cables and tamper with the cables and systems of enemies like US and UK and EU.

So yeah, GPS or low frequency emmiters are the thing since it was declassified.

SOSUS existed in the 1960s when GPS didn't exist so it can't be that critical.

In ideal situation they would need like...5 or 6 times more maritime patrol aircraft than Japan.

With the addition of sea bed arrays they would not.

To switch coasts Japanese maritime patrol aircraft needs to fly 100 miles, Russian to switch from Baltic to Pacific would need to land 4 times for fuel.

And how often would you want to switch from the Baltic to the Pacific?

Most of the time you would not.

Maritime patrol is not exclusive for military applications, its used for iceberg tracking, observing weather, search and rescue, maritime research of many kinds...

That is what border patrol forces are for... and ministries for emergency, research etc etc.

For studying weather an aircraft like the Myacheshev M-17 would be more useful than a Tu-142.

GarryB wrote:

So, Russians tempering own underwater cables? Good call.

What are you talking about?

Russian subs maintain their own cables and tamper with the cables and systems of enemies like US and UK and EU.

So yeah, GPS or low frequency emmiters are the thing since it was declassified.

SOSUS existed in the 1960s when GPS didn't exist so it can't be that critical.

In ideal situation they would need like...5 or 6 times more maritime patrol aircraft than Japan.

With the addition of sea bed arrays they would not.

To switch coasts Japanese maritime patrol aircraft needs to fly 100 miles, Russian to switch from Baltic to Pacific would need to land 4 times for fuel.

And how often would you want to switch from the Baltic to the Pacific?

Most of the time you would not.

Maritime patrol is not exclusive for military applications, its used for iceberg tracking, observing weather, search and rescue, maritime research of many kinds...

That is what border patrol forces are for... and ministries for emergency, research etc etc.

For studying weather an aircraft like the Myacheshev M-17 would be more useful than a Tu-142.

I clearly said "after it was declassified", which happened somewhere in about 1991. i belive, before that i find it more than plausible that they had some type of LFEs.

Maritime patrol does not equal ASW warfare first to clear that up. Also Russian Coast Guard to my knowledge has just few Antonov An-26 for transport duties.

Well it obviously needs to happen when you have 20+ maritime patrol aircrafts on country sized as Russia. If there is conflict of some sort in Pacific you will sure as hell move your ASW assets there, you wont search for sub in Black Sea if you are fighting with Japan. There is simply not enough of them you can spread one drop of marmelade on whole bread. Japan has very tiny piece of bread and whole jar of marmelade.

Actually i was thinking more of those 53d Weather Reconnaissance Squadron that USN operates for an example, such missions require turboprops. Such squadron would be very useful in Russian navy due to major storms and blizzards that they cope with in the North.

I do not think Russia will follow the philosophy of the US on Maritime Patrol. The age of the manned Maritime Patrol aircrafts is near the end. Manned aircrafts for Maritime Patrol have shorter future than the lifetime of a new aircraft produced today.

eehnie wrote:I do not think Russia will follow the philosophy of the US on Maritime Patrol. The age of the manned Maritime Patrol aircrafts is near the end. Manned aircrafts for Maritime Patrol have shorter future than the lifetime of a new aircraft produced today.

Seems US is planning of having high altitude maritime patrol and ASW performed by manned aircraft like P-8 (and alike?, since i doubt they will completely discard turboprops mby something on C-130J platform appears in future) and low altitude one by means of UAVs.

Militarov wrote:

That actually depends how thick is the ice, i belive IEER can work on ice too if its not extremly thick which is rarely on open ocean.

When its about MAD i belive Indian and UK P-8s will have it, while USN opted aganist it seems partially because they want to introduce new type of sonobouys called MAC which pulse for prolonged period of time till onboard battery runs off. And seems they want to keep MAD sensors on ASW helicopters and future ASW UAV-s rather than P-8s, looks that idea is that UAVs should do low altitude search and P-8s high altitude search, however 12km altitude sounds abit too high for me, i belive average altitude from which it will be operated is more like 6-8km.

As I see the IEER actually the data collection system from the sonabouys.

Means if there is ice then you need heavy, rugged (and expensive) sonabouy to crack the ice.


And above certain thickness it is not possible at all.

And even if you crack the ice the emitter will stuck under the ice, blocking the UHF transmitter.

So, no, you won't be able to use it on ice.

The P-8 fly 12 km high to observe bigger area, and to have longer loiter time.

Just for reference, this is a heavy, maximum ice condition on the Russian EEZ.

Patrol aircraft can be used only a very small area.

Means it is impossible to detect submarines with aircraft, they need seabed sonars.

They can still go for cheaper civilian jet converted for patroling like Dassault falcon jet. No need for an expensive aircraft that will be shot down if it goes near a destroyer or if intercepted by a fighter. Their role is not that important in my opinion. Maybe a big simple drone widely produce can be better.

The space between Japan and Russia can be covered by 4 Su-35's radars and all ships will be detected with the option of defending themeselves and the ability of attacking with a variety of different missiles.

Militarov wrote:

eehnie wrote:I do not think Russia will follow the philosophy of the US on Maritime Patrol. The age of the manned Maritime Patrol aircrafts is near the end. Manned aircrafts for Maritime Patrol have shorter future than the lifetime of a new aircraft produced today.

Seems US is planning of having high altitude maritime patrol and ASW performed by manned aircraft like P-8 (and alike?, since i doubt they will completely discard turboprops mby something on C-130J platform appears in future) and low altitude one by means of UAVs.

They have a young model like the P-8 and they have to deal with it. But they know this is not the future. Russia has not an aircraft like this, it is better, because they can move earlier to the unmanned platforms for maritime patrol. In 20-25 years the P-8 will be still a young aircraft but will be severely outdated.

eehnie wrote:

They have a young model like the P-8 and they have to deal with it. But they know this is not the future. Russia has not an aircraft like this, it is better, because they can move earlier to the unmanned platforms for maritime patrol. In 20-25 years the P-8 will be still a young aircraft but will be severely outdated.

No one learnt here game theory?

You can't use aircraft o hunt submarines best part of the year, means you need something (passive sonar system) anyway,and after that the airplanes has no function .

Russia needs seabed sonar systems , not maritime patrol aircrafts.

Singular_Transform wrote:

eehnie wrote:

They have a young model like the P-8 and they have to deal with it. But they know this is not the future. Russia has not an aircraft like this, it is better, because they can move earlier to the unmanned platforms for maritime patrol. In 20-25 years the P-8 will be still a young aircraft but will be severely outdated.

No one learnt here game theory?

You can't use aircraft o hunt submarines best part of the year, means you need something (passive sonar system) anyway,and after that the airplanes has no function .

Russia needs seabed sonar systems , not maritime patrol aircrafts.

I was talking in overall terms, not about a concrete area. I was not entering in the discussion about the iced areas. I tend to think the future of the maritime patrol from air will be solved with shipborne unmanned aircrafts. It means somethings:

- The aircraft must be light, then no tripulation and few to zero weapons.
- The warship will have the information from the aircraft/s and also from their other systems. They will combine them.
- Like a warship can have unmanned aircarfs can have small unmanned submarines with technologies for detection.
- Armament based in the warship can be used to answer to the detected threats.
- Also armament carried by external platforms can be used (strategic bombers, other ships, other submarines,...).

Maybe it helps to give you a better idea of what I think about.

Isos wrote:They can still go for cheaper civilian jet converted for patroling like Dassault falcon jet. No need for an expensive aircraft that will be shot down if it goes near a destroyer or if intercepted by a fighter. Their role is not that important in my opinion. Maybe a big simple drone widely produce can be better.

The space between Japan and Russia can be covered by 4 Su-35's radars and all ships will be detected with the option of defending themeselves and the ability of attacking with a variety of different missiles.

The big aircrafts last for 100000 hours, the fighter jets last for 8000 hours.

Seabed sonar array last for half million hours

Singular_Transform wrote:

Isos wrote:They can still go for cheaper civilian jet converted for patroling like Dassault falcon jet. No need for an expensive aircraft that will be shot down if it goes near a destroyer or if intercepted by a fighter. Their role is not that important in my opinion. Maybe a big simple drone widely produce can be better.

The space between Japan and Russia can be covered by 4 Su-35's radars and all ships will be detected with the option of defending themeselves and the ability of attacking with a variety of different missiles.

The big aircrafts last for 100000 hours, the fighter  jets last for 8000 hours.

Seabed sonar array last for half million hours

But the difference is that with an Aircraft your radar and sonars are not fixed. You can change your position.

SOSUS was ineffective when two akula class went near US shores for 1 month. When you know where the sonars are, you can adapt you Attack. I'm not saying it's useless but it can't be an offensive tool. And special forces can just cut them before a war.

Isos wrote:

But the difference is that with an Aircraft your radar and sonars are not fixed. You can change your position.

SOSUS was ineffective when two akula class went near US shores for 1 month. When you know where the sonars are, you can adapt you Attack. I'm not saying it's useless but it can't be an offensive tool. And special forces can just cut them before a war.

SOSU was there as a gatekeeper.

The russian system is there to cover the whole area, and give real time information about the movement of any ship.

I think it is quite interesting to see that the Russians preferring the 24/7 radars instead of the airborne units.


A 24/7 sonar system covering the Russian EEZ and beyond give more than few sonar buoy and maritime radar on an aircraft.

Starting with that a modern, 200 m long seabed sonar can detect anything in 50 km area. If not then all that you have to do is to increase the sonar length to 1000 m.

See?

The maritime aircraft / nuclear submarine needed to cover the area if the sonar failed.


The US system designed to cover any ocean around the world except the ice covered one.

The Russian is to cover the home shores, and make impossible for any adversary to operate in attack distance.

Yes for peace period it's the best choice. But in case of war these 200m sonar wires will be cut.

I think it is quite interesting to see that the Russians preferring the 24/7 radars instead of the airborne units.

If they really had the choice between A-50U/100 and ground radars they would chose A-50. They can't because of the cost. Idem for satelit early warning radar and ground base early warning radar.

I agree that they need seabed sonars but not just it without a second capability with patrol Aircraft.

Isos wrote:Yes for peace period it's the best choice. But in case of war these 200m sonar wires will be cut.


If they really had the choice between A-50U/100 and ground radars they would chose A-50. They can't because of the cost. Idem for satelit early warning radar and ground base early warning radar.

I agree that they need seabed sonars but not just it without a second capability with patrol Aircraft.

It is next to impossible to get close to a 200m sonar wire with anything.


and the cutting of it is a quite important information, means war drill immediately.


The early warning aircraft has limited size. Example it hasn't got enought power, and too small for a long wavelenght early warning radar.

Like the sonabuoys rs of the P-8 Poseidon - compared to a seabed wire sonar the floating sonar is lame and very insensitive.

I think everyone forget that the airborne application has geometrical advantage, but very bad power ,weight and size disadvantage.

And the airborne posts are quite easy to destroy, and hard to protect.

And from one AWACS you can buy 3-4 radar : )

Singular_Transform wrote:

Isos wrote:

But the difference is that with an Aircraft your radar and sonars are not fixed. You can change your position.

SOSUS was ineffective when two akula class went near US shores for 1 month. When you know where the sonars are, you can adapt you Attack. I'm not saying it's useless but it can't be an offensive tool. And special forces can just cut them before a war.

SOSU was there as a gatekeeper.

The russian system is there to cover the whole area, and give real time information about the movement of any ship.

I think it is quite interesting to see that the Russians preferring the 24/7 radars instead of the airborne units.


A 24/7 sonar system covering the Russian EEZ and beyond give more than few sonar buoy and maritime radar on an aircraft.

Starting with that a modern, 200 m long seabed sonar can detect anything in 50 km area. If not then all that you have to do is to increase the sonar length to 1000 m.

See?

The maritime aircraft / nuclear submarine needed to cover the area if the sonar failed.


The US system designed to cover any ocean around the world except the ice covered one.

The Russian is to cover the home shores, and make impossible for any adversary to operate in attack distance.

Fixed radar sites in times of war have lifespan of pack of cigarets in whorehouse. US has dozens of fixed radar installations too so?

If Russians had to choose whey would have same number if not more maritime aviation borts than US or Japan, but there is not enough money, easy as that.

Also please stop taking sonar detection as granted, it is not granted, not even by a long shot.

During the Soviet era was the PVO expected to provide air cover to strike elements of the Soviet Naval Aviation? as it is obvious that the Naval Aviation did not have Fighters or interceptors in its inventory

Ilyushin Company Completes Modernization of Il-38N Maritime Patrol Aircraft for Russian Navy

The Ilyushin Aircraft Works fulfilled the state contract to upgrade another batch of anti-submarine Il-38 aircraft of the Russian Navy to the level of Il-38N, the press service of the United Aircraft Corporation said.


"The Ilyushin aircraft complex successfully completed the maintenance and modernization of two aircraft. In December 2016 they were handed over to the customer. Upon agreement with the command of the Russian Navy aviation they were named after seaborne aviation Commander Viktor Pavlovich Potapov and Navy pilot, Hero of the Soviet Union Mikhail Konstantinovich Verbitsky," it said.

To promote integration of enterprises of the United Aircraft Corporation the modernization of some aircraft is carried out by the Myasishchev enterprise according to Il documentation.

The new search and targeting system allows the modernized aircraft to successfully cope with patrolling missions, engage expanded range of armaments in the search and destruction of submarines, in radio-electronic monitoring of surface and air targets, mine planting, search and rescue at sea, as well as environmental monitoring of the water surface.

Source: http://www.navyrecognition.com/index.php/news/defence-news/2017/january-2017-navy-naval-forces-defense-industry-technology-maritime-security-global-news/4808-ilyushin-company-completes-modernization-of-il-38n-maritime-patrol-aircraft-for-russian-navy.html

The vibration looks a bit excessive on that new radome halfway down the fuselage

The orange and white one on top?

That is actually a stealth radome and it has just been turned on and is in the process of disappearing from human sight...