Does the Russian Navy have real tasks in the far sea and ocean zones


В продолжение темы about the unlearned lessons of the Falklands War. Earlier, we came to the disappointing conclusion that a similar naval operation today would be beyond the power of the Russian Navy, since in the far sea zone (DMZ) the Russian naval group (KUG) will have nothing to cover against enemy air attacks. The existing sea-based air defense systems will not allow the ships of the Russian Navy, which have gone far from their native shores, to reliably repel massive missile salvos. The question arises, do we need this DMZ at all, or will we live without it, the DMZ, and will live just fine?


The author of the lines was prompted to write this publication by a rather strange, in his personal opinion, assertion that Russia and its navy simply do not have any real tasks in the far sea zone. But is it really so?

If you read the official press release of the Ministry of Defense of the Russian Federation, it becomes obvious that they, combat missions, are still available for the Russian Navy in the DMZ. In January-February 2022, large-scale exercises will be held in Russia with the participation of 140 warships and support vessels:

The main focus of the exercises is to work out the actions of the Navy and the Aerospace Forces to protect Russian national interests in the World Ocean, as well as to counter the military threats of the Russian Federation from sea and ocean directions.


So, we are not talking about the near sea zone, but about the World Ocean, its “operationally important areas”: in the northeastern part of the Atlantic Ocean, in the Pacific Ocean, in the waters of the Mediterranean, North, Okhotsk and Japan Seas. That is, the Russian leadership's swing is still on the status of an ocean power, which must be reckoned with. It is commendable. But to what extent does the Russian Navy today correspond to the fulfillment of tasks in the far sea and ocean zones?

When the domestic media and the blogosphere talk about the rapidly growing capabilities of the Russian fleet, they usually mean the fantastic prospects that emerge with the advent of the Zircon hypersonic anti-ship missiles. We are already talking about it they said, and I would like to wish that the military-industrial complex could solve all possible problems with target designation and missile range. An important nuance lies elsewhere.

For some reason, everyone forgets that at sea, in which case our ships will have to fight not with other ships, but with aircraft, from which it is necessary to be able to effectively defend themselves so as not to turn into targets in a shooting range. At the same time, our potential opponents have aviation not only on deck, but also on the coast. So, let's try to transfer these calculations to the ongoing exercises.

British islands


It is reported that a group of Russian ships is located near Ireland, including the frigate Admiral Kasatonov, the missile cruiser Marshal Ustinov, the large anti-submarine ship Vice-Admiral Kulakov, the Stoikiy and Soobrazitelny corvettes, as well as supply vessels. Not far from the islands, our squadron will carry out firing practice and other maneuvers. That is, this is quite a conditional combat mission in the far sea zone.

By the way, it is not entirely clear why it was necessary to conduct exercises in the area where Irish fishermen fish, who have mortgages and who need to feed their families. Ireland is not yet part of the NATO bloc, but perhaps now Dublin will think about it. If anyone had to annoy, then, probably, the UK. But the Ministry of Defense of the Russian Federation, of course, knows better.

Let's return to the main question. Of the five Russian warships, only the Admiral Kasatonov frigate, which belongs to the modern project 22350, has a truly decent medium-range sea-based air defense system: the Redut air defense system with 32 cells of ammunition for medium-range missiles 9M96E (firing range 50 km ) or long-range missiles 9M96E2-1 (firing range 150 km). Also, 12 cells of the Redut air defense system (SAM 9M96M, 9M96E or 9M100) are on each of both Russian corvettes of project 20380 Stable and Smart. By the way, according to the state, 1 anti-aircraft missiles should be fired at 2 target. Here, consider yourself.

The missile cruiser "Marshal Ustinov" has an S-300F "Fort" air defense system with an ammunition load of 64 missiles in 8 revolver-type launchers below deck, designed to protect against attacks by aircraft, cruise missiles and other enemy air attack weapons flying at speeds up to 2000 m / s, at a distance of up to 75 km and up to 25 km in height. Project 1155 BOD "Vice-Admiral Kulakov" can not be mentioned at all, since the almost complete absence of an air defense system was its "calling card" back in Soviet times.

Here, in fact, is the entire anti-aircraft defense of a small Russian squadron that climbed west of the British Isles "to scare an Englishwoman." And all this is within the range of the United Kingdom's coastal aviation, as well as the British Navy's aircraft carrier strike group, which is based nearby in Portsmouth. Let's say the irresistible "Zircons" can sink the "Queen Elizabeth", but what will we do with the rest of the British aviation in which case?

Note that for now we are only talking about the British, and there, in the northeast Atlantic, the Second Fleet of the US Navy has recently been recreated and is operating. And we are climbing there, having neither an effective long-range air defense system, nor an AWACS aircraft for early warning of a missile attack, nor our own carrier-based aircraft for air cover? Anantyurnenko.

Pacific Ocean


Fast forward to the Pacific Ocean, as well as to the Sea of ​​Okhotsk and the Sea of ​​Japan, where our KTOF is to conduct exercises. Recall that the most real opponents for the Russian Navy there are the Japanese Naval Self-Defense Forces, as well as the US Navy. The purpose of the exercise is:

A detachment of ships of troops and forces in the north-east of Russia went on an exercise in the waters of Avacha Bay off the coast of Kamchatka to perform combat training exercises at sea combat training ranges.


Our Pacific troops will work out the search for enemy submarines, artillery firing and the destruction of air targets by naval air defense forces. The corvettes "Thundering", "Perfect", "Gromky" and "Hero of the Russian Federation Aldar Tsydenzhapov", as well as the small rocket ship "Smerch", small anti-submarine ships "Kholmsk", "Ust-Ilimsk", "MPK-107" are involved in the maneuvers. ”, sea minesweepers and support vessels. We have already briefly said about the air defense capabilities of corvettes, the Osa-M air defense systems mounted on RTOs are so modest against modern aviation that they can not be mentioned. And all this should resist the Japanese base and carrier-based aircraft, sea and air-based anti-ship missiles? It's good if our coastal aviation is in time to the rescue.

Separately, I would like to mention last year's KTOF exercises in the Hawaiian Islands, which then made a lot of noise with their audacity. They were attended by the missile cruiser Varyag, of the same type as Marshal Ustinov, the frigate Marshal Shaposhnikov (former BOD project 1155), the corvettes Hero of the Russian Federation Aldar Tsydenzhapov, Perfect and Loud, an unnamed Navy submarine , two Tu-142MZ long-range anti-submarine aircraft and obsolete MiG-31BM interceptors.

To be honest, sending such a compound right under the noses of the Americans cannot be called anything other than a gamble.
Three fifth-generation F-22A Raptor fighters were immediately raised from Hawaii, which observed Russian maneuvers together with Arleigh Burke-class URO destroyers. Is it necessary to explain how the collision would have ended in reality? Sticking under the nose of the British, Japanese and Americans, having neither a powerful sea-based air defense system, nor a sufficient number of modern warships, nor a carrier-based air wing for reconnaissance and air cover, is a provocative adventure of the purest water, if you call a spade a spade.

We draw conclusions. There are tasks for the Russian Navy in the far sea and ocean zone, but now we do not have an ocean fleet. And we need to think very carefully about what exactly the Kremlin requires from our sailors and what kind of navy with what kind of ships we need.
  • Author:
  • Photos used: Ministry of Defense of the Russian Federation
27 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must sign in.
  1. Don36 Offline Don36
    Don36 (Don36) 4 February 2022 16: 27
    +1
    Sergey, now imagine a British air strike, during which it will begin to lose dozens of its aircraft. The British are not Japanese, will they have enough gunpowder to go to their death like this, even if, according to your calculations, only the cruiser Marshal Ustinov will bring down the British Air Force aircraft with his air defense system Fort 32, before the missiles are used up?! The ability of NATO ships to repulse a salvo from 16 Vulkan anti-ship missiles is also doubtful, there is nothing to say about Zircons. Many experts do not consider the F-35 to be a 5th generation aircraft due to a number of its shortcomings. The F-22 is a more dangerous machine, but Japan and Britain do not have them, and in the USA their production has been completely stopped and every loss of such an aircraft is irretrievable. In terms of the MiG-31, it can carry the Kinzhal anti-ship missiles, and no one has canceled its air-to-air missiles. If you look for literature, you can find information about the meeting of the F-15 with the MiG-25. The meeting ended with a score of 2:2 and this was against the MiG-25, not the MiG-31 ...
    1. Marzhecki Offline Marzhecki
      Marzhecki (Sergei) 4 February 2022 16: 36
      -3
      even according to your calculations, only the cruiser Marshal Ustinov will bring down 32 aircraft of the British Air Force with his air defense systems Fort, before the ammunition of the missiles is used up ?!

      Not 32 aircraft, but at best cruise missiles, 32 for Ustinov, 16 for a frigate and 6 for a corvette. The range of the air defense system is specially indicated, do you think the aircraft will enter this radius? Why would?
      And there is still the problem of seeing planes and fired missiles in time, for this you need your own planes or at least AWACS helicopters, and not one. And they need their own carrier, an aircraft carrier.
      And what to do later, when the SAM ammunition is used up?

      In terms of the MiG-31, it can carry the Kinzhal anti-ship missiles, and no one has canceled its air-to-air missiles.

      A dagger is good, but everything again rests on target designation. The MiG-31 will not fly there alone with a dagger on a suspension over the KUG? And for air battles with modern fighters, this high-altitude interceptor is outdated and not suitable.

      The ability of NATO ships to repulse a salvo from 16 Vulkan anti-ship missiles is also doubtful, there is nothing to say about Zircons.

      I deliberately did not begin to simulate a collision with NATO ships, but focused on what Britain and Hawaii, unsinkable aircraft carriers, find nearby. We will not drown them with Volcanoes and Zircons.
      Summary (once again): without our aircraft carrier with carrier-based fighters and attack aircraft, AWACS for reconnaissance and target designation, attack and anti-submarine helicopters, our KUG cannot be done in the DMZ. In the event of a real collision, all our ships are guaranteed to be sunk by aircraft and anti-ship missiles. Zircons are good, but protection is also needed.
      1. Don36 Offline Don36
        Don36 (Don36) 4 February 2022 16: 51
        +1
        Since there are electronic warfare systems, and launching missiles from long distances is possible only along a high-altitude trajectory, which, with today's radars, makes them an easy target for intercepting even self-defense air defenses (NATO subsonic anti-ship missiles), the range of which is about 20 km, and the low-altitude anti-ship missile section begins closer than 20 km from the target ... AWACS aircraft, these are large low-maneuverable vehicles and a frigate of the 22350 type will not miss them ... There will be no maneuverable combat, there will be air-to-air missiles from a distance of about 200 km, this MiG-31 can and it’s not a fact that he will miss, because even before modernization, his Soviet airborne radar saw cruise missiles even against the background of the earth ... Volcanoes and Zircons can carry a nuclear warhead, so everything is relative ... We won’t drown Hawaii, but we can make Chernobyl out of them and the Yankees will not get any easier ... Yes, there are no guarantees for the Yankees ... any detachment of ships unequivocally escort nuclear submarines with cruise missiles ... The Yankees almost lost an aircraft carrier from an accidental explosion of the Zuni 127 mm NURS on board, and now imagine that will be if instead of127 mm NURS will hit the aircraft carrier with the Vulkan anti-ship missile, God bless him, at least the Uran anti-ship missile, with a much more serious warhead than some 127 mm NURS ... one successful hit and there is no aircraft carrier, and if there are several hits ... And Volcanoes and Onyxes are equipped with a target selection system ...
        1. Marzhecki Offline Marzhecki
          Marzhecki (Sergei) 4 February 2022 17: 55
          -2
          Since there are electronic warfare systems, and launching missiles from long distances is possible only along a high-altitude trajectory, which, with today's radars, makes them an easy target for intercepting even self-defense air defenses (NATO subsonic anti-ship missiles), the range of which is about 20 km, and the low-altitude anti-ship missile section begins closer than 20 km from the target ...

          Do you know what anti-radar missiles are?

          AWACS aircraft are large low-maneuverable vehicles and a frigate of the 22350 type will not miss them ..

          These planes never get into battle; no frigate has a chance to shoot it down. We need such an aircraft ourselves.

          Volcanoes and Zircons can carry a nuclear warhead, so everything is relative ... We won’t drown Hawaii, but we can make Chernobyl out of them and the Yankees won’t get any easier ..

          About Zircons, this is so far our speculation. Well, nuclear war is what it is.

          The Yankees almost lost the aircraft carrier from an accidental explosion of the Zuni 127 mm NURS on board, and now imagine what will happen if, instead of the 127 mm NURS, the Vulkan anti-ship missiles hit the aircraft carrier, God bless him, at least Uran anti-ship missiles, with a much more serious warhead than some kind of 127 mm NURS ..

          I've seen what happens to a Russian corvette when it burns. I did not like.
  2. Sergey Latyshev Offline Sergey Latyshev
    Sergey Latyshev (Serge) 4 February 2022 17: 45
    -3
    There are tasks, there is no fleet, it is an everyday matter.
    The main thing then is whether there are capacities and means.
    I read that all the Far Eastern shipyards now "Tsesarevich Embankment" is spiritually strong ...
    And the money that disappeared from the PF was not enough for new ships
  3. You ask: "Does the Russian Navy have
    real tasks in the long run
    sea ​​and ocean zones"?
    I answer: these tasks are not
    And these zones would go to ...!
    1. bobba94 Offline bobba94
      bobba94 (Vladimir) 4 February 2022 20: 51
      0
      There is a real problem ...... these are the Kuril Islands, which are claimed by the Japanese. Recently, I constantly hear from the media and from my relatives and acquaintances who live in the Far East that they began to import weapons in large quantities to the Kuriles .... not tanks, not Grads and not armored personnel carriers, they mainly import missile systems, they are expanding the network of military airfields ... That's right, strong air defense, missile defense and aviation are needed for defense, and there is no need to go on cruisers to distant sea zones ......
      1. Marzhecki Offline Marzhecki
        Marzhecki (Sergei) 5 February 2022 08: 42
        -4
        That's right, strong air defense, missile defense and aviation are needed for defense, and there is no need to go on cruisers to distant sea zones ......

        So why did you get stuck then? To Britain? To Hawaii?
        Maybe sometimes you need to go there? Maybe the admirals know better what real combat missions are?
  4. EMMM Offline EMMM
    EMMM 4 February 2022 20: 35
    +1
    The author considers the air defense of the ship only from the point of view of the air defense system, but he forgets that the air defense system also includes other means - radars or electronic warfare.
    What strike aircraft can pose a threat to a ship?
    The famous 5th generation fighters, flying at the speed of a turtle and quite visible on the radar screens for 250 kilometers. No, the real threat is the old F-15, F-18 and maybe F-16. But they were not re-equipped with new missiles.
    1. Marzhecki Offline Marzhecki
      Marzhecki (Sergei) 5 February 2022 08: 41
      -4
      The author considers the air defense of the ship only from the point of view of the air defense system, but he forgets that the air defense system also includes other means - radars or electronic warfare.

      Did not forget. They have such an unpleasant thing as anti-radar missiles ... Which will fly in the same salvo with anti-ship missiles. And our commanders will have to decide whether to try to shoot them down or turn off the radar. An unpleasant dilemma.
      This is all on the condition that our KUG learns in a timely manner that the planes went on the attack, and this requires reconnaissance means.

      The famous 5th generation fighters, flying at the speed of a turtle and quite visible on the radar screens for 250 kilometers.

      And what is the radius of the Redoubts? 150?
      1. EMMM Offline EMMM
        EMMM 9 February 2022 23: 02
        0
        Electronic warfare equipment includes not only radars, but also other means of suppressing electronic equipment.
        If a rocket does not see a target for a hundred kilometers, what will it do? ..
    2. Marzhecki Offline Marzhecki
      Marzhecki (Sergei) 5 February 2022 11: 19
      -5
      The famous 5th generation fighters, flying at the speed of a turtle and quite visible on the radar screens for 250 kilometers. No, the real threat is the old F-15, F-18 and maybe F-16. But they were not re-equipped with new missiles.

      I believe that after such exercises, missiles will definitely appear in service ...
  5. Expert_Analyst_Forecaster 5 February 2022 06: 24
    0
    Quote: bobba94
    That's right, strong air defense, missile defense and aviation are needed for defense, and there is no need to go on cruisers to distant sea zones ......

    I fully support.
    Building an ocean fleet, investing huge amounts of money just for the sake of prestige, they say, an ocean power, is sabotage and sabotage of the country's defense capability.
  6. Marzhecki Offline Marzhecki
    Marzhecki (Sergei) 5 February 2022 08: 45
    -4
    Quote: Expert_Analyst_Forecaster
    Building an ocean fleet, investing huge amounts of money just for the sake of prestige, they say, an ocean power, is sabotage and sabotage of the country's defense capability.

    How many articles have already been written, why the Russian fleet, but some people do not reach and, apparently, will never reach. recourse
  7. Marzhecki Offline Marzhecki
    Marzhecki (Sergei) 5 February 2022 09: 08
    -2
    Quote: Expert_Analyst_Forecaster
    I fully support.
    Building an ocean fleet, investing huge amounts of money just for the sake of prestige, they say, an ocean power, is sabotage and sabotage of the country's defense capability.

    Wrecking is investing huge money in SSBNs, which we will then have nothing to cover with, and relying on them as on the Naval component of the strategic nuclear forces.
  8. Expert_Analyst_Forecaster 5 February 2022 10: 05
    -1
    Quote: Marzhetsky
    How many articles have already been written, why the Russian fleet, but some people do not reach and, apparently, will never reach.

    Maybe it's not the people who don't get it, but the fact that they have an opinion different from yours?
    Or are your articles the ultimate source of truth?
    1. Marzhecki Offline Marzhecki
      Marzhecki (Sergei) 5 February 2022 11: 19
      -4
      Maybe it's not the people who don't get it, but the fact that they have an opinion different from yours?
      Or are your articles the ultimate source of truth?

      Maybe so. Or maybe I'm just right and you're wrong?
  9. Expert_Analyst_Forecaster 5 February 2022 10: 09
    0
    Quote: Marzhetsky
    Wrecking is investing huge money in SSBNs, which we will then have nothing to cover with, and relying on them as on the Naval component of the strategic nuclear forces.

    Did I write about SSBNs?
    When there are no arguments against the opponent, it is necessary to attribute to him what he did not write, right?
    And to refute this unwritten, thereby proving your point of view, right?
    1. Marzhecki Offline Marzhecki
      Marzhecki (Sergei) 5 February 2022 11: 21
      -5
      Did I write about SSBNs?
      When there are no arguments against the opponent, it is necessary to attribute to him what he did not write, right?
      And to refute this unwritten, thereby proving your point of view, right?

      No arguments against you? I already have about 20 reasoned articles against your position. hi
      You have no arguments, one dense ignorance on this issue.
      1. The comment was deleted.
  10. Expert_Analyst_Forecaster 5 February 2022 12: 29
    +1
    Quote: Marzhetsky
    Maybe so. Or maybe I'm just right and you're wrong?

    May be. I'm just expressing my opinion.
    Or do you need to accompany every sentence or comment IMHO?
  11. Expert_Analyst_Forecaster 5 February 2022 12: 40
    +2
    Quote: Marzhetsky
    No arguments against you? I already have about 20 reasoned articles against your position.
    You have no arguments, one dense ignorance on this issue.

    Well, yes. 20 articles is an argument. You can also count the number of words and characters.
    You've just gone off topic. And they turned the arrows on my dense ignorance.
    Didn't answer my question Did I write about SSBNs?

    Okay, let me be dense and ignorant, then you are a capercaillie who screams the same thing 20 times in a row, but at the same time, he hears nothing but his cries.
  12. bobba94 Offline bobba94
    bobba94 (Vladimir) 5 February 2022 17: 35
    0
    At present, disputes about Russian aircraft carriers and long-distance ocean voyages do not make sense. That's when the military budget of Russia becomes equal to the military budget of the States, or at least 2/3, then it will be possible to talk about the construction of Russian aircraft carriers, and destroyers, and many other things ... In the meantime, it remains to remember the scene from old comedy ...... "My grandfather had a desire to buy a horse, but there was no way ......"
  13. vovabunya Offline vovabunya
    vovabunya (Vladimir) 6 February 2022 08: 59
    0
    I would like to ask about the military rank of the author! What troops did you serve in? Did they serve?
    1. The comment was deleted.
  14. Michael1950 Offline Michael1950
    Michael1950 (Michael) 6 February 2022 12: 41
    -2
    Does the Russian Navy have real tasks in the far sea and ocean zones

    - Yes: demonstration of the flag.

    The question arises, do we need this DMZ at all, or will we live without it, the DMZ, and will live just fine?

    - And no one canceled the issues of prestige and no one canceled the issues of training sailors. Despite the fact that they will not succeed against the American fleet. SO WHAT?! It is necessary to maintain some level of training anyway, otherwise the tryndets will come to everything FOREVER ... crying
  15. Michael1950 Offline Michael1950
    Michael1950 (Michael) 6 February 2022 12: 48
    -2
    Quote: Marzhetsky
    Quote: Expert_Analyst_Forecaster
    I fully support.
    Building an ocean fleet, investing huge amounts of money just for the sake of prestige, they say, an ocean power, is sabotage and sabotage of the country's defense capability.

    Wrecking is investing huge money in SSBNs, which we will then have nothing to cover with, and relying on them as on the Naval component of the strategic nuclear forces.

    - Well, you said some nonsense - nuclear submarines with ICBMs are just the least vulnerable component of the strategic nuclear forces and no one will refuse them.
  16. The comment was deleted.
  17. Michael1950 Offline Michael1950
    Michael1950 (Michael) 7 February 2022 13: 54
    -3
    Quote: Don36
    ... If you look for literature, you can find information about the meeting of the F-15 with the MiG-25. The meeting ended with a score of 2:2 and it was against the MiG-25, not the MiG-31...

    - There were no "2:2" it was "2:0" in favor of the Israeli F-15. This is absolutely accurate. wink The whole world knows it...
  18. Michael1950 Offline Michael1950
    Michael1950 (Michael) 7 February 2022 14: 22
    -2
    Quote: EMMM
    The author considers the air defense of the ship only from the point of view of the air defense system, but he forgets that the air defense system also includes other means - radars or electronic warfare.

    - Of course have. Here is just one caveat: Russian radars are perfectly choked by American electronic warfare systems, but vice versa - NO.

    What strike aircraft can pose a threat to a ship?

    - Any aircraft with AUG, covered by EA-18G EW aircraft and armed with anti-ship missiles:
    https://ru.wikipedia.org/wiki/AGM-158C_LRASM
    It has another feature: it stealth missile.

    The famous 5th generation fighters, flying at the speed of a turtle and quite visible on the radar screens for 250 kilometers.

    - The F-22 and F-35 aircraft are indeed visible on the radar screen for 250 km. Only on condition that it is a radar of at least the Voronezh type
    And all the garbage that the S-300, S-400 and the ship's "Fort" consist of, everything is much worse there:


    No, the real threat is oldies like F-15s, F-18s, and maybe F-16s. But they were not re-equipped with new missiles.

    - Ridiculous naive antediluvian delusion. The main danger are all stealth aircraft and all stealth missiles.