Can Russia and the United States unleash an underwater mine war against each other

17

One of the most resonant the recent days was the uninvited visit of an American Virginia-class submarine to Russian territorial waters, from where it monitored the exercises of the Russian Pacific Fleet. The nuclear submarine was discovered by an Il-38 anti-submarine aircraft and a Pacific Fleet submarine, after which it was forced to retreat. Since the Virginias were designed specifically as hunters for (our) submarines, her appearance at the entrance to the Sea of ​​\uXNUMXb\uXNUMXbOkhotsk, where SSBNs are patrolling, raises a lot of questions about the security of the Marine component of our "nuclear triad".

underwater wrestling


Our Sea of ​​Okhotsk is considered an almost ideal water area for combat patrols by Borei and other SSBNs: it is deep-water and, most importantly, closed to foreign anti-submarine aviation and search and strike anti-submarine groups. The Sea of ​​Okhotsk makes sovereignty over the Kuril Islands completely internal to Russia, which Tokyo is so eager to chop off from us. If Japan is able to return the “northern territories”, either by negotiations or by force, the waters of the Sea of ​​Okhotsk will become a “passage yard” for its Naval Self-Defense Forces and Air Force, as well as for the US Seventh Fleet, with all the adverse consequences that entail for us.



As you can see, the Americans do not despair and send their nuclear submarine hunters to the straits leading from the Sea of ​​Okhotsk to the Pacific Ocean. As "killers" of Russian SSBNs, two types of submarines have been developed in the United States: the aforementioned Virginias, of which 19 have already been built, and a total of 48 are planned for construction, and the Seawulf nuclear submarine, with technical the sides are real masterpieces, which only 3 were able to produce instead of the expected 30 pieces due to the extreme complexity and high cost. Let's be honest, these "hunters" are a huge danger to the Russian submarine fleet, primarily strategic SSBNs, but not only to them.

One of our astute readers suggested, at first glance, a simple and effective solution on how to protect the Sea of ​​Okhotsk from intruders: take and mine the approaches to it with bottom anti-submarine torpedo mines. Indeed, why not do so, and at the same time then block the Baltic and Black Seas in the same way?

Indeed, the Russian Navy is armed with a line of MDM bottom mines: MDM-1 Mod.1, MDM-2 Mod. 1, MDM-5 Mod. 1 and MDM-3 Mod. 1., which can be installed using submarines, surface ships and aircraft. Also, on the basis of the torpedo, a “self-transporting sea bottom mine” - SMDM was developed. It is launched through a torpedo tube and can independently move up to 17 kilometers. Lying on the bottom, mines track potential targets at a distance of up to 300 meters. It would seem, take it and block all possible underwater passages with them and sleep peacefully.

Unfortunately, everything is a little more complicated than we would like. The maximum service life of a bottom mine in a combat position is only 1 year, after which it will have to be found, removed and deactivated. It's just that the battery will run out of electric charge, and then it will neutralize itself. Another problem is the selectivity of action, or rather, its deficiency. This is due to the exceptional primitiveness of the design, where the "brains" are almost completely absent. Such weapons could potentially pose a threat to Russian warships, submarines, as well as civilian ships. On the other hand, our potential opponents can also start playing these mine games.

Thus, the US Navy is armed with naval non-contact anti-submarine mines CAPTOR (enCAPsulated TORpedo). They are rightfully considered one of the most effective and budgetary ways to provide passive anti-submarine defense. A bottom mine is structurally a container, inside of which there is a torpedo, as well as acoustic and computing equipment. The CAPTOR can be deployed from a submarine, a surface ship, or by parachute from an anti-submarine aircraft. The mine is in a vertical position, firing a torpedo upwards.

The main target for CAPTOR are (our) submarines. Hydroacoustic equipment is able to hear a submarine at a distance of 1000 meters, while it ignores surface ships and submarines in the surface position as potential targets.


The guidance system of the torpedo is active-passive, it operates at a distance of up to 1500 meters. In Soviet sources, there were references to the possibility of equipping it with a nuclear warhead. Also, domestic analysts believed that the real life of the CAPTOR bottom mine in a combat position could be from 2 to 5 years, not trusting the Americans' statements about 2-3 months. The domestic analogue of this American bottom torpedo was named MTPK-1 (universal mine-torpedo anti-submarine complex).

In any case, CAPTOR is a very serious weapon that poses a real and great danger to Russian submarines. What to do if some "Virginia" or "Sivulf" during the threatened period secretly sets up similar bottom traps on the route of the SSBN from the Sea of ​​Okhotsk to the Pacific Ocean? How can you find out in a timely manner? And most importantly, what are the ways to eliminate the threat after it is detected?

We will talk in detail about the capabilities of the Russian Navy in underwater combat sometime next time.
Our news channels

Subscribe and stay up to date with the latest news and the most important events of the day.

17 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must sign in.
  1. -5
    14 February 2022 12: 15
    The state of the PMO of the Russian Navy, politically correct, wants the best. It's small and old. The Sea of ​​Okhotsk is convenient for SSBNs, while everything is peaceful and calm. In the autumn-winter period, if it happens, the weak ACC of the fleet will not be able to provide any assistance in the Sea of ​​​​Okhotsk.
    There are still many samples of mines in service, stored in those left after the explosions in the 90s. But with carriers of mine weapons, things are bad. The mobilization of watercraft in civilian organizations has not been worked out, and their conversion too. In the UK, in 1982, thanks to the current conversion program, the passenger liner Uganda and merchant ships were quickly put into operation.

    How was the case with the recent discovery of a foreign submarine at KTOF, we will not know soon. The establishment of primary contact with buoys from the 70s, a museum exhibit of Il-38, raises doubts. Without the letter H (Novel).

    Given the weak air defense in the Kuriles, the enemy will be able to throw mines from aircraft carriers. Not very accurate, but massively.
    The most effective in that area would be our minefields (MZM) from mines PMR-1, PMR-2. In combination with RM-2G.
  2. -2
    14 February 2022 12: 29
    There is an opinion in VO that the entire mine / mine action complex of the Russian Federation is very outdated, and so far it cannot compete with amers.
    In the articles there, the possibilities are compared in sufficient detail.
    1. -5
      14 February 2022 13: 08
      By itself, the mines will not jump into the installation sites. We need carriers. The most secretive carriers of mine weapons, the MAPL 945 project, are almost gone. Dressing up SSGN 855M for these purposes is wasteful, they are not enough to ensure the main task. The same situation with aviation carriers. Mine-laying combat exercises have not been carried out at the Russian Navy for 20 years.
      1. -3
        14 February 2022 13: 16
        Not only mines were discussed.
        detection tools, computer brains, disguise, etc.,
        1. -6
          14 February 2022 14: 04
          There are few even milestones for designating cleared fairways in warehouses. Not to mention detection tools, computer brains, disguise, etc. During the 2008-2012 reform, a lot of this property disappeared.
  3. +1
    14 February 2022 12: 59
    Why not install active echo sounders in the straits between the Kuril Islands (namely, in the straits) and calm down? The straits are relatively narrow, a stationary echo sounder, having a reference image, easily notices any new object in its area of ​​responsibility, in automatic mode. Moreover, semi-automatic anti-submarine batteries can be supplied.
    1. -7
      14 February 2022 13: 05
      There are not enough funds to maintain the already installed sound direction finding stations, to inspect and repair instruments and lines of the underwater situation monitoring system.
      1. +5
        14 February 2022 13: 42
        Dear bot.
        You carry such mossy propaganda, are you not ashamed yourself? Finally change the record. In Russia, this nonsense for a long time, does not cling to anyone. Contact the curators for a new technique.
        1. -9
          14 February 2022 13: 55
          Talk about this interesting, topical topic with the military personnel of the Navy, you will be even more surprised at the state of affairs.
          1. +2
            15 February 2022 11: 29
            And since when, bots like you, have been allowed to the military. You have probably never been to Russia either.
            1. -5
              15 February 2022 11: 34
              Talk, read the Naval Collection magazine, the Foreign Military Review magazine. Get enlightened. Read about a recent incident at KTOF with an American crew hanging around in our tervods for several hours. Read about the disrupted program for the construction of facilities to control the underwater situation in the fleets. If you speak foreign languages, read NATO specialized publications.
              1. 0
                15 February 2022 11: 37
                Don't believe me. I read almost all of this regularly, and even foreigners.
                So, not at the checkout.
                Next question?
                You really haven't been to Russia.
                1. -5
                  15 February 2022 11: 59
                  I doubt that you even took the mentioned publications in your hands, or read them on the net. Judging by the text of your comments.

                  You really haven't been to Russia.

                  Judging by the grammar of your comment, you rarely write in Russian.
                  1. -1
                    15 February 2022 13: 39
                    1. It's your right
                    2. So they really didn’t exist, i.e. typical "officer's daughter".
  4. +1
    14 February 2022 14: 25
    We need such ships at sea,
    So that we can argue with any wave!
    Lighthouses are needed and we need a locator ....
    And we also need new nuclear microsubmarines of a new type
    1. -7
      14 February 2022 15: 30
      There were such boats. But they could not provide coastal infrastructure for their maintenance. There were many ideas put into the 705 project. Summed up the technological base.
  5. The comment was deleted.
    1. -5
      14 February 2022 16: 46
      We must believe in the victory of the Russian Armed Forces.