How a special operation in the Black Sea changed the perception of the Russian aircraft carrier fleet

How a special operation in the Black Sea changed the perception of the Russian aircraft carrier fleet

Probably, no topic causes such fierce verbal battles in Runet as the question of the need or uselessness of the Russian Navy aircraft carriers, by which in this publication we will mean both “classic” aircraft carriers and UDC, from which helicopters can take off and land, UAV and SKVVP. The special military operation in Ukraine, or rather, its part, taking place on the Black Sea, showed that the Russian navy has a lot of problems, but the conclusions from them are somehow diametrically opposed.

For many years they stubbornly tried to convince us that Russia is an exclusively continental power, which does not particularly need not only some aircraft carriers, but even an ocean fleet. Say, with whom are you seriously going to fight at sea there, and what kind of landings to land? Not in the steppes of Ukraine, really? Haha...

Here it would be to laugh now, but for some reason it is not at all funny. It turns out that a naval landing near Odessa would be very useful during a special military operation, but in fact we have nothing to carry it out with. About what such a landing operation should look like, we talked in general terms in article dated March 7, 2022 under the title "What the Russian Navy lacks for a successful naval landing near Odessa". We quite rightly pointed out that for this it is necessary to continuously monitor everything that happens on the Ukrainian coast and in its sky by AWACS aircraft and helicopters, and Russian aviation must turn the landing zone into a kind of lunar landscape and dominate the air. Landing should first be carried out in the safest possible way over the horizon with UDC, and only then should large landing ships be stuck into the shore, continuously covered from the air by fighters and attack helicopters.

This is approximately how it should be, and, alas, nothing like the Russian Navy can now objectively be carried out due to the physical absence of carrier-based AWACS aircraft, catapult aircraft carriers for their launch and UDC as classes. The statement of this fact caused a whole storm of angry comments from readers, who, of course, always know better. After the tragic death in the Black Sea of ​​the Saratov large landing ship, the Moskva missile cruiser and the Vasily Bekh tugboat, opponents of large and aircraft carriers, in particular, ships, for some reason decided that they were right, and it was not at all a matter of a weak naval air defense system. basing, the shortage of combat-ready surface ships for escort and the lack of air cover and reconnaissance. They say that enemy anti-ship missiles themselves will “bounce” from small boats without harming them, or even completely miss due to their size. Yes, it sounds ridiculous, but such ideas, unfortunately, are being promoted in all seriousness.

But back to the topic of large-tonnage warships. A few days ago, all the mainstream media talked about how the Turkish Navy finally received its first universal amphibious assault ship Anadolu. Posted by about this and Roman Skomorokhov, known for his principled “aircraft phobia”, surprisingly, in a very complimentary form. Let us take the liberty of quoting a respected colleague from the Military Review portal in support of:

Why UDC is needed at all has been said more than once. The first wave of landings on the territory of the enemy, which, so to speak, does not have impressive means of defense. A group of ships, which includes UDC, approaches the shore, scatters the enemy forces on the shore and begins landing. Cover ships, attack helicopters and aircraft assist in the landings. Everything is simple…

But such landings are still rare, but the visit of an order from 1-2 UDC and several frigates and escort minesweepers near Odessa in our time would look more than justified. Plus, of course, cover planes from the Crimean airfields. Here we would have an operation in which the UDC would be revealed in full, because these ships are capable of landing a decent mass of troops in a short period of time and equipment in the specified area.

Well, you must! And it was completely unusual to read further, since colleague Skomorokhov wrote that some 12 stealth fifth-generation F-35B fighters on the deck of the Turkish UDC "would come to court even with a possible showdown with Russia." Those times ... It turns out that there are still benefits from carrier-based aviation! A colleague rightly noted that the combat radius of an aircraft with a short takeoff and vertical landing is an impressive 800 kilometers, which is less than that of a conventional horizontal takeoff fighter, but allows it to operate effectively beyond the range of coastal-based anti-ship missiles. The hint at the tragic fate of "Moscow" is extremely transparent.

Roman Skomorokhov ends his article entitled “Drone carrier: aircraft carrier laughter and tears in Turkish” with the conclusion that “we have, it turns out, where to use such a ship as the UDC”, which in itself is the reason for their creation. Obviously, with great difficulty, the colleague resisted the call to rush to the creation of vertical take-off and landing aircraft, limiting himself to helicopters for the time being. For a journalist who has written many articles denying the need for large-tonnage aircraft-carrying ships for the Russian Navy, this is, without jokes, a real breakthrough. Recognition of one's delusions is a real male act, which is worth a lot, without any irony.

For the author of these lines, the “catharsis” experienced by a respected colleague is all the more important because, about a year ago, he, as it seemed to him, “broke apart” one of the articles published on Reporter. Article- “exposure” was called “What can we do in modern Russia?”, And there were a lot of distortions and frankly personal attacks, like:

So Mr. Marzhetsky, although on paper, is rather mediocre enough to send Russian citizens to death. Well, he doesn't like them, apparently.

As for "departure to death" - this is what the author of the lines repeatedly and consistently called for to provide Russian sailors with aircraft carriers for air cover, reconnaissance and target designation. In his opinion, it is precisely the high level of security of a full-fledged AUG and its ability to "snarl" that is the main guarantee of the security of Russian citizens, discouraging the desire to fight with it. What can not be said about the "mosquito fleet", which does not really have either air defense or anti-aircraft defense.

It is gratifying that confusion and vacillation finally began in the camp of "aircraft carriers", which was clearly facilitated by the ambiguous results of the Russian Navy in the Black Sea. Does this mean that you need to stop building aircraft carriers and UDC right now?

No, our priorities should be somewhat different. First you need to protect the near sea zone, for which you need a lot of PLO corvettes and frigates, as well as naval aviation. In addition, an aircraft carrier or UDC without an escort warrant is defenseless, this fact is beyond doubt. We are building ships, alas, for too long, so it makes sense to order a large batch of PLO corvettes and frigates in the PRC, which we discuss in detail told previously. It will be possible to increase the number of ships of this class to the required level in just 3-5 years. We ourselves should focus on the production of modern URO project 22350 and 22350M frigates, which will become the main "workhorses" of the Russian Navy in the far sea and ocean zones.

In addition to the two project 23900 UDCs being slowly built at the Zaliv plant in Kerch, it may be advisable to order a series of 1-2 Type-075 amphibious assault ships in the export version from the PRC. Surely the Chinese will cope even faster than the Crimeans, and these UDCs should be transferred to the Pacific Fleet of the Russian Federation in order to strengthen its capabilities to counter the Japan Maritime Self-Defense Forces. For the maintenance of such large-capacity vessels, it will be necessary to build the appropriate coastal infrastructure. And only then it makes sense to lay in Nikolaev (God willing, it will still become part of Russia) a series of 3-4 full-fledged aircraft carriers equipped with catapults and horizontal takeoff and landing fighters.

I would very much like to hope that the right conclusions will be drawn from the problems of the Russian Navy not only by fellow journalists, but also by decision-makers.
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must sign in.
  1. Yuri V.A Offline Yuri V.A
    Yuri V.A (Yuri) 9 July 2022 13: 20
    The special operation showed that the reality turned out to be even worse than the assumptions. Such leadership of the Black Sea Fleet, judging by the fate of "Moscow", "V. Beh", "Saratov", RTOs and raptors, will kill any aircraft carrier, udk and the most sophisticated destroyer
  2. aslanxnumx Offline aslanxnumx
    aslanxnumx (Aslan) 9 July 2022 15: 41
    The distance from the Crimean peninsula to Odessa is not so great to drive the aircraft carrier. And under the current leadership of the Armed Forces, if there were a hundred aircraft carriers, it would still be useless. Kuzya was driven to the coast of Syria and fought a lot.
  3. Sergey Latyshev Offline Sergey Latyshev
    Sergey Latyshev (Serge) 9 July 2022 16: 15
    And, the theme of aircraft carriers is more and more reminiscent of windmills in Don Quixote.
    It’s as if they are not new, even there are no photos of the UDC buildings under construction (which people have already begun to worry about with VO), and the topic is regularly thrown in ...
    IMHO, given that there are no schools and capacities, but there is an optimization of money, everyone is doing it right - in small steps, so that they steal less, and the only one cannot be ruined .......
  4. Spasatel Offline Spasatel
    Spasatel 9 July 2022 21: 04
    We must instruct the Rotenberg brothers to build a fleet.
    1. Monster_Fat Offline Monster_Fat
      Monster_Fat (What's the difference) 10 July 2022 11: 46
      No, now the Kovalchuks are in favor there ...
  5. Vladimir1155 Offline Vladimir1155
    Vladimir1155 (Vladimir) 9 July 2022 23: 23
    dear Author is trying to put a good face on a bad game, dozens of frigates will not appear from many words of the author, but his blue dreams of a pink pony, about some Chinese that I will come and give sony frigates dozens of udk, and aircraft carriers ..... where will we get the crews? with all the verbosity, the author did not voice the goals of the aircraft carrier? I remind my question 6 times already ... so we don’t need udk aircraft carriers, which showed the NWO and the death of Moscow Saratov and Orsk, clearly and objectively showed the fact that a coastal missile hits a surface ship and it sinks, this is Monsieur Duke! according to the air defense, which, according to the author’s blue dreams, will allegedly be able to protect his unnecessary ships ... even the city of Moscow and St. Petersburg are not properly protected, despite the fact that a layered defense has been created, that cities are removed from the enemy and have mobile air defense dispersed over vast land. ... compare both with the narrow decks of surface ships with limited displacement, visible to all enemies with an accuracy of up to a meter .... so the future of the Navy belongs to submarines, surface ships are only auxiliary, coastal and remote from the enemy up to 500 km ....
  6. SIT Offline SIT
    SIT (Stas) 10 July 2022 00: 39
    The flight of the author's thought exceeds the speed of light. Somehow, in some incomprehensible way, from the operations of the Black Sea Fleet in the very limited and shootable along and across the Black Sea, the author ended up at the origins of the ocean fleet. Why UDC and aircraft carriers in the Black Sea Fleet ???? The task of the Black Sea Fleet became obvious back in the 1st World War, when amphibious assaults were landed from the Elpidifors in the rear of the Turks and they were forced to retreat. To do this, fire support ships are needed to suppress the slightest movement on the coast and air defense ships, which, in cooperation with aviation, will be able to cover the landing from the air. An over-the-horizon landing is cool if you land on Grenada, where the entire enemy is a thousand Cuban workers building an airfield. And even then, the quad DShKs were able to land helicopters with supermen. If there are MANPADS crews on the shore, then if anyone gets to the shore, then only by swimming. And these MANPADS will be there in myriad quantities, tk. aviation will destroy the main air defense system, and it is MANPADS that will cover the coast. Mix the entire coast with a barrage of fire, and then land immediately with tanks and self-propelled guns, so as not to be cut in hand-to-hand combat on the edge. We need completely different classes of modern ships, which are not and are not expected at the Black Sea Fleet, but they may well begin to sculpt aircraft carriers, solely to report to their superiors.
    1. Vladimir1155 Offline Vladimir1155
      Vladimir1155 (Vladimir) 10 July 2022 20: 51
      Quote: SIT
      Mix the entire coast with a fire shaft, and then land immediately with tanks and self-propelled guns, so as not to be cut in hand-to-hand combat on the edge

      I completely agree that landing under enemy fire is to lose the entire landing to no avail, part of it together with the ships of others later, the tragic story of the Peterhof landing, whose corpses the Germans did not remove from the barbed wire before ours arrived ..... but in modern warfare the task is more difficult, really such a target as a BDK UDC an aircraft carrier is destroyed for 500 km or more by missiles, so a radius of 500 km will have to be mixed with a fire shaft ........ then why landing? if we can mix a distance of 500 km with a fire shaft, then landings are not needed, you can drive overland on Kamaz trucks ..... ships in closed seas, and all aircraft carriers UDC cruisers on the oceans too
      1. SIT Offline SIT
        SIT (Stas) 10 July 2022 22: 04
        In order for the landing force to reach the coast, there must be air defense ships of the Arleigh Burke destroyer type with 74 SM3 air defense missiles on board, inscribed in a combat automated system similar to the same Aegis, as well as ships equipped with medium and short-range air defense systems under the control of the same single combat automated system. We need marine analogues of C500, Buk, Tor, etc. The ships of the landing force itself should be numerous, fast and small in size, allowing them to accommodate a landing company. They don't need to hit the beach! Directly on the move through the stern slipway, lower high-speed boats with troops in one squad per boat. Unload tanks and self-propelled guns by tank landing barges from a semi-submersible landing craft, when submerged by 1.5-2 m, the barges with tanks are already afloat. Thus, before landing and especially during the landing, a mass of small targets is formed, at which it is pointless to shoot missiles from 500 km moreover, they will still be intercepted by layered air defense from S500 to AK 630M 2 "Duet".
        1. Vladimir1155 Offline Vladimir1155
          Vladimir1155 (Vladimir) 10 July 2022 23: 10
          Quote: SIT
          The ships of the actual landing should be numerous, fast and small in size,

          I fully support! there are Chamois and Dugongs, but there are not enough of them, and the UDC BDK is more like a peacetime weapon transport,
        2. Vladimir1155 Offline Vladimir1155
          Vladimir1155 (Vladimir) 10 July 2022 23: 16
          Quote: SIT
          Air defense SM3 on board, inscribed in a combat automated system similar to the same Aegis, as well as ships equipped with medium and short-range air defense systems under the control of the same single combat automated system. We need marine analogues of C500, Buk, Tor, etc.

          in general, I agree that they are needed, small ones on the seas, and large ones on the oceans (their main task is air defense for PLO, PMO ships and, as a result, ensuring the return from bases, nuclear submarines of nuclear submarines and SSBNs), but they are not, it is not expected and there is no money, although about the need for air defense karakurt and PLO karakurt are written by experts
  7. Squid X Offline Squid X
    Squid X (Serg X) 10 July 2022 06: 40
    oh hospadi, the aircraft carrier sect won’t stop everything ..
    although even its leader, Timokhin, somewhat moderated his ardor, in view of the obvious uselessness of aircraft carriers in particular and the fleet in general in a real, and not invented by sectarians, scenario of the conflict. but that's why he is the leader, which is smarter than ordinary sectarians. the same continue to dream of the Great Fleet with rapture - apparently the brains can no longer do otherwise.
    in terms of content: the conflict in Ukraine showed, "ha ha", the secondary nature and uselessness of the fleet, the vulnerability of large ships even to a second-rate enemy, and the complete uselessness of any * carriers near their shores - due to the presence of the Crimean peninsula replacing them (and on other potential teartakh - Iturup Islands, Kamchatka, Novaya Zemlya, etc., etc.).
    By the way, it is not clear what kind of "drlo aircraft" and other things over the "landing" the author calls for, if these aircraft, both in number and in nomenclature, are almost absent even in the ground air force. like many other things. and there are not enough people even for the land front. behavior typical of aviation sectarians - with a bare bottom (without a normal air force and land army) but in a silk scarf (with a fleet and aircraft carriers).
    in general, the next dream of naval theorists whom even a collision with reality did not teach anything
  8. Velmi Shin Offline Velmi Shin
    Velmi Shin (Velmi Shin) 10 July 2022 16: 38
    Aircraft carriers are needed to attack foreign territories. In this case, it is necessary to revise the defensive doctrine of the Russian Federation. But in a country where for 12 years they have not been able to create an aircraft engine or carry out normal import substitution, instead they lie, steal and dodge, doing nothing, one cannot think about seizing foreign lands.
  9. Rustem Offline Rustem
    Rustem (Rustem) 10 July 2022 21: 01
    Two taken away mistrals are not enough, the optimal solution
  10. Scharnhorst Offline Scharnhorst
    Scharnhorst (Scharnhorst) 11 July 2022 09: 37
    An article from the epic cabal of Marzhetsky, Timokhin, Skomorokhov and other writing regulars, but the topic has not been disclosed, so be it. In a couple of days, the beaten theses will be thrown again.
  11. Storm_2022 Offline Storm_2022
    Storm_2022 (Storm _2022) 11 July 2022 18: 49
    nothing like the Russian Navy can now objectively be carried out due to the physical absence of carrier-based AWACS aircraft, catapult aircraft carriers for their launch and UDC as classes.

    Again they started a memorial service about the fact that there are no aircraft carriers, everything is gone ....
    it is sickening to read these lamentations and completely unfounded conclusions about what an aircraft carrier is for.
    From Odessa to Sevastopol in a straight line of 300 km and the supply of new, more long-range anti-ship missiles Harpoon will make it possible to fire at the aircraft carrier right in the port.
    The Su-34 regiment and the Tu-22 regiment, operating from the territory of Bryansk and Crimea, with the appropriate decision of the Ministry of Defense, have long resolved most of the problems with the supply of NATO weapons and ammunition.
    The whole reason is that the country's leadership is trying to solve everything by half measures, including the demilitarization and denazification of Ukraine.
    It was aviation with daily bombardments that was supposed to take out all transport hubs, highways, bridges, power plants, defense plants, military and strategic facilities in Western Ukraine.
    It was necessary from the very beginning of the operation not to make statements and count tons of weapons that arrived from the West, but to purposefully and methodically cut off Ukraine from all supply lines of these weapons, ammunition, mercenaries, while inflicting maximum damage on the territories where they preserved and nurtured a new Bandera movement, which then spread throughout Ukraine.
    Now everything is being done the other way around, according to the scenario of Britain and the United States, which provides for the destruction of the industrial, transport, and communal infrastructure of Novorossia, and the Bandera West of Ukraine stands untouched and laughs at how Donbass is burning and being destroyed.
    1. Georgy Klochkov Offline Georgy Klochkov
      Georgy Klochkov (Georgy Klochkov) 11 July 2022 22: 01
      Everything is correct. But there are probably serious reasons that allow the leadership of the Russian Federation to hope to solve the tasks set without a total war. We see and hear the leadership of Russia - far from stupid people. Let's wait and see.
  12. svit55 Offline svit55
    svit55 (Sergey Valentinovich) 11 July 2022 21: 15
    The bulky, clumsy, defenseless fleet sailed into the past. Why "defenseless"? If such a terribly armed and very expensive one cannot defend itself against modern weapons, then it is not needed. There is more damage from such a fleet than the enemy can inflict. How much was spent on repairs and maintenance of the same "Moscow" during its service? And without doing a damn thing, without causing damage to the enemy, the warship, stuffed with expensive weapons, "heroically" drowned. The same fate awaits the UDC, aircraft carrier, etc.
    In my opinion!!! Small missile ships and a powerful, modern submarine fleet, in line with modern times.
  13. Georgy Klochkov Offline Georgy Klochkov
    Georgy Klochkov (Georgy Klochkov) 11 July 2022 21: 54
    Yes, a lot of things any army in the world needs! Of course, Russia has a lot of problems in all areas of military development and by no means a bottomless budget. It would seem that such a rich country as the United States can be an example of imitation in military construction. But how will the United States and its fleet feel if its main naval bases and groups are destroyed by a one-time detonation of underwater thermonuclear charges or a strike by hypersonic missiles? No one has yet guessed exactly how the world war will be waged. In order to solve the problems of the navy, it is necessary to optimally determine the military strategy in the predicted conflicts of local and global significance, and then compare it with your financial and technological capabilities. And this must be done constantly, correcting the solution of the problem by a similar method of "approximations". Therefore, this article is extremely useful, because truth is born in discussions. I am only opposed to us ordering the construction of ships on the side. You need to give your people jobs. It is necessary to implement powerful and diverse shipbuilding industries and spare no resources for this. After all, the construction of ships will entail a powerful development of the entire industry of Russia.
  14. Avarron Offline Avarron
    Avarron (Sergei) 11 July 2022 22: 46
    I don’t see anything special from the ships. A couple of meters closer to the enemy shore swam than necessary, and immediately flew into the Bochin.
    What is the point of keeping consumables that are so expensive to build and operate, really?
    In general, I think that we need disposable nesting barges that carry a bunch of small rocket carrier drones.
    Outside, the barge is no different from a civilian ship, and on the way to the zone of action, a ton of small, but miserable boats, on which 2-4 missiles are placed, peel off from it.
    A one-time start of all this goodness, and then the boats themselves, like kamikazes, crash into an enemy order and let all this riff-raff go to the bottom.
    Such boats can be riveted in a cloud, and barges and bulk carriers are already in bulk.
    With such barges, you can stick around the entire Pndostan around the perimeter, then, if necessary, bang at a time.
    And if you place vigorous charges on the barges, then after working out the boats, the barges can also shy away.
    And why are aircraft carriers here.
  15. Vladimir Orlov Offline Vladimir Orlov
    Vladimir Orlov (Vladimir) 13 July 2022 13: 55
    All is well, but

    it may be advisable to order in China a series of 1-2 Type-075 universal landing ships in the export version

    - wrong from a political point of view, shameful. And it will have a bad effect on the image of our military-industrial complex abroad ... The story of the Mistrals seems to have taught everyone everything. And competencies need to be increased, not lost. And we need aircraft carriers and UDC most of all in the Pacific Ocean. They will not leave Chernoy until the end of the NWO - Turkey is against ..
    1. Alexey Lan Offline Alexey Lan
      Alexey Lan (Alexey Lantukh) 1 August 2022 23: 30
      Actually, from Sevastopol to Odessa, only 300 km, as well as to the Turkish coast, from Cape Tarakhonkut near Evpatoria - 200, from the coast of the Kherson region, away from Nikolaev, about 150. I don’t want to fly! Even by helicopter, even by plane! And why are aircraft carriers on the Black Sea. But DC is needed.