IMO, the fleet will be there to monitor E.Med. Sea- it left port prior to the latest NIE regarding Iran.Russia is also looking forward to expanding its navy action zones, begun with an Aug. 3 project to establish naval bases in the Mediterranean, especially in Syria.
http://washingtontimes.com/article/20071206/COMMENTARY/112060012/1012
Russia launches first naval power build-up in the Mediterranean
President Vladimir Putin and defense minister Anatoly Serdyukov decided to send a sortie of six Russian warships, led by the Admiral Kuznetsov aircraft carrier and the Moskva guided missile cruiser, to the Mediterranean. This will be the first prolonged stay of a Russian carrier to the eastern Mediterranean vicinity of Israel’s shores and waters patrolled by the US Sixth Fleet. On its decks are 47 warplanes and 10 helicopters. The Moskva is the Russian Navy’s Black Sea flagship.
According to our Moscow sources, the Kremlin is determined not to be left lagging behind the new Bush administration’s steps towards an accommodation with Iran, which were signaled by the US National Intelligence Estimate absolving Tehran of running a military nuclear program from 2003.
DEBKAfile’s military sources report that the Russian fleet, which has already set out for its new mission from the North and Black Seas, will have the use of naval facilities at Syria’s Tartous port. Its presence for several months will be a complication for the Israel navy’s operations opposite the Lebanese and Syrian coasts, especially if the Russians are joined at Tartous by Iranian submarines or warships.
The Kremlin also decided to send a sortie of ships to the northeastern Atlantic. http://www.debka.com/headline.php?hid=4839
Russia wants to dismantle nuclear subs by 2010
- Thread starter mysterious
- Start date
- Status
Jon,
Hopefully this will answer some your questions.
Firehorse, I find naval analysis from DEBKA about as useful as sandpaper as a substitute for toilet paper.
Any analysis that doesn't highlight the CVBG including the Nikolai Chiker is probably being made from a political partisan, not a naval analyst. It is the most noteworthy aspect of this entire deployment.
Hopefully this will answer some your questions.
Firehorse, I find naval analysis from DEBKA about as useful as sandpaper as a substitute for toilet paper.
Any analysis that doesn't highlight the CVBG including the Nikolai Chiker is probably being made from a political partisan, not a naval analyst. It is the most noteworthy aspect of this entire deployment.
I sure do remember the last time the Russian aircraft carrier was here -1996.
It almost ended in a shot down of a Su-33 that was directed to Israel and did not listen to the warnings.
The strange thing was, that after the first one flew back to the ship, few days later, another one came the exact same way.
4 F-16 and several Ground-Air batteries were locked on it, yet it just did aerobatics and try to out-maunever the F-16, which were locked on it the whole time.
This incident called in Israel " Meetings from the russian kind ", it was published in the IAF magazine.
This was in the times before 9\11, nowdays it would get shut down long before
It almost ended in a shot down of a Su-33 that was directed to Israel and did not listen to the warnings.
The strange thing was, that after the first one flew back to the ship, few days later, another one came the exact same way.
4 F-16 and several Ground-Air batteries were locked on it, yet it just did aerobatics and try to out-maunever the F-16, which were locked on it the whole time.
This incident called in Israel " Meetings from the russian kind ", it was published in the IAF magazine.
This was in the times before 9\11, nowdays it would get shut down long before
1st of all Russians proovoked IAF back then and im sure nobody in the world is that stupid too fly into soverin airspace on a normal flight path not even close too flying low , well inside the other country's air cover and " THINK " that he isn't locked on or that he can outmanouver the ground air defence ?
That was simply a provocation and you even claim in this post that Su-33 is a bad aircraft , thats what I sensed from you ... hmmmmmmmmm......... Lets see im wondering what naval aircraft on a aircraft carrier has better capability's than Su-33? hmmmmmm .... Last time I checked even Super bugs were lacking behind , im not feeling alot of comprehension from your behalf.
While i generally like russian aircrafts... but here i couldnt agree. F-18 was definitly better than Su-33. Su-33 have better airframe, but otherwise it fall short on avionic and weapon loadout. Upgraded Su-33 is different matter, but russians still use old ones.
Grand Danois
Entertainer
I certainly hope the Russian defmin knows the difference between tactical and strategic...
I agree with Galrahn that the purpose of this cruise is for the Russians to get some confidence in their ability to deploy plus the assoc training. (Nice spot wrt the fleet tugs, btw)
Flagwaving is also a motif.
As to the geostrategic impact? Small, if not zero. Consider ops tempo of the USN or even the RN carriers and notice how they cover all parameters 'round the year.
Vs a two month cruise.
This is not presence.
Agree with you Chrome , the new Su-33 is still not used , rather they use old version , but I heard they will replace them.
Btw the old Su-33 is still very good and comparable ,though it does have limited carry capability ( only limited weapons ) and only decent avionics .. but the max takeoff weight is still bigger than super bug , bigger range , service celling .. and for that id rate it as a very effective aircraft for attacking lang targets.
The russian military talks big and backs it up with whispers. I suspect most of what has been said in the russian media, is designed to boost domestic morale. What they call "deployments", the western military call "local naval exercises". But the average russian does not know where their navy is operating, so they think "russia is flexing it's mucles again", and the morale boost is acomplished.
I'm not talking about the current deployment, because it's real. But for the past few years the northern fleet has been operating in the Barents sea, hardly crossing into the northern atlantic, and in the russian media we can read about them "sailing the world seas".
Also, what about the story about them building a fleet of new carriers by 2020?, Was it seven? How realistic is that, them building seven carriers in 12 years?
This current deployment is in my opinion an hasty operation, because they do not have an SSN or a proper ship with SAM capabillity. The Udaloys are Anti-Submarine Destroyers, and only have SA-N-9 and SA-N-11 SAM's. Why do they not deploy with the Kirov or the Slava class guided missile cruisers?
In 2004 and 2005 they did deploy for a month in the north atlantic. If my memory serves me right, in 2004 Kuznetsov trailed a 10 mile long oil slick and on 2005 the same ship left a SU-27 Flanker D on the bottom of the ocean, as a wire snapped when the 27 landed. But the carrier did have proper escort both times. But not now. Why? Is Putin so desperate to have a carrier deployment to the med under his presidency, that he orders it even though the navy is not prepared for it?
On another note. I see that the situation in Kosovo might be heating up. Kosovo is prepared to declare it's independence from Serbia, and most of the NATO countries will accept this. But the russians will only accept this if the serbs do. I see dark clouds on the Balkan horizon, and this time, the russians might have a large naval presence there...
I'm not talking about the current deployment, because it's real. But for the past few years the northern fleet has been operating in the Barents sea, hardly crossing into the northern atlantic, and in the russian media we can read about them "sailing the world seas".
Also, what about the story about them building a fleet of new carriers by 2020?, Was it seven? How realistic is that, them building seven carriers in 12 years?
This current deployment is in my opinion an hasty operation, because they do not have an SSN or a proper ship with SAM capabillity. The Udaloys are Anti-Submarine Destroyers, and only have SA-N-9 and SA-N-11 SAM's. Why do they not deploy with the Kirov or the Slava class guided missile cruisers?
In 2004 and 2005 they did deploy for a month in the north atlantic. If my memory serves me right, in 2004 Kuznetsov trailed a 10 mile long oil slick and on 2005 the same ship left a SU-27 Flanker D on the bottom of the ocean, as a wire snapped when the 27 landed. But the carrier did have proper escort both times. But not now. Why? Is Putin so desperate to have a carrier deployment to the med under his presidency, that he orders it even though the navy is not prepared for it?
On another note. I see that the situation in Kosovo might be heating up. Kosovo is prepared to declare it's independence from Serbia, and most of the NATO countries will accept this. But the russians will only accept this if the serbs do. I see dark clouds on the Balkan horizon, and this time, the russians might have a large naval presence there...
Of course they can't build 7 carriers in 12 years , I doubt that even USA can , that was just too optimistic.
About not putting Slava or Kirovs .. well .. Kuznetsov has such a defence its like 4 escorts , the Kuznetsov is also a huge cruiser besides beeing a aircraft carrier , its protection is very powerfull...
Russian navy in the Med
Russian navy is in the Med because of the Kosovo situation. Russia and the west oppose on this issue, Russia supports the Serb view, that Kosovo should be autonomous but not independent while the US and most of the Eu seem likely to recognise the independence of the province and the albanian grievences as they did in 1999.
If Kosovo secedes from Serbia, one can expect the Serbian north of Kosovo - where most of Serbs live - to procclaim their independence and maybe even the Bosnian Serb republic - the serb part of Bosnia - to seek to rejoin Serbia. If one is allowed to redraw maps based on ethnic majority (i.e. Kosovo), why not the others ?
Serbia is too weak to support these movements, officially at least but some irregulars and weapons delivery may take place. So the Russian navy is there to ensure that there will be no other bombing of Serbia by Nato , no EU /US Goliath showing off in force against the small Serbia. I cannot imagine Russia with Putin now allowing NATO to bomb Serbian towns.
Russian navy is in the Med because of the Kosovo situation. Russia and the west oppose on this issue, Russia supports the Serb view, that Kosovo should be autonomous but not independent while the US and most of the Eu seem likely to recognise the independence of the province and the albanian grievences as they did in 1999.
If Kosovo secedes from Serbia, one can expect the Serbian north of Kosovo - where most of Serbs live - to procclaim their independence and maybe even the Bosnian Serb republic - the serb part of Bosnia - to seek to rejoin Serbia. If one is allowed to redraw maps based on ethnic majority (i.e. Kosovo), why not the others ?
Serbia is too weak to support these movements, officially at least but some irregulars and weapons delivery may take place. So the Russian navy is there to ensure that there will be no other bombing of Serbia by Nato , no EU /US Goliath showing off in force against the small Serbia. I cannot imagine Russia with Putin now allowing NATO to bomb Serbian towns.
it's not going to have longer range or payload than any hornets if it's taking off from STOBAR vs catapult. No amount of Russian boasting will convince me otherwise.
4 escorts? What will Nikolai Chiker and Sergei Osipov contribute to the defence of the CVBG? Admiral Chabanenko and Admiral Levchenko do bring about some defences but not as much SAM capabillity as you see from a NATO CVBG. The SA-N-9 and SA-N-11 does not have sufficient range. Far as I know, the Kuznetsov does not have any better SAMs aboard. But it does pack a mean punch with it's 12 SS-N-19 Shipwrecks, but as the name suggests, this is not a surface to air missile...Of course they can't build 7 carriers in 12 years , I doubt that even USA can , that was just too optimistic.
About not putting Slava or Kirovs .. well .. Kuznetsov has such a defence its like 4 escorts , the Kuznetsov is also a huge cruiser besides beeing a aircraft carrier , its protection is very powerfull...
The lack of a proper escort and the fact that a tug is included on this deployment, suggest that this voyage is taken with a fair amount of risk.
Spacearrow99
Member
The Moskva is a Slava class cruiser
Besides having a fighter wing the Kuznetsov also has Granit Anti ship missiles , VLS system with 192 SA missiles , 24 ASW helicopters , ASW rocket launchers , 8 Kashtans that have 256 combined missiles , and 8 further AA guns , if thats not amazing amarment then I have no clue what is a amazing aircraft carrier amarment.
I can't answer that question , I have no clue how limited the fuel or payload capacity of the Su-33 is when they are taking off from STOBAR but the original payload and range are superior too the hornet , that was my point , as an aircraft , if the USN would use it on their carriers it would have superior range and payload capacity.
"The lack of a proper escort and the fact that a tug is included on this deployment, suggest that this voyage is taken with a fair amount of risk."
Too much is made of the tug.
The USN always has one close by and/or shore bases/ports/facilities/ repair/towing assets available for contingenices and emergencies its only a prudent measure.
And tells me the Russian Navy is still a very professional force despite the challenges it faces and some detrimental hisory that colors its operations.
You just dont hear about the USN tugs because those ships are too slow to be included in the battlegroup per se and they are manned by the civilian MSC force. But again I assure you they are close by.
Same holds for the majority of the USN replenishment force( Only the four AOEs normally deploy with a battle group as they are fast enough).
As for the escorts, the Udaloys, those are the best the Russian Navy has to offer at the moment and have been the workhorses of this navy for at least a decade.
Too much is made of the tug.
The USN always has one close by and/or shore bases/ports/facilities/ repair/towing assets available for contingenices and emergencies its only a prudent measure.
And tells me the Russian Navy is still a very professional force despite the challenges it faces and some detrimental hisory that colors its operations.
You just dont hear about the USN tugs because those ships are too slow to be included in the battlegroup per se and they are manned by the civilian MSC force. But again I assure you they are close by.
Same holds for the majority of the USN replenishment force( Only the four AOEs normally deploy with a battle group as they are fast enough).
As for the escorts, the Udaloys, those are the best the Russian Navy has to offer at the moment and have been the workhorses of this navy for at least a decade.
SU-33 for air defence
The SU-33 can add to the air defense of the carrier group. They could use their R-27EM missiles against cruise missiles. I think the biggest problem for this group would be detecting threats without giving away their position.
In my opinion the best solution would be to have a standing combat air patrol of 4-6 SU-33 armed for cruise missile/air defense guided by 1 or both of the carrier's Ka-31 AEW helos. In addition the group could use it's 19 Ka-27 ASW helos as decoys. The only thing emitting should be the helos.
The SU-33 can add to the air defense of the carrier group. They could use their R-27EM missiles against cruise missiles. I think the biggest problem for this group would be detecting threats without giving away their position.
In my opinion the best solution would be to have a standing combat air patrol of 4-6 SU-33 armed for cruise missile/air defense guided by 1 or both of the carrier's Ka-31 AEW helos. In addition the group could use it's 19 Ka-27 ASW helos as decoys. The only thing emitting should be the helos.
oh no, you don't want to use R-27s against cruise missiles. The performance of these missiles are not that great (that's putting it mildly). I'm not sure you want to use your main ASW assets as decoys.
Will that be required, who in the region will launch a weapon at these Russian vessle, I think going there and coming back will be all that they will do.
If the Russians are going to expand the navy, in the way they say they will, might as well roam around a bit to see if they have still got it. Otherwise why bother having these vessels operational.
Few media clips showing a couple of Su 33 and other aircrafts taking off and landing on the carrier will be nice, may be some of the super duper maneuverability and a couple of flares.
- Status