The Maritime Exclusive: Dr. Tom Fedyshin on the state of the Russian fleet
The development of the Russian armed forces, which has been observed in recent years, as well as participation in some military operations, has attracted the attention of military and specialists in many countries. Based on known data and unconfirmed information, attempts are being made to determine the prospects for the further development of the Russian army and fleet, including in the context of the global military-political situation. Some foreign attempts to analyze the situation and predict its further development are of some interest.
1 February, the American edition of The Maritime Exclusive, specializing in matters of the naval sphere, published the material “Dr. Tom Fedyszyn on the State of the Russian Navy ”(“ Dr. Tom Fedyshin on the state of the Russian fleet ”) authored by Ashley O'Keefe. The publication in the person of its correspondent asked the specialist a few questions about the current situation and possible scenarios. Here is the translation of this article.
E. O'Keefe begins an article with a small introduction in which she reminds us that the current operation in Syria and some other episodes of the work of the Russian Navy lead to natural results. The attention of foreign countries once again drawn to Russia, the former enemy of the Cold War. The task of the new article was to study the current state of affairs, namely the modernization of the Russian Navy and the recent events related to it. A retired US Navy officer and professor at the Naval College Thomas R. Fedyshin helped to study the situation.
E. O'Keefe: Let's start with a very simple question. Why should we still be interested in the navy of Russia? It seems that lately, the rise of the Chinese navy has been of greater interest.
Thomas Fedyshin: It seems that more people in the US Navy are more worried about the Chinese navy than about the Russian. I can confirm this: I was a specialist in the Russian fleet for a very long time, I have been doing this for about 20 years. During this time, no one called me! I am sure that the phone of my colleague who has studied China is calling regularly.
However, the world has changed. Remember what happened a couple of years ago. For two decades Russia has been a “former enemy,” which is now becoming a partner. The country was changing and more and more resembling the western ones. And we were shocked when Russia annexed Crimea in the 2014 year, started a hybrid war in eastern Ukraine and attracted everyone’s attention. The country that collaborated with us in both 1998 and 2005 was now listed as a combination of adversary and aggressor in NATO documents. Thus, their armed forces, which, as it seemed to us, pose no threat, and which participated in joint exercises with us, have now become a potential aggressor. Command in general and intelligence organizations in particular should pay special attention to this issue.
EO: Where is the Russian navy currently working? Does it remain in the same areas where it was before? Is the Russian fleet a real threat?
TF: Those who are old enough can remember the old fleet of the Soviet Union. For 15-20 years, it was the effective equivalent of the American Navy, although it had fewer carrier groups. In other words, the Soviet fleet was superior to us in the number of submarines and was equal in the number of surface ships. The USSR was present in all regions where the US Navy also worked. However, after the 20-year break came, when the Russian fleet was "in a coma." That is why for a long time nothing was heard about the Russian Navy. The situation began to change in 2008, when the fleet began to receive enough money, began to learn and work out the interaction. As a result, now Russian ships can be found in any part of the world. In some regions, the grouping of Russian ships is a serious force, while in others - "one, two and miscalculated." But we note that 15 years ago there were no Russian ships in the Atlantic or Mediterranean Sea ... And now they are everywhere. However, this is not always a serious force that should be considered at the highest level.
EO: British First Sea Lord Admiral Philip Jones said a few days ago that he had recently recorded the highest level of activity of the submarine forces of Russia in the last 25 years. Similar news we heard not only from the British, but also from the commander of NATO. If this is true, then how serious is the situation?
TF: Returning to the turn that happened at the beginning of the two thousandths. I will say only what was indicated in open sources and the press. I will briefly describe the situation. In 2001-2003, Russian submarines were virtually absent in the Atlantic. It is obvious that the Atlantic Ocean can become one of the main theaters of military operations of the hypothetical Third World War. Therefore, it is impossible to compare the situation when there are no Russian submarines in the Atlantic with figures cited by F. Jones. From 2008, we have seen a steady increase in the presence of Russian boats, at 5-15% per year. So, at the moment, Russia's submariners spend a total of 1500 days in the World Ocean for the year. The proportion of the length of duty in the Atlantic is growing. So we do not start from scratch, but we have to look at large numbers again. Of course, this is not the level of the Cold War, but the trend of constant growth is clearly visible.
EO: The term GIUK Gap is sometimes mentioned in conversations about submarine forces. The generation that found the Cold War no longer knows what it is. Can you tell us about the current state of affairs and plans of the command about this system?
TF: GIUK Gap is an essential element of defense. The Greenland-Iceland-UK line is the area through which any Russian submarine wishing to get into the Atlantic Ocean must pass. The passage of the Soviet boats was a real challenge, and the challenge was accepted. In the area of GIUK Gap, an advanced submarine detection system was created. All sorts of sonar complexes were present, submarines were on duty. In addition, one of the largest anti-submarine aircraft groupings P-3 was deployed in Iceland. If you were a Russian submarine, then the probability of your discovery would be very high. For two decades, there was almost no activity in the GIUK area, but now the presence of a large number of submarines is recorded there.
EO: We are not used to receiving news about Russian aircraft carriers. We thought that "Admiral Kuznetsov" for a long time will be under maintenance or repair, but instead he went to the shores of Syria. What are the successes of this ship, and what can its combat work tell us?
TF: First, one important point to be noted about Russian aircraft carriers. Russia has been talking for many years about the future construction of aircraft carriers. But in fact, it did not go further than talk. Seen shows that the Russian industry is not very well able to build large ships. With the exception of submarines, large ships are worthy of a D or D- rating. Of course, aircraft carriers are also concerned.
So, when the Russian command will be able to control the sea, we will talk about the use of aircraft carriers. I do not think that at least once there was a time when the Russian command did not think about building such ships. But now the situation is different. To participate in the military operation managed to find only one aircraft carrier with a limited aviation group.
It is necessary to take into account that “Admiral Kuznetsov” is the most important representative of the Russian fleet, including for reasons of prestige. He is unique and capable of performing tasks in a way that other ships cannot. As a result, the Russians are very proud of him. In addition, the Russian media, 20 years ago, being free, is no longer so free. The press is controlled by the government and is a propaganda tool. If the authorities can attract the aircraft carrier to participate in combat operations, then the background information will be appropriate.
EO: From this point of view, the next question may seem silly. What about the upcoming project for the 23000E Storm? The Defense News publication previously wrote that Indian naval forces might be interested in such a ship. Will a new ship be built? Will Russia make new attempts to build such ships?
TF: The Russian economy is primarily based on the export of minerals. A little less money the country receives from the sale weapons. Russians export almost as much as the USA! At the same time, the Russian economy is smaller, which is why arms revenues are of great importance. So, when you observe the deployment of new systems, sometimes it is associated not only with your own security. A significant part of the new weapons is supplied to demonstrate the current level of technology to potential customers. You mention the Indian fleet. When I was in Moscow, there were many officers from India - more than from other countries. Why? Because Russia has good relations with this country and regularly sells new models of equipment for the fleet to it. 70% of ships and submarines of the Indian Navy obtained from Russia.
I spoke with Indian officers about the procurement of Russian products. They are not too fond of purchased ships due to suboptimal characteristics and operational problems. However, they can afford to buy such ships. Similar offers from the USA have a couple of problems: the American industry reluctantly sells products with high technologies, and besides, it puts a big price on them. Budget constraints force the Indian fleet to buy Russian ships. Russia will have to continue working on Storm, with every chance to sell it to India.
But we must remember history aircraft carrier Vikramaditya. It was delivered four years later than the planned deadline and cost the customer 300% of the initial estimate. All the Indian officers with whom I had to communicate, said that this is not the best ship, but India needs an aircraft carrier. In addition, the country could afford it, and eventually got what it received. If the new “Storm” really turns out to be successful, then the Indians will have to solve the issue of the site for construction. India intends to independently build its first nuclear aircraft carrier, but its own shipbuilding industry leaves much to be desired.
What will the Russians do? I would assess the situation with pessimism. When they talk about new ships, it's about building 3-6 units. But in fact only two can be built. It seems that Russia is leaning towards the construction of an atomic aircraft carrier, but judging by the publications in the press, there is no unity in this matter. The Russians will also have to find a shipyard capable of building a ship with a displacement of 65 thousand tons. Probably, the aircraft carrier will have to build in the form of two large structures and then connect them. I am not a shipbuilder, but I understand the complexity of such works.
EO: Let's change the topic and talk about the new Maritime Doctrine released in 2015 year. What has changed in it relative to the previous version?
TF: The previous doctrine has operated since 2001, and I am familiar with it. This is important because you want to explore the differences of the new document from the previous one. If you read the American doctrine, you might have noticed that the current document and the 2007 document of the year have noticeable differences that influence the development of the fleet and shipbuilding. The same applies to the Russians. In 2001, Russia presented its version of plans for the future, and it seemed that they were compiled without the participation of the naval command. As if the ministers of trade, tourism and energy wrote the whole document, and only after that they invited the fleet commander. It was clearly a naval, not naval doctrine.
In 2015, President Putin signed a new doctrine, for which a special stage was built on board the completely new frigate “Admiral Gorshkov”. The solemn ceremony was attended by fleet and army commanders, a national security adviser, etc. But the heads of trade, tourism and other departments were not invited, since the new document is seriously different from the previous one. The new document has to read theses like "the Russian Navy must oppose the work of foreign ships in the Arctic", "NATO is the main threat, which requires grouping in the Atlantic" or "it is necessary to organize a permanent grouping in the Mediterranean".
Remember that for many years the Russian ships almost did not go to sea. In 1989, we observed how the 5 squadron was leaving the Mediterranean. We thought that this was a military trick and that cat and mouse with submarines and so on were waiting for us. But they are all gone! The commander convened the ship commanders and said bluntly: “We have nothing more to do. Any suggestions? ”I suggested arranging 15 visits to ports in the region. I had to go to the "cruise". But now the world has changed. The Russians are back in the Mediterranean. The grouping consists of large ships 7-10. In addition, they have reasons to send ships - the threat of NATO. In the case of the Pacific, Russia is inclined to consider China and India as friends. Russia is not afraid to point to growing fleets.
In accordance with the doctrine of growing all the fleets of Russia. The Black Sea Fleet had to withdraw from its bases, but the well-known events in the Crimea make it possible to increase its numbers. Other fleets will also grow, quantitatively and qualitatively. Finally, there are big plans for the construction of new ships. There is a developed industry, as well as the task of building new ships. In general, the new doctrine seriously changes the situation. A well-known meeting with the participation of President Putin and the Minister of Defense, held on board the Admiral Gorshkov, also speaks a great deal.
EO: Let's take a separate look at the Russian modernization plan. There is a general strategy, and the plan is part of it. First of all, let's talk about the surface fleet. How is Russia going to develop and modernize it?
TF: They have such a plan, and I will give you some information. Everything they say should be reduced by 50%. They lie and cheat when they talk about plans to build ships. When you compare what was said and what was built - it turns out about half. This is a question from the category of "how high Russian"? During the Cold War, there have always been controversies on this topic: “are they 6 feet? 8 feet? Or 5-6 feet? ”But for 20 years, the Russian fleet was“ 0 feet ”high. Almost nothing was built. The second largest fleet in the world has been “turned off” since 1989. The ships were tied to the berths and rot. Quantitatively, the fleet was large, but there were problems with the quality. Several ships under construction were sent for export. Ships and submarines were sold to Indonesia, India and China. Although several ships were built for themselves.
In 2008, the situation began to change. The construction of ships continued, but now everything was done more and more for themselves. In the 2000 year, there were not uncommon programs in which 14 years passed from bookmarking to handing over a ship. Funny, yes, but that was life. Russia has a small economy, it lost the Cold War because it could not keep up with the United States in spending. The Russians understood this, and therefore did not build a large number of ships, because of which money could run out quickly.
From about the 2005-2007 years - economists should give a hint here - the Russian economy has begun to rise. I do not want to talk about it with contempt, but Russia, to some extent, is an increased Nigeria - it depends on oil prices. If prices go up - wallets get fat, fall - revenues are reduced. The price of oil rose at 100 $ per barrel, and Russia had more money than it could spend. A new defense minister, Serdyukov, was appointed. Maybe in the West they know him badly, but in Russia they really appreciate what he did. He demanded that a lot of money be spent on all defense in general, and 40% of the total budget should be allocated to the fleet.
Much has been done to increase the operational readiness of the navy. It was clear that the fleet could not normally interact with the air force or the army. Remember what happened in the seventies and eighties in the United States? Under Serdyukov, it became clear that the conscription system does not allow normal training for seafarers. These were not the sailors that I would like to see on their ships. The new Minister of Defense indicated that appropriate construction is needed to be present at sea. The conscripts remained at the bases, and only contract workers were sent to the sea.
Remember, I said that in 2000-2002 years, Russian ships did not go to sea too much? Now they go out more often and without conscripts on board. Therefore, the fleet has become a qualitatively better force. And at the same time, the construction of ships is not only for third countries.
EO: Speaking of submarines, can you give a brief overview of such equipment and compare them with American submarines? Is it possible to achieve the same results as in the past?
TF: Russian submarines have never been as good as ours. But they were close in their characteristics and again approach them. There are two main areas in this area. First, strategic submarines with ballistic missiles. We can afford to have a fleet of control of the seas, while Russia does not. First of all, the Russian Navy - a fleet of strategic deterrence. So when they get money, they spend it, first of all, on strategic issues. The most successful program in this area is the Borey 955 project. Three such boats are already in the water, five more will be soon, which is why Western analysts consider the project a success. There is a big problem in the form of a Bulava rocket. In her past there were a lot of accidents, now the share of successful launches in 50% is received, which is regarded as a victory. But the missiles were deployed on carriers that are ready to move forward on duty. The Russians proudly say that the Boreas will be able to fire missiles directly from the pier, and this is true. Earlier, Russia had a fleet of strategic submarines, and now it will be with her again.
In the area of multipurpose submarines, Russia has a very ambitious project. It is notable for low noise and a large number of new systems. Such boats are similar to the American types LA and Vigrinia. With all its advantages, the new Russian boat is too complicated. It is hard to believe that the head "Severomorsk" will be followed by seven more ships. I think this will happen, but it will take a long time to get to work, almost like custom-made car production. Submarines will be too complicated for mass construction. As soon as the first submarine went out to sea, conversations began about new projects with hypersonic rocket armament and more sophisticated equipment. Summing up, we can say that the program of multi-purpose submarines is much more successful than others. In this area, the Russians have concentrated their talents and money. It was there that the main successes of the Cold War were obtained, and now there will be something similar.
EO: Let's continue the conversation on the topic “Russians can build ...” and talk about missiles. What do last year’s rocket launches by Russian corvettes from the Caspian Sea?
TF: As the cynics say, "guys, not many people will buy this." We are confident that the Russians want to sell their weapons at lower prices than the United States. It's great that the Caliber missiles can be launched from different directions and two platforms. The Buyan patrol boats, with a displacement of 1000 tons, carry eight missiles with an 1500 range of miles. Depending on the source of the information, up to 23 launches from 26 were successful. A quarter of a century ago, when we fired our first missiles, we had a higher failure rate. The Russians fired not only from ships, but also from submarines - completely new improved Kilo-class. A series of launches was carried out in the Mediterranean. Thus, Russia has a new weapon used in two areas. This is a complex weapon, and the world has noticed.
EO: We turn to larger areas and address the problems of maritime powers. Is it fair to call Russia a sea power? Most people would call it a land force. How are such questions reflected in the Russian strategy?
TF: True, basically Russia is a land power. But this is the “power of the earth”, which knows how to use opportunities on the seas in a thoughtful and purposeful way. I think that V. Putin is proud of his navy and identifies himself with him. Built a good and efficient fleet. After all, the Russian president is a master of judo. There were no celebrations of the Navy Day, on which the president did not appear. He seems to like the fleet, and he is trying to allocate sufficient funding for him.
I am not going to go far and call Russia a sea power, since it does not control large areas of the seas. However, she has admirals who were able to build a control system. The command of our 6 fleet should consider the situation and draw conclusions. The Russian fleet is still not too powerful, but it is no longer A2AD. If the US decides to fight with him on the Black or Baltic Sea or in the Arctic, then the matter will not end with a broken nose. Damage can be much higher. Russia has no personnel or traditions that allow it to operate in the vast Pacific or Atlantic Ocean, but it can do a lot near its shores.
EO: What would you consider necessary to tell our audience at the end of a conversation? How can I complete the conversation?
TF: I would like to sleep well. If our and the Russian fleet clash in open battle, then the US Navy has such an advantage that Russia will never get involved in this. As you can see, the Russian doctrine allows the use of hybrid methods - Russia is interested in dishonest methods. Thus, the equivalent of "green men" at sea can appear, and other provocation techniques can be created, which we just have to predict and take into account. Such actions will not have fatal consequences, but they can surprise and hurt us with pride. So you should prepare.
On the other hand (if Russia is regarded as an adversary or an aggressor), their military, like the former Soviet leaders, depends on the state of the economy. The low price of oil and Western sanctions show a negative impact on the Russian economy. Budget cuts were available in all areas. If you were a governor or a pensioner, the oblast budget or pension would be halved. But if you were the commander of the Navy, then your budget would not be affected. If the state of the economy continues to deteriorate further, the fleet command can reduce its spending. Because of this, all ambitious plans for the construction of aircraft carriers and destroyers will be postponed and resumed only in the future. But do not expect this to happen quickly.
Full text of the interview (in English):
http://maritime-executive.com/article/dr-tom-fedyszyn-on-the-state-of-the-russian-navy
Information