New American commander in chief: a lesson for the Russian Navy
On April 11, Admiral William F. Moran was promoted to the position of commander of naval operations of the US Navy (Chief of Naval Operations, in the Russian conceptual apparatus, commander-in-chief of naval forces). For a long time, he served as Deputy Commander, Admiral John Richardson, to conduct an air war, while performing the tasks of the director of the relevant department at the headquarters of the Navy (OPNAV 98).
The fact that Richardson’s career prospects were not brilliant was clear a long time ago. Over the past years, the US Navy has demonstrated quite a few failures in shipbuilding (the entire LCS program, technical problems with the Gerald Ford aircraft carrier, a mine action failure in RMMV, and much more), and in the development of adequate concepts (far lack of readiness to fight a strong opponent on the sea, the lag behind the US Air Force in terms of mastering the newest anti-ship missiles, the strange process of choosing a frigate for the US Navy, which promises to be a “dried destroyer” rather than the result of a coherent concept), serious imbalances development (complete absence of escort forces, it is not clear why the additional armament of landing ships weapons), gaps, and gigantic ones, in the training of personnel (collisions of ships reported by the press are only the tip of the iceberg). Of course, the Minister of the Navy, in this case Richard Spencer, is responsible for a significant part of these failures, but everyone understands that once a long time ago captain retired from the Marine Corps, Spencer in modern navy He is not an expert and is based on the opinions of others. It’s clear on whose.
One way or another, Richardson is given a quietly to serve, and he leaves his post to his deputy. Soon, apparently.
As a kind of wish for the new commander, independent observers called the need to raise combat readiness, prepare the Navy for a fight at sea with a strong adversary (meaning primarily China), and carry out a plan to increase the strength of the Navy to 355 pennants, which in itself will very difficult. Moran himself also does not forget about "wonderful people in the Navy" and about the importance of the human factor in future wars. He, in general, is right, especially against the background of how this human factor has recently manifested itself.
We, however, with our domestic problems in this whole situation should be interested in something else, namely, from what kind of strength the new American commander came.
The fact is that Moran is not a submariner. He is not from the surface fleet. He is not a scout and not a deck pilot.
William Morin served in the base patrol for most of his career aviation and is the pilot of the base (read: ground) patrol aircraft R-3 Orion. A very experienced pilot, I must say, a former instructor.
The commander of the US Navy is assigned a person who is strictly not formally a sailor at all. And it is not just like that.
During World War II, basic aviation became the decisive force in the war at sea - long-range patrol aircraft, including flying boats and amphibians, bombers and torpedo bombers aimed at working on surface targets, reconnaissance aircraft.
The battle for the Atlantic is the most striking example of the combat effectiveness of this kind of force. Few people think, but not deck aircraft drove the German submarines to depth, giving the convoys a high chance of reaching the target. These were patrol aircraft taking off from the shore, the converted Liberators and the amphibious Catalina. Of course, it was specifically in the Pacific Ocean that carrier-based aircraft of the United States sank more ships than the base one. But not much. In the Atlantic, the basic aircraft "led" with a crushing score.
The Japanese felt the power of American base aviation and themselves. Not only did American seaplanes detect and sink Japanese ships, and in large quantities, it was also the fact that practically the entire burden of the struggle against the Japanese convoys in New Guinea was borne by the American base bombers. And the results of their efforts turned out to be strongly not in favor of the Japanese. In general, deck aircraft sank 520 Japanese ships and vessels, and the base - 441. Very eloquent statistics.
In turn, the Japanese used their strike seaplanes from the bases on the Marshall Islands very widely - and successfully. The Americans were able to get anything with the Japanese flying boats, until the islands themselves were captured.
There are also loud drowning in the base aviation account. So, the Bismarck could have left if it had not been for patrolling seaplanes from the “shore”. "Tirpitz" was destroyed by ground bomber. Light cruiser "Konigsberg" - the base dive bombers of the Royal Navy.
There are examples of numbers other than these.
In turn, the Germans also gave a lot of brilliant examples of the use of ground planes against surface ships and trade convoys. "Condors" over the Atlantic, bomber attacks over the Baltic, including Rudel’s breakthrough to the Marat, attacks against the USSR Black Sea Fleet, dramatically reducing its payroll, the use of guided bombs against allies in the Mediterranean, attacks on warships during the landing in Italy - Although German aviation did not belong to Kriegsmarine, it made an enormous contribution to the war at sea, and, frankly speaking, it hit the ships and ships above the head.
Today, anyone can find a lot of information on this topic, including reference information, with numbers and dates. And this information will confirm: the base naval aviation (like the purely “ground” aircraft of the Air Force, but working on surface targets) made a decisive contribution to the war at sea.
After the end of World War II, American base aviation continued to develop primarily as anti-submarine. The tasks for the destruction of surface ships went to the batcher and, if necessary, to the Strategic Air Command of the Air Force. The Navy, having abandoned seaplanes at a certain moment, invested enormous resources in basic patrol aircraft - and did not lose. To date, the power of the American patrol aviation has reached such a high level that the actions of submarines of US enemies in real combat conditions, with the massed use of their aircraft by the Americans, will be possible only in areas protected from American aviation or under the ice. At a minimum, until the combat strength of the American BPA is significantly reduced by the attacks of various forces of their enemy. It is not difficult to imagine that it will be very difficult to provide.
Admiral V.S. Vysotsky, the former commander of the Russian Navy, in the 2013 year, allotted to the Northern Fleet's submarines no more than 48 hours until they were completely destroyed, unless their deployment areas were covered by air forces, including the aircraft carrier Admiral Kuznetsov. In the most obvious way, he was right.
The US base patrol aircraft, based on the ground, is nevertheless the “cornerstone” of the naval power of the US Navy. And the importance of the US Navy to its development is very significant. Thus, the unit was among the branches of the forces that received a fundamentally new weapon system after the end of the Cold War — the Poseidon basic patrol aircraft P-8.
In general, the fact that the new commander of the US Navy came out of the "coastal" pilots should not surprise anyone, especially considering his biography.
1981 - graduated from the Naval Academy in Annapolis.
With 1981 - in flight crews of the base patrol aviation, 44,45,46 squadron patrol, instructor in retraining of flight crews in the 30 squadron (training in US base aviation), later commander of the 2 patrol reconnaissance wing, zn-ZH-88-NI command officer; the ocean, then the departure of the “ground” in the 6-e wing, security officer and assistant commander for maintenance, administrative positions in the Navy Human Resources Bureau, the US Commander in the Pacific, director of the Navy's service personnel.
2006 - received the second higher military in the National Military College, in Newport.
From 2007 to 2008 in the apparatus of the commander of naval operations. Promoted to flag officer.
With 2008, he is the commander of the basic patrol aviation and at the same time is responsible for waging an air war as a whole at the headquarters of the Navy, being the deputy director for air warfare, and later the director for air warfare.
With 2013 - Chief of Staff of the Navy.
From 2016 - Deputy Commander of Maritime Operations.
He flew regularly and performed combat missions from air bases:
Brunswick, Maine.
Jacksonville, FL.
Whidby Island, WA.
Hawaii.
Sigonella, Sicily.
Roth, Spain.
Leyges, Azores.
Keflavik, Iceland.
Misawa, Japan.
Diego Garcia, Indian Ocean.
Masirah, Oman.
Bahrain.
He is a high-class pistol shooter and has a special medal for it.
It is easy to see that the service experience of Admiral Moran exceeds that of most sailors - he served and performed combat missions in all theaters, was familiar with a very large number of bases and regions, occupied both command and administrative and staff positions, was an instructor pilot, was familiar with combat management of the carrier strike group, managed in our category personnel service of the Navy, and not only recruitment, but also personnel training, and dealt with all issues related to the war in the air at the headquarters of the Navy.
Two higher military educations, both in elite vvuz of the USA.
Formally, it is more than a good candidate for a commander.
According to the actual ... any anti-submarine pilot whose task is to destroy submarines knows the tactics of submarines and the limits of their capabilities, understands hydroacoustics, knows how to build interaction with both surface and submarine forces, knows how to organize joint combat use with deck aircraft. Roughly speaking, he generally knows more than sailors. And if he was also engaged in reconnaissance ... Moren was engaged in it.
Let us once again draw attention to this fact - the “ground” (not ship) pilot has the rank of admiral and turned out to be a suitable candidate for the position of commander of the Navy, and there is every reason to believe that he is better prepared for this work than many sailors of equal strength - at least by virtue of more extensive experience. And the basic patrol aviation turned out to be a supplier of personnel for the staffs of all levels and, as it now turns out, for command posts, all levels too.
And here we need to look at ourselves and ask the question: what about this?
The conclusions about the role of aviation in the war at sea, to which the Americans arrived after the Second World War, in general, corresponded to those to which the domestic experts arrived. The differences were in relation to aircraft carriers - for ours they remained a bare theory, although they were always considered useful and necessary (under Khrushchev and a little after - they were considered unofficially).
What contribution to the war on the sea on the Eastern Front was made by naval aviation, wrote well Lieutenant-General V.N. Sokerin, former commander of the Air Force and Air Defense of the Baltic Fleet.
And even where the fleet and the pilots sank the German warship, the fleet has the T-31, and the aviators have the Niobe, though it was not a full-fledged ship, although it was drowned by mistake, but, generally speaking, able to snap back, and larger in size and displacement than the T-31 sunk in battle by the Baltic forces. The aircraft were "cooler" here.
After the Second World War, the USSR for several decades created a powerful in number anti-submarine aircraft and sea-launched rocket-carrying aircraft, which cannot be compared with anything in the world.
In theory, pilots with their knowledge of all theaters at once, with their understanding of what surface ships were (they were their targets, they had to know everything about them), submarines (anti-submarine targets and “colleagues” of missile carriers, sometimes together with them attacks), with the experience of constant clashes with the Americans over the sea, and an understanding of what enemy aircraft can do with the surface fleet without cover, would have to become the "fresh blood" of the fleet, the people who would dilute our embarrassing doctrines with their bold and with elym I look from top to bottom.
But this did not happen, and the fault is based on the caste system in fact the relationship in our Navy.
Who commands the Russian naval aviation (what is left of it)? Hero of the Russian Federation, fighter pilot of ship aviation Igor Sergeyevich Kozhin.
What is his military rank? Major General. Being a sea pilot ("more sea" pilot than a pilot from an aircraft carrier, it is simply impossible to think up), I.S. Kozhin has a combined arms, not naval rank. Like all pilots of naval aviation of the country.
This problem was previously written in the article. “Broken wings. Will naval aviation be reborn? ”. Recall a short quote from there:
But much less "combed" option from Lieutenant-General V.N. Sokerina:
And it was so, at least since the time of the war, if not earlier. The fleet in the person of officers from the crew does not consider aviation as a tool of decisive importance, and does not see its equal in the pilots - refuses to see. As a result, in difficult years, aviation goes “under the gas cutting” first, and career prospects, and, consequently, the expectations of the future for sea pilots are seriously limited without any reason for this. And this is a blow to the hands, a serious demoralizing factor generating nihilism and undermining loyalty. After all, an outstanding person cannot but have ambitions, even if he is a warrior. As, for example, I.S. Kozhin can get a lieutenant general? Only by service or in the form of rewarding. There is no career position commensurate with the rank of lieutenant general in naval aviation.
And, of course, the intellectual potential of the flying brotherhood is not used even by a third.
And in the conditions when aviation is the main force in the naval war! What a contrast with the Americans, in whom the Orion pilot has grown to the commander and received Admiral of the Navy!
On the other hand, there is a disregard for the development of naval aviation on the part of the commanders of the crew. After all, money is often not enough, and now the planes begin to receive kerosene on the basis of the residual principle, the raid decreases, repairs are not carried out ...
Due to the geographical features of the country, the Russian Navy is “doomed” either to have a strong base air component or to be defeated in the first war. And, it should be understood that this component is controlled, as a rule, by very clever people, to whom their “air-sea” service gave the broadest horizons and deep tactical knowledge, far beyond the “kind” of forces.
And there is no reason for the existing caste approach to be maintained when there are seafarers — important and necessary people, with sea ranks and career prospects, and there are pilots, with a different title system and an excellent form of clothing — and limited career prospects, sort of people of the second varieties occupying a subordinate position.
In order to break down this caste approach, it is extremely necessary to revalidate all naval aviation personnel to get titles of identical seafarers (was a major, became a captain of the third rank, etc.), and further discovery for pilots, navigators and all the rest of the same prospects crew members have growth in the staff line, possibly with retraining at the Naval Academy (VUNC Navy "Naval Academy named after Admiral of the Fleet NG Kuznetsov"), with subsequent work at headquarters not only in units and (I want hope tsya) naval aviation connections, but also in the headquarters of surface and underwater (especially true for antisubmarine with their knowledge) forces. There is no problem in this, and worse than now it will not be perfect, much more likely that it will be better.
It would also be worthwhile to take a closer look at the Anglo-Saxon system of appointing aircraft carrier commanders — if we have one (for the time being), then the commander must be assigned the most appropriate one. And there is an opinion that a pilot-batcher in this capacity may be at least as good as a sailor from the crew. At least, an understanding of how to set a task for a ship's air regiment at a pilot is better definitely.
And if suddenly some native of naval aviation turns out to be the most suitable candidate for the role of fleet commander, then why not? After all, naval aviation is part of the Navy, right?
Earlier, with their own hands, the Navy actually defeated its naval aviation, depriving itself of both a long arm for a long distance strike, and “eyes” capable of seeing what was going on outside the range of existing radars, and “ears” capable of “counting the blades” going somewhere then in the depths of the enemy submarine.
All this needs to be “reversed” and begin to bring the situation to a normal one. And the alignment of the status of naval aviation with other arms of the Navy, as well as the equalization of the status of sea pilots with other military personnel of the Navy, are a necessary step along this path. The captain of the first rank in the fleet can still try to wake himself up in front of the pilot-colonel, but in front of another captain of the first rank. Just by subordination. And we have to do this if one day we want to get naval aviation, corresponding in its capabilities to the challenges and dangers facing the country.
In the meantime, let the personality of the future American commander make us all think properly.
If everything goes as it is now, then soon Admiral Moran will take the highest military post in the US Navy.
The fact that Richardson’s career prospects were not brilliant was clear a long time ago. Over the past years, the US Navy has demonstrated quite a few failures in shipbuilding (the entire LCS program, technical problems with the Gerald Ford aircraft carrier, a mine action failure in RMMV, and much more), and in the development of adequate concepts (far lack of readiness to fight a strong opponent on the sea, the lag behind the US Air Force in terms of mastering the newest anti-ship missiles, the strange process of choosing a frigate for the US Navy, which promises to be a “dried destroyer” rather than the result of a coherent concept), serious imbalances development (complete absence of escort forces, it is not clear why the additional armament of landing ships weapons), gaps, and gigantic ones, in the training of personnel (collisions of ships reported by the press are only the tip of the iceberg). Of course, the Minister of the Navy, in this case Richard Spencer, is responsible for a significant part of these failures, but everyone understands that once a long time ago captain retired from the Marine Corps, Spencer in modern navy He is not an expert and is based on the opinions of others. It’s clear on whose.
One way or another, Richardson is given a quietly to serve, and he leaves his post to his deputy. Soon, apparently.
As a kind of wish for the new commander, independent observers called the need to raise combat readiness, prepare the Navy for a fight at sea with a strong adversary (meaning primarily China), and carry out a plan to increase the strength of the Navy to 355 pennants, which in itself will very difficult. Moran himself also does not forget about "wonderful people in the Navy" and about the importance of the human factor in future wars. He, in general, is right, especially against the background of how this human factor has recently manifested itself.
We, however, with our domestic problems in this whole situation should be interested in something else, namely, from what kind of strength the new American commander came.
The fact is that Moran is not a submariner. He is not from the surface fleet. He is not a scout and not a deck pilot.
William Morin served in the base patrol for most of his career aviation and is the pilot of the base (read: ground) patrol aircraft R-3 Orion. A very experienced pilot, I must say, a former instructor.
The commander of the US Navy is assigned a person who is strictly not formally a sailor at all. And it is not just like that.
Shore against the fleet
During World War II, basic aviation became the decisive force in the war at sea - long-range patrol aircraft, including flying boats and amphibians, bombers and torpedo bombers aimed at working on surface targets, reconnaissance aircraft.
The battle for the Atlantic is the most striking example of the combat effectiveness of this kind of force. Few people think, but not deck aircraft drove the German submarines to depth, giving the convoys a high chance of reaching the target. These were patrol aircraft taking off from the shore, the converted Liberators and the amphibious Catalina. Of course, it was specifically in the Pacific Ocean that carrier-based aircraft of the United States sank more ships than the base one. But not much. In the Atlantic, the basic aircraft "led" with a crushing score.
The Japanese felt the power of American base aviation and themselves. Not only did American seaplanes detect and sink Japanese ships, and in large quantities, it was also the fact that practically the entire burden of the struggle against the Japanese convoys in New Guinea was borne by the American base bombers. And the results of their efforts turned out to be strongly not in favor of the Japanese. In general, deck aircraft sank 520 Japanese ships and vessels, and the base - 441. Very eloquent statistics.
In turn, the Japanese used their strike seaplanes from the bases on the Marshall Islands very widely - and successfully. The Americans were able to get anything with the Japanese flying boats, until the islands themselves were captured.
There are also loud drowning in the base aviation account. So, the Bismarck could have left if it had not been for patrolling seaplanes from the “shore”. "Tirpitz" was destroyed by ground bomber. Light cruiser "Konigsberg" - the base dive bombers of the Royal Navy.
There are examples of numbers other than these.
In turn, the Germans also gave a lot of brilliant examples of the use of ground planes against surface ships and trade convoys. "Condors" over the Atlantic, bomber attacks over the Baltic, including Rudel’s breakthrough to the Marat, attacks against the USSR Black Sea Fleet, dramatically reducing its payroll, the use of guided bombs against allies in the Mediterranean, attacks on warships during the landing in Italy - Although German aviation did not belong to Kriegsmarine, it made an enormous contribution to the war at sea, and, frankly speaking, it hit the ships and ships above the head.
Today, anyone can find a lot of information on this topic, including reference information, with numbers and dates. And this information will confirm: the base naval aviation (like the purely “ground” aircraft of the Air Force, but working on surface targets) made a decisive contribution to the war at sea.
After the end of World War II, American base aviation continued to develop primarily as anti-submarine. The tasks for the destruction of surface ships went to the batcher and, if necessary, to the Strategic Air Command of the Air Force. The Navy, having abandoned seaplanes at a certain moment, invested enormous resources in basic patrol aircraft - and did not lose. To date, the power of the American patrol aviation has reached such a high level that the actions of submarines of US enemies in real combat conditions, with the massed use of their aircraft by the Americans, will be possible only in areas protected from American aviation or under the ice. At a minimum, until the combat strength of the American BPA is significantly reduced by the attacks of various forces of their enemy. It is not difficult to imagine that it will be very difficult to provide.
Admiral V.S. Vysotsky, the former commander of the Russian Navy, in the 2013 year, allotted to the Northern Fleet's submarines no more than 48 hours until they were completely destroyed, unless their deployment areas were covered by air forces, including the aircraft carrier Admiral Kuznetsov. In the most obvious way, he was right.
The US base patrol aircraft, based on the ground, is nevertheless the “cornerstone” of the naval power of the US Navy. And the importance of the US Navy to its development is very significant. Thus, the unit was among the branches of the forces that received a fundamentally new weapon system after the end of the Cold War — the Poseidon basic patrol aircraft P-8.
In general, the fact that the new commander of the US Navy came out of the "coastal" pilots should not surprise anyone, especially considering his biography.
Achievement list
1981 - graduated from the Naval Academy in Annapolis.
With 1981 - in flight crews of the base patrol aviation, 44,45,46 squadron patrol, instructor in retraining of flight crews in the 30 squadron (training in US base aviation), later commander of the 2 patrol reconnaissance wing, zn-ZH-88-NI command officer; the ocean, then the departure of the “ground” in the 6-e wing, security officer and assistant commander for maintenance, administrative positions in the Navy Human Resources Bureau, the US Commander in the Pacific, director of the Navy's service personnel.
2006 - received the second higher military in the National Military College, in Newport.
From 2007 to 2008 in the apparatus of the commander of naval operations. Promoted to flag officer.
With 2008, he is the commander of the basic patrol aviation and at the same time is responsible for waging an air war as a whole at the headquarters of the Navy, being the deputy director for air warfare, and later the director for air warfare.
With 2013 - Chief of Staff of the Navy.
From 2016 - Deputy Commander of Maritime Operations.
He flew regularly and performed combat missions from air bases:
Brunswick, Maine.
Jacksonville, FL.
Whidby Island, WA.
Hawaii.
Sigonella, Sicily.
Roth, Spain.
Leyges, Azores.
Keflavik, Iceland.
Misawa, Japan.
Diego Garcia, Indian Ocean.
Masirah, Oman.
Bahrain.
He is a high-class pistol shooter and has a special medal for it.
It is easy to see that the service experience of Admiral Moran exceeds that of most sailors - he served and performed combat missions in all theaters, was familiar with a very large number of bases and regions, occupied both command and administrative and staff positions, was an instructor pilot, was familiar with combat management of the carrier strike group, managed in our category personnel service of the Navy, and not only recruitment, but also personnel training, and dealt with all issues related to the war in the air at the headquarters of the Navy.
Two higher military educations, both in elite vvuz of the USA.
Formally, it is more than a good candidate for a commander.
According to the actual ... any anti-submarine pilot whose task is to destroy submarines knows the tactics of submarines and the limits of their capabilities, understands hydroacoustics, knows how to build interaction with both surface and submarine forces, knows how to organize joint combat use with deck aircraft. Roughly speaking, he generally knows more than sailors. And if he was also engaged in reconnaissance ... Moren was engaged in it.
The P-3C Orion is not a ship, but for the Americans there is not much difference - this is also the Navy, and its pilots are just as much a Navy as the sailors.
Let us once again draw attention to this fact - the “ground” (not ship) pilot has the rank of admiral and turned out to be a suitable candidate for the position of commander of the Navy, and there is every reason to believe that he is better prepared for this work than many sailors of equal strength - at least by virtue of more extensive experience. And the basic patrol aviation turned out to be a supplier of personnel for the staffs of all levels and, as it now turns out, for command posts, all levels too.
And here we need to look at ourselves and ask the question: what about this?
We
The conclusions about the role of aviation in the war at sea, to which the Americans arrived after the Second World War, in general, corresponded to those to which the domestic experts arrived. The differences were in relation to aircraft carriers - for ours they remained a bare theory, although they were always considered useful and necessary (under Khrushchev and a little after - they were considered unofficially).
What contribution to the war on the sea on the Eastern Front was made by naval aviation, wrote well Lieutenant-General V.N. Sokerin, former commander of the Air Force and Air Defense of the Baltic Fleet.
During the Second World War, the role of naval aviation as the main force in the fighting at sea was clearly defined. It accounted for more than 50% of the tonnage of transport ships and more than 70% of combat and auxiliary ships lost by Nazi Germany from the effects of our fleet as a whole.
During the exploits of 141 during the Great Patriotic War, the Baltic Aviator was awarded the title Hero, and four (Stepanyan, Rakov, Chelnokov, Mazurenko) were awarded this title twice.
During the exploits of 141 during the Great Patriotic War, the Baltic Aviator was awarded the title Hero, and four (Stepanyan, Rakov, Chelnokov, Mazurenko) were awarded this title twice.
And even where the fleet and the pilots sank the German warship, the fleet has the T-31, and the aviators have the Niobe, though it was not a full-fledged ship, although it was drowned by mistake, but, generally speaking, able to snap back, and larger in size and displacement than the T-31 sunk in battle by the Baltic forces. The aircraft were "cooler" here.
After the Second World War, the USSR for several decades created a powerful in number anti-submarine aircraft and sea-launched rocket-carrying aircraft, which cannot be compared with anything in the world.
In theory, pilots with their knowledge of all theaters at once, with their understanding of what surface ships were (they were their targets, they had to know everything about them), submarines (anti-submarine targets and “colleagues” of missile carriers, sometimes together with them attacks), with the experience of constant clashes with the Americans over the sea, and an understanding of what enemy aircraft can do with the surface fleet without cover, would have to become the "fresh blood" of the fleet, the people who would dilute our embarrassing doctrines with their bold and with elym I look from top to bottom.
Naval pilots of the USSR and Russia were often familiar with the enemy much better than the crew. Overflight of the US Navy Missile Cruiser by Soviet Il-38
But this did not happen, and the fault is based on the caste system in fact the relationship in our Navy.
Who commands the Russian naval aviation (what is left of it)? Hero of the Russian Federation, fighter pilot of ship aviation Igor Sergeyevich Kozhin.
What is his military rank? Major General. Being a sea pilot ("more sea" pilot than a pilot from an aircraft carrier, it is simply impossible to think up), I.S. Kozhin has a combined arms, not naval rank. Like all pilots of naval aviation of the country.
Major General, Hero of Russia Igor Sergeyevich Kozhin, Commander of Naval Aviation of the Navy
This problem was previously written in the article. “Broken wings. Will naval aviation be reborn? ”. Recall a short quote from there:
The pilots, whose planes were the main striking force of the Navy in a non-nuclear war, and the "eyes" of the fleet, and its "fire brigade" capable of arriving on command anywhere in the country in a matter of hours, did not become "their own" in the fleet. The psychological problem suddenly became organizational.
Naval pilots had general military ranks. Their career opportunities were limited in comparison with the crew. On the whole, naval aviation was treated as a subsidiary of the troop of forces with respect to surface and underwater forces. While the Soviet government could “flood” the armed forces with all the resources necessary for them, it was tolerable. But in 1991, the year of Soviet power was gone, and the abscess burst.
Naval pilots had general military ranks. Their career opportunities were limited in comparison with the crew. On the whole, naval aviation was treated as a subsidiary of the troop of forces with respect to surface and underwater forces. While the Soviet government could “flood” the armed forces with all the resources necessary for them, it was tolerable. But in 1991, the year of Soviet power was gone, and the abscess burst.
But much less "combed" option from Lieutenant-General V.N. Sokerina:
10 years of service as generals in the air forces of the Northern and Baltic fleets give me the right to say: over the past several decades, the fleet has developed a stable, handed down from generation to generation, prejudiced, to cynicism, disdainful attitude towards the air forces of the fleets. Everything negative that takes place on ships is smoothed out or hidden altogether. Any small thing in aviation swells from a fly to the size of an elephant. Aviation has long been and remains the "stepdaughter" of the Pope fleet.
And it was so, at least since the time of the war, if not earlier. The fleet in the person of officers from the crew does not consider aviation as a tool of decisive importance, and does not see its equal in the pilots - refuses to see. As a result, in difficult years, aviation goes “under the gas cutting” first, and career prospects, and, consequently, the expectations of the future for sea pilots are seriously limited without any reason for this. And this is a blow to the hands, a serious demoralizing factor generating nihilism and undermining loyalty. After all, an outstanding person cannot but have ambitions, even if he is a warrior. As, for example, I.S. Kozhin can get a lieutenant general? Only by service or in the form of rewarding. There is no career position commensurate with the rank of lieutenant general in naval aviation.
And, of course, the intellectual potential of the flying brotherhood is not used even by a third.
And in the conditions when aviation is the main force in the naval war! What a contrast with the Americans, in whom the Orion pilot has grown to the commander and received Admiral of the Navy!
On the other hand, there is a disregard for the development of naval aviation on the part of the commanders of the crew. After all, money is often not enough, and now the planes begin to receive kerosene on the basis of the residual principle, the raid decreases, repairs are not carried out ...
Due to the geographical features of the country, the Russian Navy is “doomed” either to have a strong base air component or to be defeated in the first war. And, it should be understood that this component is controlled, as a rule, by very clever people, to whom their “air-sea” service gave the broadest horizons and deep tactical knowledge, far beyond the “kind” of forces.
And there is no reason for the existing caste approach to be maintained when there are seafarers — important and necessary people, with sea ranks and career prospects, and there are pilots, with a different title system and an excellent form of clothing — and limited career prospects, sort of people of the second varieties occupying a subordinate position.
In order to break down this caste approach, it is extremely necessary to revalidate all naval aviation personnel to get titles of identical seafarers (was a major, became a captain of the third rank, etc.), and further discovery for pilots, navigators and all the rest of the same prospects crew members have growth in the staff line, possibly with retraining at the Naval Academy (VUNC Navy "Naval Academy named after Admiral of the Fleet NG Kuznetsov"), with subsequent work at headquarters not only in units and (I want hope tsya) naval aviation connections, but also in the headquarters of surface and underwater (especially true for antisubmarine with their knowledge) forces. There is no problem in this, and worse than now it will not be perfect, much more likely that it will be better.
It would also be worthwhile to take a closer look at the Anglo-Saxon system of appointing aircraft carrier commanders — if we have one (for the time being), then the commander must be assigned the most appropriate one. And there is an opinion that a pilot-batcher in this capacity may be at least as good as a sailor from the crew. At least, an understanding of how to set a task for a ship's air regiment at a pilot is better definitely.
And if suddenly some native of naval aviation turns out to be the most suitable candidate for the role of fleet commander, then why not? After all, naval aviation is part of the Navy, right?
Earlier, with their own hands, the Navy actually defeated its naval aviation, depriving itself of both a long arm for a long distance strike, and “eyes” capable of seeing what was going on outside the range of existing radars, and “ears” capable of “counting the blades” going somewhere then in the depths of the enemy submarine.
All this needs to be “reversed” and begin to bring the situation to a normal one. And the alignment of the status of naval aviation with other arms of the Navy, as well as the equalization of the status of sea pilots with other military personnel of the Navy, are a necessary step along this path. The captain of the first rank in the fleet can still try to wake himself up in front of the pilot-colonel, but in front of another captain of the first rank. Just by subordination. And we have to do this if one day we want to get naval aviation, corresponding in its capabilities to the challenges and dangers facing the country.
In the meantime, let the personality of the future American commander make us all think properly.
- Alexander Timokhin
- US Navy, Arms-Expo.ru, eurasian-defence.ru
Information