How things are with Russian maritime aviation: expert opinion


In modern warfare, the marine aviation. But in Russia, with its development, things are far from the best. Suffice it to say that so far the Russian Navy has only one aircraft carrier.


Naval aviation is part of the Naval fleet Of Russia. It consists of 44 anti-submarine aircraft and 43 carrier-based fighter aircraft. Also, “ordinary” planes are assigned to the naval aviation - about 50 Su-24 bombers and Su-24MR reconnaissance aircraft, more than 30 Su-30SM and Su-27, about 30 MiG-31, 3 VKP Il-22, 2 Il-20RT, more than 50 transport aircraft and up to 40 Mi-24 / 35M and Mi-8 helicopters.

The most numerous is the naval aviation of the Northern Fleet of the Russian Navy, which includes the country's only aircraft-carrying cruiser Admiral Kuznetsov and 2 fighter aviation regiments of carrier-based aviation. In the Baltic and Black Seas, the Pacific Ocean, naval aviation is represented by land based air regiments, and the Caspian Navy flotilla does not have its own naval aviation.

At the same time, when compared with other countries, the naval aviation of the Russian Navy is second only to the naval aviation of the US Navy and is equal in its potential to the naval aviation of China, Japan, and India.

Famous Russian military analyst Alexander Khramchikhin in a recently released article writes that even in Soviet times, naval aviation could solve the problems of anti-submarine defense only very conditionally. After the collapse of the USSR, everything became much more complicated:

In the post-Soviet period, the situation in this regard worsened significantly, since anti-submarine aircraft did not receive any new equipment (only 6 IL-38s were upgraded to the IL-38N variant). A very limited range of tasks can be solved by carrier-based aircraft of a single aircraft carrier.


In this regard, Khramchikhin wonders if Russia really needs aircraft carriers and is it better to spend the money that will be required for their construction to spend on frigates and anti-submarine ships?

The analyst concludes that the combat potential of Russian naval aviation is extremely limited. Since the Navy’s aviation includes “conventional” fighters, Khramchikhin believes that airborne defense of ships should be assigned to them. However, questions also arise here:

It is extremely doubtful that there will be enough fighters for this, since they will also be entrusted with the task of covering the deployment of strategic missile submarine cruisers (RPK SN) and multi-purpose submarines in the ocean. And also taking into account the fact that the MiG-31 is not very suitable for covering ships and submarines, this requires the Su-27 and its derivatives, of which there are very few in naval aviation.


It is unlikely that marine aviation will be able to protect against the carrier and landing formations of really strong states. In addition, Russian naval aviation is scattered across different fleets and, accordingly, managing its operations is also not so simple.

Nevertheless, completely abandoning naval aviation as part of the Navy is completely inexpedient, given that even much less powerful countries than Russia have aviation units as part of their naval forces. Finally, naval aviation is not only a combat use, it is also a separate school of pilots with its colossal experience in operating in specific conditions, its military and very glorious traditions.
Ctrl Enter

Noticed a mistake Highlight text and press. Ctrl + Enter

52 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must to register.

I have an account? Sign in

  1. Invoce 24 March 2020 09: 32 New
    • 12
    • 1
    +11
    Maritime aviation is part of the Russian Navy. It consists of 44 anti-submarine aircraft and 43 carrier-based fighter aircraft. Also, “ordinary” planes are assigned to the naval aviation - about 50 Su-24 bombers and Su-24MR reconnaissance aircraft, more than 30 Su-30SM and Su-27, about 30 MiG-31, 3 VKP Il-22, 2 Il-20RT, more than 50 transport aircraft and up to 40 Mi-24 / 35M and Mi-8 helicopters.

    And where are the Tu-142, Be-12 divisions as part of the regiments, Ka-28 helicopters?
    1. Insurgent 24 March 2020 09: 35 New
      • 12
      • 7
      +5
      Quote: Invoce
      Be-12 in the regiments

      With amphibian seaplanes, with their resource, quantity, and the need to replace, as far as I understand - TROUBLE

      (compared to the Soviet period) ...
      1. Invoce 24 March 2020 09: 46 New
        • 4
        • 4
        0
        Quote: Insurgent
        Quote: Invoce
        Be-12 in the regiments

        With amphibian seaplanes, with their resource, quantity, and the need to replace, as far as I understand - TROUBLE

        3-4 years ago, the "trouble" was with all types of aircraft! Currently, the manufacturer is personally responsible for the serviceability of the fleet. The Be-12 repairs and manufactured an aircraft factory in Taganrog, and they were operated in the Baltic (they are no longer there, in my opinion) and at the World Cup, which is very close to the place of manufacture. And the information was that the Be-12 will undergo modernization, because there is no decent replacement for them at the World Cup
        1. Insurgent 24 March 2020 09: 48 New
          • 6
          • 4
          +2
          Quote: Invoce
          the information was that the Be-12 will undergo modernization, because there is no decent replacement for them at the World Cup

          I would clarify, said that all over The Navy has no substitute for them ...
          And few of them remain.
          1. Nikolaevich I 24 March 2020 11: 25 New
            • 3
            • 0
            +3
            Quote: Insurgent
            And few of them remain

            Well, quite a few, but in the 90s a certain private company purchased decommissioned (!) Be-12s for organizing air travel between Sakhalin and the Kuril Islands ... that is, there was such an opportunity! For some time, the seaplanes were “honestly” operated ... but, unfortunately, the pilots were recruited poorly trained for hydroaviation .. accidents occurred ... flights were banned ...
            1. Insurgent 24 March 2020 11: 27 New
              • 6
              • 3
              +3
              Quote: Nikolaevich I
              in the 90s, a certain private company purchased decommissioned (!) Be-12s for organizing air travel between Sakhalin and the Kuril Islands

              For the "rollback", in the 90s, and not done this. It is possible that the planes were simply “let down” for decommissioning.
    2. Amateur 24 March 2020 10: 11 New
      • 4
      • 4
      0
      And where are the Tu-142, Be-12 divisions as part of the regiments, Ka-28 helicopters?

      А
      Famous Russian military analyst Alexander Khramchikhin
      probably forgot about them.
      There are entire research institutes in the Defense Ministry, which model all kinds of weapons, strategies and tactics of the Russian armed forces. Their recommendations are not always feasible for economic and / or political reasons. But individual "IKSPERDS" take over responsibility (by the way, they don’t take responsibility) the right to speak out about issues that they simply cannot judge about due to the lack of appropriate access to information.
      1. Andrei from Chelyabinsk 24 March 2020 10: 21 New
        • 7
        • 2
        +5
        He indicated the number of anti-submarine aircraft, which are precisely the Be-13 and Tu142. It’s not Khramchikhin’s fault that some people don’t know how to read.
        However, he really forgot about PLO helicopters
        1. Insurgent 24 March 2020 13: 08 New
          • 2
          • 2
          0
          Quote: Andrey from Chelyabinsk
          Be-13

          оЧеПAttack, or a new model?
          1. Amateur 24 March 2020 13: 11 New
            • 1
            • 1
            0
            Be-13

            FULL, or a new model?

            This is a model for those who can read Khramchikhin, who forgets about helicopters
          2. Andrei from Chelyabinsk 24 March 2020 13: 33 New
            • 1
            • 0
            +1
            Ophyatka, of course, the smartphone is not too convenient
      2. asv363 24 March 2020 12: 33 New
        • 0
        • 1
        -1
        Quote: Amateur
        А
        Famous russian military Analyst Alexander Khramchikhin

        Did not serve a day.
    3. IL-18 24 March 2020 10: 38 New
      • 5
      • 6
      -1
      Quote: Invoce
      And where are the Tu-142, Be-12 divisions as part of the regiments, Ka-28 helicopters?

      They do not fit into the context of an all-bad loss. Even the Chinese and Americans are missing something. But there articles are only in the context that everything is hurt, so are minor temporary flaws.
    4. Aleksandr1971 24 March 2020 10: 43 New
      • 1
      • 2
      -1
      Forgot.
      But the author for some reason adds to the list of aircraft and deck aircraft. Which actually exists, but has been unable to do its job just like carrier-based aviation for 3 years.
    5. Piramidon 24 March 2020 11: 45 New
      • 3
      • 7
      -4
      Quote: Invoce
      And where are the Tu-142, Be-12 divisions as part of the regiments, Ka-28 helicopters?

      EMNIP, the naval aviation also includes Tu-22M3 (AS Olenya). Anyway, for some reason, the author distinguishes the Navy as a "separate state." Judging by his words, in the event of an enemy landing or an ASG approaching our shores, only naval aviation should work on them, and the rest will be "smoking on the sidelines."
      It is unlikely that marine aviation will be able to protect against the carrier and landing formations of really strong states.
      1. Bongo 24 March 2020 13: 12 New
        • 4
        • 0
        +4
        Quote: Piramidon
        EMNIP, the naval aviation also includes Tu-22M3

        MRA liquidated in 2011, all naval Tu-22M3 delivered to Long-Range Aviation or "disposed of".
  2. paul72 24 March 2020 09: 38 New
    • 5
    • 1
    +4
    And why are Ka-27 helicopters not mentioned? Beriev's planes?
    Strange article
  3. bessmertniy 24 March 2020 09: 42 New
    • 2
    • 1
    +1
    Of course, there would be more. But it is not only naval aviation that one should wish for. repeat Let's hope that we are thinking on this topic at the top.
  4. gabonskijfront 24 March 2020 09: 45 New
    • 4
    • 1
    +3
    Abandon aircraft carriers? And how to project power? At least a little bit, at least somewhere in Africa. Without a normal aircraft carrier, where a full-fledged strike aviation group is based, there is nothing to do in future local conflicts. Syria has shown this.
    1. Svlad 24 March 2020 09: 59 New
      • 10
      • 1
      +9
      B 12 in the Baltic has not been around for 20 years. The last in the Museum of the World Ocean in the city center.
      1. Svlad 24 March 2020 10: 02 New
        • 13
        • 5
        +8
        Like the fleet, the Baltic also does not exist. For the parades, there are 2 BDKs, 1 bison, the flagship is not on the move and a new trifle is 2 pieces
        1. Sky strike fighter 24 March 2020 10: 17 New
          • 3
          • 8
          -5
          Quote: Svlad
          Like the fleet, the Baltic also does not exist. For the parades, there are 2 BDKs, 1 bison, the flagship is not on the move and a new trifle is 2 pieces

          Seriously? The composition of the Baltic Navy for 2020 by the link below. There, the number and composition of all fleets of the Russian Federation for 2020.

          Submarines: 1
          1 diesel submarine

          Surface ships: 52
          1 destroyer, 4 corvettes, 2 patrol ships, 8 small missile ships, 6 small anti-submarine ships, 6 missile boats, 1 sea minesweeper, 4 base minesweepers, 5 raid minesweepers, 4 large amphibious assault ships, 2 small amphibious assault ships, 9 amphibious assault ships boats

          http://russianships.info/today/
          1. Andrei from Chelyabinsk 24 March 2020 10: 24 New
            • 15
            • 1
            +14
            Of which the esm is not on the move, the corvettes are mentioned as a new trifle, the TFR already want repair, and the rest are very old people
          2. Svlad 24 March 2020 10: 25 New
            • 21
            • 3
            +18
            The destroyer is dead. Minesweepers are a terrible sight and you can shoot a film about the Second World War in the division. MrK and IPC do not tell the legacy of the 80s sucks. BF personally died. Because of this, it’s so sad
            1. huntsman650 25 March 2020 00: 16 New
              • 0
              • 0
              0
              BF former fleet)
    2. Sky strike fighter 24 March 2020 10: 01 New
      • 2
      • 10
      -8
      Abandon aircraft carriers? And how to project power? At least a little bit, at least somewhere in Africa.

      In Africa, why do we need this hemorrhoids?
    3. AAK
      AAK 24 March 2020 10: 51 New
      • 2
      • 1
      +1
      A colleague, I agree with you, the aircraft carrier, in my opinion, is needed by Russia, but it will appear only in the distant future, for the construction of such a ship there are no shipbuilding capacities, personnel, a proper project and a promising fleet
  5. Sky strike fighter 24 March 2020 09: 59 New
    • 2
    • 6
    -4
    In the post-Soviet period, the situation in this regard worsened significantly, since anti-submarine aviation did not receive any new equipment (only 6 IL-38s were upgraded to the IL-38N variant).

    I think on the basis of the Il-114-300 you can create a good anti-submarine aircraft. Over time, it should replace the aircraft created on the basis of the Il-18. And at this point in time, it is quite possible to do with modernization of the Soviet legacy.
    The ancestor of the winged family - Il-18, a reliable, strong and very unpretentious machine in operation. More than twenty modifications, including military ones, were created on its basis. This is the anti-submarine IL-38, which is currently undergoing modernization to the level of IL-38N Novella, the reconnaissance aircraft Il-20M, the jammer Il-22PP Porubshchik, and the VKP Il-22M11.

    As already mentioned, the machine, despite its age, has decent operational performance and, after the modernization, which includes major repairs and deep refurbishment, will be able to serve in our armed forces for at least ten years.
    https://m.tvzvezda.ru/news/opk/content/201808161500-656o.htm
  6. Igor Borisov_2 24 March 2020 10: 14 New
    • 1
    • 9
    -8
    Quote: Svlad
    Like the fleet, the Baltic also does not exist. For the parades, there are 2 BDKs, 1 bison, the flagship is not on the move and a new trifle is 2 pieces


    Do not distort - BDK - 4, all running yes and, as you write, a new little thing is enough .... Google
    1. Svlad 24 March 2020 11: 02 New
      • 8
      • 2
      +6
      What to google? I live here and see this arctic fox. You can forget and not recall about the landings in the Baltic Sea and it's time to rename these parts. Since the landing needs to be transported on something. And on 1 bison, and as comrade 4 BDK wrote (2 of them were transferred to "staff"), a reasonable landing is impossible.
  7. Ratmir_Ryazan 24 March 2020 10: 15 New
    • 1
    • 8
    -7
    Russian aircraft carriers are needed and this is indisputable, the interests of Russia have to be protected outside our borders and not everywhere we will have an airfield there on land, an aircraft carrier is a mobile airfield, wherever we want and put it there. And ideally, we need 5 aircraft carriers, 2 each for the Northern and Pacific Fleets + one reserve, to replace what will get up for repairs.

    Another question is that Russia should still give priority to ground forces, but at the same time we should not infringe on the fleet to the size of the coastal.
    1. Romario_Argo 24 March 2020 10: 50 New
      • 1
      • 8
      -7
      you need to create a marine version of the Su-35 fighter for 8 tons of bombs. and Su-34 for 12 tons, as well as the average MiG-35 for 6 tons. Since we do not have steam catapults, we can provide no more than 12 landings per hour i.e. this is not more than 12 take-offs per hour. Combining Su-34 and Su-35 with Mig-35 gives a larger combat radius of 1000-1500 km (F-18E 750 km). That will give a greater spread in landings, and a greater number of take-offs - up to 18 take-offs (as in Nimitz) due to the duration of flights of the Su-35 (2 hours), Su-34 (4 hours), Mig-35 (1,5 hours)
      my thought isWith a smaller number of aircraft at TAVKR (36), we get a large bomb load in the total daily departures. due to the greater range, duration of flight, bomb load (Su-34 12 tons), and a greater range of weapons (Onyx, Zircons, Daggers)
      30 (48 total) F-18E x 8 tons = 240 tons
      4 Su-35 x 8 tons = 32 tons. 12 Su-34 x 12 tons = 144 tons. 2 MiG-35 x 6 tons = 12 tons. Total: 188 tons
      BUT (!) The combat radius and hovering is higher, the range of the weapon is higher (!)
      1. Ratmir_Ryazan 24 March 2020 11: 21 New
        • 2
        • 0
        +2
        In my opinion, to make the marine version for the Su-35 and for the Su-34 and also for the MiG-35 is too much. We have a MiG-29K / KUB, so it needs to be developed and modernized. The Americans have a practical deck analogue of our MiG - F-18.

        MiG-29K / KUB - it is multi-purpose, it will be used both as a fighter and as a bomber, the flight range can be increased by refueling in the air, for this he has everything.

        Later it makes sense to make a decked Su-57.

        And the absence of a steam or electromagnetic catapult is an occasion to make them, and not build an aircraft carrier without them.
        1. Romario_Argo 24 March 2020 11: 33 New
          • 0
          • 1
          -1
          MiG-29M - glider 9-15
          MiG-29SM - glider 9-14
          MiG-29K is a glider 9-31, 9-41 (4500 kg), KUB - 9-47 (5500 kg.)
          The MiG-35 has an OVT, (6500 kg.) - this is the further development of the MiG-29K / KUB / M / SM
          1. Ratmir_Ryazan 24 March 2020 12: 57 New
            • 2
            • 0
            +2
            Everything is so, only while the MiG-35 is not in the version of the deck aircraft, it is not in the troops yet.

            I hope to appear.
  8. pavelty 24 March 2020 10: 22 New
    • 5
    • 2
    +3
    And why do we need an aircraft carrier, what tasks will it perform in the singular?
    1. Andrei from Chelyabinsk 24 March 2020 10: 43 New
      • 6
      • 3
      +3
      Already explained 100500 times
      1. pavelty 24 March 2020 11: 06 New
        • 2
        • 1
        +1
        Well, explain again, maybe I'm dull. Train pilots? Takeoff - landing, what else? Well, we will have 30 pilots who know how to take off from the deck, and the aircraft carrier died and ...
        1. Romario_Argo 24 March 2020 11: 47 New
          • 1
          • 7
          -6
          and the aircraft carrier died and ...

          we do not have aircraft carriers, but aircraft carriers of cruisers
          with a lot of layered air defense, on the example of the Lamantin project, I explain:
          8 ZRPK Pantsir-M: 256 missiles with a range of 40 km. 32 CH channels
          SAM Redoubt 144 channels TsU, 72 SAM - with a range of 150 km. - all with ARGSN
          Launcher under 24 anti-ship missiles / PLUR / SLCM - with a range of 150 km - up to 600 km.
          PTZ - Package-NK
          + air patrol 2 MiG-29K / KUB - 250 km., "wet" 2 Su-35 - 500 km.
          + "anti-submarine patrol" Ka-27M
          + TARK escort pr.1144 + frigates pr.22350
          + accompaniment PLARK / PLAT pr.855 / 971 / 949AM
          Conclusion:
          - torpedo attack on TAVKR without effective
          - air attack by air forces: air patrol: 2 MiG-29 (35) - 12 TsU, 2 Su-35 - 8 TsU,
          + TAVKR air defense 176 TsU and 328 SAM
          + TARK air defense and FR: ~ and so dofiga already (!)
    2. Ratmir_Ryazan 24 March 2020 11: 30 New
      • 3
      • 3
      0
      And why do we need an aircraft carrier, what tasks will it perform in the singular?


      Russia’s interests also have to be defended beyond our borders and not everywhere we will have an airfield there on land, an aircraft carrier is a mobile airfield, wherever we want and put it there.

      In addition, it is indisputable that a ship grouping with an aircraft carrier in its composition is much more powerful and can perform a much larger number of tasks than without it.

      An aircraft carrier is the point of power in Russia where it will put it !!!

      Russia will build new ships, including new aircraft carriers, but after it completes the modernization of its strategic submarine forces and saturates the fleet with ships in the far sea zone.

      In the meantime, the Admiral Kuznetsov TAVKR will serve the country and people, he has already given vast experience in the operation and use of an aircraft carrier in a combat situation and all this will be used in the design of new Russian aircraft carriers, the same applies to carrier-based pilots.
      1. Romario_Argo 24 March 2020 12: 12 New
        • 0
        • 0
        0
        An aircraft carrier is the point of power in Russia where it will put it !!!

        I agree.
        “soiled” Su-34s will deliver 12 tons of JUSTICE
        1. Ratmir_Ryazan 24 March 2020 13: 02 New
          • 1
          • 0
          +1
          12 tons of JUSTICE


          Is it really important to load a fighter-bomber to the eyeballs? And how often is this practiced in conditions of the use of precision weapons?

          Judging by the materials from Syria, they are loaded only with free-falling bombs to the eyeballs, but Russia achieved a greater effect by using QABs, including with respect to the Turkish forces.

          Therefore, I am not sure that making marine versions of the Su-30/35/34 and also having a marine version of the MiG-35 and Su-57 is a reasonable idea. In my opinion, the MiG-35K / KUB and Su-57K are enough.
  9. Aleksandr1971 24 March 2020 10: 41 New
    • 1
    • 0
    +1
    The expert's opinion is certainly worth considering. And some information on the quantitative composition of naval aviation is presented in this article.
    But in the way things really are in Russian naval aviation (even without taking into account state secrets), the article says very little.
    I would like to get acquainted with the expert opinion on the following points:
    - goals and objectives of naval aviation;
    - threats to maritime security of Russia;
    - tactics of application;
    - training of flight personnel;
    - material and technical support and maintenance of naval aviation;
    - plans for the purchase of new aircraft;
    - other.
    It is clear that on some of these points the average person has some idea. But there is also concern about how great the risk is that goals and objectives may not be achieved, that threats are stronger than the ability to counter them, that the flight crew does not have the necessary competencies, etc.
  10. exo
    exo 24 March 2020 11: 02 New
    • 2
    • 1
    +1
    Quote: Sky Strike fighter
    In the post-Soviet period, the situation in this regard worsened significantly, since anti-submarine aviation did not receive any new equipment (only 6 IL-38s were upgraded to the IL-38N variant).

    I think on the basis of the Il-114-300 you can create a good anti-submarine aircraft. Over time, it should replace the aircraft created on the basis of the Il-18. And at this point in time, it is quite possible to do with modernization of the Soviet legacy.
    The ancestor of the winged family - Il-18, a reliable, strong and very unpretentious machine in operation. More than twenty modifications, including military ones, were created on its basis. This is the anti-submarine IL-38, which is currently undergoing modernization to the level of IL-38N Novella, the reconnaissance aircraft Il-20M, the jammer Il-22PP Porubshchik, and the VKP Il-22M11.

    As already mentioned, the machine, despite its age, has decent operational performance and, after the modernization, which includes major repairs and deep refurbishment, will be able to serve in our armed forces for at least ten years.
    https://m.tvzvezda.ru/news/opk/content/201808161500-656o.htm

    More than once, we discussed. The plane is small. We talked about the option based on the Tu-204.This is closer to the point.
  11. Zaurbek 24 March 2020 11: 45 New
    • 5
    • 0
    +5
    Sucks .... with naval aviation. Only Su30SM
  12. Tektor 24 March 2020 12: 49 New
    • 0
    • 4
    -4
    There is still a new Ka-31 - recently the report was staring at the Star. It is very pleasing! Our answer to Chamberlain, so to speak. And I would bet on the Tu-22M3M, Su-34, Orion, Altius and Su-70. Well, on the Su-57, of course.
  13. iouris 24 March 2020 16: 42 New
    • 1
    • 0
    +1
    The basis of naval aviation is TAKR.
  14. Alexey from Perm 24 March 2020 17: 25 New
    • 2
    • 0
    +2
    I’ll tell you a secret, in Russia everything and everywhere is not very good. And the basis for this is a weak economy focused on the sale of resources.
    1. huntsman650 25 March 2020 00: 26 New
      • 0
      • 1
      -1
      Recently I delved into the prices at which military equipment is built and modernized. The prices are sooooo high))). A friend took a modernized helicopter, and so, an aluminum bucket with a range of 20000 tr. costs which the helicopter which has been modernized is equipped))). It is comprehension that this is a legitimate replenishment of someone's feeders
      1. Alexey from Perm 25 March 2020 00: 34 New
        • 0
        • 0
        0
        honestly, hard to believe. But purely by the logic of things, there may be something similar.