Flight over the sea
Even from the name - Marine Aviation (MA) — it becomes clear that these aircraft fly over the sea. Naval aviation was varied: missile-carrying, anti-submarine, fighter, and even attack. The Naval Air Force also had transport aircraft, and they also fly over the sea.
I served in naval aviation for 26 years, and before that, I trained for naval aviation for four years. In total, I have 30 years of experience, so I can say without false modesty that flying over the sea is difficult. Not completely impossible, but much more difficult than over land. For various reasons. Now I'll try to explain a little about these "various reasons."
One such reason is psychological. Flights are conducted over the sea, thousands of kilometers from the nearest alternate airfield, meaning landing is impossible in the event of fire damage or aircraft failure. And after abandoning the plane over the sea, there's little hope of rescue; help is only theoretically possible, and even if it does arrive, the body won't be able to withstand the cold water by then.
I was trained in search and rescue operations. I had to fly in combat formations as a crew member of a search and rescue aircraft with rescue containers (SAR), drop SARs, participate in organizing rescue operations and directing flights during the rescue of a Tu-22M2 crew just 120 kilometers from our airfield. Here's my personal opinion after gaining such experience: rescuing an aircraft crew in the open sea is unlikely. Frankly, I don't know of any such examples. Usually, it's just a crash into the sea, and that's it...
I've sometimes heard the opinion that aviators performing long-term flights over sea should undergo special psychological preparation. I don't know; I haven't heard of it. The doctor lectured on the dangers of venereal diseases, but I don't recall any specifics about the psychological aspects of preparing for flights over water.
Another reason why flying over the sea is difficult is navigation. Flying over the sea involves flying over featureless areas, practically unequipped with radio navigation systems. Tu-16, Tu-22M3, and Tu-142 aircraft lacked standard satellite navigation systems (SNS). On the Tu-16, navigators had plenty of time to get bored while flying over the sea, but navigators in the past were better trained, not because they were smarter, but simply because life forced them to.
More modern aircraft were equipped with inertial navigation systems and digital computer-based navigation systems, which significantly simplified navigation at sea. However, relying blindly on a navigation system is a disservice. The fact is that navigation systems accumulate errors over time, and if they are not promptly corrected using various methods (using radio systems, radar reference, etc.), you may not arrive at your destination on time.
But at sea, the problem is precisely with correction... After the regiment retrained from the Tu-16 to the Tu-22M2, some navigators recklessly trusted the aircraft's navigation system and flew to completely inappropriate destinations. Perhaps some naval aircraft have now received new standard satellite equipment, which significantly simplifies navigation, but all I know is that Tu-142 and Tu-22M3 navigators use non-standard imported navigators.
A non-standard imported navigator in the Tu-22M3 navigator's cockpit.
In our time, non-standard imported navigators had only just become available, and the entire Pacific Fleet naval aviation was allocated a whopping three Magellan-type naval navigation systems. The Chief Navigator of the Pacific Fleet Naval Aviation quite fairly distributed this wealth as follows:
- on the commander's Tu-134 fleet;
- on his personal car like a Toyota, supposedly for a detailed study, determination of various errors and development of application methods;
There was a fight over the third copy between the Tu-142, Tu-22M3, Il-38, and transport regiments. I won the fight, using my natural charm, naval audacity, and crude, primitive flattery.
That's how our Tu-142 regiment acquired a satellite navigator. I handed it over to the regiment's navigator, who, flying our An-26, honed his skills, developed a methodology, and wrote a manual. Afterward, we held a training session on using the navigator in flight, and the device began being issued to Tu-142 navigators for important missions.
And now about the main thing: carrying out missions as intended. All these antics over the sea, with the integrated use of all navigational aids to fly along a given route without deviations and precisely in time and place to a given point (area), are needed only to find the enemy and destroy him at the appointed time. It is difficult to do, but possible. I will not tell you how our naval missile-carrying division, consisting of 40 Tu-22M2 and 16 Tu-16, took off from two airfields, assembled in the air, flew to the northwestern part of the Pacific Ocean (beyond the Kuril Islands) and there carried out simultaneous missile A strike on a surface target, after which it would turn around, fly back, disengage, and land at a two-minute interval. The strike was carried out tactically, meaning without releasing the missiles; all other elements were practiced. I participated in such sorties many times, both as a second navigator and as a regiment navigator. There's simply no point in describing how we flew there, since naval missile-carrying aviation was destroyed during various reforms.
Let's briefly discuss, within the limits of what's permissible, anti-submarine warfare (ASW) aircraft, which are undoubtedly the most complex type of aviation. Currently, SAW aircraft must perform two critical tasks:
- ensuring the combat stability of our strategic nuclear-powered missile submarines (search for foreign submarines);
- conducting aerial reconnaissance of enemy ships at sea.
Finding a target underwater, tracking it, and destroying it on cue is a daunting task, but crews have managed it before. Finding enemy ships in the ocean, identifying their types, and identifying the primary target is also far from easy, and sometimes even deadly. Anything can happen...
It is also important to keep in mind that naval aviation always operates independently, without the cover of continental air defense systems and without fighter aircraft escort.
Now, for those who think long-range aircraft also fly over the sea, and there's nothing difficult about it, and there's no point in bragging about their service in naval aviation. The difference: Tu-95MS and Tu-160 aircraft don't perform their primary functions over the sea—target search, target acquisition, and destruction of underwater or surface enemies. Non-combat flights over the sea used to be called "sport flights" in our regiment.
I almost forgot to write for the romantics: from the air, the sea is not at all blue with gentle waves, but always stern, leaden-gray, hostile.
Information