The Russian Military Merged Thread- Navy

[jollyjacktar]

Ivan has lost a naval recce ship in a collision off the coast of Turkey.

Russian navy vessel sinks after collision off Turkey

Crew of both ships safe after crash near Bosphorus Strait

Thomson Reuters  Posted: Apr 27, 2017 8:02 AM ET| Last Updated: Apr 27, 2017 11:10 AM ET
A Russian reconnaissance ship sank after it collided with a Togo-flagged cargo vessel off the Turkish coast on Thursday, according to Turkey's coastal safety authority.

The Russian ship Liman and the other vessel, identified by authorities as Youzarsif H, collided in fog and low visibility in the Black Sea.

The Turkish coast guard said all 78 personnel aboard the Russian ship were rescued after it sent a tugboat and three fast rescue vessels to the area.

The freighter sustained minor damage — it is able to continue sailing — and all crew members are safe, according Turkey's transportation minister.

The ship was taking sheep from Romania to Jordan, according to Turkish broadcaster NTV.

Russia's defence ministry said the collision occurred about 40 kilometres northwest of the Bosphorus Strait.

The Bosphorus, which cuts through Istanbul, is one of the world's most important waterways for transit of oil and grains. The 27-kilometre waterway connects the Black Sea to the Mediterranean.
With files from The Associated Press and CBC News
© Thomson Reuters, 2017
Reuters

http://www.cbc.ca/news/world/russian-ship-collision-1.4088014

 

[MarkOttawa]

Aging sub woes (note cruise missiles re NORAD):

A Grim Future For Russia’s Nuclear Sub Fleet
The Kremlin can't replace its aging subs fast enough

In March 2017, Russia’s new Yasen-class nuclear attack submarine Kazan launched at the northern port city of Severodvinsk. Perhaps the quietest Russian submarine ever, the event was further evidence the Kremlin can still build capable and lethal subs capable of a variety of missions, including cruise-missile attack.

But it won’t be enough. The Russian navy — already badly depleted since the collapse of the Soviet Union — can’t quickly replace most of its existing nuclear submarine fleet, which is approaching the end of its collective lifespan. The outcome will likely mean a shrinking of the Russian nuclear submarine force in the years ahead.

By 2030, the bulk of Russia’s nuclear-powered attack and cruise-missile submarines will be in their mid-thirties at least — with some pushing into their forties. For perspective, the three oldest active American attack submarines, the Los Angeles-class USS Dallas, Bremerton and Jacksonville, are all 36 years old and waiting to be decommissioned during the next three years.

Submarines wear out in old age, particularly due to hull corrosion. Another serious concern is corrosion affecting components inside the nuclear reactor compartments, but data surrounding this subject are tightly guarded secrets among the world’s navies.

More to the point, naval vessels staying in service during old age require more maintenance and longer rest periods. Given that only around half of Russia’s submarine force — a charitable estimate — can be at sea at any given time, a force made up of mostly old boats will strain operational readiness.

The Kremlin’s relatively new multi-role Yasen class, of which two — the Severodvinsk and Kazan — launched in 2010 and 2017 respectively, cannot make up for the future retirements of Russia’s 11 Akulas, three Sierras, four Victor III attackers and eight Oscar II cruise missile subs, which are all getting long in the tooth.

The youngest Akula class, Gepard, entered service in 2000. Most date to the early 1990s.

The Yasen is a late-Soviet design with seven planned submarines, with the last one planned to enter service in 2023. This is again being generous given the Yasen class’ enormous expense, which is twice as high as one of Russia’s new ballistic missile subs.

While Russia could attempt to keep its Cold War-era subs going as long as possible, “given the obvious risk of rising costs, Russia will be able to have no more than 50 percent of the current number of nuclear submarines [by 2030],” the Russian military blog BMPD warned in a particularly grim assessment.

Russia’s ballistic missile submarines will be in somewhat better shape in 2030. Few countries possess “boomers” capable of dumping nuclear warheads into enemy cities — the United States, India, China, France, the United Kingdom and North Korea. Russia currently has 13, including three from the new Borey class, with up to five more on the way.

But by 2030, Russia’s three Delta III, six Delta IV-class boomers and its one Typhoon class will all be at least 40 years old if they remain in service. Nevertheless, even if Russia scrapped these boats and only relied on its newer Boreys, no country can likely match them in numbers except for the United States, China and possibly India...
http://warisboring.com/a-grim-future-for-russias-nuclear-submarine-fleet/

Mark
Ottawa

 

[MarkOttawa]

Negative appreciation of state of Russian Navy:

Why Russia's Once Superpower Navy Is in Big Trouble

Over the past year, the Russian Navy has undertaken several high visibility operations, most notably the deployment of the aircraft carrier Admiral Kuznetsov off the coast of Syria, and the launch of cruise missiles from ships based in the Caspian Sea. Russian submarine activity has also increased, although not quite to the level seen in the Cold War.

But Moscow might be best advised to heed Matthew 26:41 where maritime adventures are concerned; “Watch and pray, that ye enter not into temptation: the spirit indeed is willing, but the flesh is weak.” The Russian Navy is a mess, and it will probably become more of a mess in the future.

Current Ships

The Russian Navy inherited a massive, modern fleet of surface ships and submarines. Most of these disappeared in short order, as Russia was incapable of maintaining such a flotilla. The remaining major units of the Russian Navy are very old, and in questionable states of repair. Of the twenty-four major surface combatants operated by the Russian Navy, three (the frigates of the Admiral Grigorovich class) were laid down after the end of the Cold War. Most of the holdouts from the Soviet Navy are approaching the end of their useful lifespans, although the Russians have made some effort at refitting and updating parts of the fleet.

How long the Russians can keep the aircraft carrier Admiral Kuznetsov in a kind of service without a major refit is up for serious question, but despite ambitious promises no replacement has been laid down. The nuclear battlecruiser Pyotr Velikiy has remained active for the past decade, and reports persist that Admiral Nakhimov will return to service in the next couple of years, but both ships are in excess of thirty years old.

Future Projects

If Moscow built every ship that they had promised to build over the past decade, then the Russian Navy would indeed become a world class fleet. The Russian national security state thrives on the announcement of big projects, but not so much on their fulfillment. The actual record of Russian surface ship construction is, by international standards, rather grim.

The biggest successes of Russian shipbuilding have been the Admiral Grigorovich (4,000 tons) and the Admiral Gorshkov (5,400 tons) frigates. The former have endured construction times of roughly seven years; the latter of nine or so years. Two Grigorovich frigates have entered service, with four more under construction. The first Gorshkov should enter service sometime later this year, with three more on the way.

By contrast, it took the British about six years to construct the Type 45 destroyers; the Americans about four for an Arleigh Burke; the Japanese four years for an Atago; and the Chinese about four for a Type 052D. All of these ships are roughly twice the size of the frigates Russia is struggling to complete [and RCN?].

The twelve ships of the Lider class, a proposed 17,000 ton destroyer, could easily replace the existing cruisers and destroyers of the fleet, but there is little indication that the Kremlin plans to lay these ships down, much less complete them in a reasonable timeframe...

Submarines

The strength of Russia’s position depends, to great extent, on an evaluation of the centrality of nuclear submarines to naval power. Nuclear submarines, in both their ballistic missile and attack variants, are really the only things that the Russian shipbuilding industry has done well since the end of the Cold War. While the size of the flotilla has dropped (thirteen SSBNs, seven SSGNs, seventeen SSNs and about twenty diesels, depending on what’s available that day), the Russian Navy has worked hard to ensure that replacements are on the way. The eight submarines of the Borei class (three in service, five under construction) should serve as a capable deterrent for the foreseeable future, and the seven Yasen class nuclear attack submarines provide a modern complement to Russia’s existing stock of Sierra, Oscar and Akula class subs...

[More links at original of this para] Robert Farley, a frequent contributor to TNI, is author of The Battleship Book. He serves as a Senior Lecturer at the Patterson School of Diplomacy and International Commerce at the University of Kentucky. His work includes military doctrine, national security, and maritime affairs. He blogs at Lawyers, Guns and Money and Information Dissemination and The Diplomat.
http://nationalinterest.org/blog/the-buzz/why-russias-once-superpower-navy-big-trouble-21796?page=show

Mark
Ottawa

 

[Eye In The Sky]

Plus on SSBN Borei-class front:

Mark
Ottawa

A later article on the Knyaz Vladimir :

Russia to Launch its Deadliest Ballistic Missile Submarine in August

The Russian Navy will float out an improved variant of its latest class of ballistic missile submarines in the summer.

The Russian Navy will launch the first advanced variant of the nuclear-powered ballistic missile submarine  (SSBN) Project 955A Borei II-class (“North Wind”) aka Dolgorukiy-class in August, the head of the Russian Navy, Admiral Vladimir Korolyov, announced on June 26 in Saint Petersburg, Russia.

The new boomer, christened Knyaz Vladimir (Prince Vladimir), will strengthen Russia’s sea-based nuclear deterrent, according to the admiral. “In August this year, the Severodvinsk-based Sevmash Shipyard will flout out the new Borei-class strategic underwater cruiser, the Prince Vladimir, which will strengthen the potential of the nuclear component of the Navy’s submarine fleet,” he said, TASS news agency reports.

The Knyaz Vladimir, the lead boat of the improved Borei II-class, was laid down in July 2012 at the Sevmash Shipyards in Severodvinsk, a port city on Russia’s White Sea, following a two year delay due to contract disputes between the Russian Ministry of Defense and the ship contractor, which pushed back the commissioning date of the ship from 2017 to 2018. The likely 2018 commissioning date was confirmed by Vice Admiral Viktor Bursuk, the deputy commander of the Russian Navy, in March.

The major difference between the Borei and Borei II-class is the latter’s capability to carry a much bigger nuclear payload, as I noted elsewhere (See: “Russia Will Start Constructing New Ballistic Missile Submarine in December”):


In comparison to the Borei-class, Borei II-class submarines are fitted with four additional missile tubes, boast smaller hulls and cons, and feature improved acoustics and lower sound levels, next to a number of other technical improvements.

Both variants of Borei-class subs will be armed with Bulava (RSM-56) intercontinental ballistic missiles (ICBMs). The Borei-class will be capable of carrying up to 16 Bulava ICBMs, whereas the improved Borei II-class can carry up to 20 ballistic missiles.

The improved variant of the Borei-class will be capable of launching 96-200 hypersonic, independently maneuverable warheads, yielding 100-150 kilotons apiece.

The Russian Navy plans to operate eight Borei-class SSBNs–three Borei-class and five improved Borei II-class boats–by 2o25. As of new, three Borei-class SSBNs have been commissioned to date with one submarine, the Yuri Dolgoruky, serving with the Northern Fleet and the remaining two–Alexander Nevsky and Vladimir Monomakh—deployed with Russia’s increasingly more active Pacific Fleet.

Next, to announcing the launch of the Knyaz Vladimir, Admiral Korolyov also told reporters on June 26 that Russia is developing a next-generation nuclear-powered submarines. “Along with this, work is already under way to develop fifth-generation nuclear-powered submarines,” the admiral said.

As I reported in June 2015, the new sub class will likely consist of two variants specifically designed for anti-submarine warfare and anti-surface warfare missions. “The main purpose of the [underwater interceptor] is to protect groups of [ballistic] missile carrying submarines, and to battle with enemy submarines. The second ship will be a cruise missile carrier [used] for defeating coastal and surface targets,” a senior Russian defense industry official said at the time.

 

[Eye In The Sky]

Article Link

Red October Revisited: Massive Submarine Hunt Along Norwegian Coast

After a series of agonizingly unsuccessful submarine hunts in Sweden, searching for Russian subs seems to have become one of the Nordics' favorite pastimes. Even now, an intense hunt for an alleged Russian submarine is taking place along Norway's coast.

In the past few weeks, NATO has been at pains to locate a state-of-the-art Russian submarine along the Norwegian coastline. The suspected target is the Kazan (K-561), recently launched at Sevmash shipyard in Severodvinsk, the Norwegian news outlet Aldrimer reported.

According to Aldrimer, the hunt features maritime resources from the US, Canada, France, Germany and Norway. Maritime patrol flights are being carried out from Norway's Andøya and Bodø, Keflavik in Iceland, Lossiemouth in Scotland and also from French territory.

NATO defense sources told Aldrimer that the purpose of the extensive flights is to trace the current location of the Kazan, a Russian nuclear-powered Yasen-class submarine launched on March 31 this year. The same sources ventured that NATO completely lost track of the Russian submarine, which was rumored to have been monitoring the US-UK North Atlantic exercise Saxon Warrior 2017.

According to Aldrimer, the US and the UK have contributed the USS George H.W. Bush and the HMS Queen Elizabeth aircraft carriers, alongside a number of frigates, missile cruisers and a destroyer. Meanwhile, the Norwegian Navy contributed the KNM Helge Ingstad frigate to the search party. The US, Canada and France are responsible for scouting the southern parts of the search area, whereas Norway and Germany jointly run P-3C Orion surveillance aircraft in areas north of Andøya. The P-3C were previously revealed to be struggling with submarine detection.

The Twitter account MIL_Radar, which regularly reports on military aviation movements, recently published a map chart over the North Atlantic, which allegedly only reflected a small part of the operation. When confronted with the graphics and asked to clarify whether a submarine hunt was underway along the Norwegian coast, the Norwegian Armed Forces Operational Headquarters (FOH) declined to comment.

https://twitter.com/MIL_Radar/status/902218958207672321

The Kazan's predecessor, the Severodvinsk, which also became the flagship of the Yasen-class, has a submerged displacement of 13,800 tons, a length of 119 meters, can travel up to 31 knots per hour, even in submerged mode, and can dive to 600 meters.

Yasen-class submarines are widely regarded as being fearsome opponents with no adequate counterparts and are far quieter compared with older-generation Russian submarines. Russia plans to have at least eight Yasen class cruise-missile carrying attack vessels in its submarine fleet.

 

[MarkOttawa]

Russian navy, cruise missiles and deterrence, conventional and nuclear (NORAD, RCAF and RCN [ASW and surface-to-air missile capabilities on CSC] note):

The Russian Navy Is Relying More on Precision-Guided Weapons
And less on nukes for deterrence
By Dave Majumdar

The Russian navy will be focusing more effort on fielding new long-range precision-guided weapons as a form of non-nuclear strategic deterrence, reducing Moscow’s reliance on so-called “tactical” nuclear forces. Nonetheless, Russian forces are likely to retain significant non-strategic nuclear forces indefinitely into the foreseeable future.

“The Navy General Command will particularly focus on forming strategic non-nuclear deterrence groups that will include vessels armed with long-range precision weapons, as well as on improving the system of naval bases and ensuring balanced supply of weapons and munitions,” Commander-in-Chief Admiral Vladimir Korolyov told the TASS news agency.

The shift is a significant departure from previous policy, notes former Soviet and Russian arms control negotiator Nikolai Sokov, now a senior fellow at the James Martin Center for Nonproliferation Studies at the Middlebury Institute of International Studies at Monterey.

“From a broader perspective this looks like a significant development because historically the Russian navy has been the greatest proponent of non-strategic nuclear weapons: they said they cannot face U.S. Navy without them,” Sokov told The National Interest.

“Now they not only have new weapons, but, more importantly, a new mission; new and more capable weapons will emerge eventually.”

“Moreover, weapons are usable and, perhaps even more importantly, can be deployed on a broad range of platforms, including those that have never carried nuclear weapons (big help to the Russian naval program — small vessels can be very tangible and it’s easier to cut funding for big-ticket items).”

However, while the new Russian development is significant, Moscow will still rely on its nuclear forces to some extent.

“This is part of an overall Russian strategy to bolster its conventional deterrence, and ability to retaliate with long range conventional weapons,” said Michael Kofman, a research scientist specializing in Russian military affairs at the Center for Naval Analysis.

“However it does not obviate the navy’s role in escalation control with non-strategic nuclear weapons as clearly stipulated in the naval doctrine signed in 2017.”

Russia’s conventional deterrence will be used in conjunction with its nuclear forces. “The two are not exclusive but complementary pursuits, as the former (non-nuclear deterrence) is intended to deter the U.S. from leveraging its conventional superiority, while the latter (nuclear deterrence with Non-Strategic Nuclear Weapons [NSNW]) is intended for escalation control [emphasis added].”

Indeed, all of Russia’s new long-range precision-guided weapons are dual nuclear and conventional capable weapons. “The missiles are the same, the difference is solely in the payload,” Kofman said. “You can logically assume that nuclear-tipped missiles will have substantially longer ranges [emphasis added, really?].”..
https://warisboring.com/the-russian-navy-is-relying-more-on-precision-guided-weapons/

Mark
Ottawa

 

[jollyjacktar]

Very interesting ship.

https://youtu.be/E4iZv_Mjl0A

 

[MarkOttawa]

NATO and US Navy reacting to Russians and North Atlantic (e.g. growing nuked SLCM threat)--presume RCN will be represented at Norfolk:

'Great power competition': Nato announces Atlantic command to counter Russia
US to reactivate its Second Fleet and host new naval command in Norfolk, Virginia, amid rising tensions with Moscow

Amid rising tensions with Russia, the Pentagon has announced the official launch of a new naval command and the reactivation of the US Second Fleet to bolster the US and Nato presence in the Atlantic Ocean.

“The return to great power competition and a resurgent Russia demands that Nato refocus on the Atlantic to ensure dedicated reinforcement of the continent and demonstrate a capable and credible deterrence effect,” said Johnny Michael, a Pentagon spokesman. He said the new Nato command “will be the linchpin of trans-Atlantic security”.

The decision reflects escalating worries across Europe and within Nato over Russia’s increased military presence and patrols in the Atlantic region. Under the new plan, the US will set up Nato’s new Atlantic Command headquarters in Norfolk, Virginia.

Outlines of the plan were approved at the February meeting of Nato defence ministers as part of a broader effort to ensure the security of the sea lanes and lines of communication between Europe and North America. Nato secretary general Jens Stoltenberg told reporters at the time: “We have seen a much more assertive Russia, we have seen a Russia which has over many years invested heavily in their military capabilities, modernized their military capabilities, which are exercising not only conventional forces but also nuclear forces.”

He said the new Atlantic Command would be vital for the alliance to be able to respond. Nato also created a new logistics command, which is expected to be located in Germany.

At the same time, the US navy is re-establishing its Second Fleet command, which was was merged with the navy’s Fleet Forces command in 2011 to cut costs. The command will oversee ships, aircraft and landing forces on the east coast and northern Atlantic Ocean, and will be responsible for training forces and conducting maritime operations in the region.

Restarting the command was recommended in the navy study done following the two deadly ship collisions in 2017 that killed a total of 17 sailors. Admiral John Richardson, the chief of naval operations, said the move comes as the security environment “continues to grow more challenging and complex”.
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2018/may/05/great-power-competition-nato-announces-atlantic-command-to-counter-russia?CMP=Share_iOSApp_Other

More:

Navy Reestablishes U.S. 2nd Fleet to Face Russian Threat; Plan Calls for 250 Person Command in Norfolk
https://news.usni.org/2018/05/04/navy-reestablishes-2nd-fleet-plan-calls-for-250-person-command-in-norfolk

From June 2016:

USN “Admiral Warns: Russian Subs Waging Cold War-Style ‘Battle of the Atlantic’”–and RCN?

Further to this post and the “Comments” on Russian subs (note cruise missile threat to North America)...
https://cgai3ds.wordpress.com/2016/06/03/mark-collins-usn-admiral-warns-russian-subs-waging-cold-war-style-battle-of-the-atlantic-and-rcn/

Mark
Ottawa

 

[MarkOttawa]

Hunting for Red October and cruise-missile subs--re-created USN Second Fleet to the Arctic and Russian SSBN havens (implications for NORAD):

CNO: New 2nd Fleet Boundary Will Extend North to the Edge of Russian Waters

ABOARD AIRCRAFT CARRIER USS GEORGE H.W. BUSH – The boundaries of the Navy’s reestablished U.S. 2nd Fleet extends well past the old submarine stomping grounds of the Cold War and into waters north of Scandinavia and the Arctic Circle, near the submarine headquarters of Russia’s Northern Fleet, Chief of Naval Operations John Richardson said on Friday.

“A new 2nd Fleet increases our strategic flexibility to respond — from the Eastern Seaboard to the Barents Sea,” Richardson said. “Second Fleet will approach the North Atlantic as one continuous operational space, and conduct expeditionary fleet operations where and when needed.”

Richardson and new 2nd Fleet commander Vice Adm. Andrew Lewis stressed the standup of the new command was a reflection of the National Defense Strategy from Secretary of Defense James Mattis that signaled a return to “great power competition” with nation-states, rather than the low-intensity ground wars the U.S. has waged since 2001...

Former Deputy Secretary of Defense Bob Work told USNI News on Friday the extension of the boundary to Russia’s doorstep was in line with the new Mattis-led strategy.

“This truly is about great power competition and demonstrating it to the great powers that we can operate in waters nearby when and where we chose to do so. It’s signaling we’re here. We’re ready to go,” Work said.
“In China we have a rival that is really has a full-spectrum naval capability. The Russians truly are more of an undersea competitor. The best way to get there is to operate in those grounds close to them and not let them break out into the open ocean.”

...Richardson declined to talk to reporters about specific Russian capabilities he views as threats. However, it’s well known the Russian Navy has invested heavily in its attack submarine fleet and its new Kalibir land strike missile with about a 1,000-mile range...

https://news.usni.org/2018/08/24/cno-new-2nd-fleet-boundary-will-extend-north-edge-russian-waters

Mark
Ottawa

 

[MarkOttawa]

Anyone seriously expect any large-scale reinforcing by sea of NATO Europe would actually occur?

How Russia’s Sub-Launched Missiles Threaten NATO’s Wartime Strategy

NATO used to worry that Soviet subs would decimate supply convoys and carrier battle groups. Now Russia can simply wreck ports from afar.

Three years ago, the Russian submarine Rostov-na-Donu wrapped up its sea trials by firing a few test missiles in the Barents Sea. This is not particularly unusual; such tests are sometimes conducted just off the Norwegian coast, close enough to be seen by the NATO ally’s border guards. Nor was it unusual for the newly commissioned attack submarine to head off toward its new homeport, Sevastopol in annexed Crimea, home of Russia’s Black Sea fleet.

The unusual part came in early December, when the improved Kilo-class submarine began to loiter off Syria — and on Dec. 8, unleashed a volley of Kalibr cruise missiles against what Moscow alleged were ISIS targets ashore.

The cruise missile attack itself counted for little in the Syrian civil war, where both Russia and the U.S.-led coalition have been pounding targets from the air with missiles and bombs for years. But it signaled that Russia had joined the small global club that can deliver no-notice long-range strikes from the relative safety of the underwater domain. This technological achievement has game-changing implications for NATO and America’s ability to come to the aid of its European allies if Russia and the transatlantic alliance ever comes to blows in Europe...
https://www.defenseone.com/ideas/2018/10/how-russias-sub-launched-missiles-threaten-natos-wartime-strategy/151803/

Mark
Ottawa

 

[GR66]

Anyone seriously expect any large-scale reinforcing by sea of NATO Europe would actually occur?

Mark
Ottawa

Wouldn't it?  Are you saying that you don't foresee any need for the US to reinforce NATO (there isn't a realistic threat from Russia), you don't think that the US would reinforce NATO (political decision not to get involved) or that the reinforcement would be by air instead of by sea?

If the last I'd like to know from more knowledgeable people if that would be accurate.  It's a very long flight from the US to say Poland (or Japan, or the Middle East, etc.) and I imagine the very long flights with high fuel requirements would put a major strain on US strategic airlift assets (both crews and aircraft) to transport troops, vehicles, munitions, etc. in order to reinforce and then sustain a major ground war.

I would think that a more logical approach would be to use sealift to get the materials closer to the conflict zone (Atlantic coast of Europe, Japan, Guam, Saudi Arabia, etc.) then focus your airlift on shorter hops toward the front.  Just a total speculation though on my part.

 

[CBH99]

I would think your right.  You can move A LOT more vehicles, ammo, fuel, and supplies on those massive cargo ships than you ever could with a C-17. 

Why move one Abrams when you could move 50?  Why move 4 Humvees when you could move 100?  or 200?


I would think there WOULD be large scale reinforcement of Europe/NATO via the Atlantic.  Between the US, Canada, and all of the EU countries relying on those reinforcements - I'm thinking the Atlantic would be a fairly high priority to control.  It's the "highway" between the western countries of North America & the western countries of Europe - I'm thinking that highway between the 2 would be kept fairly clear of enemy assets. 

Also agree, Russia isn't a realistic threat.  Could they disrupt?  Sure.  Full scale naval war?  Their fleets are too widely dispersed in the various seas to go toe to toe with the US, Canadian, British, French, Italian, Danish, Finnish, etc etc fleets.  On or below the surface.

 

[MarkOttawa]

More on the US re-inforcing NATO Europe by sea:

‘You’re on your own’: US sealift can’t count on US Navy escorts in the next big war

In the event of a major war with China or Russia, the U.S. Navy, almost half the size it was during the height of the Cold War, is going to be busy with combat operations. It may be too busy, in fact, to always escort the massive sealift effort it would take to transport what the Navy estimates will be roughly 90 percent of the Marine Corps and Army gear the force would need to sustain a major conflict.

That’s the message Mark Buzby, the retired rear admiral who now leads the Department of Transportation’s Maritime Administration, has gotten from the Navy, and it’s one that has instilled a sense of urgency around a major cultural shift inside the force of civilian mariners that would be needed to support a large war effort.

“The Navy has been candid enough with Military Sealift Command and me that they will probably not have enough ships to escort us. It’s: ‘You’re on your own; go fast, stay quiet,’” Buzby told Defense News in an interview earlier this year...
https://www.defensenews.com/naval/2018/10/10/youre-on-your-own-us-sealift-cant-count-on-us-navy-escorts-in-the-next-big-war-forcing-changes/

Mark
Ottawa

 

[GR66]

All the more reason for Canada to increase the number of escort ships we have.  It would also be a contribution recognized and valued by the US.

 

[Eye In The Sky]

There is more to contend with than Russian surface and sub-surface;  naval air.  The 3 combined are somewhat more capable than I think most people give them credit for.  1 unlocated Oscar is a significant threat on it's own.

Any major reinforcing across the pond would likely involve both sea and air assets.  Will it ever happen?  Likely not but they are contingency plans for it regardless.

 

[CBH99]

This is true, and in the case of conflict with China - especially near it's territory - I think that's a bigger threat.


Lets keep in mind the Russian carrier may or may not even be able to get underway, and may or may not be able to conduct flight operations.

That's not a slant against them or the crew.  It's an old ship, and as Syria showed us, it has enough difficulty generating sorties without an adversary hunting for it.  I don't know how much of a role Russian naval air would play in any Atlantic conflict.

 

[MarkOttawa]

NORAD/missile defence implications for RCN, RCAF:

Russia’s Newest Yasen-Class Attack Submarines Are the Equal of America's Subs

Russia has had a lot of wonder weapons in the news, from combat walkers to nuclear-powered cruise missiles. Many of these weapons verge on the ridiculous or are the product of propaganda, but some are legitimately concerning. One scenario that keeps Pentagon planners up at night: the threat of sea-launched cruise missiles, ferried halfway across the Atlantic by Russia’s new submarines, threading their way through American airspace to deliver their deadly nuclear warheads on unsuspecting targets. Welcome to the new Yasen-class submarines...

One such project was the Project 855 nuclear-powered cruise missile submarine, or Yasen-class. The first ship in the class, Severodvinsk, was laid down in December 1993. Just three years later, Moscow halted construction due to a lack of funds with only a third of the hull completed. The submarine finally entered service in 2014 as Russia’s first truly modern nuclear attack submarine of the post-Cold War era.

Severodvinsk is a big submarine. She is approximately 393 feet long and displaces 11,800 tons submerged. An OK-650KPM pressurized-water nuclear reactor provides 200 megawatts of power, driving her to speeds up to 31 knots submerged. A Irtysh-Amfora sonar system provides near all-around sonar coverage, with a bow-mounted spherical sonar array, flank arrays on the hull of the submarine, and a towed sonar array dragged from the rear of the submarine while moving.

The Yasen-class combat systems are formidable, with ten 533-millimeter torpedo tubes armed with UGST-M heavyweight guided torpedoes. The weapon systems of greatest concern to Western analysts however are the eight multipurpose vertical launch tubes behind the sail. These launch tubes can accommodate P-800 Oniks missiles, ramjet-powered ship killers that in the final moments of an attack speed up to a blistering Mach 2.5, all the while staying as low as 16 feet above the wavetops.

Basically, a surprise attack by a Yasen armed with Oniks missiles would give U.S. carrier strike groups little time to react.

Another weapon that fits in the vertical launch tubes: Kalibr land attack cruise missiles. Similar to the American Tomahawk cruise missile, Russia has launched several waves of Kalibr missiles from submarines and surface ships against Islamic State targets in Syria. Kalibr missiles are also nuclear tipped. The first Yasen submarine, Severodvinsk, can carry up to 40 Kalibr cruise missiles while the second, Kazan, can carry 32. The result is a potent potential first strike platform.

For years, Russia has tried to devise a means of bypassing American ballistic missile defenses. Even though U.S. defenses are oriented against smaller states like Iran and North Korea, the Russians believe the potential exists for Washington to scale up its defenses to the point where they could threaten Moscow’s nuclear deterrent. If Washington can shoot down Russia’s missiles, that’s not much of a nuclear deterrent.

U.S. missile defense efforts are concentrated against high-flying ballistic missiles. Cruise missiles like Kalibr on the other hand fly a low, terrain-hugging profile to evade early warning radars. Russia’s implied threat in fielding nuclear-tipped cruise missiles is that no matter what kind of missile defenses the U.S. deploys, Russia will seek to go around them.

The problem with missiles like Kalibr is that they could easily be nuclear first-strike weapons. Kalibr has a range of 1,600 miles. As submarine expert H.I. Sutton, author of World Submarines: Covert Shores Recognition Guide, points out, a Type 855 submarine armed with Kalibr missiles “could target East Coast U.S. cities from the mid-Atlantic.”

Submarines with Kalibr missiles could launch decapitation strikes against key government targets across the United States, crippling the ability of U.S. strategic forces to retaliate. The closer the launching submarine can get to the U.S. mainland, the deeper the cruise missiles can fly into North America and the harder it is to stop them [emphasis added]...
https://foxtrotalpha.jalopnik.com/russia-s-newest-yasen-class-attack-submarines-are-the-e-1829644713

Mark
Ottawa

 

[MarkOttawa]

USN P-8s sub-hunting (mostly) from Alaska (as well as Iceland), mainly interested in Russkies I imagine but also to keep eye out for Chinese in north:

Navy Looking To Fly P-8s From Cold War-era Base In Alaska

The Navy may begin deploying submarine-hunting P-8 Poseidon aircraft to a small airstrip hundreds of miles off the Alaskan coast, signaling a new emphasis on keeping watch over Russian and Chinese moves in the Arctic.

The remote runway sits on the island of Adak in the Aleutian island chain, and is the westernmost airfield that can handle passenger aircraft in the United States — in fact, it currently handles Air Alaska flights two days a week.

Formally known as Naval Air Facility Adak, the small airport has been operating commercially since the Navy moved out in 1997, but increasing Russian and Chinese activity in the Arctic has the Navy looking at new patrols as it searches for ways to keep a closer watch on the far north.

Navy officials previously estimated that reopening the base would cost around $1.3 billion, but Navy Secretary Richard Spencer indicated Wednesday at a joint hearing of the Senate subcommittees on sea power and readiness and management that he isn’t looking to reopen the entire facility.

“The airstrip is in great shape,” Spencer said after the hearing when I asked about flying aircraft from the island. The Navy would likely have to pay to clean up one of the hangers, but the airport “has a fuel farm up there that Air Alaska is using to fuel its planes, it has de-icing platforms that we could use for fresh water washdowns for the P-8. They have lodging up there that is supposedly coming forward to us on a rental availability, so it really isn’t a big bill.” 
Navy photo

Navy Secretary Richard Spencer speaks to sailors.

In recent years the US has spent millions of dollars to fix up another Cold War-era airfield — Naval Air Station Keflavik in Iceland — to accommodate P-8s to keep watch on Russian submarine activity in the North Atlantic between Greenland, Iceland, and the United Kingdom. The waterway — dubbed the GIUK Gap — is the primary outlet for Russian subs moving from their northern ports into the Atlantic [emphasis added].

The Pentagon has grown increasingly concerned over ceding ground to Russia and China in the Arctic, as both countries are outpacing the US in building icebreakers to help move ships and supplies to far-flung outposts as the region’s ice disappears due to global warming.

Spencer told lawmakers “our Russian friends are warming up five airstrips and 10,000 Spetsnaz troops [in the Arctic] for quote unquote search and rescue. The Chinese are up there. Everybody is up there.”

“Everybody but us,” retorted Alaska Sen. Dan Sullivan...

The Navy isn’t the only service looking to beef up its presence in Alaska. The Air Force suggested recently it is looking to move some of the F-22s made homeless after Hurricane Michael battered Tyndall Air Base in Florida to Alaska’s Joint Base Elmendorf-Richardson [emphasis added]...

Adak, a 3-hour flight west from Anchorage deep in the Bering Sea, would allow US aircraft to not only push deeper and more consistently into the Arctic, but give US spy planes a new base from which to keep an eye on Russia’s Pacific Fleet and the increasing number of Chinese subs prowling the Pacific [emphasis added]...
https://breakingdefense.com/2018/12/navy-looking-to-fly-p-8s-from-cold-war-era-base-in-alaska/

How focused on sub-hunting in North Atlantic will RCN and RCAF be in future?

Mark
Ottawa

 

[MarkOttawa]

One trusts USN thinking mainly of NATO's European Arctic:

The Navy Is Gearing Up for 'Leaner, Agile' Operations in Arctic, North Atlantic

This is not your grandfather's 2nd Fleet.

The Navy's newest combatant command will be "leaner, agile and more expeditionary" than the U.S. 2nd Fleet that was deactivated in 2011, Rear Adm. John Mustin, the fleet's deputy commander, told attendants Wednesday at the Surface Navy Association's annual symposium.

The 2nd Fleet, which the Navy re-established in May, is designed to assert U.S. presence in the Atlantic and support operations in the North Atlantic and Arctic. While its actual makeup is still in the works, it is expected to reach initial operational capability this summer.

When it does, it will be a small fighting force [emphasis added] that has taken lessons from the service's overseas fleets and II Marine Expeditionary Force, Mustin said.

"The focus of 2nd Fleet is to develop and dynamically employ maritime forces ready to fight across multiple domains in the Atlantic and Arctic," he said.

According to the service, the fleet will serve as the maneuver arm for U.S. Navy North in the Western Atlantic, "ensuring freedom of the sea, lines of communication and executing operational missions and exercises as assigned."

It also will serve as a maneuver arm for U.S. Naval Forces Europe in the Eastern and North Atlantic.

The idea is that the fleet will focus on force employment, capable of deploying rapidly, regardless of area of operations.

"When I say lean, what does that mean? The staff complement is organized and billeted to be operational. The majority of staff will focus on operations, intelligence, plans and training," Mustin said.

The Navy first established the 2nd Fleet in the 1950s, a response to deter Soviet interest in the Atlantic, especially Europe. It was disbanded in 2011, and most of its assets and personnel were folded into Fleet Forces Command.

But growing concern over potential Russian dominance in the North Atlantic and Arctic prompted Chief of Naval Operations Adm. John Richardson to reactivate the unit [emphasis added].

2nd Fleet version 2.0, however, won't look much like its historic predecessor.

Mustin said the command staff will be small, currently consisting of 85 members. The full number is still being determined, a 2nd Fleet spokeswoman said.

And while technically it will be headquartered in Norfolk, Virginia, Mustin said sailors can expect that it will have the ability to deploy its command-and-control element forward, with a small team operating forward from a command ship or "austere offshore location."

The command also will integrate reserve forces on an as-needed basis and bolster its staff with personnel from allied nations, he added [emphasis added, RCN?].

"This is not your grandfather's 2nd Fleet or, as my staff likes to point out, my father's 2nd Fleet," Mustin said.

It will resemble overseas fleets, he said, which means it will become responsible for forces entering the integrated phase of composite unit training exercises, and "we will own them through deployment and sustainment."

The ships will fall under operational control of U.S. Fleet Forces Command, but tactical control will be delegated to 2nd Fleet [emphasis added].

Standing up a fleet within a year has been a challenge, Mustin said, but there's excitement surrounding the concept. He noted that many surface warfare officers interested in being assigned to the command had approached him at the symposium.

"It's fast and furious, but we are getting there," he said.

At the symposium, some observers questioned how integration will work with other naval fleets with overlapping areas of responsibility.

Vice Adm. Lisa Franchetti, commander of 6th Fleet, said the integration will be seamless.

"Our idea is not to make a line in the water. When you make lines, adversaries exploit them. Our idea is to figure out how to flow forces and how to address anything that flows our way," she said.
https://www.military.com/daily-news/2019/01/16/navy-gearing-leaner-agile-operations-arctic-north-atlantic.html

Mark
Ottawa

 

[Retired AF Guy]

Interesting video about the Russian Akula class submarines.

http://www.thedrive.com/the-war-zone/26261/video-takes-you-inside-russias-beast-devision-of-akula-class-nuclear-fast-attack-subs