Russian fleet sailing in to the North sea [Archive]

sandiego89

18th Oct 2016, 19:38

So do we have anything to deal with it if it were hostile?

What can we use to shadow it??

I assume by we you mean UK, and although much diminished the UK still has submarines and surface assets that are capable of responding to both of your questions. True not as robust as before with the loss of MPA, smaller fleet and diminished dedicated maritime attack aircraft.

Shadowing is doable with a variety of surface and sub-surface assets. This deployment will also be tracked very closely by other nations, so I am sure their location will be quite well known, and help could be requested...

TEEEJ

18th Oct 2016, 19:59

The Tug Nikolay Chiker assigned to the carrier task force was at the following positon as of 17 GMT

60.52707N 3.32093E

Map Link

https://goo.gl/maps/aYfAKFVHJjv

Vessel details for: NIKOLAY CHIKER (Tug) - IMO 8613334, MMSI 273531629, Call Sign RAL 48 Registered in Russia | AIS Marine Traffic (http://www.marinetraffic.com/en/ais/details/ships/shipid:4404011/mmsi:273531629/imo:8613334/vessel:NIKOLAY_CHIKER)

racedo

18th Oct 2016, 20:02

Woolwich Ferries are offline tomorrow as they are tasked with shadowing Russians for 60 miles.

Does RN still have more Admirals than Vesssels ?

Jimlad1

18th Oct 2016, 20:10

Christ on a bike, not the tired old 'more admirals than ships' line again. It wasnt funny in the 17th century, and it isn't funny (or true) now. Hey ho...

The fact the Russians need to deploy a rescue tug with their carrier (something no other nation feels the need to do) should tell you all you need to know.

10 DME ARC

18th Oct 2016, 20:21

I remember sitting in the VCR one cold winters morning at Sumburgh and as it got light finding a Russian destroyer moored in a bay! Been shadowing a NATO exercise but had asked to come in to ride out a storm!

Pontius Navigator

18th Oct 2016, 20:40

We almost went to war as a result of Russian Naval incursions in 1904

TEEEJ

18th Oct 2016, 21:32

NOTAM for Kuznetsov flight ops Wed 19th October until Fri 21st October.

RECEIVED FROM MAIN AIR TRAFFIC MANAGMENT CENTER OF RUSSIA: RUSSIAN NAVY TRAINING FLTS IN HIGH SEA AREA OF THE NORTH SEA PSN 6300N 00000E - 6300N 00400E - 6150N 00300E - 6150N 00000E - (6300N 00000E)

LOWER: Surface, UPPER: FL180

FROM: 19 Oct 2016 07:00 GMT (09:00 CEST) TO: 21 Oct 2016 16:00 GMT (18:00 CEST)

SCHEDULE: DAILY 0700-1600

Map for NOTAM area off Norway.

http://i66.photobucket.com/albums/h261/TOMMYJO/Kuznetsovflightops.jpg

Google translate of the following link

The Russian Navy has notified the Civil Aviation Authority that they will train on aircraft operations in international airspace west of Floro from Wednesday morning.

Alerted three days of exercises
But Wednesday morning it is expected that the eight vessels slowing down the pace. The Russians have warned the Norwegian authorities that they will practice in an area of about 20,000 square kilometers, in international waters off the coast of Sogn og Fjordane.

The Civil Aviation Administration has been notified of activity up to 17,000 feet from seven o'clock Wednesday morning, and in three days.

From link in Norwegian.

Russerne vil øve med fly i Nordsjøen fra onsdag morgen - Russland - VG (http://www.vg.no/nyheter/innenriks/russland/russerne-vil-oeve-med-fly-i-nordsjoeen-fra-onsdag-morgen/a/23823619/)

noflynomore

18th Oct 2016, 21:35

I think even at the time the "Dogger Bank Incident" to which you allude was recognised as nothing more sinister than grotesque incompetence on the part of the Czar's Navy.
From a lengthy and fairly vigorous gun exchange in which Russian Battleships en route to Japan to do war with the Emperor there came across the Hull trawler fleet and mistook them for Japanese torpedo boats (yes, seriously! On the Dogger Bank!) and ended up enthusiastically shelling each other for some while (1 trawler sunk, 2 fishermen killed) our Russian heroes went on through fiasco after fiasco to Japan where Togo sunk the entire fleet bar 2 or 3 ships. 35 or so left Petrograd. 3 returned. One, the Aurora, the Flagship broke out of the Jap blockade and heroically made it home and remains a museum ship to this day - she fired the shot that signalled the start of this week's associated problems - the Russian Revolution.

The Russian Navy has a lot of ground to make up...

Fishermen, keep yer heids doon!

NutLoose

18th Oct 2016, 22:44

I wonder if they ever paid royalties for the ski jump they have on their carrier. If memory serves me correctly didn't a naval Lt Cmdr. Taylor come up with the idea, but patented it under his wife's name thus meaning they got royalty payments from it?

Fonsini

19th Oct 2016, 01:01

Apart from a few Harpoons on the Type 23s what do we have left in the arsenal in the way of anti-ship missiles ? Sea Eagle is gone, Sea Skua is for rowing boats and by all accounts well past its sell by date, and the Exocets are gone.

Things seem a little thin in the "sinking things" area, or is it just an over-reliance on submarines ?

glad rag

19th Oct 2016, 02:49

pity their boats weren't made by Toyota......:E

A_Van

19th Oct 2016, 05:32

Don't you follow the news? These old tubs seem to move to Mediterranean. No interest in UK or intentions to threat anybody. After that Kuznetsov is scheduled to get (a long lasting) maintenance at its home base.

Mil-26Man

19th Oct 2016, 07:02

We've been at.peace with Russia since the 1850s.

Nope - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/North_Russia_Intervention

And although never 'hot', the Cold War can hardly be characterised as peace (the clue is in the name).

Heathrow Harry

19th Oct 2016, 07:14

Van is correct - the Admiral fancies some autumn sunshine - starting to get cold and dark in Murmansk.....................

Union Jack

19th Oct 2016, 09:26

We've been at peace with Russia since the 1850s. - Jimlad1

Except for Berwick-upon-Tweed allegedly, according to some sources, which only signed a "peace treaty" with Russia in 1966, vide Myth Or Reality? Berwick Revisits Its 'War With Russia' | Culture24 (http://www.culture24.org.uk/history-and-heritage/art38768) :ok:

Jack

Tankertrashnav

19th Oct 2016, 09:38

Lordflasheart - Google translate gave me this for "hands to flying stations" but I think your version worked very well :ok:

руки летающих станций

Heathrow Harry

19th Oct 2016, 11:39

"Except for Berwick-upon-Tweed allegedly, according to some sources,"

I can remember it being on TV when a diplomat went to Berwick and handed over a letter saying thry weren't going to invade - must have been in the early '60's.........

JonnyT1978

19th Oct 2016, 13:05

Maybe they have a rogue Typhoon class submarine with a commander who wishes to defect?

TelsBoy

19th Oct 2016, 13:13

Ivan in the North Sea at the same time as Join Warrior - not exactly a coincidence.

Perhaps Morayvia can get the old Nimrod hanging about Kinloss airworthy and use it to keep an eye on them :E

Not_a_boffin

19th Oct 2016, 13:50

According to Auntie, "Russian submarines (this one pictured passing the Norwegian island of Andoya) would typically help protect the larger ships"

http://ichef.bbci.co.uk/news/624/cpsprodpb/1377A/production/_91983797_submarine.jpg

Allegedly taken off Andoya on Monday. If accurate, one might suspect that boat isn't going too far further south.......or someone has called the skippers pint a puff, with perhaps unforeseen consequences.....

racedo

19th Oct 2016, 14:00

Nope - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/North_Russia_Intervention

And although never 'hot', the Cold War can hardly be characterised as peace (the clue is in the name).

Knew a man when I was growing up who participated in Allied actions in Russia in that time.

racedo

19th Oct 2016, 14:03

The fact the Russians need to deploy a rescue tug with their carrier (something no other nation feels the need to do) should tell you all you need to know.

Wouldn't get too carried away on that one after all our T45's were all tied up in Portsmouth because of issues in design a short while ago.

Russians prepare for every eventuality.

Jimlad1

19th Oct 2016, 16:25

Wouldn't get too carried away on that one after all our T45's were all tied up in Portsmouth because of issues in design a short while ago.

Russians prepare for every eventuality.

Actually that is a falshehood on the T45 issue. They were alongside for a number of reasons, not least summer leave! They were not all alongside for mechanical reasons.

163627

19th Oct 2016, 19:35

More Admirals than ships?

It all depends on how one defines "ship" in this context. Taken from a recent written answer to a Parlimentary question the RN presently has: 40 Admirals; 80 Commodores; 290 Captains; 1060 Commanders; 2000 Lieutenant Commanders; 2510 Lieutenants and 750 Sub-Lietenenants. Which does appear to be a little top-heavy for the number of ships the RN presently has. In particular the 80 Commodores and 290 Captains when taking account of the fact that the majority of warships are commanded by an officer of Commander rank or below and as far as I'm aware there is now only one (part-time) sea going post for an officer of 1* or above. Is Parkinson's law alive and well and living within the RN?

Lonewolf_50

19th Oct 2016, 19:39

Not a Boffin: my old recognition training says "SSBN, Delta Class" but I can't tell if it's a Delta II or a Delta III.

Not_a_boffin

19th Oct 2016, 21:01

Suspect it's a IV. On the surface. With a tube hatch open. Not recommended......

ETOPS

19th Oct 2016, 21:55

Interestingly Richmond went AIS dark after leaving Tynemouth this afternoon - how are we armchair admirals meant to follow Ivan ??

racedo

19th Oct 2016, 21:55

Actually that is a falshehood on the T45 issue. They were alongside for a number of reasons, not least summer leave! They were not all alongside for mechanical reasons.

Good job the wars never start when people are on summer leave then............

racedo

19th Oct 2016, 21:58

It all depends on how one defines "ship" in this context. Taken from a recent written answer to a Parlimentary question the RN presently has: 40 Admirals; 80 Commodores; 290 Captains; 1060 Commanders; 2000 Lieutenant Commanders; 2510 Lieutenants and 750 Sub-Lietenenants. Which does appear to be a little top-heavy for the number of ships the RN presently has. In particular the 80 Commodores and 290 Captains when taking account of the fact that the majority of warships are commanded by an officer of Commander rank or below and as far as I'm aware there is now only one (part-time) sea going post for an officer of 1* or above. Is Parkinson's law alive and well and living within the RN?

Could almost pay for a decent pay rise for the Junior ranks if had a decent cull of senior officers.

TEEEJ

20th Oct 2016, 00:12

Norwegian media are reporting that the Russians ended the flight ops early and have moved further south.

But by 12 o'clock enlightened Joint Headquarters TV 2 that the Russians seem to have dropped exercise. War ships were then in the North Sea at Shetland, heading towards the English Channel. Ship manager at the Norwegian frigate KNM "Fridtjof Nansen" confirms to TV 2.

- The Russian vessels sailed into British economic zone earlier today and is now in international waters east of Shetland, said Commander Daniel Thomassen.

Google translate from Norwegian media link.

Russerne avbrøt øvelse i Norskehavet - nå er de på vei sørover mot Syria (http://www.tv2.no/a/8669066/)

recceguy

20th Oct 2016, 11:28

Some people call the Russian fleet a "flottilla"...

Actually the "Piotr Veliky" is the biggest battlecruiser in the world. I would like to be in the Channel the next couple of day, to see the tiny RN frigate bobbling in the wake of the Russian battleship...
The days of hunting the Bismarck are over - especially without maritime patrol aircraft (and aircraft carriers, of course) Fortunately the French Navy will be there to once the Dutch and Norwegians have left.

Bing

20th Oct 2016, 11:30

It's odd, going by another thread on here aircraft carriers are an obsolete waste of resources, and yet someone sails one with about six aircraft on past Dover and suddenly it's the end of the world.

Mortmeister

20th Oct 2016, 11:31

sir

20th Oct 2016, 11:52

????? ?????????? ???????? ? ????? - ???????????? ???? ??? ????? ???????? - BBC ??????? ?????? (http://www.bbc.com/russian/features-37707807)

It appears on the Russian BBC, credited to AFP and the Norwegian MOD

ImageGear

20th Oct 2016, 12:28

Barents Observer (http://thebarentsobserver.com/en/security/2016/10/russias-biggest-warships-steams-along-coast-norway-towards-syria)

Apparently after a launch??

This event must have been warned?

Imagegear

pasta

20th Oct 2016, 12:36

If true, that seems pretty weird. Why on Earth would you put one of your SSBNs in the vicinity of a group of surface ships that is inevitably going to attract interest from potential adversaries? Surely one of the central tenets of SSBN operation is that you do everything in your power to make sure no-one knows where you are, or gets close enough to get a sniff of your acoustic signature? I almost wonder whether it's a poorly-chosen library photo...

As for surfacing with the hatch open - I guess it's conceivable one might have a hatch issue and have to surface in a hurry to fix it from the outside (if it wasn't an emergency you'd presumably wait, and do it in the dark...)

Edit: Makes more sense in the light of ImageGear's post - separate deployment in a different location...

pasta

20th Oct 2016, 12:47

This event must have been warned?
Yes - all ballistic missile tests have to be pre-notified, and various steps taken to allow interested parties to monitor them (which I guess is how the Norwegians ended up taking the photo). Very interesting account of a British Trident test in Hennessy's book.

TEEEJ

20th Oct 2016, 13:32

North Sea location of Tug Nikolay Chiker from AIS, 19th October, 2310 UTC

55 49 24N 3 38 28E

Map link

https://goo.gl/maps/eQExBxMNXRR2

From

https://www.vesselfinder.com/?imo=8613334

Tankertrashnav

20th Oct 2016, 14:25

The days of hunting the Bismarck are over - especially without maritime patrol aircraft

Yes but Yeovilton have still got a Stringbag, and the Russians will be passing withing range soon!

NutLoose

20th Oct 2016, 14:30

RN set off in hot pursuit

http://www.royalnavy.mod.uk/-/media/royal-navy-responsive/images/news/ships/montrose/140916-montrose-changes-command/img_1027.jpg?

Underbolt

20th Oct 2016, 15:08

"as far as I'm aware there is now only one (part-time) sea going post for an officer of 1* or above"

Are you referring to the new CO of HMS Queen Elizabeth (former Ark Royal and Illustrious skipper and BRNC commandant, who is now a Commodore in real life but wearing a Captain's stripes for reasons of tradition)?

Wander00

20th Oct 2016, 15:16

Aah, whaler pulling, takes me back to Outward Bound, except we pulled, and sailed 32ft cutters

Heathrow Harry

20th Oct 2016, 15:49

"Two British warships are shadowing an aircraft carrier and other Russian naval ships as they pass the UK on their way to Syria. The carrier Admiral Kuznetsov and its task force are on a course to sail through the North Sea and English Channel.A Ministry of Defence spokesman said the ships would be "man-marked every step of the way" while near UK waters"

Going to be difficult to "man-mark" 8 Russian ships with two of ours tho'..............

MPN11

20th Oct 2016, 16:08

Our MPA will keep them cov..... oh.

TEEEJ

20th Oct 2016, 19:50

Tug Nikolay Chiker Oct 20, 2016 19:40 UTC

52.73717N 2.63163E

https://goo.gl/maps/XZa8YWPBvjT2

https://www.vesselfinder.com/vessels/NIKOLAY-CHIKER-IMO-8613334-MMSI-273531629

Tankertrashnav

20th Oct 2016, 23:49

Aren't the French chipping in? Surely if les russes are sailing down La Manche they should be as involved as we seem to be?

serf

21st Oct 2016, 03:00

Maybe ignoring them would be more effective.

TEEEJ

21st Oct 2016, 10:03

BBC and Sky News in the UK are currently running helo footage of the Kuznetsov in the approaches to the English Channel.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-37725327

Kuznetsov Task Force now visible from Dover. Live on BBC.

Madbob

21st Oct 2016, 11:02

The Kuznetsov seems to me to making rather a lot of smoke. Particularly as it seems to be going rather slowly. Estimate <20 knots.....

Is this crappy fuel, normal ops or a sign of the mechanical state of the engines?

MB

noflynomore

21st Oct 2016, 11:23

Smoke will have nothing to do with the "engines" (sic) as she is steam powered. Boilers make the smoke in a steamship but combustion air will be automatically controlled on such a comparatively modern vessel so Chiefy being asleep at the sprayers is hardly a likely cause.

Filthy, cheap, sulphur laden fuel will be the answer and no boiler can deal with that and not make copious smoke.

She's most unlikely to be using the gas turbines at that speed - and if she were we'd not see their plume as it would be smothered by all that filth from the heavy fuel oil.

Not exactly stealth, is it?

serf

21st Oct 2016, 11:33

Underbolt

21st Oct 2016, 12:40

I did notice that the smoke seemed to be travelling about twice as quickly!

PhilipG

21st Oct 2016, 13:36

Good thing that the wind is blowing them through the Channel, it would be embarrassing if she was blown to a stop in the Channel by a South Westerly wind.

Arclite01

21st Oct 2016, 14:35

langleybaston

21st Oct 2016, 15:01

Do they know today is a sacred day in British naval history?

The Immortal memory.

Not_a_boffin

21st Oct 2016, 15:17

Just wondering why:

1. The Russians only have 1 carrier

2. They have never really gone for the carrier as a means of power projection - even at the height of the cold war they were not using them

3. Why the Russian Navy (generally not just carriers) are not really seen around the world - unlike their US counterparts.................

Thoughts anyone ??

Arc

On the assumption it's a genuine question - and not a wah.....

1. Because that's the only one that had been completed when the USSR/CIS imploded 20-odd years ago. They hung on to it primarily for prestige and because, being non-nuclear, it was cheaper to keep "alive" than their submarines and large missile cruisers.
2. Primarily because when your land mass spans a good proportion of the globes circumference, most of the power projection you want to do can be achieved via land. A secondary reason was always that all they had to do was deny the free use of the sea to the US/NATO, much of which could be achieved by submarines (or threat thereof)
3. Because until relatively recently, they had no money to maintain ships, pay sailors, buy fuel. At all.

A_Van

21st Oct 2016, 15:32

Arclite01,

The answer is very simple. Air carriers are the means of an aggressor (or, more mild, of an offensive side) generally speaking. I.e., you move the air force closer to the theater, which is relatively far from your borders.

USSR doctrine was always based on the defence concept (believe it or not, it's up to you). Especially overseas operations were never planned. Only in the late years of the USSR some old but still hot (or semi-mad) heads in the lead of the communist party had gone crazy on the idea of copying everything that the US had. In space, a vivid example was Buran (similar to Space Shuttle). Billions were invested, only one (though a very successfull) flight performed, and then - "dismissed".

Also, right words were said about prestige, etc. In reality, only subs really matter for Russia and they are in a good shape.

Arclite01

21st Oct 2016, 15:58

Not-A-Boffin and A_VAN

Thanks for the concise responses and perspectives.

Arc

ImageGear

21st Oct 2016, 17:18

I would assume that with most sensors running on the ships, and with "on airways", "off airways", VFR and assorted mil traffic, especially in the channel, the radars would be lit up like Christmas trees.

The Command Centres must have been frenetic dealing with potential threats and targets arriving from all sides. :eek:

I am aware of the clockwork precision of the well oiled machine but this would not be a typical day in Murmansk.

Imagegear

Bigbux

21st Oct 2016, 17:31

USSR doctrine was always based on the defence concept (believe it or not, it's up to you).

According to some of my friends in the former NVA, that defence would appear to have been quite aggressive. :)

Out Of Trim

21st Oct 2016, 17:33

The Russian Flotilla also being shadowed by 2 US Navy P8s.. At high level though.

https://drive.google.com/open?id=0BwaLWsK6ziKGeHB0YmlRczFsV0E

https://drive.google.com/open?id=0BwaLWsK6ziKGeUttZF9hOWZRRHc

Royalistflyer

21st Oct 2016, 17:47

A Van is right, Russia has no interest in power projection as such - it is not interested in acquiring overseas territories. Hence no real interest in carriers - its submarines do the necessary job of deterring naval incursions. As for "aggressive defence" - yes - why not - keep potential threats well away from your borders. If America stopped being stupid and trying to crowd Russia's borders, there would be no tension. We should perhaps have thought in the same terms, why do we need carriers today - except to trot after America in pointless (and usually unsuccessful) interventions in moslem countries. We should be concentrating on defence - naval and air - of our islands.

thunderbird7

21st Oct 2016, 17:48

Nimrod. There. I've said it. :)

Akrotiri bad boy

21st Oct 2016, 18:00

Guys let's forget about the hardware and trust to the Civil Service. Those exhaust emissions have got to be in contravention of the MARPOL regulations and open the Kuznetsov to the possibility of an arrest by the MCA.:p

pax britanica

21st Oct 2016, 18:36

No doubt the most effective counter to this -show of force (really) would be to completley ignore it as has already been suggested-you cannot project power if no one can see or hear it and for all his many sins Putin is not an idiot and probably i about number 50 on a list of world leaders who would start a war (unless of course its in his (as he sees it) back yard.

At my age its easy to look back and see how much money we spent countering a threat that was only there to counter a threat from us and where by and large the equipment for doing so didn't work very well anyway. So, I don't want to see General Dynamics BAe systems etc get rich by re-armament at the expense of the NHS and Pensions unless of course we save so much money from leaving the Eu we will be able to re build the navy-re fund the NHS and built another four High Speed rail links and hub airports as we were promised

India Four Two

21st Oct 2016, 19:19

Akrotiri bad boy

21st Oct 2016, 19:28

Having steamed through the straits a "few" times the ColRegs are a little open to interpretation and it's generally best to steer around scheduled ferry traffic. My guess is the Kuznetsov went with Rule 99:
The right of Might:suspect:

TEEEJ

21st Oct 2016, 20:16

P-8 mission to the English Channel. Operating out of Iceland.

https://twitter.com/MIL_Radar/status/789530467641004032

https://twitter.com/MIL_Radar

TEEEJ

21st Oct 2016, 20:44

So did the Russian task force participate in the mandatory Dover Straits traffic scheme (https://mcanet.mcga.gov.uk/public/c4/regulations/safetyofnavigation/pdf/mgn128.htm) or did they go "AIS dark" and operate under the maritime equivalent of "due regard"?

The Kuznetsov group support tanker Osipov is currently on AIS in the English Channel.

2016-10-21 20:32 UTC

50.50257N 0.01395E

Map Link

https://goo.gl/maps/LiYBuqiSWWU2

Vessel details for: OSIPOV (Unspecified) - MMSI 273546000, Call Sign Registered in Russia | AIS Marine Traffic (http://www.marinetraffic.com/en/ais/details/ships/shipid:351134/mmsi:273546000/vessel:OSIPOV)

barnstormer1968

21st Oct 2016, 21:17

I feel the Royal Navy and our political leaders have missed a good opportunity here, and have played someone else's game to our own loss.
As the carrier is doing nothing wrong, and is not from an enemy power (we aren't at war with Russia) and is simply passing by then some senior RN bods could have asked to come aboard for drinks or a tour of a passing naval vessel.
By welcoming fellow sailors the Brits would be shown as the good guys. I feel that we have missed an opportunity here.

ImageGear

21st Oct 2016, 21:52

Trouble is we might not get them back, or worse :E

ZeBedie

21st Oct 2016, 21:53

By welcoming fellow sailors the Brits would be shown as the good guys. I feel that we have missed an opportunity here.

Indeed. Cold war with Russia is so 20th C. It's time to move on and cooperate with The Bear.

ImageGear

22nd Oct 2016, 04:04

Yes cooperate/collaborate ? The Bear has had 20 years of the West's "Cooperating" and where are we now. The cooperation tap for whatever reason has been turned off and we face a very uncooperative Bear.

The Bear (and other nations) snigger up their sleeves when the "cooperation" option is raised. They exist in a dog(Bear) -eat-dog world and only pay lip service to any relationship. We have developed a "soft underbelly" of liberalism and capitalism and as such we should expect to be intimidated and squeezed to the point where Bears choose whether we will be toast or lunch.

Why do the Russians feel the need to bring their collateral through the English Channel? make no mistake, it's because they can. Have we sent a flotilla to cruise around off St Petersburg on the way to our Estonian naval facilities, No, why - because we can't.

We're scr***d

Imagegear

A_Van

22nd Oct 2016, 07:02

ImageGear,

You put things upside down. "Cooperation" from late 80's through early 00's meant "surrender" and humiliation for Russia. Lots of hardware were destroyed to reduce its amount (as the West insisted), all armed forces were in a chaos state. Then came (bombing of) Yugoslavia and expansion of NATO to the Russian borders. Peacekeeper masks (of US and NATO) were thrown away and luckily some slow re-construction finally started here.

Your colleagues are right in some posts above: let's leave in peace. Do not "tease the bear", do not throw stones, do not threat, etc. and he would live quietly in his forest.

Regarding passing through straights, there is such a thing called "international law". Until the law is not changed, navigation in places like English Channel, Bosphorus/Dardanelles etc. is allowed. Change the treaties and ships will be sailing north of the islands, no problem.

Hangarshuffle

22nd Oct 2016, 07:15

I thought the pictures streamed on TV were good, as are the pictures in the Daily Mail, which then disgraced itself with its incredible, shrieking headlines (almost like a 1914 issue if you follow me). Amazed by the hysteria whipped up by some of the press-they truly need to calm down.
Interesting that both Navies (Russian and RN) have now adopted similar armed sentry levels on deck these days. And they also had one of their helo's running on deck as it passed through straits (armed and ready for response if required)? I remember the days when everyone was unarmed and simply could walk around willy nilly (at the height of the cold war, ironically)! Things rapidly changed after the rise of AQ.

They had two fire engines onboard in Fly 1 which I think is pragmatic- we should copy this for our QE class, but we have no plans as far as I've learned from colleagues still in.
Materially the ship looked in good condition on the outside, freshly painted probably. But somehow it doesn't look exactly worked up, I find that hard to articulate but maybe its still a bit of a show pony>?
Looking again at the phots, the whole top part of the ship has been repainted including the flight deck. No oil spots are really evident. Only 1 flight deck tractor and no sign of the crane, forklift or associated ground equipment. Also, the jets have ladders attached, but seem devoid of any blanking, ground pennants etc, why so- they are at alert 5? They weren't seriously expecting to launch them from only halfway down the deck? Plus they had an obvious tail wind anyway.
Still, I wish them well. I'm fully with Pax B up above, we all need to find and maintain a continued peace. That Daily Mail leader writer needs a word. HS.

A_Van

22nd Oct 2016, 07:40

HS,

It was announced in advance (and reflected in the media) that there would be live training for those Su-33's that are hosted onboard. Whether it were in the North sea or would be later somewhere in Biscaya, I do not remember.

barnstormer1968

22nd Oct 2016, 11:07

ImageGear.
I should have expected that reply from post #74 :)
While I haven't suggested cooperating with the Russian navy or any Russian forces I feel that just being friendly/courtious can diffuse many situations. I find Putin a very strange, corrupt and egotistical character, but let's be clear that the average sailor on the Russian carrier group probably spends very little time wanting to invade the UK.

ImageGear

22nd Oct 2016, 12:18

Barnstormer

Understood, my comment was made after midnight so not particularly lucid.

I prefer to "get to know" my "potential" enemies and if this should be through social interaction then lets understand it for what it is. While we all share common bonds of the sea and the sky, the world is too dangerous a place for this to be conducted in a flag bedecked hangar unless the attendees are very carefully "selected".

As for invasion, well by the time it gets to that we are all toast together, anyway the Bear and our Eastern "friends" already own large swathes of European countries so they are well on their way to "owning" us.

After this I fully expect to be consigned to the 20th Century dinosaur museum so I will be sure to look the part. :ok:

Imagegear

TEEEJ

22nd Oct 2016, 12:57

The Swedes sent out a SIGINT/ELINT Gulfstream IV as the Kuznetsov Task Group was in the North Sea.

Flight track at following link.

https://twitter.com/gerrydogma/status/789418765603733504

noflynomore

22nd Oct 2016, 13:37

And a Noggie sub popped up in Aberdeen the day after the flotilla had passed. I bet they'd have a tale to tell. I mean, I bet they'd been on her tail, and then some.

Out Of Trim

22nd Oct 2016, 14:46

The RAF also keeping tabs on the fleet, a C-130J and a Tornado GR4 have flown by today. Another P-8 in the vicinity again.

https://drive.google.com/open?id=0BwaLWsK6ziKGbzdFb09ackhLck0

https://drive.google.com/open?id=0BwaLWsK6ziKGVXQyX3ZHcDBGeWc

Lyneham Lad

22nd Oct 2016, 18:11

Also as reported in The Times this morning...
Tornados scrambled to track Russian carrier in Channel
(http://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/tornados-scrambled-to-track-russian-carrier-in-channel-5xzvjhjv9?shareToken=e388e339d7c6ed14195b0f2e9c65a15e)

Hangarshuffle

22nd Oct 2016, 22:04

Doesn't seen that long ago (but it is, and then it isn't) I talked to a couple of old boys who were DEMS gunners. Well up there in WW2's most dangerous jobs ever devised (in fact it is or was). On the convoys of course. God we lost some good lads on those routes helping our then allies. And now its all changed again. They'd wasted their time, the 2 DEMS gunners.
I find this new anti Russian sentiment expressed in the British press utter bolluaeux. Allies/enemies/allies/enemies every 20 years is just plain confusing and very tiring and very dispiriting and very unclever really. We need a better way than this.
This new cold war is very managed by people not with our interests at their hearts - hope we all remember that.

Bigbux

22nd Oct 2016, 23:17

I was hoping the Kuznetsov was going to launch a few sorties of the unannounced kind - this would be in keeping with the recent TU 95 and 160 activity. But I guess they have bigger fish to fry elsewhere. It would be a bit embarrassing if everything was "D" state by the time they reached the Med, and there is always Cyprus to buzz - should be well in range of S400 cover.:hmm:

57mm

23rd Oct 2016, 12:52

Akronelli's been inside SAM range for a long time. During F4 APCs there we would frequently be tracked by SA-5 Gammon kit.

A_Van

23rd Oct 2016, 15:17

Hangarshuffle,

Absolutely agree. And it works both way: WTF should I confront my dozens of friends in US, UK, hundreds in continental Europe just because the current regime decided to consider them as enemies?

TEEEJ

23rd Oct 2016, 15:45

US Navy P-8 out of Rota likely tracking the Kuznetsov Group.

23rd October 1150 UTC

https://twitter.com/chillcommand/status/790145574037286912

recceguy

23rd Oct 2016, 19:42

The RAF also keeping tabs on the fleet, a C-130J.....

Using a C-130 for maritime patrol ! they are down to the level of the South African Air Force .....

Out Of Trim

23rd Oct 2016, 20:08

Why not use a C-130J? We don't have an MPA until the P-8s get delivered.

Maybe the Herc was just transiting the area. We didn't need to search for them; seeing as we had two RN vessels shadowing the Russian Flotilla.

Pontius Navigator

23rd Oct 2016, 21:18

OOT, we were once tasked to track two Bear en route an RN TG. All we needed to do was position ourselves to intercept. Only snag was we had no idea where the RN was. The Russians did but the RN wouldn't tell us

Wander00

24th Oct 2016, 08:03

Interestingly, just stayed in a hotel near Morlaix airport in N Brittany. Several Russians staying and only hotel I have ever stayed I where all notices were in French, English......and Russian

Evanelpus

24th Oct 2016, 08:39

We didn't need to search for them; seeing as we had two RN vessels shadowing the Russian Flotilla.

Plus the amount of black smoke coming from the carrier could have been seen for miles!;)

sandiego89

24th Oct 2016, 19:17

receeguy: Using a C-130 for maritime patrol ! they are down to the level of the South African Air Force .....

Maybe they can call down to the C-130 guys in Argentina and ask them how they mounted the mk.82 dumb bombs on the wing pylon.....

Tankertrashnav

24th Oct 2016, 19:46

I find this new anti Russian sentiment expressed in the British press utter bolluaeux.

I entirely agree - most Russians I have met are great people.

Now, anti-Putin sentiment? That's an entirely different matter.

recceguy

25th Oct 2016, 03:52

most Russians I have met are great people

Same with me : most Americans I met were great people.

Onceapilot

26th Oct 2016, 11:25

ORAC

26th Oct 2016, 11:35

FODPlod

26th Oct 2016, 11:47

Someone please tell me that NATO actually has a political gameplan for how to treat this floating deployment and the problems it might cause or suffer? How about having a strategy for the refuel/provisioning issue? Is the, "individual members decide", a satisfactory stance for NATO?:ugh:

OAP
Isn't Russia a member of NATO's Partnership for Peace (PfP) programme? Sounds like an ideal framework for making some reciprocal logistical support arrangements. ;)Partnership for Peace (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Partnership_for_Peace#Current_members)The Partnership for Peace (PfP) is a North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) program aimed at creating trust between NATO and other states in Europe and the former Soviet Union; 22 states are members...

racedo

26th Oct 2016, 12:40

FODPlod

At the moment NATO doesn't like the idea that Russia came to the aid of an ally that has been invaded by people that are supported and trained by NATO members to overthrow a legal Government.

As Libya has proven when you get idiot leaders deciding to replace someone with not even a Plan A then you create even more instability. Sadly I expect nothing less from Western Governments with weak leadership.

TEEEJ

26th Oct 2016, 13:07

Breaking on Sky News UK.

Russia's Embassy in Spain says that the request for Russian warships to refuel in the Spanish port of Ceuta has been withdrawn.

squawking 7700

26th Oct 2016, 13:16

There's always Gib.......

Interested Passenger

26th Oct 2016, 13:29

now would be a great time for an (old) Top Gear channel crossing in a Hilux.

They are more likely to recognise Clarkson than Boris.

PhilipG

26th Oct 2016, 16:25

So do we think that the Russian Task Group can get to Syrian waters without refuelling? Could they ask the Algerians for help?

TEEEJ

26th Oct 2016, 16:53

Arclite01

26th Oct 2016, 17:00

They are not short of assets or options it seems.

Although it makes the case for a nuclear powerplant...............

Arc

PhilipG

26th Oct 2016, 17:10

Interesting question, Philip. The Baltic Fleet Tanker Lena deployed about a week before the Kuznetsov Task Group down to the Azores. Possibly she will be part of the support to the Kuznetsov group?

Baltic Fleet Tanker Kola is currently heading for the English Channel.

https://www.vesselfinder.com/vessels/KOLA-IMO-6720004-MMSI-273318510

Northern Fleet Tanker Kama has been part of previous Kuznetsov Med deployments. She was in the Sea of Azov/Black Sea last week so will likely deploy in support?

https://www.vesselfinder.com/vessels/KAMA-IMO-8860822-MMSI-273431840

Malta has also supported previous Kuznetsov Task Force deployments. It will be interesting to see if Malta allows elements of the task force to enter Valletta?

As I see it, Malta will be put under a lot of EU pressure not to support the Task Force.

Turkey as ever is a wild card, they as NATO members might try to stop Kama transiting to the Med, not sure what the political ramifications of this would be though.

So Kola would seem to be the most reliable source of fuels.

I have no idea of the capacity split between Fuel Oil for the Kuznetsov, diesel for the subs and corvettes etc and aviation fuel...

Madbob

26th Oct 2016, 18:36

It would be nice to have some NATO naval assets in the way if only to make the Russians have to alter course and increase revs? A little close manoevering and some high jinks would force the battle group to burn more fuel than in their passage plan! That could cause a little embarrassment.
What's the naval equivalent of Bingo and Joker?

MB

TEEEJ

26th Oct 2016, 19:26

Philip,
I don't think that Turkey would try to stop any Russian Navy vessels through the Turkish Straits. If they took the option for the likes of Kama then they would have to stop all the others. The Russian Navy "Syrian Express" from the Black Sea has been going on for years now transporting arms and supplies to Syria. After recently patching up relations with Russia I don't believe that they are going to go back down that slippery slope.

See list of Russian Navy vessels through the Bosphorus.

https://turkishnavy.net/foreign-warship-on-bosphorus/foreign-warship-on-bosphorus-in-2016/

It looks likely that the main task force group is going through the Strait of Gibraltar? Tug Nikolay Chiker sent an international weather message during 18 GMT on HF using Morse Code.

Date/time, Lat/Long, course, speed groups from the message.

RAL48 26181 99359 70057 22222 at 1833 GMT

35.9N 05.7W Heading East at 6-10 Knots

Map Link

https://goo.gl/maps/gkY3hUh9vGL2

Nikolay Chiker appears to have switched off AIS around midday.

https://www.vesselfinder.com/vessels/NIKOLAY-CHIKER-IMO-8613334-MMSI-273531629

Lonewolf_50

26th Oct 2016, 20:27

racedo

27th Oct 2016, 16:05

Are you familiar with the INCSEA agreements? As I recall, they are still active.

Some people are so keen to start a war.

A US friend who did 8 years out of Ft Bragg says he often goes to Political campaign events of either party.

When they advocate attacking someone he always makes a point of congratulating them on their speech afterwards and asking of their family, then asks why they have not enlisted.
The never find a recruiter one falls flat when he says that is what he volunteers for 2 weekends a month and happy to arrange an appointment.
Since 2001 post 9/11 and pre Afghanistan adventure there have been no Politicians kids who have signed up in his catchment area in California.
He knows it as "Lets some other schmucks kid die syndrome"

West Coast

27th Oct 2016, 16:18

He knows it as "Lets some other schmucks kid die syndrome"

Both the prospective VPs have sons who are active duty Marines.

Lonewolf_50

27th Oct 2016, 16:43

racedo, you can look this up:
Senator John McCain(R-Arizona) and
Senator James Webb (D Virginia (he only served one term, 2006-2012) had sons serving in the Marines during the war, in the war.

I like your friend's style. :ok:

TEEEJ

28th Oct 2016, 19:11

The situation in regards to Malta.

No Russian war ships will be refuelled in Malta, Foreign Minister George Vella said today, dismissing claims that the flotilla was planning a stopover on the island on their way to Syria.

Contacted by Times of Malta, Dr Vella would not, however, confirm or deny whether a request had been made by the Russians for a fleet stopover in Malta.

It is not known whether any request from the Russians was turned down on constitutional or ethical grounds.

Russian warships will not be refuelled in Malta - Opposition asks if permission was granted, then withdrawn, minister avoids direct reply - timesofmalta.com (http://www.timesofmalta.com/articles/view/20161027/local/no-russian-warship-will-be-refuelled-in-malta.629234)

The following Portugeuese Air Force video from earlier in the week provides an update on the tanker situation. In addition to Sergei Osipov there was also tanker Dubna and Kama.

https://www.facebook.com/PortugueseAirForce/videos/827575554048937/

From

https://www.facebook.com/PortugueseAirForce/?fref=nf

Confusion over Kama was due to the Marine Traffic AIS website having the incorrect Kama picture. That image shows the Murmansk registered Kama but the data is for a another Kama.

Vessel details for: KAMA (Ore/Oil Carrier) - IMO 8860822, MMSI 273431840, Call Sign UIPW Registered in Russia | AIS Marine Traffic (http://www.marinetraffic.com/en/ais/details/ships/shipid:350085/mmsi:273431840/vessel:KAMA)

Northern Fleet Kama doesn't appear to be on AIS.

Tanker Dubna at following link but doesn't have AIS active.

https://www.vesselfinder.com/vessels/DUBNA-IMO-7347471

Tanker Osipov has now switched off AIS. This morning she was anchored off Morocco and then noted underway.

Vessel details for: OSIPOV (Unspecified) - MMSI 273546000, Call Sign Registered in Russia | AIS Marine Traffic (http://www.marinetraffic.com/en/ais/details/ships/shipid:351134/mmsi:273546000/imo:0/vessel:OSIPOV)

Tug Nikolay Chiker is underway and heading east. Position from HF Morse weather message during 13 UTC

RAL48 28121 99357 70027 22222 @1324Z

35.7N 02.7W Heading East at 6-10 Knots

https://goo.gl/maps/JsABa4Z345L2

Nikolay Chiker still on AIS as of 1817 UTC

Map Link

https://goo.gl/maps/8zBx7Ct65aA2

Vessel details for: NIKOLAY CHIKER (Tug) - IMO 8613334, MMSI 273531629, Call Sign RAL 48 Registered in Russia | AIS Marine Traffic (http://www.marinetraffic.com/en/ais/details/ships/shipid:4404011/mmsi:273531629/vessel:NIKOLAY%20CHIKER)

tdracer

29th Oct 2016, 18:42

At least according to this, the Admiral Kuznetsov is quite the POS...

Russia's Dilapidated Aircraft Carrier Keeps Getting Banned From Ports (http://www.popularmechanics.com/military/navy-ships/a23584/admiral-kuznetsov-sad-smoky-voyage/?src=nl&mag=pop&list=nl_pnl_news&date=102916)

Sounds like one could justify banning it from a port as a pollution hazard (it might sink and muck up the water) :}

TEEEJ

1st Nov 2016, 12:58

Overhead image of Kuznetsov from GeoEye-1 satellite from last Friday.

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/CwHVGg7W8AAehmE.jpg

https://twitter.com/DigitalGlobe/status/793149319637508096

From

https://twitter.com/DigitalGlobe

MPN11

1st Nov 2016, 13:24

Interesting image. I get the sensation they're paining the foredeck; there seems to be some drums in the unfinished area. Why is of course a different question.

Pontius Navigator

1st Nov 2016, 16:12

UN Blue?

However look at the aircraft parked in the shadows, they are also light blue.

MPN11

1st Nov 2016, 19:35

They appear in that image to be dark grey, although I know they're not. Anyway, would that fool any modern sensor system, let alone a human eyeball [which has been around for ages]?

Pontius Navigator

1st Nov 2016, 22:12

MPN11, not the 3 grey at the stern, but the 5 blue ones midships. This link is from January and shows the bow and forward deck is a lighter grey.

http://russia-insider.com/en/9-fascinating-facts-about-russias-largest-warship/ri12334

TEEEJ

1st Nov 2016, 22:31

The Russians have released footage from this deployment. The MiG-29s are in the grey scheme.

uQmKH2rne6I&feature=related

unmanned_droid

1st Nov 2016, 23:52

I think that's an alright video. It's good to see carrier ops from their perspective.

I thought the simple dark-grey/blue scheme was becoming standard for all russian ground attack aviation? It appears the Mig-29s are in the same scheme as the newest Su-34s.

The Su-33s seem to be in a 2 blues and a grey scheme which is different to what they originally had. Maybe this is a new Russian Air Defence scheme to be deployed across the fleets?

/geek

TEEEJ

2nd Nov 2016, 13:34

UD,

As you correctly state the grey top scheme is present on many Russian aircraft.

Even the land based Russian Navy Su-30SMs are in the scheme.

39 - Russia - Navy Sukhoi Su-30SM at Ramenskoye - Zhukovsky | Photo ID 621891 | Airplane-Pictures.net (http://www.airplane-pictures.net/photo/621891/39-russia-navy-sukhoi-su-30sm/)

Some of the Russian Air Force Su-30SMs are also in the scheme.

01 - Russia - Air Force Sukhoi Su-30SM at Ramenskoye - Zhukovsky | Photo ID 617481 | Airplane-Pictures.net (http://www.airplane-pictures.net/photo/617481/rf-93696-01-russia-air-force-sukhoi-su-30sm/)

VFC-12 US Navy Agressor Squadron recently painted some of their F/A-18 Hornets in the scheme to represent the Su-30/Su-34.

https://www.facebook.com/andrea.arlotti.7/posts/10209915119302252

The die-hard conspiracy people went nuts claiming that there were being painted up in Russian schemes for "false flag" ventures in Syria.

https://www.metabunk.org/debunked-us-caught-repainting-fighter-jets-for-false-flag-2014-training.t8018/

Lonewolf_50

2nd Nov 2016, 19:19

The MiG-29 is a good looking aircraft. I liked the shot of the Helix hovering; I am guessing that it's on plane guard during the recovery.

Thanks for the video, maritime ops have a certain inherent goodness. :E

hoodie

2nd Nov 2016, 20:15

What are all the flames off the starboard side at around the 1 minute mark?

unmanned_droid

2nd Nov 2016, 20:28

hoodie, that appears to be a decoy to me?

TEEJ...thanks - I recognise your login from elsewhere? I used to be much more active on other forums, such as keypublishing and ukar but life got in the way, so I'm not very current anymore.

TEEEJ

4th Nov 2016, 19:05

No problem, UD.

The Cruiser Peter the Great appears to be off eastern Crete.

https://twitter.com/hdevreij/status/794551071112888320

https://twitter.com/hdevreij/status/794561866425139200

Daylight image apparently posted 1428 hrs.

https://twitter.com/hdevreij/status/794554612468555776

Tug Nikolay Chiker still on AIS east of Crete (2016-11-04 18:47 UTC)

Vessel details for: NIKOLAY CHIKER (Tug) - IMO 8613334, MMSI 273531629, Call Sign RAL 48 Registered in Russia | AIS Marine Traffic (http://www.marinetraffic.com/en/ais/details/ships/shipid:4404011/mmsi:273531629/imo:8613334/vessel:NIKOLAY_CHIKER)

MPN11

4th Nov 2016, 20:28

Daylight image apparently posted 1428 hrs.

https://twitter.com/hdevreij/status/794554612468555776
COMSEC not a strong point, then :)

jolihokistix

5th Nov 2016, 14:16

And this carrier-centric fleet is supposed to be heading to Syria?

Or showing the flag, on the way to support the Russian rebels in the Crimea and eastern Ukraine, and solidify the general status quo up there in the Black Sea?

Heathrow Harry

6th Nov 2016, 01:16

they have to apply to the Turks if they are going into the Black Sea so we'd know pretty soon...

TEEEJ

6th Nov 2016, 13:54

NOTAM for Russian Navy Exercise (Training Flights and Rocket Test Firings) 10-15 November and 17-22 November 0500-2100 hrs.

http://i66.photobucket.com/albums/h261/TOMMYJO/NOTAM-RUSSIAN-NAVY-NOV-2016.jpg

A1323/16 NOTAMN
SFC - FL300
CREATED: 03 Nov 2016 13:10:00
SOURCE: EUECYIYN
A1323/16 NOTAMN
Q) LCCC/QWELW/IV/BO /W /000/300/3507N03501E045
A) LCCC B) 1611100500 C) 1611222100
D) 10-15 17-22 0500-2100
E) RUSSIAN NAVY EXERCISE (TRAINING FLIGHTS
ROCKET TEST FIRINGS) WILL TAKE PLACE IN AREA :
342940N0343345E
343000N0350700E
343327N0351850E
343345N0353548E
354500N0352540E
354500N0345600E
350540N0344715E
F) SFC G) FL300
CREATED: 03 Nov 2016 12:46:00
SOURCE: EUECYIYN

A1324/16 NOTAMN
Q) LCCC/QARLC/IV/NBO/E /000/300/3511N03438E055
A) LCCC B) 1611100500 C) 1611222100
D) 10-15 17-22 0500-2100
E) DUE TO RUSSIAN NAVY EXERCISE AS REFERED IN
NOTAM LCNC A1323/16, THE FOLLOWING AIRWAYS WILL BE
CLOSED:
1.W/UW 17 (BALMA-NIKAS)
2.R/UR 78, M/UM978 (ALSUS-NIKAS)
3. B/UB15 L/UL620 (BALMA-ALSUS)
4. W/UW10, L/UL619 (VESAR-NIKAS)
5. R655 (BALMA-KOBER)
6. UR655 (BALMA- LCA)

From Cyprus info at following link.

Latest NOTAM Briefing | NOTAM Info (http://notaminfo.com/latest)

recceguy

6th Nov 2016, 16:44

That's a big area, from SFC to FL 300 .... airways are declared closed.

A sort of no-fly zone just off the Syrian coast.

How can it be tolerated by NATO?

TEEEJ

6th Nov 2016, 17:36

How can it be tolerated by NATO?

Tolerated? It is international waters and airspace. It is hardly going to hinder Coalition/NATO operations. If anything the exercise is going to be welcomed by the intelligence community.

Black Sea Fleet Tug SB-5 went into Tartus, Syria a few days ago. She towed a barge from the Black Sea. I wonder if it is target barge for the exercise?

r3DUo_iEzTs&feature=related

Wander00

6th Nov 2016, 17:55

But can airways if affected be declared "closed" unilaterally?

Out Of Trim

6th Nov 2016, 20:17

The NOTAMS have been issued by the Cypriot Authorities.

As they are responsible for promulgating safety information to Air Crews operating within their FIR. THerefore, the Cypriot Authorities themselves have declared the effected airways closed during this period.

The Sultan

6th Nov 2016, 22:36

Probably wise to shut the airways with Russia's history of shooting civilian airliners out of the sky for no reason.

The Sultan

A_Van

7th Nov 2016, 04:03

The Sultan,

You probably meant the US ship shooting down a civilian airlines, didn't you?
The only well-known accident of that kind with a navy ship (USS Vincennes destroyed and Iranian A-300) is dated back to 1988.

Buster Hyman

7th Nov 2016, 05:36

KAL902, KAL007, MH17.

A_Van

7th Nov 2016, 06:38

KAL902, KAL007 - shot down by interceptor aircraft, and this thread is about fleet ops(Navy).

MH 17 - shot down by Ukrainians (rebels or government, is yet unclear) like they "treated" SBI 1812 (shot in 2001 over Black Sea). But again, no fleet involved (ground-to-air missiles).

Buster Hyman

7th Nov 2016, 09:58

The thread is about fleet ops, but your response was to a general statement about Russia shooting airliners out of the sky. Ratio of 3 to 1 stands.

Lonewolf_50

7th Nov 2016, 13:42

The Cypriots are acting with caution. I'd say their caution is balanced with the concerns over both the shoot down of the Russian aircraft by the Turks not so long ago, and the MH 17 (a civilian airliner shot down, with the betting money being that it was a mistake) being very close in memory.

An ounce of prevention is worth a pound of cure.

skua

8th Nov 2016, 06:16

There is a lot of Russian money in Cyprus. Russia likes its money to talk - loudly.

msbbarratt

8th Nov 2016, 06:34

There is a lot of Russian money in Cyprus. Russia likes its money to talk - loudly.

Well, there was until the Cypriot government raided savings accounts as a way of staving off disaster during the financial crisis. Then it became, briefly, Cypriot money, and shortly afterwards it became lenders money.

Lordflasheart

8th Nov 2016, 07:19

NOTAM for Russian Navy Exercise (Training Flights and Rocket Test Firings) 10-15 November and 17-22 November 0500-2100 hrs.
Two six-day training blocks ? In a war zone ?? Are these guys complete green-horns just getting their first sea-legs or practising for an air show ? If they don’t go live on real targets inside Syria by day two of the first block, I’d send them all to the salt mines to earn their keep.

Black Sea Fleet Tug SB-5 went into Tartus, Syria a few days ago. She towed a barge from the Black Sea. I wonder if it is target barge for the exercise?
I would have thought one bomb would sink that barge if they hit it. I wonder if it’s to assist with Kuznetzov going alongside in Tartus for some R & R, or perhaps it's just a complete red herring ?

Or showing the flag, on the way to support the Russian rebels in the Crimea and eastern Ukraine, and solidify the general status quo up there in the Black Sea?
Indeed, not forgetting Moldova.

....................

skua

8th Nov 2016, 07:53

MSB - I was there last week. Boorish Russians everywhere and spending. Russian owned businesses v much in evidence.

Wander00

8th Nov 2016, 08:18

Russians everywhere in N Cyprus, and universally rude and offensive in my experience. Act like they own the place - maybe they do

A_Van

8th Nov 2016, 15:57

Russian criminal elements in Cyprus are kids and beggars as compared with those who happily reside in London and Cote d'Azur and are welcomed there as "serious businessmen" and "investors" "hiding themselves from a bloody Moscow regime". In reality they are trivial thieves. You'd better kick their ass's and let them enjoy the rest of their time behind the bars.

"Revenons a nos mutons", though. It has been officially announced in the Russian media that this group of vessels including aircraft onboard Kuznetsov are getting ready to strike terrorist groups that are concentrated around Aleppo. This is to prevent them help those already encircled in the city.

Here is the URL (sorry, it's in Russian but it's not a problem any more today with online translation services):

http://www.rbc.ru/rbcfreenews/5821f9e09a7947b49edc7d8a?from=newsfeed

Lordflasheart

8th Nov 2016, 20:19

What the kind gentleman above said - confirmed in english -

https://sputniknews.com/middleeast/201611081047197471-russian-aircraft-carrier-strike-syria/

Perhaps that NOTAM will need to be advanced to the 9th.

LFH

..............

jolihokistix

8th Nov 2016, 23:52

That'a the first time I have heard Daesh and Aleppo mentioned in the same context.

flyhardmo

9th Nov 2016, 02:17

That'a the first time I have heard Daesh and Aleppo mentioned in the same contex

Our media and governments call them moderate rebels. At one point they were even called Al-qaeda but a rebranding and marketing exercise change their name to Jabhat Fateh Al-Sham so we could give them more weapons.

recceguy

9th Nov 2016, 06:18

At one point they were even called Al-qaeda but a rebranding and marketing exercise change their name

Excellent summary, I'm with you !!

And BTW, now that the old crazy grandmother on pills is not going to lead in Washington - remember she called President Putin a "nazi" - maybe some constructive talks are going to take place instead of pure confrontation ?

Lonewolf_50

9th Nov 2016, 13:38

Excellent summary, I'm with you !!

And BTW, now that the old crazy grandmother on pills is not going to lead in Washington - remember she called President Putin a "nazi" - maybe some constructive talks are going to take place instead of pure confrontation ?
That remains to be seen. It will be interesting to see who Trump selects for his FP and military advisors, who is in the National Security Council, and who will be willing to work for him. That will inform how much American activity all over the globe will increase, decrease, or remain about the same, and particularly in the Eastern Med/Mid East. I am not convinced that Trump will want to increase defense spending. I suspect he's more along the lines of Ike's PoV that the strength of America is its economy, from which all other strength can be derived.

Wander00

9th Nov 2016, 15:30

Given the power of Republican Congress and Senate to block Obama, I have little doubt but that they will curb Trump's more extreme ideas

A_Van

9th Nov 2016, 15:55

Lonewolf,

You wrote: "I suspect he's more along the lines of Ike's PoV that the strength of America is its economy, from which all other strength can be derived."

I'd prefer to have such an approach implemented in "my campus" too.

SWBKCB

10th Nov 2016, 11:00

Russia ships 'chase away' Dutch submarine in Mediterranean - BBC News (http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-37928222)

Heathrow Harry

12th Nov 2016, 07:22

"wo six-day training blocks ? In a war zone ?? Are these guys complete green-horns just getting their first sea-legs or practising for an air show ? If they don’t go live on real targets inside Syria by day two of the first block, I’d send them all to the salt mines to earn their keep. "

as opposed to the USN and RN who normally plan to keep 30% of their ships in "training" following maintenance after 70+ years of operation????

TEEEJ

12th Nov 2016, 15:43

Landsat 8 image 8th November 2016 of Kuznetsov group..

http://i66.photobucket.com/albums/h261/TOMMYJO/Kuznetsov8thnov2016jpg.jpg

Link to large image.

https://c7.staticflickr.com/6/5683/30622201550_7f537c6ec2_h.jpg

From

https://www.flickr.com/photos/pierre_markuse/30622201550/

ImageGear

12th Nov 2016, 22:07

Steaming? - That thing looks like it's on fire, gives away the position of all the escorts too.

Davef68

12th Nov 2016, 22:24

Is that the smokiest warship in the world?

Canute

13th Nov 2016, 06:48

It's not "smoky"
Its just that the Russians have a different and more practical way of solving the "where is mum?" question.

We have "outhouse", they have smoke signals.

Herod

13th Nov 2016, 08:10

Maybe there's still a market for Best Welsh Anthracite.

Buster Hyman

13th Nov 2016, 08:40

That's what the Tugs are for I suppose...

AreOut

13th Nov 2016, 10:43

that trail of smoke looks like a huge middle finger given to greenpeace

Just a spotter

14th Nov 2016, 09:49

At the risk of drifting the thread off topic .... does anyone know if the Kuznetsov's sister, the Liaoning blows as much smoke when at sea?

JAS

Pontius Navigator

14th Nov 2016, 09:51

It's a smoke screen.

jolihokistix

14th Nov 2016, 11:08

Liaoning? Not smoky here. (Until the steam pipes burst, anyway.)

https://warisboring.com/china-flaunts-first-carrier-battle-group-photo-op-af0f7d712e66#.2h3kw6bas

http://www.realcleardefense.com/articles/2014/10/22/chinas_aircraft_carrier_trouble_spewing_steam_and_losing_pow er_107506.html

TEEEJ

15th Nov 2016, 13:18

Two six-day training blocks ? In a war zone ?? Are these guys complete green-horns just getting their first sea-legs or practising for an air show ? If they don’t go live on real targets inside Syria by day two of the first block, I’d send them all to the salt mines to earn their keep.

The Kuznetsov group have commenced combat ops.

The Russian military has launched a large-scale operation against terrorists stationed in Homs and Idlib provinces of Syria, Russian Defense Minister Sergey Shoigu said on Tuesday.

"Today at 10:30 and 11:00 we launched a large-scale operation against the positions of Islamic State and Al-Nusra [terrorist groups] in the provinces of Idlib and Homs," Shoigu said at a meeting between Russian President Vladimir Putin and the top leadership of the Russian Armed Forces.

The 'Admiral Kuznetsov' aircraft carrier, the flagship of the Russian Navy, is also taking part, Shoigu said. This is the first time the 'Admiral Kuznetsov' has taken part in a military operation. Sukhoi Su-33 fighter jets have been launched from the deck of the carrier, the defense minister said.

Terrorist positions have been hit with cruise missiles from the frigate ‘Admiral Grigorovich’, Shoigu added.

https://www.rt.com/news/366995-anti-terrorist-operation-carrier/

Lonewolf_50

15th Nov 2016, 16:22

TEEJ, this is a strange reminder of our carrier ops in the early 80's over Syria in support of French/US forces in Lebanon. (Back when we flew A-6's and Bobby Goodman was taken prisoner after the A-6 was shot down). Assad's dad was in charge in those days, and it was a different sort of conflict. I guess the Russian Navy will get a book full of lessons learned from this operation, all said and done.

57mm

15th Nov 2016, 16:34

How much air to ground ordnance do the Su-33s carry when launched from the carrier? The ones in the RT video clip are air to air armed.

ETOPS

15th Nov 2016, 18:01

The ones in the RT video clip are air to air armed.

Maybe the film released by the Russians isn't from todays ops?

Hangarshuffle

15th Nov 2016, 18:44

The planes are gleaming compared to FRS1 or FA2 in comparative role way back ****ty when.

TEEEJ

16th Nov 2016, 15:16

Footage from the Kuznetsov showing Su-33s carrying FAB-500 unguided bombs. NATO ship/helo keeps watch.

J4n_PCG-1zY&feature=related

Lonewolf_50

16th Nov 2016, 15:51

The reporter in the helicopter would be better off wearing hearing protection ... :ugh: as the crew does.

jolihokistix

17th Nov 2016, 15:15

The Russians must be feeling the pressure on their little Syrian base of Tartus. Is this preparation for pull-out if the war does not go their way? This aircraft carrier can relieve some of the pressure, and maybe practice for evacuation if/when the base gets surrounded by terrorists. Russia's Vietnam?

Lonewolf_50

17th Nov 2016, 15:19

Russia's Vietnam?
Not likely. Given the pressure ISIS is under currently in Mosul ... and the fact that Assad is still hanging in there, not seeing the "collapse" looming.
Why do you?

racedo

17th Nov 2016, 21:08

jolihokistix

17th Nov 2016, 23:09

Well, we'll see. The Russians are good at double bluff. Perhaps "keeping their options open" might have been a better way to phrase it. I sense they are tired of this game.

TEEEJ

18th Nov 2016, 11:42

Russian strategic bombers have repeated the Atlantic/Strait of Gibraltar mission profile to launch cruise missiles over the Mediterranean.

Russia has deployed strategic bombers to launch strikes on Islamic State (IS, formerly ISIS/ISIL) and Al-Nusra Front targets in Syria, the Defense Ministry reported. The bombers flew from Russia for the mission, and fired cruise missiles while over the Mediterranean Sea.

With in-flight refueling on two occasions, the bombers covered a distance of some 11,000km (6,835 miles), flying over a northern sea route and the eastern Atlantic.

From

https://www.rt.com/news/367290-russia-cruise-missiles-isis-nusra/

zjYplYsKJ3E&feature=related

Tu-160s first flew the Strait of Gibraltar route back in November 2015.

Russian bombers fly around Europe to strike Syria in 8,000 mile show of strength - Telegraph (http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/europe/russia/12009123/Russian-bombers-fly-around-Europe-to-strike-Syria-in-8000-mile-show-of-strength.html)

NATO QRA were scrambled. Activity with voice recordings at following link.

QRA 16th November 2016: milradar (http://milradar.livejournal.com/1515.html)