Russian fleet sailing in to the North sea
Guest
Posts: n/a
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.
I am aware of the clockwork precision of the well oiled machine but this would not be a typical day in Murmansk.
Imagegear
The Command Centres must have been frenetic dealing with potential threats and targets arriving from all sides.
I am aware of the clockwork precision of the well oiled machine but this would not be a typical day in Murmansk.
Imagegear
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: West Midlands
Posts: 239
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
USSR doctrine was always based on the defence concept (believe it or not, it's up to you).
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: Horsham, England, UK. ---o--O--o---
Posts: 1,185
Received 4 Likes
on
2 Posts
The Russian Flotilla also being shadowed by 2 US Navy P8s.. At high level though.
https://drive.google.com/open?id=0Bw...HB0YmlRczFsV0E
https://drive.google.com/open?id=0Bw...UttZF9hOWZRRHc
https://drive.google.com/open?id=0Bw...HB0YmlRczFsV0E
https://drive.google.com/open?id=0Bw...UttZF9hOWZRRHc
Last edited by Out Of Trim; 21st Oct 2016 at 21:13.
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: UK on a crosswind
Posts: 262
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
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.
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.
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
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
So did the Russian task force participate in the mandatory Dover Straits traffic scheme (https://mcanet.mcga.gov.uk/public/c4...pdf/mgn128.htm) or did they go "AIS dark" and operate under the maritime equivalent of "due regard"?
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
The right of Might
P-8 mission to the English Channel. Operating out of Iceland.
https://twitter.com/MIL_Radar/status/789530467641004032
https://twitter.com/MIL_Radar
https://twitter.com/MIL_Radar/status/789530467641004032
https://twitter.com/MIL_Radar
So did the Russian task force participate in the mandatory Dover Straits traffic scheme (https://mcanet.mcga.gov.uk/public/c4...pdf/mgn128.htm) or did they go "AIS dark" and operate under the maritime equivalent of "due regard"?
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
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: bristol
Age: 56
Posts: 1,051
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
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.
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.
By welcoming fellow sailors the Brits would be shown as the good guys. I feel that we have missed an opportunity here.
Guest
Posts: n/a
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
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
Last edited by ImageGear; 22nd Oct 2016 at 04:20.
Join Date: May 2012
Location: Moscow region
Age: 65
Posts: 567
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
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.
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.
Last edited by A_Van; 22nd Oct 2016 at 07:12.
Join Date: Feb 2013
Location: England
Posts: 924
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
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.
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.
Last edited by Hangarshuffle; 22nd Oct 2016 at 07:28.
Join Date: May 2012
Location: Moscow region
Age: 65
Posts: 567
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
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.
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.
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: bristol
Age: 56
Posts: 1,051
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
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.
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.
