Were Soviet anti-CBG tactics likely to succeed?

RSS
Email

0 Kudo

Author	Comment
Admiral Beez	Were Soviet anti-CBG tactics likely to succeed?	Lead	[-]
Posts: 4510 (30-Apr-2008 15:42:15) Reply Quote More My Recent Posts Message Me Connection Blocking Invite Ignore User's Posts	During the Cold War, the USSR's plan to take out USN carrier battle groups was to attack with large numbers of Bear-guided, missile-armed Tupolev Tu-22M jets and cruise-missile-armed submarines. By the mid-1980s, given the effectiveness of AWACS-directed Phoenix-armed F-14s, Ticonderoga missile cruisers and lastly ship-based CIWS, how likely was a Soviet attack to succeed? Of course it's a numbers game, with the Soviet trying to send in more missiles than the USN defences can handle, but how likely was this to occur?
Gernsback		#1	[-]
Posts: 238 (30-Apr-2008 15:54:19) Reply Quote More My Recent Posts Message Me Connection Blocking Invite Ignore User's Posts	I've read in one of the wargames done in the 1980s that an 8-regiment raid against a CVBG and amphib fleet using proper dispersion and decoys would only take out about four ships.
Admiral Beez		#2	[-]
Posts: 4511 (30-Apr-2008 17:46:49) Reply Quote More My Recent Posts Message Me Connection Blocking Invite Ignore User's Posts	I suppose if one of the four ships is the carrier, then that's a mission kill. However, the USN would still have another ten carriers, and the Soviets have just lost a ton of aircraft, pilots and missiles, and besides the amphib force or the supply convoy will still get through.
Nightwatch2		#3	[-]
Posts: 3533 (30-Apr-2008 17:52:51) Reply Quote More My Recent Posts Message Me Connection Blocking Invite Ignore User's Posts	glad we never found out. Our take in the airwings at the time was that we could probably prevail against a regimental size raid, including subs and surface ships, against a single carrier. That ratio would sorta hold as you went up the scale, i.e., as long as the raids matched the carrier airwings we would hold (2 vs 2, 3 vs 3, etc.) If the Soviets were able to mount a 2 v 1 then things would get dicey in a hurry and we figured the regiments would be depleted enough that the next carrier into the fight might do better and perhaps find a survivor or two from the first CVBG...... intel cueing was always critical so that we could "set the grid" prior to arrival of the opposition. If our first indication were the radars coming on, we were toast..... and of course the use of nuclear cruise missiles tipped things into a whole new ball-game! we did not think that the Soviets would be able to ccordinate subs and surface shooters with a regimental raid. Too hard. We figured those would factor in as barriers against our forces moving forward in the North Pacific and North Atlantic. Republican; because not everyone can be on welfare.
Admiral Beez		#4	[-]
Posts: 4512 (30-Apr-2008 18:25:03) Reply Quote More My Recent Posts Message Me Connection Blocking Invite Ignore User's Posts	How many aircraft made up a Regiment of Backfires? Was a Regiment considered a group of Squadrons? How many missiles would each Backfire deploy?
Nightwatch2		#5	[-]
Posts: 3537 ( 1-May-2008 00:48:03) Reply Quote More My Recent Posts Message Me Connection Blocking Invite Ignore User's Posts	regiment sizes varied depending on the aircraft. Not sure of the classification so no further comment. Republican; because not everyone can be on welfare.
wabpilot		#6	[-]
Posts: 2029 ( 1-May-2008 01:04:57) Reply Quote More My Recent Posts Message Me Connection Blocking Invite Ignore User's Posts	Nightwatch2 wrote: glad we never found out. Definitely. I think if we had been able to trap some Bears, we would have had a substantial advantage. The F-14/AIM-54 paired with the E-2 gave us that opportunity. But, if the Bears went undetected, I think we would have been in trouble. A complicating factor was the presence of the REFORGER convoys. Frankly those were what the AVMF would be shooting at, not a CVBG. The whole point of Soviet naval aviation was to close the Atlantic to US and Canadian reinforcements. Our job would have been greatly complicated by having to position ourselves in such a way as to protect the convoys and hit the AVMF. we did not think that the Soviets would be able to ccordinate subs and surface shooters with a regimental raid. Too hard. We figured those would factor in as barriers against our forces moving forward in the North Pacific and North Atlantic. I agree. Had we pursued the maritime strategy of the Reagan administration, war fighting in the North Atlantic would have been very different and much more dangerous for our side. Of course, the F-18s might have tipped the scales our way. But, I sure would not have wanted to go up north with a A-7s.
seasick		#7	[-]
Posts: 4628 ( 1-May-2008 03:07:06) Reply Quote More My Recent Posts Message Me Connection Blocking Invite Ignore User's Posts	How long could the Soviets have kept their Tu-95, Tu-16, and Tu-22M flying in large numbers? How long until the maintance becomes overwhelming?
jim3au		#8	[-]
Posts: 1472 ( 1-May-2008 04:11:24) Reply Quote More My Recent Posts Message Me Connection Blocking Invite Ignore User's Posts	From what I understood from other readings and from what the more knowledgeable have said, the maintenace is unlikely to be a factor. The Soviets had to find and keep found the American carriers. The Soviets could easily get the element of surprise working once because they had ships, aircraft and boats whose specific job was to follow the American battle group and keep it under observation. That would work alright up until the American Admiral decided to lose his follower, then the Soviets have to fly in with their radar announcing their coming and they are going to take casualties regardless of how effective their attack is. They are going to have to keep on taking those casualties until they withdraw and the Admiral calls off pursuit. As has been stated, they have as a battle plan to provide more targets than the Americans can shoot down and then fire more missiles than the Americans can defend against. It might be uncomfortable being on a Perry class FFG in the Atlantic when all this is coming to pass but it will not be much fun being in a Russian air regiment knowing that you are intentionally being used as cannon fodder. Unless the Soviets can put up some absolutely huge numbers of aircraft, and then coordinate them in massed attacks [which is pretty tricky] the number doing three sorties will be small. There should be plenty of maintenance personnel for the returning Soviet aircraft because there is likely to be only a small fraction of them returning.
Nightwatch2		#9	[-]
Posts: 3541 ( 1-May-2008 17:53:19) Reply Quote More My Recent Posts Message Me Connection Blocking Invite Ignore User's Posts	"There should be plenty of maintenance personnel for the returning Soviet aircraft because there is likely to be only a small fraction of them returning." something we were pretty good at (in exercises anyway) I got a lot of good Bear and Badger hunting in....... it was all about numbers. For a good analogy, watch the movie Gettysburg where a description of the upcoming Picket's charge is described by "Gen Longstreet" to the spy who wants to carry a rifle in the attack. Pretty good description of what the North Atlantic would have looked like. Republican; because not everyone can be on welfare.
Joshua Kintner		#10	[-]
Registered Member Posts: 413 ( 2-May-2008 14:48:32) Reply Quote More My Recent Posts Message Me Connection Blocking Invite Ignore User's Posts	I am reminded of the TC novel Red Storm Rising when I read through this discussion. In the book, a raid against an Allied CVBG took place where two American and the French CV Foch were steaming together in the North Sea. I don't recall the exact numbers mentioned in the book, if precise numbers were mentioned, but basically the Soviet attack plan had Bears streaming in from the north and firing off a large number of Kelt missiles modified to give off the radar signatures of a Tu-22M. The F-14 Screen went north and engaged the Kelt missiles with their Phoenix missiles, killing a large number of "Backfires" before the real Tu-22M raid came in from the west and blew the crap out the CVBG. Even taken by suprise, the Allied CVBG killed a large number of inbound vampires thanks to the AEGIS cruisers, but CVN Nimitz was still crippled, and Foch was blown up with the loss of most hands, along with a Amphib Assault Carrier being torn to shreds.

<< Previous Topic Next Topic >>

Yuku free message boards

Were Soviet anti-CBG tactics likely to succeed?

Were Soviet anti-CBG tactics likely to succeed?

Quick Reply