In the article offered to your attention, we will try to understand the current state and prospects of the naval aviation of the Russian Navy. Well, first, let's remember what the domestic naval aviation was like during the Soviet era.
As you know, for a number of different reasons, the USSR did not stake on aircraft carriers or carrier-based aircraft in the construction of the navy. However, this does not mean that in our country they did not understand the importance of naval aviation in general - on the contrary! In the 80s of the last century, it was believed that this branch of power is one of the most important components of the navy. The naval aviation (more precisely, the Air Force of the USSR Navy, but for the sake of brevity, we will use the term "naval aviation" regardless of how it was specifically called in a given historical period), many important tasks were assigned. including:
1. Search and Destruction:
- enemy missile and multipurpose submarines;
- enemy surface formations, including carrier strike groups, amphibious assault forces, convoys, naval strike and anti-submarine groups, as well as single combat ships;
- transports, aircraft and enemy cruise missiles;
2. Ensuring the deployment and operations of the forces of its own fleet, including in the form of air defense of ships and fleet facilities;
3. Conducting aerial reconnaissance, guidance and issuance of target designations to other branches of the Navy;
4. Destruction and suppression of objects of the air defense system in the flight lanes of their aviation, in the areas where missions are carried out;
5. Destruction of naval bases, ports and the destruction of ships and transports located in them;
6. Ensuring the landing of amphibious assault forces, reconnaissance and sabotage groups and other assistance to ground forces in coastal areas;
7. Setting up minefields, as well as mine fighting;
8. Conducting radiation and chemical reconnaissance;
9. Rescue of crews in distress;
10. Implementation of air transportation.
For this, the following types of aviation were part of the USSR naval aviation:
1. Marine Missile Aviation (MRA);
2. Anti-submarine aviation (PLA);
3. Attack aviation (SHA);
4. Fighter aircraft (IA);
5. Reconnaissance aircraft (RA).
And besides, there are also special-purpose aircraft, including transport, electronic warfare, mine action, search and rescue, communications, etc.
The number of Soviet naval aviation was impressive in the best sense of the word: by the beginning of the 90s of the twentieth century, it consisted of 52 air regiments and 10 separate squadrons and groups. In 1991, they included 1,702 aircraft, including 372 bombers equipped with anti-ship cruise missiles (Tu-16, Tu-22M2 and Tu-22M3), 966 tactical aircraft (Su-24, Yak-38, Su-17, MiG-27, MiG-23 and other types of fighters), as well as 364 aircraft of other classes and 455 helicopters, and a total of 2,157 aircraft and helicopters. At the same time, the basis of the strike power of naval aviation was made up of naval missile-carrying divisions: their number as of 1991 is unknown to the author, but in 1980 there were five such divisions, which included 13 air regiments.
Well, then the Soviet Union was destroyed and its armed forces were divided among numerous "independent" republics, which at once received state status. It must be said that the Russian Federation withdrew its naval aviation in almost its entirety, but the Russian Federation could not contain such a large force. And so, by the middle of 1996, its composition was reduced more than threefold - to 695 aircraft, including 66 missile carriers, 116 anti-submarine aircraft, 118 fighters and attack aircraft, and 365 helicopters and special aviation aircraft. And that was just the beginning. By 2008, naval aviation continued to decline: unfortunately, we do not have accurate data on its composition, but there were:
1. Naval missile-carrying aviation - one regiment equipped with Tu-22M3 (as part of the Northern Fleet). In addition, there was another mixed air regiment (568th, at the Pacific Fleet), in which, along with two squadrons of Tu-22M3, there were also Tu-142MR and Tu-142M3;
2. Fighter aviation - three air regiments, including 279 oqiap, designed to operate from the deck of the only domestic TAVKR "Admiral of the Fleet of the Soviet Union Kuznetsov". Naturally, the 279th OQIAP was based on the Northern Fleet, while the other two regiments belonged to the BF and Pacific Fleet, armed with the Su-27 and MiG-31 fighters, respectively;
3. Assault aviation - two regiments deployed in the Black Sea Fleet and the Baltic Fleet, respectively, and armed with the Su-24 and Su-24R aircraft;
4. Anti-submarine aviation - everything is somewhat more complicated here. Let's divide it into land-based and ship-based aviation:
- the main land anti-submarine aviation is the 289th separate mixed anti-submarine aviation regiment (Il-38, Ka-27, Ka-29 and Ka-8 helicopters) and the 73rd separate anti-submarine aviation squadron (Tu-142). But apart from them, the Il-38 anti-submarine aircraft are in service (along with other aircraft) of three more mixed air regiments, and one of them (917th, Black Sea Fleet) also has Be-12 amphibious aircraft;
- ship-based anti-submarine aviation includes two naval anti-submarine regiments, and one separate squadron equipped with Ka-27 and Ka-29 helicopters;
5. Three mixed air regiments, in which, along with the previously mentioned Il-38 and Be-12, there is also a large number of transport and other non-combat aircraft and helicopters (An-12, An-24, An-26, Tu-134, Mi -eight). Apparently, the only tactical justification for their existence was that the aviation that survived after the next round of "reforms" should be brought together into a single organizational structure;
6. Transport aviation - two separate transport aviation squadrons (An-2, An-12, An-24, An-26, An-140-100, Tu-134, Il-18, Il18D-36, etc.)
7. Separate helicopter squadron - Mi-8 and Mi-24.
And in total - 13 air regiments and 5 separate air squadrons. Unfortunately, there is no accurate data on the number of aircraft as of 2008, and it is difficult to derive them empirically. The fact is that the numerical strength of naval aviation formations is to a certain extent "floating": in 2008, there were no air divisions in the naval aviation, but in Soviet times, an air division could consist of two or three regiments. In turn, an air regiment usually consists of 3 squadrons, but exceptions are possible here. In turn, an air squadron consists of several air links, and an air link can include 3 or 4 aircraft or helicopters. On average, an air squadron can number 9-12 aircraft, an air regiment 28-32 aircraft, an air division 70-110 aircraft.
Taking the values of the number of air regiment in 30 aircraft (helicopters), and the air squadron - 12, we get the number of naval aviation of the Russian Navy in 450 aircraft and helicopters as of 2008. There is a feeling that this figure is overestimated, but even if it is correct, then in In this case, it can be stated that the number of naval aviation decreased in comparison with 1996 by more than one and a half times.
Someone might decide that this is the very bottom, from where there is only one way - up. Alas, this turned out not to be the case: as part of the reform of the armed forces, it was decided to transfer the aircraft of naval missile-carrying, assault and fighter aircraft (except for carrier-based aircraft) under the jurisdiction of the air force, and later - the military space forces. Thus, the fleet lost almost all of its missile carriers, fighters and attack aircraft, with the exception of the carrier-based aviation regiment, which then flew on the Su-33, and the Black Sea attack aviation regiment, armed with the Su-24. As a matter of fact, the latter could also be transferred to the Air Force, if not for a legal nuance - the air regiment was deployed in the Crimea, where, according to the agreement with Ukraine, only the Navy could deploy its combat units, but the Air Force was prohibited. Thus, having transferred the air regiment to the Aerospace Forces, it would have to be relocated from the Crimea somewhere else.
How reasonable was this decision?
In favor of the withdrawal of missile-carrying and tactical aviation into the Air Force (the Aerospace Forces was created in 2015), the absolutely disastrous situation in which the domestic naval aviation found itself in the first decade of the 21st century spoke. The funds allocated for the maintenance of the fleet were absolutely scanty and did not in any way correspond to the needs of the sailors. In essence, it was not about saving, but about the survival of a certain number of forces out of their total number, and it is very likely that the Navy preferred to direct funds to preserve the holy of holies - strategic missile submarine forces, and in addition - to preserve in a combat-ready state of a certain number of surface and submarine ships. And it is very likely that naval aviation simply did not fit into the beggarly budget that the fleet was forced to be content with - judging by some evidence, the situation there was even worse than in the domestic Air Force (although, it would seem, it was much worse) … In this case, the transfer of a part of the naval aviation to the Air Force seemed to make sense, because there it was possible to support the completely drained air force of the fleet, and nothing was expected in the fleet except a quiet death.
We said earlier that in 2008 naval aviation probably consisted of 450 aircraft and helicopters, and this seems to be an impressive force. But, apparently, for the most part it existed only on paper: for example, the 689th Guards Fighter Aviation Regiment, which was previously part of the Baltic Fleet, quickly "dried up" to the size of a squadron (the regiment itself ceased to exist, now they are thinking of reviving it, well, God forbid, in a good hour …). According to some reports, from the material part of the regiment and two squadrons of the naval missile-carrying aviation of the Air Force, it was possible to assemble only two combat-ready squadrons of Tu-22M3. Thus, the number of naval aviation remained formally significant, only the fighting efficiency was retained, apparently, no more than 25-40% of the aircraft, and maybe less. Thus, as we said earlier, the transfer of missile carriers and tactical aviation from the fleet to the Air Force seemed to make sense.
However, the key word here is "as if". The fact is that such a decision could be justified only in the context of the continuation of the budget deficit, but the last days were coming for him. It was during these years that a new era began for the domestic armed forces - the country finally found funds for more or less worthy of their maintenance, at the same time they began to implement the ambitious state armament program for 2011-2020. Thus, the country's armed forces should have risen, and with them - and naval aviation, and it was simply not necessary to withdraw it from the fleet.
On the other hand, as we remember, that was a time of many changes, including organizational ones: for example, four military districts were formed, the command of which is subordinate to all the forces of the ground forces, the air force and the navy located in the district. In theory, this is an excellent solution, as it greatly simplifies leadership and increases the coherence of actions of various branches of the armed forces. But what will it turn out to be in practice, after all, in the USSR and in the Russian Federation, the training of officers was sufficiently specialized and narrowly focused? Indeed, in theory, such a joint command will work well only if it is headed by people who perfectly understand the features and nuances of the service of military pilots, sailors, and ground forces, and where to get such, if we even have in the Navy there was a division into "surface" and "underwater" admirals, that is, officers spent their entire service on submarine or surface ships, but not on both in turn? How well will the commander of a district, in the past, say, a general officer, set tasks for the same fleet? Provide his combat training?
The author has no answers to these questions.
But back to the joint commands. Theoretically, with such an organization, it makes absolutely no difference where specific aircraft and pilots are located - in the Air Force, or the Navy, because any combat missions, including naval ones, will be solved by all the forces at the disposal of the district. Well, in practice … As we said above, it is difficult to say how effective such a command will be in our realities, but one thing is known for certain. History irrefutably testifies that whenever the fleet was deprived of naval aviation, and its tasks were assigned to the Air Force, the latter failed miserably in combat operations, demonstrating a complete inability to fight effectively over the sea.
The reason is that combat operations at sea and ocean are extremely specific and require special combat training: at the same time, the air force has its own tasks, and will always view naval war as something, perhaps important, but still secondary, not related to the basic functionality of the air force and will prepare for such a war accordingly. I would like to believe, of course, that in our case it will not be so, but … perhaps the only lesson of history is that people do not remember its lessons.
Therefore, we can say that the naval aviation of the domestic fleet in 2011-2012. was, if not destroyed, then reduced to a nominal value. What has changed today? There is no information on the number of naval aviation in the open press, but using various sources, you can try to determine it "by eye".
As is known, naval missile aircraft ceased to exist. Nevertheless, according to existing plans, 30 Tu-22M3 missile carriers should be upgraded to Tu-22M3 and be able to use the Kh-32 anti-ship missile, which is a deep modernization of the Kh-22.
The new missile received an updated GOS capable of operating in conditions of strong electronic countermeasures by the enemy. How effective the new GOS will be, and how effectively aircraft that are not in the fleet will be able to use it, is a big question, but nevertheless, upon completion of this program, we will receive a full-fledged missile-carrying aviation regiment (at least in terms of numbers). True, today, apart from the "pre-production" aircraft, on which the modernization was "tested", there is only one aircraft of this type, the rollout of which took place on August 16, 2018, and although it is said that all 30 aircraft must undergo modernization before 2020, such a time frame is highly questionable.
In addition to two Tu-22M3Ms, we have 10 more MiG-31Ks converted into carriers of the Dagger missiles, but there are too many questions regarding this weapon system that do not allow us to unequivocally consider this missile an anti-ship weapon.
Assault aircraft … As we said earlier, the 43rd Separate Naval Assault Aviation Regiment, based in the Crimea, remained in the Russian Navy. There is no exact number of Su-24Ms in its armament, but given the fact that the first Su-30SM squadron formed in Crimea was included in its composition, and the regiments usually number 3 squadrons, it can be assumed that the number of Su-24M and Su- 24МР as part of naval aviation does not exceed 24 units. - that is, the maximum number of two squadrons.
Fighter aircraft (multipurpose fighters).
Here everything is more or less simple - after the last reform, only the 279th OQIAP remained in the Navy, in service with 17 Su-33s (approximate figure), in addition, another air regiment was formed under the MiG-29KR / KUBR - 100th okiap. Today it includes 22 aircraft - 19 MiG-29KR and 3 MiG-29KUBR. As you know, further delivery of these types of aircraft to the fleet is not planned. However, at present, the Su-30SM are entering service with naval aviation - the author finds it difficult to name the exact number of vehicles in the army (probably within 20 vehicles), but in total, under the contracts in force today, 28 aircraft of this type are expected to be delivered to the fleet.
This, in general, is all.
Reconnaissance aircraft - everything is simple here. She is not there, with the possible exception of a few Su-24MR scouts in the Black Sea 43rd Omshap.
Anti-submarine aviation - today it is based on the IL-38 in, alas, an unknown quantity. Military Balance claims that as of 2016 there were 54 of them, which more or less coincides with the estimates of 2014-2015 known to the author. (about 50 cars). The only thing that can be said more or less accurately is that the current program provides for the modernization of 28 aircraft to the IL-38N state (with the installation of the Novella complex).
It must be said that the Il-38 is already a rather old aircraft (production was completed in 1972), and, probably, the rest of the aircraft will be removed from the naval aviation for disposal. It is the 28 Il-38N that will soon form the basis of Russian anti-submarine aviation.
In addition to the Il-38, the naval aviation also has two Tu-142 squadrons, which are usually also included in the anti-submarine aviation. At the same time, the total number of Tu-142 is estimated as "more than 20" by domestic sources and 27 aircraft according to the Military Balance. However, according to the latter, of this total number 10 machines are Tu-142MR, which is an aircraft for the relay complex of the reserve control system of naval nuclear forces. In order to accommodate the necessary communication equipment, the search and targeting complex was removed from the aircraft, and the first cargo compartment is occupied by communication facilities and a special towed antenna 8,600 m long. It is obvious that the Tu-142MR cannot perform anti-submarine functions.
Accordingly, in all likelihood, the naval aviation includes no more than 17 anti-submarine Tu-142. Taking into account the fact that the regular number of the air squadron is 8, and we have 2 of these squadrons, there is an almost complete correspondence with the number of the regular organizational structure determined by us.
In addition, the anti-submarine aviation includes a number of Be-12 amphibious aircraft - most likely 9 machines remain, of which 4 are search and rescue (Be-12PS)
Special aircraft … In addition to the already mentioned ten Tu-142MRs, the naval aviation also has two Il-20RT and Il-22M. They are often recorded on electronic reconnaissance aircraft, but this is most likely a mistake. Yes, the Il-20 is indeed such an aircraft, but the Il-20RT is, in fact, a telemetric flying laboratory for testing missile technology, and the Il-22M is a doomsday command post, that is, a control plane in case of a nuclear war.
Quantity transport and passenger aircraft it is not amenable to precise accounting, but, probably, their total number is about 50 cars.
Helicopters
Radar patrol helicopters - 2 Ka-31;
Anti-submarine helicopters - 20 Mi-14, 43 Ka-27 and 20 Ka-27M, a total of 83 vehicles;
Attack and transport-combat helicopters - 8 Mi-24P and 27 Ka-29, 35 vehicles in total;
Search and rescue helicopters - 40 Mi-14PS and 16 Ka-27PS, total - 56 machines.
In addition, it is possible that there are about 17 Mi-8s in the version of transport helicopters (according to other sources, they were transferred to other power structures).
In total, today, the Russian naval aviation has 221 aircraft (of which 68 are special and non-combat) and 193 helicopters (of which 73 are non-combat). What tasks can these forces solve?
Air defense … Here, the Northern Fleet is doing more or less well - it is there that all our 39 Su-33 and MiG-29KR / KUBR are deployed. In addition, this fleet probably received several Su-30SMs.
However, attention is drawn to the fact that the typical "budget" air wing of one American aircraft carrier has 48 F / A-18E / F "Super Hornet" and it is possible to strengthen it with another squadron. Thus, the naval tactical aviation of the entire Northern Fleet, at best, corresponds to a single US aircraft carrier, but given the presence of AWACS and electronic warfare aircraft in the American air wing, which provide much better situational awareness than our aircraft can provide, one should rather speak of American superiority. One aircraft carrier. Out of ten.
As for the other fleets, the Pacific and Baltic fleets today do not have their own fighter aircraft at all, so their air defense is completely dependent on the Aerospace Forces (as we said earlier, historical experience shows that the fleet's hope for the Air Force has never justified itself). The Black Sea Fleet, which received the Su-30SM squadron, is doing a little better. But this raises a big question - how are they going to use it? Of course, the Su-30SM today is not only a strike aircraft, but also a fighter capable of "counting spars" to almost any 4th generation fighter - numerous Indian exercises, during which aircraft of this type collided with various foreign "classmates", led to rather optimistic results for us. However, to paraphrase Henry Ford: "The designers, nice guys, have created multifunctional fighters, but the genetics, these blabbering wiseacres, did not cope with the selection of multifunctional pilots." The point is that even if it is possible to create a multi-role fighter that can equally well fight both air and surface and ground targets, then prepare people who can equally well fight enemy fighters and perform strike functions, probably, all the same it is impossible.
The specifics of the work of a pilot of long-range, fighter or attack aircraft are very different. At the same time, the process of training pilots in itself is very lengthy: in no case should one think that military educational institutions produce pilots trained for modern combat operations. We can say that the flying school is the first stage of training, but then, in order to become a professional, a young warrior has to go through a long and difficult path. As the commander of the naval aviation of the Navy, Hero of Russia, Major General Igor Sergeevich Kozhin said:
“Pilot training is a complex and lengthy process that takes about eight years. This, so to speak, is the path from a flight school cadet to a 1st class pilot. Provided that he goes to study at the flight school for four years, and in the next four years the pilot will reach the 1st grade. But only the most talented are capable of such rapid growth”.
But "Pilot 1st Class" is a high, but not the highest stage in training, there is also an "ace pilot" and a "sniper pilot" … years of hard work. And yes, no one argues that, having achieved high professionalism, for example, on the MiG-31, the pilot is able to retrain on the Su-24 in the future, that is, to change his “occupation”. But this, again, will require a lot of effort and time, during which the skills of a fighter pilot will gradually be lost.
And yes, there is absolutely no need to blame educational institutions for this - alas, in almost no business a university graduate is a professional with a capital letter. Physicians, despite the 6-year study period, do not start independent practice, but go to an internship, where they work for another year under the supervision of experienced doctors, while they are prohibited from making independent decisions. And if a young doctor wants an in-depth study of any direction, a residency awaits him … Why, the author of this article, being already a graduate of an economic university in the distant past, soon after starting work heard an absolutely wonderful phrase addressed to him: “When a big part of the theory will fly out of your head, and practical knowledge will take its place, perhaps you will justify half of your salary”- and this was absolutely true.
Why are we all talking about this? Moreover, the Black Sea Su-30SM were included in the assault aviation regiment and, apparently, the fleet is going to use them precisely as strike aircraft. This is confirmed by the words of the representative of the Black Sea Fleet Vyacheslav Trukhachev: "The Su-30SM aircraft have proven themselves well and today are the main striking force of the Black Sea Fleet's naval aviation."
Interestingly, the same can be seen in the aviation of other countries. Thus, the US Air Force has the F-15C air superiority planes and its two-seat strike "version" of the F-15E. At the same time, the latter is not at all devoid of fighter qualities, he remains a formidable air fighter, and he, perhaps, can be considered the closest American analogue of our Su-30SM. Nevertheless, in modern conflicts, the F-15E has almost never been assigned the task of gaining / maintaining air superiority - this is the responsibility of the F-15C, while the F-15E is focused on the implementation of the strike function.
Thus, we can assume that in the Black Sea Fleet, despite the presence of the Su-30SM squadron (which in any case would be hopelessly small), naval aviation is incapable of solving air defense tasks for ships and fleet facilities.
Impact functions … The only fleet that can boast of the ability to somehow solve them is the Black Sea, due to the presence of an assault air regiment in the Crimea. This formation is a serious deterrent and practically excludes "visits" of Turkish surface forces or small detachments of NATO surface ships to our shores in wartime. However, as far as the author knows, such visits were never planned, and the US Navy intended to operate with its aviation and cruise missiles from the Mediterranean Sea, where they are absolutely inaccessible to the Su-30SM and Su-24 of the Russian Black Sea Fleet.
Other fleets of tactical attack aircraft do not have in their composition (except perhaps a few Su-30SM). As for our long-range aviation of the Aerospace Forces, in the future it will be able to form one regiment (30 vehicles) of the modernized Tu-22M3M with X-32 missiles, which can act as a means of strengthening any of our four fleets (the Caspian Flotilla clearly does not need such a thing). But … what is one missile regiment? During the Cold War, the US Navy consisted of 15 aircraft carriers, and the Soviet MPA - 13 air regiments of missile-carrying aviation in which there were 372 aircraft, or almost 25 aircraft per aircraft carrier (this is not counting a separate instructor-research rocket-carrying regiment). Today the Americans have only 10 aircraft carriers, and we will have (will there be?) 30 modernized Tu-22M3M - three vehicles per enemy ship. Of course, the Tu-22M3M with the Kh-32 has significantly greater capabilities than the Tu-22M3 with the Kh-22, but the quality of the American air groups does not stand still - their composition was replenished by the Super Hornets with AFAR and improved avionics, on the way F-35C … The USSR never considered the Tu-22M3 a wunderwaffe, capable of destroying all enemy aircraft carriers, and today our capabilities are reduced not even several times, but an order of magnitude.
True, there are ten more MiG-31K with the "Dagger"
But the problem is that it is completely unclear whether this missile can hit moving ships at all. There is a lot of talk about the fact that the "Dagger" is a modernized missile of the "Iskander" complex, but the aeroballistic missile of this complex is not able to hit moving targets. Apparently, the R-500 cruise missile is capable of this (in fact, this is a land-based "Caliber", or, if you will, "Caliber", this is the overwhelmed R-500), and it is quite possible that the "Dagger" complex is also Like Iskander, it is a "two-missile" missile, and that it is possible to defeat sea targets only when using a cruise missile, but not an aeroballistic missile. This is also hinted at by the exercises that took place, in which the Tu-22M3 with the Kh-32 and the MiG-31K with the aeroballistic "Dagger" took part - while the defeat of sea and ground targets was announced, and it is obvious that the Kh-32, being an anti-ship missile, was used by the target ship. Accordingly, the "Dagger" was fired at a ground target, but who would do it with an expensive anti-ship missile? If all this is true, then the capabilities of a dozen MiG-31K are reduced from "an invincible hypersonic wunderwaffe that can easily destroy US aircraft carriers" to a rather weak ten-rocket salvo with conventional anti-ship missiles that are unlikely to be able to overcome the air defense of a modern AUG.
Reconnaissance and target designation … Here, the capabilities of naval aviation are minimal, since for everything about everything we have only two specialized Ka-31 helicopters, which, in terms of their capabilities, are many times inferior to any AWACS aircraft. In addition, we have at our disposal a number of Il-38 and Tu-142, which theoretically can perform reconnaissance functions (for example, the modernized avionics of the Il-38N aircraft are capable, according to some sources, of detecting enemy surface ships at a distance of 320 km). However, the capabilities of the Il-38N are still very limited in comparison with specialized aircraft (Il-20, A-50U, etc.), and most importantly, the use of these aircraft for solving reconnaissance tasks reduces the already unimaginable strength of anti-submarine aviation.
Anti-submarine aviation … Against the background of the frankly disastrous situation of other naval aviation, the state of the anti-submarine component looks relatively good - up to 50 Il-38 and 17 Tu-142 with a certain amount of Be-12 (possibly 5). However, it should be understood that this aircraft has largely lost its combat significance due to the obsolescence of search and targeting equipment, caused, among other things, by the replenishment of the US Navy with 4th generation nuclear submarines. All this is not a secret for the leadership of the Russian Navy, so now 28 Il-38s and all 17 Tu-142s are being modernized. The updated Il-38N and Tu-142MZM, most likely, will fully meet the tasks of modern warfare, but … This means that the entire anti-submarine aviation is reduced to one and a half regiments. Is it a lot or a little? In the USSR, the number of anti-submarine aircraft Tu-142, Il-38 and Be-12 was 8 regiments: thus, we can say that our future one and a half regiments, taking into account the growth of aircraft capabilities, is quite sufficient for one fleet. The problem is that we have not one, but four fleets. Perhaps the same can be said about our anti-submarine helicopters. Generally speaking, 83 rotorcraft represent a significant force, but we must not forget that ship-based helicopters are also counted here.
Perhaps the only types of naval aviation that have more or less sufficient numbers to solve the tasks facing them are transport and search and rescue aviation.
What are the prospects for domestic naval aviation? We will talk about this in the next article, but for now, summarizing its current state, we note 2 points:
The positive aspect is that the worst times for the Russian naval aviation are over, and they survived, despite all the troubles of the 90s and the first decade of the 2000s. The backbone of the pilots of carrier and base aviation has been preserved, thus, today there are all the necessary prerequisites for the revival of this type of troops;
The negative aspect is that, taking into account the existing number, our naval aviation has actually lost the ability to perform its inherent tasks, and in the event of a large-scale conflict, "it is unlikely to be able to do more than show that it knows how to die bravely" (phrase from the memorandum of Gross-Admiral Raeder dated September 3, 1939, dedicated to the German surface fleet).
