Does Russia need aircraft carriers?
The history of the creation and construction of aircraft-carrying ships of the USSR and Russia is deeply dramatic and in many respects tragic.
Despite the fact that the leadership of the Soviet fleet, back in the distant 1920s, realized the enormous potential of this new type of ships in the war at sea, and at the same time the first attempts to build them were made, the first "full-fledged" aircraft carrier - the heavy aircraft-carrying cruiser "Admiral Kuznetsov ", entered the fleet only at the end of 1991. Before the Great Patriotic War, and then, until the mid-1960s, the construction of such ships was largely hindered by the country's economic opportunities, and after that - by the will of the country's top military and political leadership.
At the moment, the Russian Navy has only one aircraft carrier - the same aircraft carrier "Admiral Kuznetsov", which performs more "training" functions, to provide experience in operating such ships, rather than being a full-fledged combat unit. As before, aircraft carriers are the "blue dream" of modern Russian admirals. However, for now, the new Russian aircraft carriers remain only dreams, and there are a huge number of economic and industrial factors that impede its construction. The only thing is that now there is no need to prove their role to the political leadership of the country, in contrast to the "Soviet" times.
At the same time, the issue of the need to build new aircraft carriers for the Russian fleet is a subject of public discussion, mainly in the vastness of various media and the Internet, and has huge "camps" of both supporters and opponents. This article attempts to address this issue from all sides. First, it is necessary to consider the arguments of opponents of building new aircraft carriers for the Russian fleet. After reviewing their opinion, the following arguments can be highlighted:
- A "race" with the fleets of the United States and other Western powers is a priori meaningless, since Russia is a "continental" power, while the United States and a number of other Western powers (for example, Great Britain) are "sea", for which the fleet is almost the main military-political instrument. Accordingly, the US fleet will be a priori overall superior to the Russian one, and the “chase” after it in an attempt to equalize in combat capabilities, as it was during the Soviet era, due to a huge number of factors, especially economic, is initially doomed to collapse.
- Opponents of the Russian aircraft carriers see in them, first of all, a "superpower" military-political instrument that allows for the "projection of power" in various parts of the globe, as well as a kind of instrument of "colonial policy" with the aim of providing military and "psychological" influence at various countries of the third world, "looking back" at the same time, first of all, at the US aircraft carrier fleet. This point of view is only partly correct. In addition to the above "functions" of aircraft carriers, their main role in the US Navy is overlooked. And in the American navy, aircraft carriers are, first of all, a means of gaining supremacy at sea. If you look at the experience of using American aircraft carriers in local conflicts in recent decades, it is easy to see that the role of carrier-based aircraft was in many ways “secondary”. Most of the tasks assigned to aviation in all these conflicts were solved primarily by "land" aviation. Actually, the domination of the United States in many regions is provided not by aircraft carriers, but by a huge network of military bases, in many scattered on all continents, on which, if necessary, the necessary air and land groups are deployed. However, in solving the problems of conquering superiority at sea, American aircraft carriers are second to none. Their carrier-based squadrons, capable of firing a huge variety of anti-ship missiles (ASM), can overwhelm the forces of the fleets of most potential adversaries.
- Finally, the most important argument of the opponents of Russian aircraft carriers is the economic factor. The construction of an aircraft carrier costs colossal money - at least 6-7 billion dollars (given the long absence of the practice of building such large ships, the amount may turn out to be much higher). In addition, the creation of an aircraft carrier also implies the creation of an "accompanying" grouping of other ships, and this is a truly grandiose economic task, the feasibility of which is questioned by opponents of the construction of aircraft carriers.
Now let's consider, in fact, what "pluses" are provided by the presence of an aircraft carrier. It should be noted right away that the concept of using aircraft carriers in Russia (and in other countries as well) has little in common with the "American" one, so focusing on the United States in this matter is meaningless. The main task of aircraft carriers in the Russian fleet is, first of all, the creation of an "air shield" over the connection of ships and increasing its combat stability.
- Even a "light" aircraft carrier has 2-3 squadrons of fighters on board, which provide direct cover for the formation of ships, wherever it is. This provides an order of magnitude greater combat stability. Despite the fact that modern shipborne air defense systems provide high fire performance, carry out simultaneous shelling of several targets, and have a very high probability of hitting the enemy with anti-ship missiles, it is worth noting that enemy aircraft can freely release their anti-ship missiles outside the effective air defense of the ship formation. In this case, the ships will have to fight off a large number of anti-ship missiles on their own, and during a massive attack, a large salvo of enemy anti-ship missiles is able to “penetrate” the air defense of the ship formation. However, even 1-2 squadrons of carrier-based fighters are capable of, if not disrupting, then significantly disorganizing even a massive attack by enemy aircraft, which will greatly simplify the "work" of naval air defense systems. Note that we are talking about a massive attack by enemy aircraft, for example, in a combat clash with an American carrier strike group (AUG). And in this role, apart from the aircraft carrier, nothing can provide adequate air cover for the compound. Covering by "coastal" aircraft is possible only in the immediate vicinity of the coast, and it is a priori less effective than from carrier-based aircraft.
- The presence of an aircraft carrier as part of a formation significantly expands the capabilities of reconnaissance and target designation for connecting ships. The structure of the carrier-based wing includes, at a minimum, Long Range Radar Detection (AWACS) helicopters. And even with their limited capabilities in comparison with AWACS aircraft, they are able to detect air and surface targets at a distance of up to 200 kilometers (deck AWACS aircraft in our country have not been created, and obviously, the development of such an aircraft will take a lot of time). However, the construction of an aircraft carrier is a process, to put it mildly, not a quick one. In addition, in the future, the role of AWACS aircraft can be assumed by AWACS unmanned aerial vehicles (such projects exist in our country). This provides the possibility of both timely detection of air threats and the issuance of target designation for anti-ship missiles when firing at long range. It also significantly increases the capabilities of naval air defense systems. New shipborne air defense systems such as the European PAAMS, the American Aegis with the latest SM-6 anti-aircraft missiles and the Russian Polyment-Redut have anti-aircraft missiles with active homing heads, which allows them to hit low-altitude targets (which include anti-ship missiles) outside the radio horizon … However, this requires information about targets beyond the radio horizon, and only AWACS aircraft or helicopters can provide it.
“An aircraft carrier can greatly increase its strike connectivity as well. Modern aircraft of the 4+ generation can use almost the entire range of guided weapons, and even a light fighter such as the MiG-29K can take two light anti-ship missiles without any problems.
- Finally, an aircraft carrier is also a kind of huge command post for connecting ships. Only on ships of this class are the most advanced automated control systems for the ship formation, capable of receiving, transmitting and processing information from the ships of the formation, submarines, aviation and the headquarters of the Navy, practically in real time.
Thus, the presence of an aircraft carrier as part of a fleet of ships not only at times, but by an order of magnitude increases its combat stability and combat capabilities. Even in spite of the fact that the modern Russian fleet is in many respects "coastal", its "zone of responsibility" is very large. What are only the waters of the Barents or Okhotsk Sea. At the same time, the fleets of potential adversaries are very impressive. It is extremely difficult to do without aircraft carriers even to solve the problems of defense of the maritime borders and the maritime economic zone of Russia. To ensure these tasks, it is desirable for the Russian fleet to have one carrier group in the Northern and Pacific fleets, which would include an aircraft carrier, 1-2 missile cruisers or destroyers, 3-5 frigates and 1-2 multipurpose nuclear submarines (nuclear submarines).
Unfortunately, the construction of aircraft carriers in our country is constantly being postponed, and it is unlikely that they will be laid even in the foreseeable future in view of the not very best economic situation. Indeed, the construction of an aircraft carrier is terribly expensive. So, for example, the construction of a new Russian aircraft carrier of Project 23000 is estimated at 300 billion rubles. In addition, it is necessary to create new destroyers and frigates, which would be included in the aircraft carrier group, to create the necessary infrastructure for basing and many other related projects. However, the construction and commissioning of such an aircraft carrier formation will increase the power of the Navy by an order of magnitude, turning it into a powerful military-political instrument capable of preventing a possible war from flaring up by its very appearance. For example, in the event of a conflict around some disputable water area rich in natural resources, the appearance of an aircraft carrier formation in this area can, with a very high probability, force the enemy to abandon any attempts to resolve the conflict by force and make him more "accommodating" at the negotiating table.
And what is no less important, in addition to the obvious military advantages, the construction of an aircraft carrier is a huge investment in the country's industry. The construction of such a ship is within the power of only the most developed powers; in fact, it is a kind of "national project", on which thousands of enterprises throughout the country are working. Yes, the aircraft carrier is insanely expensive, but the costs for it will pay off many times in the future. Its construction will entail "pulling up" the level of the entire industry as a whole, and its high-tech industries in the first place. These are tens, if not hundreds of thousands of new jobs. At the same time, despite the huge cost, the construction process takes a huge amount of time (it will take 7-10 years to build an aircraft carrier in our country at the moment), accordingly, the financing of its construction is very much "spaced" in time, and will not be an excessive burden for the annual budget country.
An aircraft carrier is an indispensable element for the fleet of any more or less large maritime power. In addition to the United States, France has its own aircraft carrier, England is building two new-generation aircraft carriers, India and China have acquired new aircraft carriers. Yes, China completed the construction of the former Soviet aircraft carrier "Varyag", and for India the former aircraft carrier "Admiral Gorshkov" was rebuilt into a "full-fledged" aircraft carrier. But these powers have already started building their own national aircraft carriers. At the same time, China has launched an ambitious program involving the presence of 6 aircraft carriers by 2030. And if aircraft carriers can be afforded by France, England, India and China, then can't Russia really afford them?
And I really want to hope that time will pass, and in the future the new Russian aircraft carrier will cut the waves of the World Ocean with its huge bow, evoking fear and respect of any potential adversaries.
