Unsure of what a typical USSR navy battle-group would look like

[MayorMcWeed]

Finding it hard to find information on what a USSR naval battle-group would look like, or carrier battle-group, or did they even do that? I don't know, my googlefu is failing my today, I'm trying to make a mission like US vs USSR fleets, but as easy as it is to find pictures of US naval groups from that time, the iron curtain is really messing with me when it comes to finding the soviet counterparts

[Ole "Slim Jolo" the Hobo Hero]

Yea last night I was trying to figure out what a typical Black Sea / Mediterranean battle group my look like for the same reason as well as what US / NATO 6th Fleet or local coastal forces of respective nations like Greece / Turkey might look like, was kinda playing around basically dueling a force of 5 missile cruisers / destroyers in the Adriatic but I don't know what an actual 'authentic' force would have looked like circa 1985 or where they'd be operating / what they'd be doing. I assume a Soviet/Pact force circa 1985 might operate out of all their Black Sea regions as well as maybe basing/operating rights out of places like Syria / Egypt / Libya etc?

Really hope they add ability to edit flight decks in the editor soon too / generic airbase options for all sides so we can kinda build stations how we like. On one hand I found it was sorta fun just placing a USSR air base somewhere on north end of Black Sea and trying to kinda 'duel' with its resources, but on other end besides carrier group I don't think theres a Blueforce equivelent to the large USSR airbases, just a small airbase or carrier options for flight decks in editor right now

Tho i'd wonder if you save a scenario as something, is there a plaintext file to edit flight deck as well?

In my mind I kinda liked making scenarios with kinda limited resources in a game like CMO and want to do the same with Sea Power, haha. Funny enough you can launch flights from airbases in editor and just have their chance of appearing as 0, but if you reload the saved scenario the flight deck will be full again and you'll have to do it all over, super annoying - also seems like you can't place a flight and make it rebase at another airbase in editor either, etc. All things I really hope they change for sake of scenario creators haha (tho we also just need much larger catalogs of air / ships for nations in general too)

[MayorMcWeed]

Originally posted by Ole "Slim Jolo" the Hobo Hero:

Yea last night I was trying to figure out what a typical Black Sea / Mediterranean battle group my look like for the same reason as well as what US / NATO 6th Fleet or local coastal forces of respective nations like Greece / Turkey might look like, was kinda playing around basically dueling a force of 5 missile cruisers / destroyers in the Adriatic but I don't know what an actual 'authentic' force would have looked like circa 1985 or where they'd be operating / what they'd be doing. I assume a Soviet/Pact force circa 1985 might operate out of all their Black Sea regions as well as maybe basing/operating rights out of places like Syria / Egypt / Libya etc?

Really hope they add ability to edit flight decks in the editor soon too / generic airbase options for all sides so we can kinda build stations how we like. On one hand I found it was sorta fun just placing a USSR air base somewhere on north end of Black Sea and trying to kinda 'duel' with its resources, but on other end besides carrier group I don't think theres a Blueforce equivelent to the large USSR airbases, just a small airbase or carrier options for flight decks in editor right now

Tho i'd wonder if you save a scenario as something, is there a plaintext file to edit flight deck as well?

In my mind I kinda liked making scenarios with kinda limited resources in a game like CMO and want to do the same with Sea Power, haha. Funny enough you can launch flights from airbases in editor and just have their chance of appearing as 0, but if you reload the saved scenario the flight deck will be full again and you'll have to do it all over, super annoying - also seems like you can't place a flight and make it rebase at another airbase in editor either, etc. All things I really hope they change for sake of scenario creators haha (tho we also just need much larger catalogs of air / ships for nations in general too)

Yeah the game has some certain areas where it needs to cook more for sure, have you tried going across the international date line yet? It's basically the edge of flat earth in this game haha. Have you tried messing with the airbase load out in the game files? There's .ini files for every type of airbase, and if you downloaded one of the modded airbases you can edit them in the mod's folder in the workshop folder! Obviously not ideal, it really should be capable in the editor. Same with load outs of every plane...

[nul]

Not an expert, but decided to search.

https://www.history.navy.mil/research/library/online-reading-room/title-list-alphabetically/c/conflict-coop-us-soviet-navies-cold-war.html

Each era had a slightly different strategy, but if you look under the "1958-1968" heading, it notes that submarines and "naval rocket aviation" was the primary strategy defined (but deployed?).

https://navyhistory.org/2013/02/normans-corner-analyzing-exercise-okean/

Their exercises consisted of large surface forces (61 in the above case). Other exercises like Okean, even larger - https://www.usni.org/magazines/proceedings/2020/april/okean-massive-soviet-exercise-50-years-later.

Other than that, what I've been able to find is they don't really operate a 'Battle Group' in the sense that the US Navy does (and certainly not a CAG ;)).

I skimmed this so I may be drawing the wrong conclusion from someone who has the time to read it, but my take away was that the Soviet Navy was most concerned about protecting their SSBNs above all else for the second-strike capability.

https://www.cna.org/archive/CNA_Files/pdf/cop-2013-u-005622-final.pdf

There is a lot of declassified information from the CIA/USN regarding the Soviet Navy should you want to dive in.

Perhaps the reason this is difficult to find is there was no common "make up" of a surface fleet. Perhaps they simply brought what they believe they required to the fight. That's my conjecture. Hopefully we have someone here from the USN that may know more.

[MayorMcWeed]

Originally posted by nul:

Not an expert, but decided to search.

https://www.history.navy.mil/research/library/online-reading-room/title-list-alphabetically/c/conflict-coop-us-soviet-navies-cold-war.html

Each era had a slightly different strategy, but if you look under the "1958-1968" heading, it notes that submarines and "naval rocket aviation" was the primary strategy defined (but deployed?).

https://navyhistory.org/2013/02/normans-corner-analyzing-exercise-okean/

Their exercises consisted of large surface forces (61 in the above case). Other exercises like Okean, even larger - https://www.usni.org/magazines/proceedings/2020/april/okean-massive-soviet-exercise-50-years-later.

Other than that, what I've been able to find is they don't really operate a 'Battle Group' in the sense that the US Navy does (and certainly not a CAG ;)).

I skimmed this so I may be drawing the wrong conclusion from someone who has the time to read it, but my take away was that the Soviet Navy was most concerned about protecting their SSBNs above all else for the second-strike capability.

https://www.cna.org/archive/CNA_Files/pdf/cop-2013-u-005622-final.pdf

There is a lot of declassified information from the CIA/USN regarding the Soviet Navy should you want to dive in.

Perhaps the reason this is difficult to find is there was no common "make up" of a surface fleet. Perhaps they simply brought what they believe they required to the fight. That's my conjecture. Hopefully we have someone here from the USN that may know more.

Wow, thanks man, great stuff.

[BBsquid]

The Soviet Navy's primary focus was protecting SSBN bastions. They didn't really form battle groups per se because, despite the advice and guidance of ADM Gorshkov, the Soviets really weren't a blue water, open ocean combat force.

They expected to defeat NATO convoys, SAGs, and CVBGs with massed missile attacks from SSNs, SSGNs and Soviet Naval Aviation.

The capital ship in the Soviet Navy wasn't a surface ship, it was submarines.

[joetrusty2020]

The IISS Military Balance for those eras are somewhat guess work, likewise for Norman Polmar's Guide to the Soviet Navy and the respective Navy, Air Army, and PVO planes in the area. Also remember that there may be conflicting accounts of how the Soviet Navy operated, i.e. only 15% deployed to provide a wartime surge vs 25% or 33% for US or NATO navies for ships/subs deployed (Lehman's Command of the Seas had a US Navy surge plan of 100%, too), which is also mentioned in a CIA document for Soviet operating practices. Clancy had his own take in Red Storm Rising and in Hunt for Red October, likewise for Larry Bond, the Harpoon wargame creator. So I have been doing a nominal fleet based upon efforts to harmonize those sources for deployment and then pulling the respective surface action group from a fraction of the assumed geographically assigned ships. If you want, then as time permits, I can try to post some of those examples later.

On the Soviet end with a conservative (non-surge) deployment, it did not seem that they had many principal surface combatants to deploy. For a test scenario, I have a Kirov and 3-4 escorts off the North Cape, but a 688 is not going to get much penetration with Harpoons against their air defenses. The helicopters make any Mk48 attacks difficult to get into a shooting position. So you probably need to coordinate an airstrike with 688 torpedo attack to keep the Soviet defenses distracted, which is kind of the reverse of "Dance with Vampires."

[MayorMcWeed]

Originally posted by joetrusty2020:

If you want, then as time permits, I can try to post some of those examples later.

Yes please! Perhaps as a steam guide so it can benefit as many people as possible!

[joetrusty2020]

Deployed Soviet ships available for surface action groups (guess)

I will have to tinker with escorting a Steam Guide later and have to reassess these numbers that I recorded from maybe 3 years ago. Also, I may not have included the smaller corvettes and missile boats since they might not have been represented in the earlier naval warfare simulators that I had. These were probably from Norman Polmar's Guide to the Soviet Navy, 4th ed., 1986, since the numbers do not seem to match the IISS Military Balance 1991, unless I scaled general numbers for cruisers and destroyers. For IISS, in 1981, the Military Balance had 294 major combat vessels for the Soviets, including 82 in the Northern Fleet. By 1991, IISS reduced the numbers to 226 and 60. So these numbers below are probably 50% of each assumed fleet on active deployment at sea, except that there may have been full numbers for the carriers and battle cruisers.

Red Banner Baltic Fleet:
2 Kresta II, 2 Udaloy, 3 Sovremenny, 3 mod Kashin, 1 Kashin, 7 Krivaks

Red Banner Black Sea Fleet:
2 Moskva Heli carriers, 2 Slava, 4 Kara, 7 Kashin, 7 Krivaks
Is not the Dangerous Straits scenario using escorts like this one?

The 5th Eskadra (Squadron) from the Black Sea Fleet maintained nearly 50 vessels in continual rotations throughout the Mediterranean during the mid-1980s (Norman Polmar's Guide to the Soviet Navy, 4th ed., 1986, p.40) --- So I would have to go back and dig up the smaller craft, support vessels, and assumptions on submarines. Grishas may be guarding ports as part of the border guards and listed separately.

FYI, Arctic pack ice maximum April/May and minimum September/October (Compton-Hall, Richard, Sub vs. Sub: The Tactics and Technology of Underwater Warfare, 1988, p.81)

The Soviet Navy emphasized readiness at port and only had 15% of ships at sea according to Norman Polmar's Guide to the Soviet Navy (4th ed., 1986, p.2). A declassified CIA analysis from 1979 provided additional readiness information on the Soviet Navy. Apparently 40% of the attack or cruise missile submarines are in various stages of repair or work-up at any given time, which implies a lower state of readiness in port (CIA, Warsaw PACT Forces Opposite NATO, 1979, p.71, para. 189)

Red Banner Northern Fleet
Battlecruiser Kirov? One in Northern, 5 Kresta II, 2 Kresta I, 2 Sverdlov, 3 Udaloy, 3 Sovremennyy, 2 mod Kashin, 4 Kanin, 7 Krivaks, 15 amphibious

Red Banner Pacific Fleet
2 carriers,1 Kirov, 3 Kara, 3 Kresta II, 1 Udaloy, 3 Kashin, 2 Kanin, 11 Krivaks

[Ole "Slim Jolo" the Hobo Hero]

Originally posted by joetrusty2020:

The 5th Eskadra (Squadron) from the Black Sea Fleet maintained nearly 50 vessels in continual rotations throughout the Mediterranean during the mid-1980s (Norman Polmar's Guide to the Soviet Navy, 4th ed., 1986, p.40) --- So I would have to go back and dig up the smaller craft, support vessels, and assumptions on submarines. Grishas may be guarding ports as part of the border guards and listed separately.

What did maritime law allow for in terms of Soviets transiting the Bosphorus / Dardanelles into and out of the Mediterranean ?

I noticed just how shallow at least the Dardanelles is when I was checking out transiting it in a Los Angelas class sub, but then also got me thinking about it's real life function too - like I assume the Russians were allowed to use it unimpeded like how we use Suez / Panama canal and so on too, as I understand it more or less accessible to everyone in globe for sake of avoiding conflict kinda deal

But from an intelligence stand point, unlike your fleets being able to leave home ports and get into, say, the Arctic / Atlantic like slinking SSBN's out too sea for sake of communicating to enemy you can potentially be anywhere all the times, if your SSBN was operating with Black Sea fleet and leaving to the Mediterranean, that element of surprise is gone, because the potential enemy, NATO, just watched everything you just sailed through and is going to have some idea of all ships you have in the Mediterranean at all times *because* they'd all be tracked going through Dardanelles, Suez or Gibraltar (though I guess hypothetically a submarine could sneak through Gibraltar?).

Outside of the Black Sea and in the Mediterranean I feel like soviet ships would almost be 'cut off' in a way they're maybe at least not near as restricted vs the rest of the globe?

[Rontagosh]

They would look like an asymmetrical and broken smokey line of ships running out of fuel and slowly sinking.

Same as today, basically.

Only reason total war never happened is because they were unable to defeat us at any time (also because we're irrationally merciful), also same as today

[joetrusty2020]

Originally posted by Ole "Slim Jolo" the Hobo Hero:

[quote=
What did maritime law allow for in terms of Soviets transiting the Bosphorus / Dardanelles into and out of the Mediterranean ?

Google search brings up Montreux Convention Regarding the Regime of the Straits that requires advance notification and prevents passage during wartime, like with the conflict today, but I suppose in a really hot war the convention may be ignored, if sufficient force is brought against Turkey. The notification procedures mean that all signatories would be notified of the military passage, but the United States is not a signatory and would probably gather the intelligence from its allies.