Help me design a soviet SAG

[Monk78]

So I’m trying to put together the concept of a multi purpose soviet SAG in the early 70s
Available ships are
Sverdlov class cruisers
Moskova aviation cruisers
Kashin ( unmodified) , Kotlin SAM DDG
Kanin DDG
Kotlin and skory DD
Riga FF
( note kynda , kresta I and Kashin mod / kilden are not available)
Need a decent balance of ASW and AAW capabilities, ASUW capabilities will be limited to use of SAM in anti ship mode plus guns or any help from submarines and AVMF bombers

 

[Dilandu]

Moskova aviation cruisers

Moskva, not Moskova.

 

[Dilandu]

So I’m trying to put together the concept of a multi purpose soviet SAG in the early 70s

First of all, USSR did not operate in "surface attack groups" terms. The standard system was deployed escarda (or operation escarda), which was essentially the analogue of US numbered fleets. The escadra was composed of several task forces, which were mainly functional.

For example, the 5th Mediterranean Escarda was composed of:

* 50s TF - command ship with escorts (usually modernized "Sverdlov"-class cruiser)
* 51s TF - submarines
* 52s TF - strike force of gunnery and missile armed ships
* 53s TF - anti-submarine force
* 54s TF - amphibious force
* 55s TF - supply ships

Need a decent balance of ASW and AAW capabilities, ASUW capabilities will be limited to use of SAM in anti ship mode plus guns or any help from submarines and AVMF bombers

Let's look at "Okean-70" exercises in 1970. The Black Sea Fleet and 5th Mediterranean Escadra deployed:

* Two helicopter cruisers project 1123 ("Moskva" and "Leningrad")
* Two gun cruisers project 68 ("Mikhail Kutuzov" and "Admiral Ushakov")
* Missile cruiser project 58 ("Grozny")
* Two large missile ship - refitted destroyers with ASM's armament - project 56-EM ("Bedovyy") and project 57 ("Boikyy")
* Missile destroyer with SAM armament project 56-K ("Bravyy")
* Four large anti-submarine ships project 61 ("Komsomolets Ukrainy", "Otvajnyy", "Reshitelny", "Kransyy Kavkaz")

So you could see the general idea.

Need a decent balance of ASW and AAW capabilities, ASUW capabilities will be limited to use of SAM in anti ship mode plus guns or any help from submarines and AVMF bombers

It's impossible. Soviet naval squadron always included at least some warships with anti-ship missiles.

 

[Monk78]

Why didn’t the Soviets use the submarines ( which was their strongest arm ) for ASUW esp since they had few ocean going ships at that time with AshM

 

[CV12Hornet]

Why didn’t the Soviets use the submarines ( which was their strongest arm ) for ASUW esp since they had few ocean going ships at that time with AshM

They did. But the Echoes needed to be surfaced to fire their missiles and acquire targets, making them extremely vulnerable to ASW measures and thus not something to be solely relied upon. And the rest of their submarines were reliant on torpedoes.

 

[uk 75]

There is an interesting account in a what if history book of an engagement between Soviet and US ships before US ships had Harpoons. Little Rock uses Talos SAMs instead. I forget which book it was.

 

[Scott Kenny]

There is an interesting account in a what if history book of an engagement between Soviet and US ships before US ships had Harpoons. Little Rock uses Talos SAMs instead. I forget which book it was.

Talos would do UGLY things to a ship...

That's what happens to an old DE target hulk when an UNARMED Talos impacts it!

Picture and quotes from https://www.okieboat.com/Talos firing operations.html

In 1968 the Okie Boat participated in an exercise off California in which a mothballed destroyer escort (DE) was used as a target. After a day or two of other ships and aircraft shooting at the hulk with guns and missiles the Oklahoma City launched one Talos missile carrying a dummy warhead. The missile's 1500 Kg (3300 lbs) of magnesium alloy airframe and aviation gasoline traveling at Mach 2.5 (1800 mph) possessed enough kinetic energy to sink a ship, even without a warhead.

These pictures show the huge hole in the DE where the missile slashed through the ship. The missile came down almost vertically, striking amidships just aft of the funnel, exploding in the boiler room and engine room. The explosion blew out a large wedge cutting through two thirds of the main deck and continuing through the bottom of the ship. After this hit the ship broke into two parts and sank. Damage would have been even greater if the warhead had carried explosives!

It is interesting to compare the Talos round to a projectile from a battleship. The missile normally carried the Mk 46 continuous rod warhead. In this configuration the missile weighed about 3300 pounds, and the warhead carried 225 pounds of TNT/RDX explosives. For comparison, a Mk 13 16" HC projectile (fired from the Iowa class battleships) weighed 1900 pounds and carried 154 pounds of Explosive D (ammonium picrate). The Talos round was half again as massive as the battleship projectile, carried half again as much explosive, traveled at more than twice the impact velocity, had a greater range, and didn't miss. Clearly, the Talos round would cause far greater damage.

 

[Dilandu]

Why didn’t the Soviets use the submarines ( which was their strongest arm ) for ASUW esp since they had few ocean going ships at that time with AshM

Because submarines are slow (if they want to stay undetected, of course) and seriously hampered in terms of sensors and communications. And before the advent of underwater-launched anti-ship missiles - the first was P-70 "Ametist" in 1968 - submarines were forced to either surface to launch a missile attack (and surfaced submarine is VERY vulnerable) or rely on short-range torpedoes.

Also because submarines are quite costly in compairson with surface warships.

 

[Dilandu]

since they had few ocean going ships at that time with AshM

Actually not that few. To calculate for 1970:

* Four project 58 missile cruisers (with P-35 missiles)
* Four project 1134 missile cruisers (with P-35 missiles)
* Eight project 57-bis missile destroyers (with KSch missiles)
* Four project 56-EM missile destroyers (with KSch missiles)

Since 1970s many older ships were refitted with P-15 Termit missiles (like Project 56-EM destroyers and some Project 61 large anti-submarine ships), and newly build large anti-submarine ships usually have dual purpose anti-submarine/anti-ship missiles (like project 1134-A/B).

 

[Monk78]

Actually not that few. To calculate for 1970:

* Four project 58 missile cruisers (with P-35 missiles)
* Four project 1134 missile cruisers (with P-35 missiles)
* Eight project 57-bis missile destroyers (with KSch missiles)
* Four project 56-EM missile destroyers (with KSch missiles)

Since 1970s many older ships were refitted with P-15 Termit missiles (like Project 56-EM destroyers and some Project 61 large anti-submarine ships), and newly build large anti-submarine ships usually have dual purpose anti-submarine/anti-ship missiles (like project 1134-A/B).

Ksch missiles though were removed in the 70s as ships were converted fo ASW AAW roles

 

[Monk78]

Because submarines are slow (if they want to stay undetected, of course) and seriously hampered in terms of sensors and communications. And before the advent of underwater-launched anti-ship missiles - the first was P-70 "Ametist" in 1968 - submarines were forced to either surface to launch a missile attack (and surfaced submarine is VERY vulnerable) or rely on short-range torpedoes.

Also because submarines are quite costly in compairson with surface warships.

But isn’t a SSN a bigger threat than a destroyer with 8 AshM ?
They are harder to find
Require multiple platforms so are kind of a force in being
Ofcourse when they are against nonUSN or RN navies

 

[Dilandu]

Ksch missiles though were removed in the 70s as ships were converted fo ASW AAW roles

It was about 1972-1975, I was talking about 1970.

 

[Scott Kenny]

But isn’t a SSN a bigger threat than a destroyer with 8 AshM ?
They are harder to find
Require multiple platforms so are kind of a force in being
Ofcourse when they are against nonUSN or RN navies

Depends. Something huge like an OSCAR-class? Yes, that's a bigger threat due to lots more weapons (24x P700 Granit AShCMs and 28x weapons in the torpedo room). But a Charlie-class? Those only carried 8x AShMs and 12x 53cm torpedoes (probably 10x torpedoes and 2x RPK-2 Vyuga/SS-N-15 Starfish).

 

[Yellow Palace]

Probably 10x torpedoes and 2x RPK-2 Vyuga/SS-N-15 Starfish).

And I would guess those RPK-2s were reserved for when something absolutely, positively had to not be there, so for 99% of missions short of global thermonuclear war might as well not be there.

 

[Monk78]

Depends. Something huge like an OSCAR-class? Yes, that's a bigger threat due to lots more weapons (24x P700 Granit AShCMs and 28x weapons in the torpedo room). But a Charlie-class? Those only carried 8x AShMs and 12x 53cm torpedoes (probably 10x torpedoes and 2x RPK-2 Vyuga/SS-N-15 Starfish).

8 AshM if launched in a salvo can easily overwhelm the Defences of a 80s era destroyer ( not equipped with AEGIS )

 

[Scott Kenny]

And I would guess those RPK-2s were reserved for when something absolutely, positively had to not be there, so for 99% of missions short of global thermonuclear war might as well not be there.

Exactly. So you have 8x AShMs and 10x Torpedoes to work with. You're also going to keep at least 2 torpedoes in reserve for self defense, maybe 4x if you have a couple of Shkval supercavitating torps onboard.

So, 6-8 torpedoes for offense. Two fish per submarine you're dealing with, 1-2 fish per surface target depending on size.

8 AshM if launched in a salvo can easily overwhelm the Defences of a 80s era destroyer ( not equipped with AEGIS )

Yes, 8x AShM would probably kill a SpruCan or earlier DD/DDG, if operating alone.

But 24x AShM would be a dead carrier group or convoy.

 

[Monk78]

Exactly. So you have 8x AShMs and 10x Torpedoes to work with. You're also going to keep at least 2 torpedoes in reserve for self defense, maybe 4x if you have a couple of Shkval supercavitating torps onboard.

So, 6-8 torpedoes for offense. Two fish per submarine you're dealing with, 1-2 fish per surface target depending on size.




Yes, 8x AShM would probably kill a SpruCan or earlier DD/DDG, if operating alone.

But 24x AShM would be a dead carrier group or convoy.

So essentially one Charlie class, submarines can take out two destroyers theoretically, if it uses both its missiles and torpedoes ? Provided the ASROC equipped destroyers it can approach after launching its missiles

 

[Scott Kenny]

So essentially one Charlie class, submarines can take out two destroyers theoretically, if it uses both its missiles and torpedoes ? Provided the ASROC equipped destroyers it can approach after launching its missiles

Assuming a very aggressive Charlie captain, I'd use torpedoes on the escorting destroyers and then volley the AShMs at the convoy they were protecting.

 

[Monk78]

Assuming a very aggressive Charlie captain, I'd use torpedoes on the escorting destroyers and then volley the AShMs at the convoy they were protecting.

And if the target is not convoys then take out 2 DDG before they are sunk ?
Not USN DDG but let’s say German Japanese. French etc

 

[Scott Kenny]

And if the target is not convoys then take out 2 DDG before they are sunk ?
Not USN DDG but let’s say German Japanese. French etc

I'd say a Charlie could easily get 2 DDs. One with the AShMs, at least one more with the torpedoes.

 

[Graham1973]

I don't know if this helps, but the entry in the fictional warships list for the 1979 novel 'Threat Warning Red' by Anthony Fox had the following Soviet 'Task Forces' in it.

Russia

Task Force 'A'

Unnamed
Tanker, class not specified

Unnamed
2 Kashin class destroyers
Details as per the real ships

Task Force 'B'

Unnamed
Kara class cruiser
Details as per the real ships

Unnamed
2 Krivak class frigates
Details as per the real ships

Task Force 'C'

Unnamed
2 Kresta Class cruisers (Not specified if Kresta I or Kresta II class in novel.)
Details as per the real ships

Unnamed
6 Skoryy class destroyers
Details as per the real ships

A link to the full entry is below:

https://www.secretprojects.co.uk/threads/fictional-warships-novels.25930/page-3#post-281405