Rethinking Naval Power: Lessons from Ukraine's Success against Russia

[Social Media]

 

Ukraine's near-complete naval victory in the Black Sea, achieved without the use of conventional warships, has been a striking achievement. However, this does not imply that conventional warships have become obsolete, nor does it argue against the necessity of aircraft carriers. On the contrary, the events in the Black Sea underscore the continued relevance and importance of these naval assets.

 

Russia's Black Sea Fleet has faced significant challenges, primarily due to its operational bases' proximity to enemy-held territory. Both Sevastopol and Novorossiysk have been within the reach of Ukraine's expanding arsenal of surface drones and Western-supplied missiles. Many Russian ships were destroyed while docked or anchored, exposing a critical vulnerability. The Black Sea's relatively small size further compounds this issue, limiting Russia's ability to maneuver and avoid enemy attacks. In this constrained environment, the advantage has often tipped in favor of Ukraine.

 

The conditions of the Black Sea play a crucial role in this dynamic. Its limited size means it doesn't typically produce large waves, which allows smaller, faster vessels like speedboats and maritime drones to operate effectively. However, this advantage diminishes in rougher seas where larger warships can outperform smaller vessels. Ukraine's maritime drones have benefited from the generally calm conditions, giving them an edge over larger, slower Russian ships.

 

Russia's ability to provide strategic surveillance has been severely compromised. Naval warfare necessitates access to airborne radar, which can cover vast expanses of sea. Ship-based radars are limited by the horizon, unable to detect low-flying or floating threats beyond 30 miles. Russia's maritime patrol and radar surveillance capabilities have been stretched thin, with essential assets like the Tupolev-142 and Beriev A-50 planes needed elsewhere to protect its nuclear deterrent. The loss of these surveillance aircraft has left Russia's Black Sea Fleet vulnerable, unable to monitor Ukrainian drone movements or protect vital trade routes.

 

The Black Sea Fleet's operational failures highlight the importance of layered defense. Effective maritime maneuvering requires three layers of protection: outer defense by fighter jets, middle defense by heavy air defense missiles, and inner defense by close-in weapon systems on ships. Russia's failure to integrate these layers has been evident in their significant losses. The sinking of the Moskva, which should have had multiple layers of defense, illustrates this point. Ukrainian forces have effectively used sophisticated Western missiles, rather than just drones, to target and destroy Russian ships.

 

The Montreux Convention of 1936 further complicates the situation by giving Turkey control over the Bosphorus Strait, preventing Russia from replacing lost ships or bringing in reinforcements. This restriction applies to Ukraine as well, limiting both sides' naval capabilities. Ukraine's success despite these constraints is notable but does not suggest that navies can do without conventional forces or aircraft carriers.

 

NATO navies, with decades of experience in asymmetric naval warfare, are better prepared for these challenges. Since the 1980s, NATO has practiced countering swarms of fast attack craft and low-flying aircraft, honing their skills against unconventional threats. Modern warships are equipped with automated defenses, such as 30mm guns, ideal for countering drones. These experiences and capabilities highlight the continued importance of conventional naval assets in a comprehensive defense strategy.

 

The growing importance of unmanned systems in military operations is undeniable. Drones offer significant advantages in terms of effectiveness, lethality, and cost. The Royal Navy and the US Navy are investing heavily in developing and integrating unmanned systems, such as Project Ark Royal, aiming to use uncrewed systems for all non-personnel maritime movements by 2030. This shift towards unmanned systems is part of an ongoing evolution in military technology, not a wholesale replacement of traditional naval forces.

 

The Defense Review will likely address the need for rapid procurement and integration of new technologies, including unmanned systems. However, the notion that Ukraine's success with surface drones will render conventional navies obsolete is misguided. The peculiarities of the Black Sea conflict, the broader context of maritime warfare, and the necessity of maintaining a balanced, multi-layered defense all support the continued relevance of traditional naval assets, including aircraft carriers.

 

In conclusion, Ukraine's naval success against Russia in the Black Sea demonstrates the potential of unconventional tactics and technologies. However, it does not diminish the importance of conventional naval forces. Aircraft carriers, with their ability to project power and provide critical surveillance, remain essential components of modern navies. The lessons from the Black Sea highlight the need for a comprehensive, adaptable approach to naval warfare, integrating new technologies while maintaining the strengths of conventional forces.

 

 

Credit: Daily Telegraph  2024-08-08

 

 

Get our Daily Newsletter - Click HERE to subscribe

 

Cigna offers a variety of health insurance plans designed to meet the minimum requirement for medical treatment coverage, with benefits reaching up to THB 3 million. These plans are tailored to provide comprehensive healthcare solutions for expatriates, ensuring peace of mind and access to quality medical services. To explore the full range of Cigna's expat health insurance options and find a plan that suits your needs, click here for more information.

[thaibeachlovers]

On 8/8/2024 at 8:36 AM, Social Media said:

Aircraft carriers, with their ability to project power and provide critical surveillance, remain essential components of modern navies.

but only against countries without hundreds or thousands of missiles and drones. Many modern warships only have one or two Phalanx type weapons to protect the vessel against such. Even if they shot down many drones, at the rate they use ammunition they will run out and if enough drones survive they will be able to put the vessel out of action.

 

I wonder if the "planners" in the British navy are regretting the decision to spend all the money on 2 aircraft carriers.

[Tug]

It would take one powerful drone to take out a carrier and keep in mind you are talking about the Russian navy they have never won a naval battle sorry Russia but it is what it is

[rickudon]

The Falklands war showed that anti-ship missiles can seriously damage large ships. Ukraine's Neptune missiles have done most of the damage to larger Russian Warships; drones have had a cost effective success rate against smaller vessels. Submarines and aircraft put an end to close blockade in the 20th century, missiles and drones are doing the same in the 21st. Just like on the land battlefields, nations will need to update their defences at sea.

 

As for the future, a British scientific autonomous submarine just completed a 5 month research trip, alone, both near surface and at depth. The implications for conventional naval warfare is going to need a big rethink.

[gargamon]

And the US just successfully tested surface ship killer bombs dropped from B-15s. One bomb destroys one ship. To be used, of course, on china's new ships.

 

https://www.marinecorpstimes.com/air/2024/08/09/ship-killing-guided-bomb-put-to-test-as-air-force-sinks-cargo-vessel/