Showing posts with label Russian Northern Fleet. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Russian Northern Fleet. Show all posts

March 29, 2017

Russian Navy|ВМФ России Rescue Tug SB-406|СБ-406 visited Jacksonville FL in 2012

Russian Navy Sea-going Rescue Tug SB-406|СБ-406
Photo Credit: Knud Olsen - 26 Nov, 2016
There is a persistent rumour on the internet that needs to be corrected, and a friend of mine encouraged me to do so   :)

Hurricane "Super Storm" Sandy was expected to hit the United States on October 26th 2012 and a nearby Russian Navy Seagoing Tug Boat SB-406|СБ-406 [IMO: 8126551] was granted safe harbour in Jacksonville, Florida... it seems.  Nobody knows exactly what berth it was at, or how it was arranged, but there are rumours that the crew went off and bought a bunch of booze and food, taking advantage of the shore leave.

Somewhere along the lines this fish story got bigger; it was an AGI "Spy Ship", and a Submarine too!

Well, from what I gather, Russian Navy officers would rather die than let you get anywhere close to an AGI or Submarine, so I'm quite sure they weren't there; there was online one tug, which wouldn't have anything classified that wasn't locked up tight.  Yes, the Russian Navy Viktor Leonov was nearby, but not in Jacksonville at that time; Havana maybe?  A submarine is below the waves and relatively unaffected by the weather, and they could scoot away anyhow, so there is no reason for them to come into Jacksonville either.

Anonymous local sources have been quoted as saying:
"The ship in question appears to be the Russian Project 712 Sliva Class Sea-going rescue Tug, SB-406. 255.8 ft. in length with a designated compliment of 43 + 10 salvage crew members. Actual job description of men on boat is unknown.
It has been estimated that up to approximately 40 crew members have been seen. Worker on site reports that he has been working there for 20 months and this is the first military ship that has docked up from any nation.
It was supposed to leave tonight (Sunday, 4 Nov) but come back in sometime after Tuesday"
I'd like to believe that an AGI, a Sub, and a Tug, all stayed in Jacksonville (or around Jacksonville) during Sandy, but it does not look likely with the evidence that is out there.



References:
http://freebeacon.com/national-security/russian-subs-skirt-coast/
http://therealrevo.com/blog/?p=87496
http://www.shipspotting.com/gallery/photo.php?lid=1636015 (<-- likely later in the same deployment)

March 05, 2017

The Truth? You can't handle The Truth.

Viktor Leonov - February 27th 2014 in Havana, Cuba
Photo Credit: Unknown
In any DoD / Pentagon / Military Press Release there are at least 4 versions of the truth.

1. The Press Release

Carefully crafted to match the narrative du-jour, the military will put out intentional leaks to journalists, or official press releases through a Public Affairs office, that fit with whatever message they are trying to convey to their citizens and internationally.

NB Classifications
Even "Unclassified" information is a classification, so watch for how the term is used.  (eg, "sorry, I can't give that to you, it's classified" doesn't mean it's Secret or Top Secret, necessarily.)

2. Unclassified / For Official Use Only

You didn't think the Pentagon would tell you what was actually happening did you?  Well maybe they did, maybe they didn't, but there is a less massaged briefing note somewhere that wasn't that Press Release, and has more dirt about whatever it is, and is supposed to be for internal / official use.  Different governments have different names for this classification.  You can find 1950s Cold War briefs that fit into this category if you hunt the public government archives sites to see how boring they are.

3. Secret

"Secret" classification could be something about ship or troop movements, highly detailed maps, perhaps info gained by Satellite intelligence with some details left out for a senior military brief... or many things.  The story in the Press Release will likely look considerably different at this level; it will show casualty counts of an enemy encounter, details about where enemy forces came from and intelligence gathered - but still mostly avoid mentioning the methods (Did the info come from a paid informant?).  You can find examples of this in the Bradley Manning Wikileaks docs from the Afghanistan files.

4. Top Secret (and above)

You're going to find the names of informants, what sort of weapons systems nobody knows about, information about secret satellite programs - whatever. This is where you find "The Truth" if it exists.  You will find blame, you will find unredacted imagery, you will find evidence of things that "don't exist", whatever crazy conspiracy stuff that you think they have at Area 51 is in here, potentially at a higher classification than Top Secret.  My point is, this is where that Press Release has all the truth, or as much truth as you can find.  The Snowdon files are at this level, and they disclose methods and technology used by several agencies.


What we, the public, get as a press release is a shadow of the original story, and only has what the military and the government believe we need to know to keep us satisfied and quiet.

We don't need to know the names of the dead. We don't need to know the names of the local corrupt mayor in some shit-hole mud hut on the other side of the world.  We don't need to know we're paying off some of the bad guys to allow our troops safe passage through their turf.  We don't need to know who we plan on assassinating next.  Let the military do their job, we don't need to second guess them all the time.

Except... (You knew there was going to be a "but", right?)

Russian Naval surface ship movements, when they're literally within sight of the shore, should not be hidden from the public and teased out in geometric riddles. That's just cruel and unusual to those of us interested in tracking  those surface assets.

Hey, Captain, Major, Colonel, General... They know you know where they are. We know you know where they are. Who does it help to keep that information classified and out of reach of Joe Public?

Yes, I understand that the military won't tell us the locations of every Russian sub, if they knew every sub in every ocean, but there is no reason not to share surface-ship movement information near the coast of the USA. Ships can be seen from space, they can sometimes be seen from shore, and they can certainly be seen by sensors, or by a ship that shadows them.  I am pleased for getting the leaks we do from Lucas @ Fox's Pentagon source, regarding the position information of the Viktor Leonov.  She has been off the coast of the USA since mid-February, but I'd really prefer if the military just spilled all the data when the Russians are done their mission so those of us who are interested could analyse the data whole.

Throw me a bone!

July 09, 2016

The RV Yantar pops up on AIS, momentarily

Photo Credit: Cees Bustraan / ShipSpotting.com - September 20th, 2015
I'm quite fascinated how commercial and military ships both use AIS-T and AIS-S while in transit.  Of course, when performing operations military ships turn off their AIS beacons to be less noticeable, but once and a while someone hits the wrong button.

Last year when the RV Yantar ("RV" as it is officially a Research Vessel, with SAR capabilities) was headed back to Murmansk, the home of the Russian Northern Fleet, she seemed to go out of AIS-T range somewhere North of Norway in the Barents Sea.  But when she docked at the port in Murmansk on October 28th 2015, she didn't show up on AIS-T.  There are AIS-T receivers in the Port of Murmansk, and other ships show up - just not the Yantar... so, they must have turned off their beacon, while travelling in shipping lanes and docking in a port.  Isn't that weird for a research vessel involved in nothing military or suspicious in nature?  Isn't it?

As I mentioned last year, the Yantar is rumoured to have been commissioned by the GUGI (An acronym for what roughly translates to Main Directorate for Deep Sea Research), the part of the Ministry of Defence of Russia which is responsible for "underwater engineering" - a euphemism meaning spying by means of planting, tampering with or stealing objects underwater (source).  I suspect this is the equivalent of the US National Underwater Reconnaissance Office.  Warefare.be reports the Yantar is part of the 29th Special Squadron of the Northern Fleet, which is the unit that operates the underwater spy submarines and "stretch submarine variants that act as "mother ships" for the Russian Navy.  The 29th Special Squadron is based at Olenya Guba (Оле́нья Губа).

Oh yes, so about the button.  Evidently someone turned on the AIS beacon on the RV Yantar while it was docked on July 6th, 2016.  Where?  In Olenya Guba, of course!  I don't think the ship had been tracked all the way back there before, which is why I was excited!

Location of the RV Yantar / July 6, 2016
Lat/Lon:69.21657 / 33.3624 (UTC)
Speed/Course:0.0 kn / 20°
Image courtesy of MarineTraffic.com

May 31, 2016

Чан-Ручей | Chan-Ruchey - Russian Navy Northern Fleet Weapons Storage Facility?

The nuclear powered Battle Cruiser, Пётр Великий / Pyotr Veliky (Peter the Great) is the flagship of the Russian Navy Northern Fleet, and has set out to sea for the first time in a long time (ref), performing sea trials after an extensive refit (ref); she was reported to be travelling with the Sergey Osipov, a Russian Navy Boris Chilikin-Class large seagoing tanker capable of carrying 13440 tons of petroleum products.  However, why?  The Pyotr Veliky is a nuclear powered ship, and doesn't need an oiler.  On May 25th 2016 the Sergey Osipov was at the Russian Naval facility at Чан-Ручей / Chan-Ruchey; was the Pyotr Veliky there too?  To restock with munitions? What is there, exactly?

Чан-Ручей / Chan-Ruchey is in the Closed Administrational and Territorial District (Закры́тое администрати́вно-территориа́льное образова́ние (ЗА́ТО)) of Видяево (Vidyayevo), in Murmansk Oblast, positioned as far as it can be from the residential area of Vidyayevo, while still being in the same closed district.  The nearby Ara Bay naval facility, 20 km by road away, within the same district, is still a Submarine base, and it was the home port of the ill-fated K-141 Kursk.



What stands out first to me is that an oiler went there at all, with an enclave of only a handful of buildings; why?  Is it near any sort of refinery nearby?  No, so I'm going to guess they were dropping off a load of oil, not picking up... but what are they dropping off for... heating and generators?  Perhaps this was the yearly / monthly delivery.  This is a very remote location with little infrastructure nearby other than the road that leads East to Murmansk and West to Vidyayevo and other villages.  I am pretty certain this facility has it's own central heating and power plant.  On some maps this is labelled as a storage facility, perhaps it is a munitions storage facility.  Looking at the underground oil storage which is there, it seems like a lot of oil for only a handful of buildings.  What am I missing?

What looks like liquid storage, petrolium?
credit: Nokia Maps
If there are munitions nearby you wouldn't normally have that much fuel, and I don't see any earth covered magazines anywhere near there either.  Looking closely at the pictures I do see what looks like two portals to the inside of the mountain (red), two air intakes (yellow) and a building at the top of the mountain (light blue).  I really do appreciate the Soviets' flair for under-mountain construction!

Potal entrances on the West side of the hill, with air intakes
Bing Maps
It is unclear to me, from aggregating information, if this is an underground storage area for conventional munitions, nuclear weapons, fresh nuclear fuel, spent nuclear fuel, or nuclear waste.  The perimeter security for the facility is considerably less than is seen elsewhere, but this facility is considerably more remote than others as well.


Further reading:
http://spb.org.ru/bellona/ehome/russia/nfl/nfl4.htm#O16
http://zatovid.ru/up/pages/istvid/geo.htm
http://www.ara-guba.ru/category/photoalbum/ara-guba/
http://benjamin.tschukalov.info/projects/vidyaevo.html
http://benjamin.tschukalov.info/projects/ara-guba.html
http://www.ara-guba.ru/2007/08/26/map-11767-12625/
https://books.google.ca/books?id=JLFX6EMPqBkC&pg=PA122&lpg=PA122&dq=%22Chan-Ruchey%22+storage&source=bl&ots=A702hTQXjU&sig=WL1g0yCpLjedWwcvp1GFQG-qqmw&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwighum_ovbMAhWH7YMKHWiiC1YQ6AEIHzAA#v=onepage&q=%22Chan-Ruchey%22%20storage&f=false


Russian Navy Battle Cruiser
Пётр Великий / Pyotr Veliky (Peter the Great)
Source: http://ot-a-do-ya.org/Enc/RI-SSSR-RF/Warships/TARKR11442.aspx

March 15, 2016

Anon. French military source says Russian SSBN was detected off the French coast

On March 10th Vincent Jauvert, a reporter for L'Obs, a French news organisation, broke the story that a Russian SSBN was detected off the coast of France, in international waters, in January 2016.  The source was an anonymous French defence official.

Original here:

If you're not too savvy with the French language, here is the Reuters story that followed:

J E Dyer is an expert in all things Navy, especially underwater intelligence, and provides an extremely well written in-depth analysis regarding the potential strategic advantage of positioning an SSBN there; her blog post is here:

Steven Pifer of the Brookings Institute (full bio here) provides his thorough analysis regarding the potential messaging being delivered by Russia here:

I'd like to back up at this point and ask some questions.  This discussion is all based on one anonymous French defence official who leaked information to the media that cannot be confirmed or denied independently or by any official source; why is it we think this claim is true?  

This leaked intelligence, of a Russian Sub being detected off the coast of France in January, would be at least Secret or Top Secret information, and if it wasn't leaked through official channels, should provoke an investigation by the French military to find the person who leaked the information.  I didn't hear any suggestion of anything like that in any media yet.

I'm very sceptical of unconfirmed leaked information that could be used to bolster the US Military / Navy budget. There are several angles to this story that are strange and have not been investigated. Why should we believe an anonymous source with a suspicious story that plays into the US Navy "red scare" narrative that could be used to increase funding for missile defense, or other military programs?

We have no way to ascertain the validity of the source or details of the story.

Did the French positively identify the type of submarine beyond it being an SSBN? If so, how? Acoustically? Magnetically? What margin of error was there for the determination? Did the French have a submarine in pursuit? Surface vessel tracking it for a while? Since no official source is going to talk about this, it's impossible to determine to what degree of certainty the type of vessel was identified. I've been told that accurate identification is possible with current military sensors, but we have no way to tell what sensors were used, and to what accuracy the identification was made.

The source did not identify exactly what type of submarine was spotted; just that it was an SSBN. There are multiple types of SSBNs in the Russian Navy, so which one was it? How did they determine it wasn't an SSGN if they didn't determine what type of SSBN it was? There is a Russian project where SSBNs are modified (lengthened) into "motherships" to ferry mini-subs to underwater cables. Does a acoustic or magnetic signature of a Delta IV SSBN and Delta IV "Stretch" (mothership) sound similar? Could they be mistaken for one another?
Russian Navy Delta IV SSBN Submarine
(Image Credit: Unknown)

A Delta IV "Stretch" (or other "stretch" variant) might make a lot more sense in this scenario. Undersea cables seem to be of interest to the Russian Navy lately. A "Stretch" variant could ferry a mini-sub outfitted with special equipment to tap underwater cables. This would mean no "messaging" or "nuclear saber rattling" was being performed, it was simply an underwater reconnaissance operation to tap undersea cables that was spotted.  Such "mothership" submarines are also part of the Northern Fleet, located near Murmansk at Olenya Guba (Оле́нья Губа), part of the 29th Special Squadron. Does that ring any bells?  Perhaps completely by coincidence, that's where the RV Yantar, the new research vessel, is also based. (previous blog posts about her here)
Russian Navy Delta IV "Stretch"
(Image Credit: Globalsecurity.org)
Tapping undersea cables isn't as sexy a story as nuclear saber rattling, and potentially wouldn't give the same "boost" to the US Navy's budget in the manner they want. Stating publicly that the Russians can go anywhere in international waters and tap cables would also raise a lot of questions about the safety of the Internet infrastructure that the governments of the world are likely ill-equipped to answer. Yes, undersea cables can be compromised. No, your government can't stop them.  Yes, other governments are doing the same thing.

August 20, 2015

Following the Russian Navy Mod Altay class tankers

Image Credit: Ian Sturton - Mod Altay Class Tanker

Kola - Przemek / ShipSpotting.com Baltiysk, Kaliningrad 2006

Sometime last year I became interested in the Russian Naval Auxiliary ship Kola. ( Likely in part due to Tom in Lincolnshire, UK SoundCloud / Twitter ) The Kola is an oiler; a floating gas station for the Russian Navy. As I don't have my own spy satellite constellation (YET!), and the Russian Navy uses very loose terms for their deployment areas, I'm keeping an eye on a few ships of interest (like the Kola) to see where they operate, as they indicate larger operations. An oiler... oils! Well, more accurately, it ships marine diesel to ships at sea, and does alongside replenishment. If there's an oiler, there's at least one bigger boat around that's thirsty. 

Most recently the Kola returned from a Mediterranean deployment with the Russian Navy's Baltic Fleet Neustrashimyy-class (Неустрашимый) frigate RFS Yaroslav Mudry (СКР Ярослав Мудрый). The Yaroslav Mudry is the most modern Russian Navy Frigate in the fleet, being commissioned in 2009.

There were six oilers of the same class as the Kola, spread out across the fleet.  I'm uncertain which of those ships are still operating with the Russian Navy or have been decommissioned.  Specifications for the Mod Altay class tankers are as follows:

Mod Altay class (Project 160) (AOL)
Built between 1967-72 by Rauma-Repola, Finland
Displacement - full load: 7366 tonnes (7249.7 (uk) t) (8119.6 t short)) (7366000 kg)
Length - overall: 106.2 m (348.4 ft)
Beam - overall: 15.5 m (50.9 ft)
Kola - apachio / ShipSpotting.com Baltiysk, Kaliningrad 2006.12.23

Draught - hull: 6.7 m (22.0 ft)
Top speed: 14 kt (25.9 km/h) (16.1 mph)
Range: 8600 n miles (15927.2 km) (9896.7 miles) at 12 kt (22.2 km/h) (13.8 mph)
crew: 60
Cargo capacity: 4,400 tons oil fuel; 200 m3 solids
Machinery: 1 Burmeister & Wain BM550VTBN110 diesel; 3,200 hp(m) (2.35 MW); 1 shaft