Russian Naval Construction Plans and Update

Tsavo Lion wrote:Is it because it's a different time now & there's no Stalin & Beria anymore to shoot/send them to GULAG for slow completion of orders? What would make them better? New equipment? More qualified management, personnel & yards?  

Tsavo Lion wrote:What about capital ships that can be built only in big drydocks like in Nikolaev, now in Ukraine? To build them & req. infrastructure also takes many years. If they didn't have to build all those new icebreakers, do u think the new warships could be there sooner?
OTH, RF has her nuclear triad & can do w/o big surface fleet, especially now as the Chinese Navy will keep JMSDF & USN busy in W. Pac. & possibly elsewhere!

PapaDragon wrote:.
Capital ships are completely redundant at this point in time. Later yes but not now.

Now they need three things: missile ships, corvettes and frigates. That's it.

Three shipyards per one class. Problem solved.

Anything bigger right now is a waste of time, money, man-hours, and production capacities.

AlfaT8 wrote:

PapaDragon wrote:.
Capital ships are completely redundant at this point in time. Later yes but not now.

Now they need three things: missile ships, corvettes and frigates. That's it.

Three shipyards per one class. Problem solved.

Anything bigger right now is a waste of time, money, man-hours, and production capacities.

I disagree, the Super-Gorshkov would also be a good investment.
Unless you mean the SG when you mentioned "missile ships".

AlfaT8 wrote:

PapaDragon wrote:.
Capital ships are completely redundant at this point in time. Later yes but not now.

Now they need three things: missile ships, corvettes and frigates. That's it.

Three shipyards per one class. Problem solved.

Anything bigger right now is a waste of time, money, man-hours, and production capacities.

I disagree, the Super-Gorshkov would also be a good investment.
Unless you mean the SG when you mentioned "missile ships".

PapaDragon wrote:

AlfaT8 wrote:

PapaDragon wrote:.
Capital ships are completely redundant at this point in time. Later yes but not now.

Now they need three things: missile ships, corvettes and frigates. That's it.

Three shipyards per one class. Problem solved.

Anything bigger right now is a waste of time, money, man-hours, and production capacities.

I disagree, the Super-Gorshkov would also be a good investment.
Unless you mean the SG when you mentioned "missile ships".

No, Super Gorshkov would only be good investment if they were building Gorshkovs en masse. But they are not. They aren't even building any, they are just finishing old order placed in bygone era.

It's been years since they even placed order for a frigate, let alone laid one down. Something is seriously wrong here. Ukrainian engine excuse no longer flies since it's been resolved.

AlfaT8 wrote:Dude, i am not saying they should stop building Gorshkovs, it's just that the SG could also be built, it should take less time and money to build than it would take to build the Lider, while also being able to fulfill the role of both Destroyer and Cruiser, a good investment IMO.

Yea, those are Corvettes.

PapaDragon wrote:

AlfaT8 wrote:Dude, i am not saying they should stop building Gorshkovs, it's just that the SG could also be built, it should take less time and money to build than it would take to build the Lider, while also being able to fulfill the role of both Destroyer and Cruiser, a good investment IMO.

Yea, those are Corvettes.

Nothing wrong with building Super Gorshkov but they are not building anything at all. Not a single ship above corvette.

There is a supposed delay on account of AA missiles but it also makes no sense. It takes 3 years to reach a phase in construction where AA missiles are being installed. It takes much less than that to resolve problem with those missiles. So why aren't they ordering more frigates?

They have 4 under construction for North Fleet. They should order at least 4 more for Pacific. It would be enough to plug a gap. Instead nothing. Not a single one for years and by the looks of it nothing for years to come. Not even announcement.

miketheterrible wrote:they are only building those for India

The ships of a small displacement created for the Russian Navy will operate both in the far ocean zone, and close to the coast and even on rivers. On board the novelty is hidden a whole arsenal of missile, torpedo and antisubmarine weapons, more suitable for the cruiser. The newest corvettes will be able to inflict massive missile strikes on coastal targets, combat aircraft carriers, hunt for submarines, and provide fire support to the naval landing force. But the main advantage of the ship, the project of which was developed by the Krylov Scientific Research Center, is its low cost.

The corvette will cost the military seamen a little more than a small rocket ship (MRK) of the "Buyan" type. Therefore, the project has already received an informal name "people's" and "budget." According to its characteristics, the novelty seriously exceeds the MRK. According to experts, a new corvette is needed for the Russian Navy. It is a good option to get for a relatively small amount of money a fleet of shock ships with great potential and unique characteristics.

As "Izvestia" was told in the General Staff of the Navy, the draft of the new corvette has already been preliminarily studied and received positive reviews.

"A new corvette is an attempt to create a small displacement ship, but with very powerful and multifunctional armament," Valentin Belonenko, representative of the Krylov Scientific Center, told Izvestia. - At the same time, he can operate in the far sea, coastal zones or even in the estuaries of large rivers. At high "sea" sides the ship has a very small draft. In its motion lead water jet engines, which increases maneuverability in small water areas.

In appearance, the ship is similar to the atomic destroyer "Leader" project 23560. This ship should replace the heavy nuclear cruisers such as "Peter the Great". The chopped lines of the hull, the pyramidal hanging superstructure, the complete absence of antennas and the armament put into the below-deck space. All of these are elements of Stealth stealth technology. However, unlike the older brother, the corvette has an order of magnitude smaller displacement.

At the same time on its board are 24 universal launchers 3S-14 for the launch of long-range cruise missiles Caliber and anti-ship Onyx. This is more than on ships with a similar displacement of the type "Buyan-M" or "Karakurt." And little less than the "Leader".

The corvette also has a powerful air defense system. These are 16 long-range guided missiles and 32 are small ones. In addition, the newest universal 100 mm automatic artillery A-190 stands on board. Two 30 mm six-barrel rapid-fire cannons AK-630 and one twelve-barrel cannon "Duet". To combat enemy submarines installed torpedo tubes "Packet-NK" caliber 324 mm. Detection of submarines is carried out by means of a hydroacoustic complex with antennas in the nose bulb, under the keel and extended, towed behind the stern of the ship, and also with the help of the Ka-27 helicopter. For its basing in the stern superstructure there is a hangar.

"Compared to the Buyans and the Karakurts, the new corvette has serious advantages," the military historian Dmitry Boltenkov told Izvestia. - He has a powerful air defense system, a large number of strike complexes. The ship is more universal. It is such a ship that is now required by the Russian Navy. In case of their construction on each fleet it is possible to create a strong numerous shock group from new corvettes.

At present, five small missile ships of the project Buyan-M are part of the Russian Navy. Another seven are in varying degrees of readiness. Also, the Main Command of the Navy ordered a series of 18 more advanced "Karakurts".

Big_Gazza wrote:Already discussed this previously in http://www.russiadefence.net/t4811p275-russian-naval-shipbuilding-industry-news, starting at post 286 by Austin.

This new pic does at least confirm the short-range AA is in two VLS on heli deck level.

AlfaT8 wrote:

PapaDragon wrote:.
Capital ships are completely redundant at this point in time. Later yes but not now.

Now they need three things: missile ships, corvettes and frigates. That's it.

Three shipyards per one class. Problem solved.

Anything bigger right now is a waste of time, money, man-hours, and production capacities.

I disagree, the Super-Gorshkov would also be a good investment.
Unless you mean the SG when you mentioned "missile ships".

Nasr Hosein wrote:

AlfaT8 wrote:

PapaDragon wrote:.
Capital ships are completely redundant at this point in time. Later yes but not now.

Now they need three things: missile ships, corvettes and frigates. That's it.

Three shipyards per one class. Problem solved.

Anything bigger right now is a waste of time, money, man-hours, and production capacities.

I disagree, the Super-Gorshkov would also be a good investment.
Unless you mean the SG when you mentioned "missile ships".

I have a question, if there are plans for a "Super Gorshkov", then would this ship be classified as a Frigate or Destroyer? Whatever the case, would the advent of a "Super Gorshkov" mean that there wouldn't be any Lider Class Destroyers? Because as far as I am aware, the design for Lider Class Destroyers have been approved and all related tasks will commence in the coming time. Also, when there is a "Super Gorshkov", would that mean that the Admiral Groshkov Class Frigates  (current ones), be discontinued by the time the sixth frigate has been built and handed over for trials before commissioning?

AlfaT8 wrote:
Definitely a Destroyer at this point.
Think of it as a cheaper Lider in a sense, the Lider is more a capital ship with all the bells and whistles, while the SG is more a guided missile ship.
Unlikely, even if the SG becomes a reality, the Russian navy trying to get the best bang for there buck will still most likely focus on Frigates, besides they still have a crippling need for new Frigates.
Then again, who knows, they might focus on an upgraded Grigorovich-class instead.

T-47 wrote:

AlfaT8 wrote:
Definitely a Destroyer at this point.
Think of it as a cheaper Lider in a sense, the Lider is more a capital ship with all the bells and whistles, while the SG is more a guided missile ship.
Unlikely, even if the SG becomes a reality, the Russian navy trying to get the best bang for there buck will still most likely focus on Frigates, besides they still have a crippling need for new Frigates.
Then again, who knows, they might focus on an upgraded Grigorovich-class instead.

Super Gorshokov is just extended version of Gorshkov, so if they managed to smooth Gorshkov production. SG will come out just fine, it only needs a bigger yard to build.

Nasr Hosein wrote:

T-47 wrote:

AlfaT8 wrote:
Definitely a Destroyer at this point.
Think of it as a cheaper Lider in a sense, the Lider is more a capital ship with all the bells and whistles, while the SG is more a guided missile ship.
Unlikely, even if the SG becomes a reality, the Russian navy trying to get the best bang for there buck will still most likely focus on Frigates, besides they still have a crippling need for new Frigates.
Then again, who knows, they might focus on an upgraded Grigorovich-class instead.

Super Gorshokov is just extended version of Gorshkov, so if they managed to smooth Gorshkov production. SG will come out just fine, it only needs a bigger yard to build.

Speaking of "bigger yards", I have searched (unsuccessfully) for information regarding any intent or plans by Russia to expand its shipbuilding industry to facilitate building large combat ships like Destroyers, Aircraft Carriers and Cruisers. Are there such plans in the foreseeable future?

Nasr Hosein wrote:
Speaking of "bigger yards", I have searched (unsuccessfully) for information regarding any intent or plans by Russia to expand its shipbuilding industry to facilitate building large combat ships like Destroyers, Aircraft Carriers and Cruisers. Are there such plans in the foreseeable future?