Does not really matter, Russias subs and planes with their focus on long range supersonic antiship missiles can take on those ships NP. I think Russia builds surface warships with the belief they are really to show the flag and a peace time weapon. In war it will be planes and subs that will be the only things that can survive.
Russia needs to be able to expand its trade to places not on its land borders, and to access such markets it needs to have a physical presence there. How can Russia trade with Venezuela if the US could simply impose a naval blockade and block naval traffic to and from the country?
Can Russia rely on the US or UK to help Russian flagged ships being attacked by Pirates in the various places of the world?
I doubt it.
She needs to be able to sort out her own problems using her own resources, but that means if she is operating in the south pacific or south atlantic or off the coast of africa or south america then it needs its own organic air power... which means aircraft carriers... which means cruisers and destroyers to support them and be supported.
Keep in mind the Russian concept of an aircraft carrier is not to invade a country, but to offer air protection to a group of surface vessels.
All these media sources are such crap. They feed sensationalist clickbait fragments that are basically worthless.
Sounds like the shipyards wanting decisions so they can make plans.... which is understandable from their position... they want to make boats, but for the Navy... they don't just want any boats... they want useful suitable boats because they are not getting hundreds of these things...
That's clearly not enough for long range missions. Those 24 needs to accomodate anti sub missiles, anti ship missiles and land attack missiles so more or less 8 of each type which is very low for any of those missions. Far away they don't have friendly bases to switch the missiles
It is a Frigate. For those long range missions it will have a Kirov with 80 missiles... each...
A single Arleigh burk can launch 50 tomahawks and still have enough anti air and anti sub missiles.
8 missiles is too low. It's even pathetic.
Yeah... 50 tomahawks shot down by two corvettes air defence missiles, while those 8 Zircons sink 8 American cruisers... pathetic.
Pathetic you think it would operate on its own, pathetic you are comparing a frigate with a cruiser...
However, when they go out and release the Lider model, or the Shturm aircraft carrier model, it's literally one of their design exercises, then people come along and go "is this Russia's next warship?", it isn't, it means literally nothing, zero.
I honestly think we're going to see cruiser far sooner rather than later, I mean, this UDC literally came out of the blue and it's not a small vessel, which illustrates my point above, it's not the displacement or size that drives up cost and build time
As you mention as the ships get bigger the problems of Ukrainian engines disappear and nuke power plants come in to play which is bad for cost but good for performance.
Russia is never going to have enough big ships able to take on all of HATO... they don't need it.
What the do need is a group of ships that can operate together anywhere on the planet and fight as a group... in terms of SAMs and cruise/attack missiles they are already second to none.. they just need to build the ships... but they need to decide what ships to build first... so have some patience... when they are ready.