Russian Naval Construction Plans and Numbers

No good news from Severnaya Werf..

26 October 2022 12:51
MASHNEWS
Shipbuilding

Igor Orlov: boathouse "Severnaya Verf" will continue to build a new contractor

Director of Severnaya Verf Igor Orlov spoke in an exclusive interview with MASHNEWS about the progress of construction of a new slipway for large-capacity ships and vessels.
“We are finishing the competitive procedures for selecting a new contractor,” said Igor Orlov, adding that the previous contractor did not complete the required amount of work, going bankrupt.

"This year we will continue to build," summed up the director of Severnaya Verf.

Earlier it was reported that USC plans to complete the construction of a new slipway at Severnaya Verf in 2023.
The construction of a boathouse at the shipyard is the first stage in the modernization of the plant's production. In 2017, Metrostroy received a contract to perform these works. It was assumed that the work would be completed in the first quarter of 2019, but the contractor failed to cope with the task, the contract was terminated.

In 2020, USC CEO Alexei Rakhmanov said that they plan to complete the construction of the boathouse before the end of the year. In September 2020, Severnaya Verf signed a contract with a new contractor, Domestic Systems and Technologies LLC. After that, the object was planned to be commissioned in 2022. The cost of the contract was estimated at 7.8 billion rubles.

The first stage of production modernization included the construction of two horizontal slipway slabs 250x100 m, covered by a boathouse 73.5 m high, with overhead cranes with a lifting capacity of 350 tons.

https://www.korabel.ru/out/redirect.html?url=https%3A%2F%2Fmashnews.ru%2Fstroitelstvo-novogo-ellinga-na-severnoj-verfi-prodolzhitsya-v-etom-godu.html&object=news&id=329330


My addition; With the exception of Sevmash, which is overloaded (it turned out to be a big mistake that only this shipyard builds nuclear submarines) with the construction of 3 nuclear submarine projects (885M, 955A, 09851 Khabarovsk), as well as the modernization of the "Nakhimov" cruiser, all other Russian shipyards are ineffective that that's already a big shame. "Baltic Shipyard" is an exception, but only nuclear icebreakers are built there - there is no production for military needs. The problem is not only shipyards, but also subcontractors who do not deliver engines and other equipment installed on ships on time. There is no order and there is no efficiency and that is why everything is delayed by a year or two or much more when it comes to frigates 22350..
The Russians still talk a lot about the navy, but the results are not at all impressive. Although I believe that Sevmash will start the accelerated construction of the successor to the project 971 submarines when the 955A strategic submarines are completed - nothing else makes me happy. There is hope for submarines, but not much for surface warships at the moment.

GarryB wrote:With the current split with the west Russia is going to have to shift focus to the rest of the world which means a shift in focus in their military spending as well.

The Navy was not a real focus in the past though they are making corvettes that make western destroyers look underarmed and equipped, so the direction is good... they just need more funding and attention.

Saying one shipyard is overloaded is BS because the corvettes and frigates and minesweepers and helicopter landing ships and other vessels being made for the Russian Navy are not nuclear powered so other shipyards can make them.

If they do follow through on plans for destroyers and cruisers and their new fixed wing carriers to be nuclear powered then other shipyards are going to have to deal with nuclear propulsion technology too, and most shipyards are going to have to be able to handle bigger ships whether it is just to upgrade them or to build them... because bigger ships are coming... civilian and military.

Sevmash is currently building 10 nuclear submarines; 4 strategic 955A, 5 multipurpose 885M, and "special purpose" submarine of project 09851 Khabarovsk. Two more submarines are being tested by Sevmash and are about to be put into service, i.e. Suvorov (955A) and Krasnoyarsk (885M). That's 12 submarines plus the modernization of the Nakhimov cruiser. Sevmash is working at full steam and is the only relatively efficient shipbuilder - that's the bottom line. Of course, we should expect the start of construction of additional submarines in the near future.

All Russkie shipyards are going full ahead.
They no longer have space for new projects, booked for the next decade.
The new floating nuclear power plant hulls will be built by the Chinese due to that.
The Turks are building ferries for the same reason.

Well, not all of them are overloaded and I think that Yantar could get a contract for two more landing ships of project 11711, while it remains to be seen whether the Amur Shipyard will start building frigates as it is hinted at. The question is whether Zvezda and Baltic shipyards will sign contracts for the construction of military ships in the future. Many problems need to be solved such as engine problems because even the small rocket ships of project 22800 are delayed because of it. Project 22350 frigates remain a huge problem and apologies for Ukr. Zorya Mashproekt are out of place because the Russians have no one to blame for not starting development of their own turbines earlier and before 2014. That was a large mistake.

"special purpose" submarine of project 09851 Khabarovsk. wrote:

And possibly another Peseidon 09853 carrier unit. So, three Poseidon drone carriers are present in the tests and construction.

ALAMO wrote:All Russkie shipyards are going full ahead.
They no longer have space for new projects, booked for the next decade.
The new floating nuclear power plant hulls will be built by the Chinese due to that.
The Turks are building ferries for the same reason.

Kherson shipyard will soon be employed after the war then!

I still hope also for Nikolaev... It is true that the 3 large shipyards there are in a dilapidated state, but probably the same could be said for Kerch in 2014. And they are anyway in a perfect location for shipbuilding (a very important consideration when planning to build a shipyard). So investing there (after Nikolaev is Russian and there is no nearby front of the conflict) will be much better than giving money to foreign shipyards.

By the way, can the shipyard in Mariupol be used for shipbuilding or is it only for ship repairs?

after Nikolaev is Russian and there is no nearby front of the conflict) will be much better than giving money to foreign shipyards. wrote:

It is not known whether Nikolaev will be Russian but another gigantic shipyard is to be built in Russia.

Arrow wrote:

It is not known whether Nikolaev will be Russian but another gigantic shipyard is to be built in Russia.

Where?

I know only about Zvezda and about something for Novatek in the Kola bay.

There was some talk about a massive shipyard in Kotlin island near Sankt Petersburg, but I do not know the status.

This will not anyway superseed the advantages about having back Nikolaev.

There is hardly any advantage to having Nikolayev shipyard.
It is in a state of decomposition, and the whole infrastructure there is made back in the tsarist times. Soviets only expanded it.
If anyone is to build a dreadnought, then yes, that would be a good address.
Only needs to be grub up first ...

ALAMO wrote:There is hardly any advantage to having Nikolayev shipyard.
It is in a state of decomposition, and the whole infrastructure there is made back in the tsarist times. Soviets only expanded it.
If anyone is to build a dreadnought, then yes, that would be a good address.
Only needs to be grub up first ...

To which one do you refer to? All of them? There was Nikolayev Shipyard (former communara 61), which is the the oldest of them, founded in 1789, where in 1900 the battleship potemkin was build (and where more recently te slava class cruisers were built).

There was the black sea shipyard founded in 1895, where all the soviet aircrafts carriers where built (and which largest slipway was partially destroyed a few years ago to build the grain terminal).

Finally there was Okean shipyard, build in 1951 and reconstructed in the 70s. It build only civilian ships and apparently it had a medium tonnage line (where they could  build vessels with maximum dimensions of 135x18 m, with a launching weight of 6,000 tons) and a large tonnage line with a massive dry dock (354x60x14 m) with two cranes with a capacity of 320 tons each.  According to public available info this line could be used for the construction of ships of maximum dimensions of 340x50x18 m.


Probably the first two shipyards are in need of complete reconstruction, but Okean should still be in conditions no worse from what was Kerch shipyard in 2014.

Furthermore even if they are in bad conditions, they are in good geographical location for building there modern shipyards, and it could be easier (albeit still expensive) to dismantle old equipment there and build there something new than in some location geographically unsuitable.

Back to Kherson, which is already in Russian hands, albeit currently too close to the contact lines. This shipyard was apparently still somewhat active also recently, and is capable of building ships up to 180 metres long and with launching weight of 10000 tons. This shipyard should be of course the first to be involved, unless also the Mariupol shiprepairing yard could be also used for shipbuilding.


Edit: In Nikolaev there is also the Nibulon shipyard, able to build ships up to 140 metres long, belonging to the grain export firm and basically the only ship building yard that was really active in the last years in the Ukraine.


https://www.nibulon.com/data/branches/shipbuilding-and-repair-yard-nibulon/about-shipbuilding-and-repair-yard-nibulon.html


Note: in 2019 they built there the Nibulon max, a 140m cargo ship and the longest cargo ship built in modern Ukraine.


https://ubn.news/nibulon-commissioned-on-friday-the-nibulon-max-a-140-meter-long-grain-handling-ship-considered-to-be-the-longest-ship-built-in-independent-ukraine/

ALAMO wrote:There is hardly any advantage to having Nikolayev shipyard.
It is in a state of decomposition, and the whole infrastructure there is made back in the tsarist times. Soviets only expanded it.
If anyone is to build a dreadnought, then yes, that would be a good address.
Only needs to be grub up first ...

New dreadnoughts... 

Rodion_Romanovic wrote:Where?

I know only about Zvezda and about something for Novatek in the Kola bay.

There was some talk about a massive shipyard in Kotlin island near Sankt Petersburg, but I do not know the status.

This will not anyway superseed the advantages about having back Nikolaev.

On Kotlin island next to Piter. 
Problem with all these shipyards in Ukraine is, aside from need of massive investments is where to find all qualified workforce. Most of them didn't do shit for 30 years and competencies were lost. Whole Russian shipbuilding sector is still battling with same problem ( lack of qualified workforce).

Rodion_Romanovic wrote:[
To which one do you refer to?

Yeah, you are right - I was not precise.
To the 61, as that is the most known one.
We usually talk about that one when speaking about "The Nikolayev shipyard".
The one you are addressing is in much better shape, still, it is one dock only.
A big one, but constructed in the SU for one purpose only - to make carriers.
All the assisting cluster was there.
Today it would be considered as a relict - a yard that can build one ship of the size is ineffective.
They have a smaller repair dock either, but both the big and the small one are being used for the same low scale repair or section assembling for years.
All of that facilities are old age and require extensive rebuilding programs to be effective. All the new yards made in Russia are just another level, let it be a giant Zvezda or a small Pella.
To have Nikolayev or not have it makes no difference.

Well, the core of shipyard personnel could be formed already expert workers from other regions of Russia.
But how to solve in general the issue of lack of qualified personnel? Organise state funded apprenticeships programs (both for normal workers and engineers) in each of the large and already established Russian shipyards (especially in Sankt Petersburg, but also in Zvezda, Amur, Crimea, etc), in order to educate and train new generation of workers, and then possibly rotate them in other shipyards? 

If those apprenticeship programs are state funded (e.g salary for the trainees and engineering graduates are payed for the first 2 or 3 years by the state), that means that the shipyard themselves will not have to worry about the cost of getting new personnel to be trained.

I thought about this because in the aeronautical sector in Europe, both Airbus and Rolls-Royce have similar programs (apprenticeships and graduate programs)

In the case of those companies, they do not get exactly the salaries of the trainees paid by the state, but they get tax exemptions almost equivalent to that amount, so it is almost the same.

E.g.
https://www.airbus.com/en/careers/apprentices-and-pupils

https://www.airbus.com/en/careers/graduates



Quick consideration on Nikolaev:

Here is the location of the shipyards I mentioned before (please ignore the Ukrainian naming of the city)


Location C (in the north) is the delapidated Nikolaev shipyard (former communara 61)

In location B there are, next to each other the Nibulon grain terminal, the former black sea shipyard and the small but active Nibulon shipyard (build probably in part of the territory of the black sea shipyard)

Location A, to the south of Nikolaev, is where Okean shipyard is.

Those 1241 are sitting there like forever. They tried to sell them to Vietnam two decades ago or so.

The Russian Navy will very likely be even smaller than it is now.
Apart from the problems with engines, it is necessary to finally select and reduce the number of projects under construction. It turns out that all projects of Russian surface warships are "unfinished" and that they are constantly being improved through construction. Due to the inefficiency and slowness of the construction, this should not be surprising, because since 2006, when the construction of the "Gorshkov" frigate began and 16 years have passed, only two frigates (Gorshkov and Kasatonov) of that project have been put into use. At the same time, the Chinese did build over 30 Type-054A project frigates and about the same number of Type-052C, Type-052D and Type-055 destroyers. That's why any comparison with China is ridiculous. The "Leopard" submarine has been undergoing modernization for over 10 years, and the same applies to the "Irkutsk" submarine, a complete mess.


* Although the corvettes of projects 20380 and 20385 are similar in terms of displacement, they are still very different in terms of armament, while project 20386 is essentially a completely new ship.

* The Russians started building 21631 Buyan-M projects and subsequently started building 22800 Karakurt small missile ships. The reason for this is that the project 22800 has much better sailing characteristics in rough seas. And the Russians again announce the increase of the combat kit and the construction of small missile ships of the project 21635 Sarsar.

* Although the cessation of delivery of gas turbines from Ukroshitstan in 2014 is no justification for Russia, because one can justifiably ask why Russia waited for 23 years (from 1991 to 2014) to finally start designing gas turbines for the 22350 project. Eight years have passed since 2014, and the "Golovko" frigate has not yet begun sea trials, and I think that the question is whether the ship will be handed over to the Russian Navy next year. At the same time, "Isakov" has not yet been launched. It is a great shame for the country that builds 885M and 955A submarines. And in the end, here we come to a change in the project and it is already clear that from the fifth ship all frigates will have 24 or 32 cells in 3 to 4 UKSK.

* Project 11711 also underwent changes, so the third and fourth ships (Vladimir Andreyev and Vasily Trushin) were significantly enlarged.

* Any talk about project 22350M or about destroyers is completely meaningless after the above. Russian surface warships have no prospects (since the collapse of the USSR, nothing has been improved in terms of shipbuilding) and it remains to be seen whether Russia is at least able to build new submarines to replace projects 971 and 945A. That's why I'm just looking at Sevmash, although I'm already worried that the next in the 885M line, the submarine "Arkhangelsk", has been under construction for over 7.5 years and has not yet been launched. This means a minimum of 10 years until the introduction of that submarine into service and this leads to an imminent reduction in the number of operational SSN/SSGN submarines in the Russian Navy.

There is no comparison really. You are comparing a navy which is in full swing in terms of production to one which is still trying to come up with the proper ship types to manufacture. Why don't you look at the Chinese ships from 1990-2010 then? It was a succession of pathetically obsolete ships, mishmashed designs, and poor designs in general made in homeopathic amounts until they came up with the ship types they have in service at the moment. I think the major mistake Russia made was believing they could import weapon components. After the Chinese were hit with sanctions following the Tiananmen Square incident in 1989 they have had severe restrictions on weapons imports. Given that experience and their previous experience with the Soviets withdrawing technical support after the Sino-Soviet split they basically demand the capability to license manufacture anything they use in their own military to any large degree. That is where I think Russia failed with its imports of MTU engines and Ukrainian gas turbines. They should have never put those in the critical production path without demanding tech transfer first.

I think the Russian industry responded quite quickly to the gas turbine shortage. 5 years is the typical minimum for a project like that to enter production. Ramping up to mass production will take longer. The main issue is the goddamned diesels.

lancelot wrote:There is no comparison really. You are comparing a navy which is in full swing in terms of production to one which is still trying to come up with the proper ship types to manufacture. Why don't you look at the Chinese ships from 1990-2010 then? It was a succession of pathetically obsolete ships, mishmashed designs, and poor designs in general made in homeopathic amounts until they came up with the ship types they have in service at the moment. I think the major mistake Russia made was believing they could import weapon components. After the Chinese were hit with sanctions following the Tiananmen Square incident in 1989 they have had severe restrictions on weapons imports. Given that experience and their previous experience with the Soviets withdrawing technical support after the Sino-Soviet split they basically demand the capability to license manufacture anything they use in their own military to any large degree. That is where I think Russia failed with its imports of MTU engines and Ukrainian gas turbines. They should have never put those in the critical production path without demanding tech transfer first.

I think the Russian industry responded quite quickly to the gas turbine shortage. 5 years is the typical minimum for a project like that to enter production. Ramping up to mass production will take longer. The main issue is the goddamned diesels.

And where are the gas turbines you write about because "Golovko" was launched on May 22, 2020 and both turbines were installed inside the ship by December 2020. The ship still hasn't started sea trials. And what is the guarantee that even when it finally starts sea trials, there will be no malfunctions ?
What is the justification that Russia, as a country with a largest nuclear arsenal (a fact), did not start designing and then building gas turbines immediately after the disintegration of the USSR ?
30 years Lancelot, over 30 years have passed since 1991 and this kind of irresponsibility is not acceptable. They had over 30 years to start developing their own turbines and not be dependent on Ukroshitstan Zorya Mashproekt. And while you mention China in the period from 1990 to 2010, I have to write to you that the construction of project Type-054A frigates and Type-052C destroyers began before 2010. So, the Chinese already hinted in the zero years of the 21st century in which direction they were going.
Which current Russian warship under construction would you turn against Type-052D and Type-055 destroyers ? Although they are far better armed than the Chinese Type-054A class frigates, the Russian Project 22350 frigates have neither the range nor the arsenal to counter the Chinese destroyers. Only two such frigates are in service after 16 years of construction - 16 years!!! I have already written about the fact that only American and Chinese warships have universal VLS, while European and Russian ships use separate VLS for air defense systems.
Lancelot, who needs "technical support" now, the Chinese or the Russians ?

First of all, don't forget the totally different role of the navy for both countries.
WMF task is to protect the nuclear missiles carriers, and that is very much of it ...
Russian trade to this very moment was made by the land corridors and pipes ...
While China is strongly dependant on global trade executed by sea.
China is objectively speaking 5x bigger economy than the Russian one, so just multiply the Russian numbers by 5 ...
And what you will have - is more or less what we see.
Still, all Russian fleet modernization projects are much more effective than let's say European.

ALAMO wrote:First of all, don't forget the totally different role of the navy for both countries.
WMF task is to protect the nuclear missiles carriers, and that is very much of it ...
Russian trade to this very moment was made by the land corridors and pipes ...
While China is strongly dependant on global trade executed by sea.
China is objectively speaking 5x bigger economy than the Russian one, so just multiply the Russian numbers by 5 ...
And what you will have - is more or less what we see.
Still, all Russian fleet modernization projects are much more effective than let's say European.

No bro, you're wrong this time. The fucking French and Italians have built 19 frigates of the FREMM class since 2007, and even the USA ordered 20 "Constellation" frigates based on those frigates.

Not that I feel a particular need to defend Russkies here bro, but ...

Re: France/Italy programs, we talk about two world-class marine powers, so there is nothing strange that they can construct&build relatively successful units.
France's and Italy's defense budgets combined are bigger than the Russian one.
Both nations are well established naval construction players for centuries, and none of them faced catastrophic events like the dissolution of the WarPac and the SU itself.
Russkie are being continuously deprived of the possibility of a stable fleet modernization program, and that is both obvious and notorious.
The 2014 coup was a giant blow to the Russian naval programs of all sorts, and I am impressed - frankly speaking - that they have managed to recover in a really short time.

Yet, FREMM is just an oversized equivalent of a Russian corvette.
It represents no bigger punch than 20380, objectively speaking.
From this perspective, Russians made no worse - 20380, 20385, 20386, 11356 ...
If we take let's say Horizon frigates, then again Russkie are not worse with 22350...

Just take a look at the submarine construction program - what the Russians do there is mindblowing. There is no equivalent in Europe for that, no matter that the European combined defense spending fourfold the Russian ones.

lancelot has a good point there.
Chinese are just steadily expanding their capabilities, and that reflects the general condition of China itself.
They became a global superpower in the last 2 decades and the biggest economy on the planet. They need a big, blue water navy because of the structure of the economy - big dependence on the sea route trade.
That includes both the things they export and the crucial resources that they need to import, including the supply from Africa.
It didn't take out of anywhere, you know. They needed time to master the situation, and a civilian construction peak was one of the reasons here. You need cadres to make a successful naval construction program, and you can't have those cadres with no big & effective marine construction sector. This is what Russkie have been building for more than a decade now, and belive me my friend, you will see the difference very soon.

It is a matter of priorities if you ask my opinion

Podlodka77 wrote:And where are the gas turbines you write about because "Golovko" was launched on May 22, 2020 and both turbines were installed inside the ship by December 2020. The ship still hasn't started sea trials. And what is the guarantee that even when it finally starts sea trials, there will be no malfunctions ?
What is the justification that Russia, as a country with a largest nuclear arsenal (a fact), did not start designing and then building gas turbines immediately after the disintegration of the USSR ?
...
I have already written about the fact that only American and Chinese warships have universal VLS, while European and Russian ships use separate VLS for air defense systems.

It is like I said it took them roughly 5 years to put those marine gas turbines into production from when the project started in 2014. Which is pretty impressive. Yes it might have malfunctions like the UK has had issues with its propulsion units in the Type 45. So what? I am pretty sure if there are any issues they will be fixed.

Remember that trade with Ukraine was pretty lopsided to begin with and with so many things needing funding after the breakup of the Soviet Union the naval combustion engines were like the last item on the list. It is not like they didn't have enough credits given that Ukraine always seemed to never pay for the natural gas they used. The only reason Russia went with things like the MTU diesel engines in the first place was because of the lack of on time delivery on the part of Ukraine of any military components they ordered. The only sector in Russia which had consistent funding in the 1990s was strategic weapons like the ICBM program.

With regards to the VLS like others here told you, a universal VLS takes more space, and since Russia is still restrained to building smaller ship hulls they maximize their space with separate VLS for the land attack and air defense missiles. It is as simple as that.