Russian Navy: Status and News #5

Isos wrote:Is it a photoshop ? Never seen pictures of this ship.

3D render of a World of Warships digital model.

SeigSoloyvov wrote:Ah the Sovetsky Soyuz class.

Proof the Russians invented stealth tech before anyone else, it was never spotted during the war and the Germans never realized it was sinking their ships.

Odd the Russians revealed the existence of the ship to the world like this

Wut?  Given that the Germans had known that she was being built at Leningrad, and had been flying aerial recon & photographed her, you still think it was "never spotted" and only now are the Russians revealing her existance?



Low info voter indeed...



BTW here she is on the stocks, along with the heavy cruiser Chkalov.  Photo taken by Luftwaffe in June 1941

Isos wrote:

JohninMK wrote:Another St Petersburg ship on the 25th Navy Day.

The "Soviet Union" still under her own power. Quite a sight!

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/E7sxRXuXEAcP9dT?format=jpg&name=medium

Is it a photoshop ? Never seen pictures of this ship.

Dude, are you for real?

Isos wrote:
Is it a photoshop ? Never seen pictures of this ship.

Believe me if that behemoth existed for real and survived to this day then there's no way you would have missed it

SeigSoloyvov wrote:

ALAMO wrote:

Isos wrote:

Still Ukrainian... Russia has no right over Ukrainian ships even if they are abandoned  

I would not be so sure about that, as there are civil laws in every country that regulates the status of abandoned possession
As f_p mentioned, it is a brain exercise only, still interesting.

Well, they weren't abandoned they were seized there is a difference. Russian naval troops seized the base and didn't let anything go. Not like the Ukies went "you can have this" it was "So here is the deal, we are taking over the base and all your ships are staying right here". When you seize a base you are seizing everything around and in at the same time.

If my memory is correct didn't Russia blockade the port entrance also?.

I realize fanboys will try to argue otherwise but hey that's fanboys.

The Ukraine elite screwed Russia on every deal since 1991. A war shouldn't have happened in the first place. And it was war. Of course Russia is going to take their shit. As it should. They took one of Ukraine's only working submarines too.

PapaDragon wrote:

Isos wrote:

JohninMK wrote:Another St Petersburg ship on the 25th Navy Day.

The "Soviet Union" still under her own power. Quite a sight!

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/E7sxRXuXEAcP9dT?format=jpg&name=medium

Is it a photoshop ? Never seen pictures of this ship.

Dude, are you for real?  

Plenty of such ships were kept as museum. I remember Russia has one in Crimea. I thought it was this one but then I saw it was huge .

GarryB wrote:

The 22350 "frigates" are classified as a 1st rank ship, this is a destroyer or "ship of the line" not a frigate, using the common and NATO classification.

So the Gorshkov frigates are the same 1st rank as the upgraded Peter the Great Orlan class ships?

The fact that the designation for the Udaloy has changed from Destroyer to Frigate suggests that ships can change rank easily enough and that when new destroyers and new cruisers are built these frigates will drop down the ranks accordingly.

Not, they were "large antisom ships" in Soviet times, Frigate means instead that they are fully multirole:
French, as an example, have not Destroyers but "Frigate premier rang" instead.

Back to the large landing ship, it was probably one of the few useful ships in the Ukrainian navy before 2014 and probably the one most useful at the moment to Russia. It could be even used as part of the Syrian express.

The other ships that were in acceptable state were the krivak 3 frigate that is currently the Ukrainian flagship and the two 1124 corvettes built in the early 90s (currently in Crimea and just preserved as they were not given back to 404). One of them was practically delivered from its commander in 2014, that changed allegiance to Russia and if I am not mistaken was later given command of a (older) ship of the same class in the Baltic fleet.

GarryB wrote:

The 22350 "frigates" are classified as a 1st rank ship, this is a destroyer or "ship of the line" not a frigate, using the common and NATO classification.

So the Gorshkov frigates are the same 1st rank as the upgraded Peter the Great Orlan class ships?

The fact that the designation for the Udaloy has changed from Destroyer to Frigate suggests that ships can change rank easily enough and that when new destroyers and new cruisers are built these frigates will drop down the ranks accordingly.

no, "Frigate" Udaloy is also first rank ship
the rank does not change, the tons does not change, the weapons does not change and also increase...., change only the name (its more politically correct "frigate" than destroyer....)

1st rank: Gorshov, Udaloy, Sovremennyy, nuclear submarines and cruisers. Of course, cruisers can be flag ships with an admiral onboard. Basically more than 5000 t full load means 1st rank

2nd rank: Stereguschy , Daghestan,. Krivak , Neustrashiniy , Grigorovich (Krivak V), Rapucha, diesel submarines. Basically more 2000 t

3rd rank: Buyan-M, Karakurt, Tarantul, Grisha, Nanuchka, Parchim, Zubr, ocean minesweepers. Basically more 400--500 tons, Also salvage tugs and the most auxiliares

4th rank (comanded by liutenants): Landing crafts, gunboats, harbor minesweepers, harbor tugs. etc...



https://vk.com/rusflot?w=wall-72814627_150695
The 1st rank frigate "Admiral of the Soviet Union Fleet Gorshkov" Project 22350 of the Northern Fleet of the Russian Navy. In 2018 he entered the Navy. Board number - 454. Designed for the destruction of ground targets, NK of the enemy, support for anti-aircraft defense and air defense of fleet formations. It is part of the 43rd division of missile ships of the Northern Fleet. Based in Severomorsk.


https://vk.com/rusflot?w=wall-72814627_150793
Corvette 2 rank "Boyky" Project 20380 of the Baltic Fleet of the Russian Navy. In 2013 he entered the Navy. Board number - 532. Designed to search and destroy enemy submarines, to fight surface ships. It is part of the 128th BF surface ship brigade. Based in Baltiysk.



It appears that ships 22350 and 22350M will cover the Sovremenny and Udaloy sites in the long term with better weapons and greater versatility, although with a smaller size.
In fact, the 22,350 are entering the places where the Sovremenny (more than a dozen) should be, who caused premature loss due to the disastrous Ukrainian turbines.


in the same way, it seems that the 22380 and 22385 occupy the place left by the premature loss of the Krivak, also with better armament and polyvalence and smaller size.

And the Lider, classified as "destroyers" with 20,000 tons, will replace the cruisers in the very long term, especially since they will surely have a construction period of many years and the last will come when the nuclear cruisers "Kirov" are withdrawn, probaly the construction period between 2030 and 2045 or more. (I hope I live long enough to see it)

Rodion_Romanovic wrote:Back to the large landing ship, it was probably one of the few useful ships in the Ukrainian navy before 2014 and probably the one most useful at the moment to Russia. It could be even used as part of the Syrian express.

The other ships that were in acceptable state were the krivak 3 frigate that is currently the Ukrainian flagship and the two 1124 corvettes built in the early 90s (currently in Crimea and just preserved as they were not given back to 404). One of them was practically delivered from its commander in 2014, that changed allegiance to Russia and if I am not mistaken was later given command of a (older) ship of the same class in the Baltic fleet.

Russia does not need any ships from Ukraine, except the Rapucha.It would have been better not to give it to the Ukrainian navy, given that Russia has 15 and needed 16 to have 4 in each fleet.

In fact, the ships that Russia gave Ukraine in 1997 were all useless garbage for Russia except the Rapucha.
The Krivak 3 could have served in 1997 not now, and also the Russian Navy does not use the Krivak 3, they were in the Kamchatka-based border guard

AMCXXL wrote:

Rodion_Romanovic wrote:Back to the large landing ship, it was probably one of the few useful ships in the Ukrainian navy before 2014 and probably the one most useful at the moment to Russia. It could be even used as part of the Syrian express.

The other ships that were in acceptable state were the krivak 3 frigate that is currently the Ukrainian flagship and the two 1124 corvettes built in the early 90s (currently in Crimea and just preserved as they were not given back to 404). One of them was practically delivered from its commander in 2014, that changed allegiance to Russia and if I am not mistaken was later given command of a (older) ship of the same class in the Baltic fleet.

Russia does not need any ships from Ukraine, except the  Rapucha.It would have been better not to give it to the Ukrainian navy, given that Russia has 15 and needed 16 to have 4 in each fleet.

In fact, the ships that Russia gave Ukraine in 1997 were all useless garbage for Russia except the Rapucha.
The Krivak 3 could have served in 1997 not now, and also the Russian Navy does not use the Krivak 3, they were in the Kamchatka-based border guard

exactly, all the krivak III were build for the soviet border guard. If I am not mistaken that one in particular was completed (in Kerch) after the dissolution of soviet union, and Ukraine "renamed" it as a frigate.

SeigSoloyvov wrote:Are you serious xD, Just woooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooow.

You clearly missed the joke and your trying to insult my intelligence? what an absolute moron.

I feel sorry for you.

I kinda hoped you were joking, but with shit-thick ignorant Muricanz with zero knowledge of the rest of the world or the people who live in it, one can never be really sure...

So yeah, I assumed the worst.  Under the circumstances, I still say I made the right call.

[quote="GarryB"]

Well, they weren't abandoned they were seized there is a difference. Russian naval troops seized the base and didn't let anything go. Not like the Ukies went "you can have this" it was "So here is the deal, we are taking over the base and all your ships are staying right here". When you seize a base you are seizing everything around and in at the same time.

The Russian troops were in Russian bases leased from Ukraine. They never exceeded the number of troops they were allowed to have in those bases.

Most of the seizing was done by the Crimean people, the Russians just looking on and being polite.

Those Crimean people were legally Ukrainian so those boats and that land was theirs and they legally voted to join the Russian Federation... which meant all the ships and property reverted to Russian ownership, so Russia was being very generous returning the crap they didn't want to Kiev... something that Kiev managed to ruin by murdering their own people.

Exactly.

And besides, what about Ukrainian servicemen and women switching en masse to Russia. Should Russia return them too? Now that would be laughable. There are reports of the numbers that refused to fight their Russian brothers-in-arms and joined their ranks, but can't find it right now. Let the yankee fanboy do some research and check it himself. He's always quick to jump on petty issues looking to score cheap points for his team, claim his holier-than-thou impartiality, then label the rest of us Russian fanboys..

Russian (not Soviet) ship classification depends​ on function+size and seems to go like this:

Small missile ships: exactly what the name says, small single role (Tarantul, Buyan, Karakurt...)

Corvettes: small multirole ships (Steregushi, Gremashi...)

Frigates: Large multirole ships (Neustrashimyy, Grigorevich, Gorshkov, Udaloi upgrade...)


Next ones should be Destroyers which would be extra large multirole ships but those are still not in the game


Ships like Slavas, Kirovs and original Udalois are leftovers from old classification and are not taken into account when classifying new ones, they are just around doing their thing

slasher wrote:

GarryB wrote:

Well, they weren't abandoned they were seized there is a difference. Russian naval troops seized the base and didn't let anything go. Not like the Ukies went "you can have this" it was "So here is the deal, we are taking over the base and all your ships are staying right here". When you seize a base you are seizing everything around and in at the same time.

The Russian troops were in Russian bases leased from Ukraine. They never exceeded the number of troops they were allowed to have in those bases.

Most of the seizing was done by the Crimean people, the Russians just looking on and being polite.

Those Crimean people were legally Ukrainian so those boats and that land was theirs and they legally voted to join the Russian Federation... which meant all the ships and property reverted to Russian ownership, so Russia was being very generous returning the crap they didn't want to Kiev... something that Kiev managed to ruin by murdering their own people.

Exactly.

And besides, what about Ukrainian servicemen and women switching en masse to Russia. Should Russia return them too? Now that would be laughable. There are reports of the numbers that refused to fight their Russian brothers-in-arms and joined their ranks, but can't find it right now. Let the yankee fanboy do some research and check it himself. He's always quick to jump on petty issues looking to score cheap points for his team, claim his holier-than-thou impartiality, then label the rest of us Russian fanboys..

It must be borne in mind that the population of Sevastopol has been Russian since the 18th century and before that it was fundamentally Greek since the time of the Trojan War, the Tartar occupiers who arrived in the 15th century lived mostly in the interior of Crimea.

When the Soviet Black Sea Fleet was finally partitioned in 1997, simply many Russian sailors, inhabitants of Sevastopol for the most part, switched to the Ukrainian fleet. In 2014 they, and in some cases their sons, went the other way and returned to the Russian Fleet 17 years later.

85-90% of the sailors went to Russian Naxy, of course they were Russians, the few ukrainians who were in Sevastopol were simply occupants placed there by the Kiev government and were returned to Ukraine
In fact, the former head of the Ukrainian fleet is now Vice Admiral of the Pacific Fleet.

ALAMO wrote:Sure it is, designed&build in Poland

well, it was built in the People's Republic of Poland, nothing to do with present-day Poland
Unfortunately Walesa destroyed the country and the shipyards and other industries went to shit. In the 90s Western Europe was filled with Poles and other Eastern Europeans looking for work so as not to starve to death

PapaDragon wrote:
Russian (not Soviet) ship classification depends​ on function+size and seems to go like this:

Small missile ships: exactly what the name says, small single role (Tarantul, Buyan, Karakurt...)

Corvettes: small multirole ships (Steregushi, Gremashi...)

Frigates: Large multirole ships (Neustrashimyy, Grigorevich, Gorshkov, Udaloi upgrade...)


Next ones should be Destroyers which would be extra large multirole ships but those are still not in the game


Ships like Slavas, Kirovs and original Udalois are leftovers from old classification and are not taken into account when classifying new ones, they are just around doing their thing

No, the Goshkov is a first rank ship, it is in the same category as the Udaloys and Sovremenny (in fact I think that the Sovremenny of north fleet is already decommissioned or is it close to being , with the arrival of the 22350´s). They all belong to the same 43rd Missile Ship Division

Basically, Gorshov is designed for Carrier Gropus and oceanic deployment or for command itself naval formations of lower-ranking ships , while the other "frigates" are common frigates for antisubmarine waffare and escort

Nowadays the "name" designated for the ships is a political designation, in my country an Aegis 6000 ton anti-aircraft destroyer is called "frigate", because "destroyer" sounds very aggressive for liberals, and it is not politically correct neither inclusive nor ecological nor resilient nor carbon neutral, etc ...

The mission of each type of ship is not only defined by the tonnage but also by the mission for which they were designed.

https://ru.wikipedia.org/wiki/%D0%9A%D0%BB%D0%B0%D1%81%D1%81%D0%B8%D1%84%D0%B8%D0%BA%D0%B0%D1%86%D0%B8%D0%B8_%D0%BA%D0%BE%D1%80%D0%B0%D0%B1%D0%BB%D0%B5%D0%B9_%D0%92%D0%9C%D0%A4_%D0%A0%D0%BE%D1%81%D1%81%D0%B8%D0%B8

Battle ship 1st rank
Ships of the 1st rank have a jack that rises on the bow flagpole of the ship when docked. Displacement of ships of the 1st rank is more than 5,000 tons. They are intended for operations in the distant sea and oceanic zone, both as part of formations (naval strike group, aircraft carrier strike group) and independently.
The 1st rank ship is commanded by a senior officer, captain of the 1st rank.


2nd rank ship
Ships of the 2nd rank have a jack that rises on the bow flagpole of the ship when docked. Displacement of ships of the 2nd rank - from 1,500 tons to 5,000 tons. They are designed for operations in the far sea zone, both as part of formations (naval strike group) and independently.
The ship is commanded by a captain of the 2nd rank.


3rd rank ship
Ships of the 3rd rank do not have a jack. Displacement of ships of the 3rd rank - from 500 tons to 1,500 tons. They are designed to operate in the near sea zone, both as part of formations and independently.
The ship is in command of the 3rd rank captain.