Upgraded Kirov class: Project 11442 [Admiral Nakhimov] #2

Looks like the monster is ready….


MOSCOW, November 17. /TASS/. The physical launch of two reactors of the Admiral Nakhimov heavy nuclear missile cruiser (TARKR) of Project 11442M during repair and modernization at Sevmash is planned for the third ten days of November. A source in the Russian shipbuilding industry reported this to TASS.

https://tass.ru/armiya-i-opk/19311565

For those thinking it is not worth it it depends on purpose, they are going to be making frigates so not fixing this cruise up wont change that... if they want to spend that money on more frigates then those frigates get added to the end of the queue because they wont push a cruiser off a slipway and put four frigate hulls there and start work building four extra frigates.

Equally the future Russian surface ship groups are going to need excellent air defence systems and the air defence sensors and weapons you can put on a cruiser are vastly superior to anything going on a frigate... in fact when they have their new destroyers and new cruisers they likely wont even take frigates with them because they will slow the group down... and it will likely be destroyers and cruisers that have the serious ABM systems to defend themselves from ballistic missile and hypersonic missile attack.

Remember that the US has Standard SM2 surface to air missiles which are similar to S-300 which means mach 5-6 so they do have hypersonic anti ship missiles... but they fly on very predictable flight paths and if they try to manouver they will bleed speed because they will be huge and unpowered.

When the west finally gets hypersonic anti ship missiles Russia will have had a decade of practise defending itself from such weapons and will be rather more ready than any western group of ships.

When the job is moving furniture you don't think... wow 2 million dollars for a big truck is too expensive... i will just buy 50 cars and save some money... the manning demands for 50 cars, not to mention all the jobs you lose because you can't take big items and of course all the extra fuel you burn and coordination problems you create when some don't get to where you are going... if you want to trade internationally then you do it by sea and you need a decent navy to support that or you will get your transport ships seized by countries who know you don't have a navy that can do anything about it.

If the cost of modernizing one such cruiser would amount to 3 or 4 project 22350 frigates, as some write, then the whole job pays off.
On the other hand, the first 4 frigates of project 22350 have less striking power than "Nakhimov". One "Nakhimov" alone against the first four frigates of project 22350; it has more UKSK, a far more versatile air defense system and a far greater range, one less helicopter, nuclear propulsion, an immeasurably higher sailing speed and radius. The only thing is that it is not known how many Paket-NK systems will be installed on the ship.

Perhaps it is better to have four smaller ships and not keep all eggs in one basket, but the more versatile air defense on the "Nakhimov" again gives that ship a better chance compared to the first 4 frigates of project 22350. And most importantly, the speed of construction of those frigates has not yet reached the desired level . Therefore, I would rather sacrifice "Marshal Ustinov" and "Varyag" than "Peter the Great". The potential for modernization is far greater on 1144 cruisers.
The cruiser "Admiral Nakhimov" will most likely not be operational until at least 2025, and when it finally becomes operational, it will probably serve for no less than 20 years and maybe until 2050.

As for the other four frigates, that is, from the 5th to the 8th, project 22350, with 24 missiles (per ship) in UKSK, they would surpass "Nakhimov" and its striking power. And if we are talking about 32 missiles per ship, then even three frigates would surpass "Nakhimov". However, there is no hint that the number of missiles has been increased for air defense, as well as whether close air defense will be strengthened with "Pantsir-M".
If Russia proves that it is able to deliver one frigate from 2025 and launch another one in the same year, then it is pointless to spend money on older ships. Although, withdrawing "Peter the Great", who has only been in service for 24 years, is a sin and idiocy. As I wrote, I would sacrifice both project 1164 cruisers first, which are non-nuclear, are older, and have far less potential for modernization.

Let these two bad boys (Pavel and Peter) keep sailing the seas…

Admiral Nahimov should be scrapped. Loading a huge amount of resources into this ship is a waste of resources.
.

And nuclear powered aircraft carriers should be scrapped.
Any hit to such a ship would knock it out of gear at the very least.
The reason for this is that no air defense system is 100% accurate and if the "Nakhimov" is a waste of resources then I am convinced that the "Arleigh Burke" destroyers would DEFINITELY not defend the carrier.

If there's one thing I'd like to see, it's to finally dispel the myth about aircraft carriers. Neither aviation is a wunderwaffe nor is a 100,000 ton floating coffin indestructible.
Since World War II, those huge cans have not been used against a serious opponent. For decades, neither modern missiles, nor submarines, aviation - nothing threatened them.

Of course, aircraft carriers are overrated. This is a floating target for advanced enemys.

I am convinced that any surface ship, even if it has 100 anti-aircraft missiles, will be hit by at least 2 out of 10 modern anti-ship missiles.
And I mean a missile like the P-800 "Onyx" or even 3M-54 Kalibr, while the H47M2 "Kinzhal" and especially the 3M22 "Zircon" would have much better chances.
So one "Arleigh Burke" would certainly be destroyed with two P-800s.
The impact of "Kinzhal" pierced the reinforced concrete at a huge depth in West Ukroshitsan, so it would certainly pierce most of the decks on the carrier and then the kaboom will follow...
Trust me, my friend, the biggest "wunderwaffe" is an aircraft carrier. I often write after the message "this is just my opinion", but this time I am convinced that it is so.

The Americans, on the other hand, still do not have a high-quality anti-ship missile to fight the Nakhimov.
But yes, surely he too would be destroyed quickly.

The era of large ships and aircraft carriers is ending. A much better concept is smaller ships in larger numbers. Especially since the current revolution in AShM has reduced their dimensions, increased their range and speed. You can now place a modern compact AShM on a ship with a displacement of 2,000 tons. And Taki 22350 can carry 32 of them.

Let's pretend that the Adm Gorshkov pays a visit to Cuba and for good measure ad the future Adm Gromov and a support ship for effect. It will barely make the headlines anywhere else but Florida.

Let's pretend that the Adm Nakhimov does the same thing on it's own.

In the 90's and early 2000's several Russian ships made port visits in Cape Town and nobody got too excited...until Peter rocked up on it's own one fine summers day!

Arrow wrote:Admiral Nahimov should be scrapped. Loading a huge amount of resources into this ship is a waste of resources.
.

Wut? They have spent the best part of 10 years rebuilding her, and now they are days away from starting her new reactors, and you want to scrap her?

Just when you've started making sense in your posts, you suddenly revert back to your past idiocy.... Forget to take yer meds or something?

C'mon bud. You're better than this...

Podlodka77 wrote:If the cost of modernizing one such cruiser would amount to 3 or 4 project 22350 frigates, as some write, then the whole job pays off.
On the other hand, the first 4 frigates of project 22350 have less striking power than "Nakhimov". One "Nakhimov" alone against the first four frigates of project 22350; it has more UKSK, a far more versatile air defense system and a far greater range, one less helicopter, nuclear propulsion, an immeasurably higher sailing speed and radius. The only thing is that it is not known how many Paket-NK systems will be installed on the ship.

Perhaps it is better to have four smaller ships and not keep all eggs in one basket, but the more versatile air defense on the "Nakhimov" again gives that ship a better chance compared to the first 4 frigates of project 22350. And most importantly, the speed of construction of those frigates has not yet reached the desired level . Therefore, I would rather sacrifice "Marshal Ustinov" and "Varyag" than "Peter the Great". The potential for modernization is far greater on 1144 cruisers.
The cruiser "Admiral Nakhimov" will most likely not be operational until at least 2025, and when it finally becomes operational, it will probably serve for no less than 20 years and maybe until 2050.

As for the other four frigates, that is, from the 5th to the 8th, project 22350, with 24 missiles (per ship) in UKSK, they would surpass "Nakhimov" and its striking power. And if we are talking about 32 missiles per ship, then even three frigates would surpass "Nakhimov". However, there is no hint that the number of missiles has been increased for air defense, as well as whether close air defense will be strengthened with "Pantsir-M".
If Russia proves that it is able to deliver one frigate from 2025 and launch another one in the same year, then it is pointless to spend money on older ships. Although, withdrawing "Peter the Great", who has only been in service for 24 years, is a sin and idiocy. As I wrote, I would sacrifice both project 1164 cruisers first, which are non-nuclear, are older, and have far less potential for modernization.

Let these two bad boys (Pavel and Peter) keep sailing the seas…

We also need to factor in that the 1144s are nuke powered so have a global reach and effectively unlimited endurance, or limited only by availability of supplies for the crew.  No frigate can match them in this respect, not even close.