Russia, Ukraine to sell Slava Class Cruiser

B

BLUEJACKET

Banned Idiot
Just since some Russian ships are covered with rust, it doesn't mean all of them plus the Ukrainian ones are in bad shape.
Are you saying that cruisers are absolete concept?
The Slava-class cruisers carry an advanced version with an improved sophisticated guidance system, an autopilot that can be programmed for mid-course maneuvers, and an enhanced engine. The P-700 Granat [SSN-19 Shipwreck] was developed as a more successful turbojet alternative to the
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
, from which it was derived.
Click to expand...
Some of those ASM tubes can be removed and/or the ship can be used as LACM/ ASW/long range AD/UAV/TBMD platform with different tubes. Since the PLAN (which currently
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
) is to use the seabastion stategy for its SSBNs, the Slavas can be adopted for the role of defending them, in adition to other tasks. And I completely agree with the next post. Also, while naval doctrines change the older designs can be adopted to new requirements. In WWII, USN
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
were mainly used as air defence screens for convoys and carriers.
The nature of the war in the Pacific altered the battleship’s role forever. The Battle of Midway showed that it was no longer necessary for battlewagons to stand toe-to-toe and slug it out in the contest for supremacy at sea. But battleships performed a number of vital tasks during World War II: from escorting convoys to providing anti-air defense to providing necessary gunfire support to troops ashore.
..USS New Jersey (BB 62). was brought back into service in 1968 and served as a gun platform off the coast of Vietnam. Her nine 16-inch guns could throw a 2,700-pound projectile more than 20 miles. The ship was again decommissioned in 1969, but was recommissioned in 1982. The invasion of neighboring Kuwait by Iraqi dictator Sadam Hussein in February 1991 postponed the fate of USS Missouri (BB 63) and USS Wisconsin (BB 64). The big guns of the two battleships hammered at land targets in Kuwait in support of the Allied ground offensive..
Click to expand...
And some of the USN CG-47 Ticonderoga-class are going to be
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
, while still being a Cold War era
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
.
Do you know what frequent storms in S.China & Philippine Sea or Indian Ocean can do to smaller DDGs?
 
Last edited:
Jeff Head

Jeff Head

General
Registered Member
Totoro said:
But modern day sea warfare accentuates dispersion of units which are then combined into a potent force with networking. With further computeratization i expect even the US supper carriers to give way to larger number of smaller carriers in the next 50-100 years.
Click to expand...
This is true up to a point. The Slava class were a good interim solution between the large battle cruisers and the DDGs. They are formidable ships and they are not that huge...not too much larger than a Tico fully loaded and on par with the newer Japanese AEGIS destroyers (really cruisers) currently being built. They have very effective AAW and ASW capabilities that are an increase to the Sov class vessels which the PLAN has already bought four of.

While it may certainly not be the long term solution or direction, buying a couple of these, particularly if they come at a good price and are in good condition, would be an immediate and effective interim measure to complement the Sovs and bolster overall fleet capabilities, particularly in terms of more vessels capable of effective area defense for any PLAN CSG, SAG or Amphib group.

Just my opinion.
 
Last edited:
Gollevainen

Gollevainen

Colonel
VIP Professional
Registered Member
Just since some Russian ships are covered with rust, it doesn't mean all of them plus the Ukrainian ones are in bad shape.
Are you saying that cruisers are absolete concept?
Click to expand...

I hate generalization but in this case it's too often true. Yeas, a ship laid down in the mid eighties and have then being layinmg iddle in Nikolajev shipyard for over twenty years and in those years soviet union broke down and Ukraina gained independence. So pretty much its true in this situation, the ship is in bad shape.

Cruisers have been obsolent since the end of WWII. There's just new naval doctrines being developted and for example soviet docrtines required a big tradditional cruiser-size hulls and in western generalisation these ships are being called cruisers. But thats the case with every other warship classes as well. Destroyers are nothing what they used to be, not to mention frigates.

Slava doctrine and concept has been outdated since 1991 and even back then it was completely unsuitable for any other navy. Today it's useless asit's main weapon system is outdated and no longer in production. The huge size was only becouse of its massive size weapons. As they are no longer availble, there is no justification for such a large, expensive and crumble ship.

Some of those ASM tubes can be removed and/or the ship can be used as LACM/ ASW/long range AD/UAV/TBMD platform with different tubes. Since the PLAN (which currently doesn't have any cruiser) is to use the seabastion stategy for its SSBNs, the Slavas can be adopted for the role of defending them, in adition to other tasks. And I completely agree with the next post. Also, while naval doctrines change the older designs can be adopted to new requirements. In WWII, USN battleships were mainly used as air defence screens for convoys and carriers.
Click to expand...

A 052C size ship with improved VLS can do all the reasonable suggestion that you made for the Slava. And the USN BB are quite lame eaxmaple. It's the same as to use tanks with their 12.7mm AA mg as a mobile airdefence battery. The BB were kept afloat only becouse none dared to scrab such big, symbolic and expensive ships after such a short service life. To buy already old, bad shape and completely obcolent ship is nothing else than madness
 
B

BLUEJACKET

Banned Idiot
Then following your premise the Varyag and Gorshkov are also absolete for China and India, respectively! And yet both ships been bought and now being refurbished for use in the 21st cetury. BBs had big guns for fire support and had room for Harpoons/Tomahawks -that's why they were recomissined and kept in service. Some even now
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
their
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
!
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!


If the navies of the world started to decomission their ships as soon as doctrines/international environment change, they would all go bankrupt with no means to build any new up-to-date ships! Also, big ships act as "political massage" carriers, even if they are not well optimised - that's why Russia keeps the Kuznetsov, even though it may not be as capable as the RN brass wants to.
IMO Slavas can be reconfigured as multipurpose ships for blue water ops the PLAN will be conducting with increased frequency from now on, and may prove useful in confronting USN, IN and JMSDF (or any other navy, for that matter!).
 
Last edited:
I

IDonT

Senior Member
VIP Professional
BLUEJACKET said:
Then following your premise the Varyag and Gorshkov are also absolete for China and India, respectively! And yet both ships been bought and now being refurbished for use in the 21st cetury. BBs had big guns for fire support and had room for Harpoons/Tomahawks -that's why they were recommissined and kept in service. Some even now
Click to expand...

Varyag and Gorshkov are carriers not surface combatants. Totally different animal. There are not a lot of large displacement flattops vessels for sale ay more. What they bring in firepower more than justifies the cost. Slava on the other hand is more of a liability by sucking out a disproportionate number of funds vs. capabilities.

Military procurement is about economics. You can't have every thing...though it would be nice. Getting one piece of equipment means that you have to take it out on another (Unless you are the U.S.- this includes battleship proponents)
 
B

BLUEJACKET

Banned Idiot
Slava on the other hand is more of a liability by sucking out a disproportionate number of funds vs. capabilities.
Click to expand...
Slava class is more capable than any other DDG/FFG currently in PLAN's inventory, including the 4
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
class DDGs. Also, larger ship carry more fuel and stores giving it more endurance, cutting down on the # of port calls/ underway replenishments. This is very important for blue water ops.
Despite having less ASW capability than the Russian Udaloy-class, and less strike capability than the Slava-class, the
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
provides China with a balanced platform that vastly exceeds the capabilities of domestic designs. ..
China Eyes Ukrainian Slava-Class Cruiser [May 2004]
Ukrainian Defense Minster Oleksandr Olinyk announced March 2 that the Slava-class cruiser Ukraina will be offered for sale on the international market. He said China most likely will be the buyer of the warship, which, despite lengthy construction delays, is 96 percent complete...
The Slava-class cruiser, however, adds the new dimension of long-range surface-strike capability with 16 P-500 Bazalt surface-to-surface missiles with a range of 297 nautical miles. [about 2x firepower of the Sovremenny]
This capability would give the Chinese Navy a standoff capability against large air-capable combatants such as aircraft carriers, amphibious ships and other large surface combatants.
If China accepts the cruiser as is, it likely will transfer the vessel to China for completion and outfitting, since it will be able to finish the work at significantly less cost than if completed in the Ukraine. Current estimated value of the Ukraina is $500 million.
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!


Acquisition by the PLA Navy of a SLAVA class cruiser would add a very potent new surface attack and air defense capability. The large size of this cruiser would additionally serve to raise the profile of the PLA in Asia, and regional fears of its growth. In a sense, the SLAVA is the surface analogue to the OSCAR class SSGN..The SLAVA would also be useful to PLA Naval forces in that its RIF-M anti-aircraft system is the naval version of the very effective S-300 land-based SAM system. ..Its SS-N-12 missiles have a high flight profile which eases detection by U.S. ship defenses, but then dives down fast which complicates interception. A PLAN SLAVA class cruiser would present a significant threat to the U.S. and its allies Asian navies, in addition to the possibility of using its missiles to attack land targets.
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
Click to expand...
 
Last edited:
S

Scratch

Captain
Being rational is a difuse thing and clearly depends on the viewpoint.

As was stated by several members the ship seems to be outdated for PLAN needs. But are perhaps other considerations more importand to PLAN leadership?
How about the military shipbuilding capacity? Could it be that China wants to "mass produce" it's own designs and has therefore not the ability to build a cruiser class vesel additionally to the ships being build right now?
Civil ship-building will increase in the coming years, there is of course potential, but maybe China doesn't want to compromise that capacities for military usage. Plus there are other components to put in the ship wich would have to be produced.

Is it possible that a cruiser capability like vessel was envisioned by PLAN admirals for a future CBG? And with Varyag going on rather fast they might want a cruiser class rather fast for training evaluation. But aren't capable of building one on short notice for the reasons I stated above.
Showing off a hole CBG might be even more impressive.

The strike capacitiy of a slava is big, you could put many more modern, therefore smaller missiles in it than originally envisioned. If not part of a CBG, it could have a strike capacity coming relativly close to a CVW, though with limited range. So one gets two strike capable groups with having only one carrier.

And finally, when it comes to international recognition and respect a strong navy and airforce are much more importand than a modern army.
Because utilizing a good army in places where it would be needed (outside of perhaps Tibet) like i.e. Taiwan will require a strong navy anyway.
 
C

celtic-dragon

New Member
Scratch said:
Makes sense. I could imagine them to then reverse engeneer it to make their own yards build cruisers as well. Besides, I believe they might want to cange the weapons suite to chinese systems anyway.
At least at that point they will have all types of vessels to make up a real CSG.

Of course India is not out of the game. They don't have cruisers either, and with that military/technology cooperation contracts signed lately while Putin was in India ...

It an exciting guessing game.
Click to expand...
I'm betting on the Indian Navy, considering the other purchases from Russia that have occurred. The Admiral Gorshkov was an important milestone, and India is looking at working toward becoming a global power. A Slava class cruiser would bookend the new aircraft carrier quite nicely, as well as provide a valuble part of any battlegroup.
 
B

BLUEJACKET

Banned Idiot
Scratch said:
Being rational is a difuse thing and clearly depends on the viewpoint.

As was stated by several members the ship seems to be outdated for PLAN needs. But are perhaps other considerations more importand to PLAN leadership?
How about the military shipbuilding capacity? Could it be that China wants to "mass produce" it's own designs and has therefore not the ability to build a cruiser class vesel additionally to the ships being build right now?
Civil ship-building will increase in the coming years, there is of course potential, but maybe China doesn't want to compromise that capacities for military usage. Plus there are other components to put in the ship wich would have to be produced.
Is it possible that a cruiser capability like vessel was envisioned by PLAN admirals for a future CBG? And with Varyag going on rather fast they might want a cruiser class rather fast for training evaluation. But aren't capable of building one on short notice for the reasons I stated above.
Showing off a hole CBG might be even more impressive.
The strike capacitiy of a slava is big, you could put many more modern, therefore smaller missiles in it than originally envisioned. If not part of a CBG, it could have a strike capacity coming relativly close to a CVW, though with limited range. So one gets two strike capable groups with having only one carrier.
And finally, when it comes to international recognition and respect a strong navy and airforce are much more importand than a modern army.
Because utilizing a good army in places where it would be needed (outside of perhaps Tibet) like i.e. Taiwan will require a strong navy anyway.
Click to expand...

These are all good points! Any "blue water" navy must have cruisers as well, and I think China will get there first, having direct access to Pacific. India, on the other hand, is too preocupied with Pakistan and other neighbors and has no real purpose beyond the Straits of Malakka & S.China Sea- it must first become regional economic superpower before aspiring to become global one, and I doubt they would want to be such anyway- their potential adversaries are much closer and don't need to be deterred with ICBMs.
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
 
Last edited:
C

celtic-dragon

New Member
Gollevainen said:
I hate generalization but in this case it's too often true. Yeas, a ship laid down in the mid eighties and have then being layinmg iddle in Nikolajev shipyard for over twenty years and in those years soviet union broke down and Ukraina gained independence. So pretty much its true in this situation, the ship is in bad shape.

Cruisers have been obsolent since the end of WWII. There's just new naval doctrines being developted and for example soviet docrtines required a big tradditional cruiser-size hulls and in western generalisation these ships are being called cruisers. But thats the case with every other warship classes as well. Destroyers are nothing what they used to be, not to mention frigates.

Slava doctrine and concept has been outdated since 1991 and even back then it was completely unsuitable for any other navy. Today it's useless asit's main weapon system is outdated and no longer in production. The huge size was only becouse of its massive size weapons. As they are no longer availble, there is no justification for such a large, expensive and crumble ship.



A 052C size ship with improved VLS can do all the reasonable suggestion that you made for the Slava. And the USN BB are quite lame eaxmaple. It's the same as to use tanks with their 12.7mm AA mg as a mobile airdefence battery. The BB were kept afloat only becouse none dared to scrab such big, symbolic and expensive ships after such a short service life. To buy already old, bad shape and completely obcolent ship is nothing else than madness
Click to expand...
Why in the world would you say cruisers are obsolescent? While destroyers and frigates/escorts are the most common surface combatents today, Jeff Head correctly points out that some Japanese (and British!) "destroyers" are destroyers in name only, since they have the size, displacement and armament of a cruiser! Apparently, there is still a place for larger warships with greater range, duration and capability. Nobody thought that the Kirov was obsolete at the time, even though battle cruisers had been considered operationally extinct since the sinking of the Scharnhorst. If your naval stratagy calls for a cruiser to fulfill certain mission requirements REALISTICALLY, then the "cruiser" is relevant. The Slava in question falls into the niche left by the lack of Kirov battlecruisers and Kiev-class carriers, in that it can complement a carrier battlegroup, or as the Kievs were designed to do, guard a SSBN bastion. it has flexibility that a destroyer would be hard-put to match. just my opinion.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top