Russian Military News, Reports, Data, etc.

thunderchief

thunderchief

Senior Member
Jeff Head said:
I agree it is mostly political. And yet they do have these massive hulls, and putting a new common VLS in them with new missiles, 80 of them, for SSM, along with the 456 AAW missiles makes them very effective platforms.

Such ships could form the core of an escort for their carrier(s), or as the lead for a SAG that was anti-ship centric, and still provide unbelievably dense area air defense.

So, they end up getting two birds with one stone. The political statement as well as a vessel that can be very useful.
Click to expand...

Frankly , there is lot of talk what would final configuration of Admiral Nakhimov look like , from relatively modest upgrade of electronics and battle management system , to deep overhaul with new weapons like you described . Last (and most expensive) variant would turn Nakhimov in some kind of arsenal ship . But again , question remains what would Russia realistically do with such ship ?

IMHO , even with modernized Kirov , SAG without air-cover would be inferior in open sea against CSG with modern aircraft . Again , to use it as a simple escort for Russian carrier would be an overkill , especially now when all they have is one mid-sized carrier-cruiser hybrid . Current situation in Russian Navy is pretty much confusing , and I don't think they have made concrete plans what they want to get with money they have . From purely tactical point of view , it seems to me that best course of action is to build new lighter and more modern ships , and to gradually retire old Soviet leftovers without sinking too much money in them . But again , this is not just tactical but also political question , so we will see what would happen in the end .
 
Jeff Head

Jeff Head

General
Registered Member
thunderchief said:
Frankly , there is lot of talk what would final configuration of Admiral Nakhimov look like , from relatively modest upgrade of electronics and battle management system , to deep overhaul with new weapons like you described . But again , question remains what would Russia realistically do with such ship ?

Current situation in Russian Navy is pretty much confusing , and I don't think they have made concrete plans what they want to get with money they have . From purely tactical point of view , it seems to me that best course of action is to build new lighter and more modern ships , and to gradually retire old Soviet leftovers without sinking too much money in them . But again , this is not just tactical but also political question , so we will see what would happen in the end .
Click to expand...
Yes there is a lot of talk, and the Russian Navy building plan is quite confusing.

They are producing some decent FFGs, but seem to be building two or three diferent varieties.

They are much delayed on their new destroyer program, which they very much need.

The Yassen SSN seems pretty good, but they are building VERY slowly...meaning they are strapped for money.

The Borei SSBN is turning into a disaster because they have not been able to get the missiles to work properly.

And as far as a carrier program goes, they talk a lot...but nothing ever happens. I do believe they are going to refit the Kuznetsov, but she will be out of service for four years and they will have no carrier in any case while that happens.

There is no doubt that they are making a big political statement with the Kirov class if they can even get to where they have two of them available. But it is going to be another four years before they plan to complete it, and a lot of money.

And yes, at this point in time you simply cannot be sure what they will actually end up doing in their yeards.

I believe they do have a decent plan for the Nakhimov to upgrade her reactors, her sensors, and her weapons systems. But how much of that they will actually accomplish will not be known for sure until she actually comes out of refit and we actually see her.
 
Last edited:
thunderchief

thunderchief

Senior Member
Didn't see this at forum , sorry if it is re-post : Indonesian test of P-800 Oniks/Yakhont in 2012. Interesting points at 1:22 (launch) , 1:45 (hit) and 2:17 (sinking)

[video=youtube;d5O9pP1NWkA]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=d5O9pP1NWkA[/video]
 
Jeff Head

Jeff Head

General
Registered Member
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!



lk60_rosatomflot_01.jpg

​

World Maritime News said:
Baltiysky Zavod, a subsidiary of United Shipbuilding Corporation, yesterday held a keel laying ceremony for the new generation nuclear icebreaker of Project 22220. When finished, the icebreaker LK-60 will be the largest and most powerful icebreaker in the world with an approximate lifespan of 40 years.

As Rosatom (Russia’s State Atomic Energy Corporation) reports, the icebreaker will have the length of 173.3 m, width – 34 m, designed draught – 10.5 m, minimum working draught – 8.55 m and a displacement of 33,540 t. The nuclear power installation will use a new integral reactor RITM-200 designed by ROSATOM’s Nizhniy Novgorod-based OKBM Afrikantov. It will be more reliable, economical (the core needs refueling once in seven years) and nearly twice smaller than existing reactors.

By her technical characteristics, this state-of-the-art nuclear icebreaker is a double-draught ship capable of operating in both the Northern Sea Route lines and rivers of the Arctic region. Owing to a greater width (34 m) than the existing icebreakers (30 m), the LK-60 will be able alone to steer tankers of up to 70,000 tons displacement in the Arctic. It will be for the first time that an icebreaker capable of passing 3-meter thick ice has been built.

The icebreaker detailed design was developed by CDB Aisberg in 2009. The new nuclear-propelled ship will differ from the previous generation of icebreakers in a special ballast system, which will allow her changing draught from the maximum to the minimum one over a certain period of time. Filling her ballast tanks with water, the nuclear icebreaker will “settle down” and raise the vessel while sailing in severe ice conditions.

The construction of the icebreaker is scheduled to be completed in December 2017.
Click to expand...

Wow. This is a huge Icebreaker. They plan to build three of them. This will be in addition to the four Arktica Cass nuclear icebreakers they currently have, and I expect these will replace those, except for the last one (launched in 2007).

The intent is to keep the northern route open year round for commercial traffic.

Displacement: 33,540 tons
Length: 568.5 ft.
Beam: 111.5 ft.
Draft: 34.5 ft.
Ice Breaking Thickness: 9.85 ft.
Crew: 75
Propulsion:
2 x RITM-200 reactor
3 x shafts
Power: 60 MW

But the need to refuel every seven years seems too often to me. The projected life span is 40 years so they would have to refuel her five times

By comparison, the largest US Icebreaker is the USCGC Healy WAGB-20. Here are her specs:

Displacement: 16,000 tons
Length: 420 ft.
Beam: 82 ft.
Draft: 29.3 ft.
Ice Breaking Thickness: 5 ft.
Crew: 54 + up to 50 scientists
Propulsion:
4 × Sulzer 12ZAV40S
2 x shafts
Power: 34.5 MW

Half the displacement, and half the ice thinckness capability


800px-USCGC_Healy_%28WAGB-20%29_north_of_Alaska.jpg

​
 
FORBIN

FORBIN

Lieutenant General
Registered Member
Next Canadian Icebreaker will also be large about 20000 t, Polar Icebreaker.
 
thunderchief

thunderchief

Senior Member
Jeff Head said:
By comparison, the largest US Icebreaker is the USCGC Healy WAGB-20.
Click to expand...

Size is not the problem , number is . Looks like Healy is sole remaining icebreaker in US Coast Guard . That would mean that Russians have firm upper hand in Arctic region , with all undiscovered resources there .

asif iqbal said:
Look at the size of this thing! Absolutely massive! Imagine that appearing off a country's coast and threatening you
Click to expand...

Well ... looks scary but currently those ships don't have a much of land attack capability . P-700 missiles could attack some shore facilities and there are those 130 mm guns , but that is about everything .
 
Jeff Head

Jeff Head

General
Registered Member
thunderchief said:
Size is not the problem , number is . Looks like Healy is sole remaining icebreaker in US Coast Guard . That would mean that Russians have firm upper hand in Arctic region , with all undiscovered resources there.
Click to expand...
Oh, when you are wanting to keep those arctic sea lanes open all year, through the winter, size is most certainly an issue.

The 20,000 ton class ice breakers typically can break through 4-5 ft of ice. The monsters the Russians are building can break through 10 ft of ice. That's the difference it makes.

Numbers also clearly play a role because you have to have enough to account for maintenance, breakdowns/damage, etc. and still keep the sea lanes up north open if that is your intent. In that case, clearly one or two will not suffice. But six or seven will.

I was just mentioning that this new Russian LK-60 will be the world's largest icebreaker and comparing it to the largest US Coast Guard icebreaker, the Healy, for reference.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top