Welp! Russian ship + catching fire. Not surprising at all
For all the money they have wasted keeping it afloat and repairing it, they could have bought a brand new carrier from China..
Russian Military News, Reports, Data, etc.
- Thread starter tphuang
- Start date
For all the money they have wasted keeping it afloat and repairing it, they could have bought a brand new carrier from China..
I prepared a couple of tables listing production of ships by Russia's main military shipyards. I wanted to explore production capacity in the relevant periods: 2010-2014, 2014-2021 and extrapolate a hypothetical production rate for 2022-onward.
Light green is laying of keel. Dark green is launching. Light blue is commissioning. When launching and commissioning is in the same year I only mark dark green. If launching is earlier any work in the commissioning year is excluded from totals.
Submarines
Surface vessels - 2000t and above
Surface vessels - below 2000t
Total production figures for each shipyard
All in all this means that Russian naval modernization will struggle even more than it did, considering the cost of war shifting resources necessary to support production of warships to other areas. The consequences will be interesting.
Northern Fleet will operate only three 22350 FFGs until 2030 if Black Sea Fleet receives the two intended previously for Northern and Pacific fleets. Pacific Fleet will also see its modernization slow with just three 22350 and six 20385 until approx. 2030.
Those choices will strip the Navy of its most needed assets - modern sensors electronic systems - as they will continue to use the outdated Soviet designs from the 80s until 2030. Russian Navy will be like the Turkish or Taiwanese Navy at the turn of the century - still with WW2 destroyers.
The SSBNs will be finished as priority, but by then Akulas will be technologically 40 year old and without an obvious replacement since Husky is still in design phase, and Yasen-M is too expensive.
Yes.
There are two factors at play: the condition of Russian shipbuilding companies (in particular the shipyards in Murmansk) and internal fighting between companies and factions in the Russian military-industrial complex.
Refit and modernization of Kuznetsov:
Or they could have simply retired it without replacement, along with the other outdated and uneconomic large surface vessels like the Kirovs and Slavas. Starting with the fourth ship in the class a 5400t Gorshkov-class frigate is a better multirole warship than any of the cruisers.
As for Kuznetsov - without shipborne AEW she is not a capable carrier, but a mobile littoral landing pad. Liaoning and Shandong are utilized with that fact in mind - as skill-building and auxiliary vessels - but Russia insists it has a real carrier and intends to operate it until 2048.
Considering that short-ranged MiG-29KR is more modern fighter than Su-33 it would make more sense to invest in shore-based aerial refueling and AEW rather than continue with Kuznetsov. Such assets could be moved very quickly between theaters. Soviet Naval Aviation was a much bigger threat to NATO forces than surface and submarine fleet and it could be used over land as well.
Light green is laying of keel. Dark green is launching. Light blue is commissioning. When launching and commissioning is in the same year I only mark dark green. If launching is earlier any work in the commissioning year is excluded from totals.
Submarines
- SevMash in Severodvinsk is the only nuclear-capable submarine facility.
- Admiralty Shipyard in St.Petersburg builds conventional submarines and large auxiliary ships like the project 23550 conventional ice-breakers.
Surface vessels - 2000t and above
- Severnaya Verf in StPetersburg is the main military shipyard and builds all new designs (including 20386 - omitted here).
- Amur Shipyard in Komosomolsk-on-Amur is currently being expanded but it lacks expertise.
Surface vessels - below 2000t
- Zaliv is the shipyard in Kerch Strait in Crimea and it has been chosen as the manufacturer of two Priboy LHDs. Should anything happen in Crimea as result of the war - which has a degree of likelihood - Russia is likely going to lose its "Mistrals" for a second time. Decision was political - other shipyards in Crimea also received small orders after 2014.
- Yantar is the shipyard in Baltiysk. It builds small warships and auxiliaries.
- Zelenodolsk only builds small warships and is responsible for producing the Buyans. Recently it fell out of favor.
Total production figures for each shipyard
- SevMash was busy before 2016 with Delta IV refits and Oscar II modernizations (before the current refit to 949AM). Currently Akulas are being repaired but they only receive minor upgrades.
- Admiralty is going to be out of orders for submarines after 2026 and so far nobody ordered Amur.
- Severnaya is the only yard building Gorshkovs as Amur tries struggles with 20381 and 20385 so there won't be a significant increase in the deliveries of the most important warship.
- Zaliv will be stuck with Priboys, after Bykovs were deemed a bad choice and it is also vulnerable to attack.
- Yantar is a small yard that will most likely focus on exports (Grigorovich) and other types of vessels.
- Zelenodolsk can't build ships larger than Gepards and Buyan-M.
All in all this means that Russian naval modernization will struggle even more than it did, considering the cost of war shifting resources necessary to support production of warships to other areas. The consequences will be interesting.
Northern Fleet will operate only three 22350 FFGs until 2030 if Black Sea Fleet receives the two intended previously for Northern and Pacific fleets. Pacific Fleet will also see its modernization slow with just three 22350 and six 20385 until approx. 2030.
Those choices will strip the Navy of its most needed assets - modern sensors electronic systems - as they will continue to use the outdated Soviet designs from the 80s until 2030. Russian Navy will be like the Turkish or Taiwanese Navy at the turn of the century - still with WW2 destroyers.
The SSBNs will be finished as priority, but by then Akulas will be technologically 40 year old and without an obvious replacement since Husky is still in design phase, and Yasen-M is too expensive.
Not again... Is this really that difficult?
Yes.
There are two factors at play: the condition of Russian shipbuilding companies (in particular the shipyards in Murmansk) and internal fighting between companies and factions in the Russian military-industrial complex.
Refit and modernization of Kuznetsov:
- mid-2016 - order of works
- february 2017 - start of works
- march 2018 - revision of ongoing state armaments program which reduced funds for shipbuilding
- october 2018 - sinking of the floating dock
- december 2019 - fire
- end of 2020 - initial planned end of refit
- december 2022 - fire
- end of 2023 - current planned end of refit
- start of 2024 - planned return to service
Or they could have simply retired it without replacement, along with the other outdated and uneconomic large surface vessels like the Kirovs and Slavas. Starting with the fourth ship in the class a 5400t Gorshkov-class frigate is a better multirole warship than any of the cruisers.
- Gorshkov (Mod): 32 USKS VLS, 32 Redut VLS, AESA radar, signature reduction, complement of 210
- Slava: 16 Vulcan, 64 S-300F, traditional radar, no signature reduction, complement of 480+
- Kirov: 20 Granit, 96 S-300F/FM, 64 Kindzhal/Tor, traditional radar, no signature reduction, complement of 710
As for Kuznetsov - without shipborne AEW she is not a capable carrier, but a mobile littoral landing pad. Liaoning and Shandong are utilized with that fact in mind - as skill-building and auxiliary vessels - but Russia insists it has a real carrier and intends to operate it until 2048.
Considering that short-ranged MiG-29KR is more modern fighter than Su-33 it would make more sense to invest in shore-based aerial refueling and AEW rather than continue with Kuznetsov. Such assets could be moved very quickly between theaters. Soviet Naval Aviation was a much bigger threat to NATO forces than surface and submarine fleet and it could be used over land as well.
Russia is making the biggest mistake by keeping the Kuznetzov and Slavas alive.
They are keeping the Kuznetsov to keep their competences in carrier operation. As for the Slavas they have no replacement for them yet. It is as simple as that. The Slavas will likely be retired once Project 22350M comes out.
They used to build Akulas in the Amur shipyard back in Soviet times. But yeah it is unlikely that will happen again even though the facilities are still there.
At least one of the Priboy LHDs was supposed to operate out of the Black Sea. If it isn't safe at the shipyard it wouldn't be safe at its base either.
It mostly built ships for the Caspian flotilla. But since that task was complete it has had little to do. They also built ships for the Black Sea fleet but there are other options for that now. Back when it started building the Buyan-M Russia did not have the shipyards in Crimea.
The Sevmash shipyard was upgraded to perform large block construction and work with titanium and composites. This will be likely used on the Husky submarine once that starts being built. I expect them to start building Husky sooner rather than later. Yasen-M it seems will be only built in enough numbers to replace the Oscar II. The replacement for the Akula will likely be the Husky.
They will soon replace most of the older Project 636 submarines with 636.3. I think Admiralty Shipyard will just continue building the Lada at a slow pace. Until Russia comes up with actually working AIP or improved battery technology there is little point in making a new conventional submarine design. Most of the conventional submarines are already the Project 636.3 with modern electronics, sensors, and combat systems. The Lada is basically the same thing with automated combat systems and smaller crew since they never got AIP for it working.
I would not say Amur "struggles" with Project 20380 and 20385. Not when they can build them faster than Severnaya ever did. Also the Project 20380/5 are pretty competent, especially in their later versions. They are basically a light frigate with about the same weapons load as Western frigates of double their displacement. The 20385 has 8 UKSK-VLS cells, which can fire the Zircon, and 16 Redut cells for air defense. Redut is basically a naval S-350. Compare that with the weapons load in one of the Mogami-class frigates which has twice the displacement. The Mogami-class has 8 subsonic anti-ship missiles and 16 Mk-41 VLS for air defense. The Mogami-class has about the same weapons load as the basic Project 20380 with the Uran... And that is one of the most advanced frigate designs the West has right now.
Bykov was originally planned to be used for policing more than anything. The problem is trying to use it for something it was not designed to do in the first place. Like perform actual combat missions.
Yantar used to serial build the Krivak frigates in Soviet times. They can build ships as large as the Ivan Gren. So they can certainly do more than what they are doing right now.
It is located inland inside Russia and any ships it makes will have to go through the Russian canal system. What else did you expect? That is why they are using the Black Sea shipyards now. They are much larger. And weather conditions in the Black Sea region mean it is way easier to work outside, in the open air, on ships for most of the year.
Yes it is quite likely that resources will be diverted from the navy to the army. But I doubt they will stop the major programs since they have little alternative. Most of their existing ships will need replacement this decade.
Actually the Pacific fleet will have also have 3 more Project 20380 "corvettes". That will be 3 frigates, and basically 9 light frigates. You think that is not enough? It will be enough to basically renew their entire lineup of large ships there in the Pacific. And they have an ally there. The Chinese Navy. I think the Northern fleet, if they do as planned, will be in way worse shape. The Pacific fleet is shaping up to be the best equipped of them.
What you are not taking into consideration though, is that if the conflict in Ukraine continues, and Turkey continues blocking the straits to military ships, all the large ships Russia is currently building for the Black Sea fleet will likely end either at the Northern fleet or the Baltic fleet.
Not really. While yes they still need to replace a boatload of hulls, most of the large hulls will be replaced with either new ones or modernized ones. At least half of the Udaloy destroyers are being upgraded similar to what they did with the Marshal Shaposhnikov.
It is also claimed that Amur will start building some variant of Project 22350.
The replacement for Akula will be the Husky.
Yeah I think the same. They could just build more Gorshkov frigates to replace the larger ships. I think they have not done it yet because of lack of production capacity of ship components. There is little point in building more hulls if you have nothing to put inside of them. Right now they can only make the propulsion for one ship a year.
It seems pointless. Until you realize that the Kirov refit basically gave them a chance to work on making combat systems for cruiser ships, and the shipyard is also digitizing the blueprints of the hull. Russia has had bad experiences with trying to make whole new designs without learning the lessons on Soviet ones before. And nuclear propulsion is the only chance Russia has of making a large cruiser sized ship. Russia has a weakness in marine gas turbine propulsion, but they have world leading marine nuclear propulsion.
It is being used to maintain competences in carrier operations like I said. The Russian Navy has been against doing what you said for precisely that reason.
what will be advantage of maintaining this competency?. it is like thousands of people at high salary wasting time.
most of humanitarian work can be done with LHD. there is no way carrier can be protected. we are entering truly space age of sensors , global strike platforms and high speed communication. now add all kind of below , on and above surface drones.
when you look at latest Tu-160M takeoff it is very effortless like without afterburner. it show modern engines can give it tremendous acceleration that will increase the performance of missiles much more than anything fired from ship or subs. modern air launched missile also can be made more compact and stealthy so much harder to intercept. i also think Pilot as career more rewarding so best people will be attracted. Russia bomber fleet has outperformed every thing in this conflict when you look there simultaneous launch ability.
Not again
It could be sabotage.
Lethe
Captain
Maintaining competency only matters if you are going to be in a position to further develop that competency into a credible capability going forward. One carrier isn't a combat capability, it's a training aid*. Given Russia's challenging strategic geography, I believe that if Russia cannot field a bare minimum of three carriers, complete with air wings and robust escort capabilities, then they shouldn't bother. And I don't believe that is a realistic prospect. Ergo, Admiral Kuznetsov and Russia's fixed-wing aviation dream should die to free up resources that can be more efficiently invested in more important and desperately under-resourced areas.
(* The French plan to replace CdG with only one carrier is stupid for the same reason. But it is less stupid than Admiral Kuznetsov because France does not face the strategic challenges that Russia does, nor are the rest of the French armed services falling apart as Russia's are. Essentially, France can afford the indulgence of a single "vanity" carrier to "maintain competency" and pretend that it is still a great power. Russia cannot afford this.)
Thanks for this fantastic work.
(* The French plan to replace CdG with only one carrier is stupid for the same reason. But it is less stupid than Admiral Kuznetsov because France does not face the strategic challenges that Russia does, nor are the rest of the French armed services falling apart as Russia's are. Essentially, France can afford the indulgence of a single "vanity" carrier to "maintain competency" and pretend that it is still a great power. Russia cannot afford this.)
Thanks for this fantastic work.
Last edited:
The Marine Nationale at least understands that they need to save costs where possible if they want to one carrier. That's why they are buying US EMALS and AAG and using modified SSBN reactors. If the VMF wants to continue operating carriers and to keep building them in the future they will need to collaborate with the PLAN. At the very least they could save a lot of money by buying EMALS and arrestor gear and maybe even J-35 from China. I don't think they will though.