Landing "Ivan Gren" is preparing to join the ranks of the Russian Navy

JSC "Baltic Shipbuilding Plant" Yantar "" finally completed the construction of the BDK "Ivan Gren" project 11711, which came to the place of state tests. This is the second ship of the project, the implementation of which has been delayed for a long time. And as it became known, the remaining four ships in the Ministry of Defense were refused. Why? And what awaits a new large landing ship in the near future?

Comments

[svp67]

So I realized that "Peter Morgunov" is our "Mistral"? What about his managerial capabilities?

[g1v2]

Morgunov is the same BDK as Gren. This is not an analogue of Mistral. Mistral's analogs are still being developed. When they lay - xs. But in the plans until 2020, the bookmark was planned.
But we ourselves did not build such ships before, and we have few shipyards capable of building a ship of such a displacement. A part of the shipyards stockpiled up to 12 thousand tons. The northern shipyard is being modernized, but most likely it is specially for laying the Leader cruisers. Amber does not have such opportunities - slipways do not allow. In fact, the Admiralty Shipyards, the Baltic Shipyard and the new Far Eastern Star now have the opportunity to build a fishing rod. But the admiralty must now lay the ice patrol. and then one more - plus a contract for 6 Varshavyanks with them. The Baltic Shipyard is building a series of 3 nuclear icebreakers. Then the super icebreaker "Leader" should build when the project is prepared. Well, the Star - is focused on more important civilian projects. First of all, on gas carriers, which we had to purchase from Koreans. Thx xs - where and when the udk will be laid, but they will be.

[svp67]

Quote: g1v2

In fact, the Admiralty Shipyards, the Baltic Shipyard and the new Far Eastern Star now have the opportunity to build udk

And Kerch?

[g1v2]

In the sense of the "Gulf"? Capacities allow, but they only bring it in order. Equipment is being modernized, people are being recruited. Workers also need to be trained. He was given under the control of Zelenodoltsy. Modernization is underway, but before completion is still a long time. Theoretically, you can lay there. But it is unlikely that the plant will immediately pull such a complex project. Most likely it will be pumped like others - from simple to more complex. First tugboats and support vessels, then MRK or something like that, and only then big warships. Moreover, Zelenodolsk residents themselves have no experience of building warships with a displacement of more than 5 thousand tons. But theoretically, if managers and trained workers are pulled up from Zelenodolsk, then there are chances - the team is competent there.

[antivirus]

I don’t know what “strategic planning” is,
in my opinion, it is 3-5 years for a project + 5 years to build a ship + 10 years, a flag demonstration and !!!! 5 years before the first stage, you must already have Lada and KAMAZ + TVs and gas turbines + pipes with insulation and fittings. at a global level.
Then it makes sense to build a fleet (for you moremen) for the "peaceful" advancement of their interests.
and just an order from Severstal and others to metallurgists, for the payback of Western equipment.

[g1v2]

In an ideal world where there was no collapse of the Soviet empire and where the shipyard has been riveting ships like cookies for the past 25 years, it probably would have been. And the reality is different. 5 years only to bring the plant in proper form, recruitment and training of the bulk of the working and engineering personnel. Moreover, it is necessary to train in practice - that is, on the construction of civil vessels of completed projects or auxiliary fleet. Well, or if you force it, then on small warships such as MRK or Grachat.
Development of a modern project of a ship of 1-2 ranks, brought to mind - but at least 5 years in my opinion. Construction of the lead ship of the first rank of the new project - 10 years. The second is about 7-8 years old. Starting from the third, it is possible for about 5-6 years to swing a boat of the same type. To build quickly - you need to build a lot of well-developed projects, like states. How much have they built Arly Burkov? And how much time do they spend? That's when we will be like this - the riveted projects at the fully finished production will rivet, then our terms will be completely different.

[ProkletyiPirat]

You are certainly right, the laws of mass production are the same for both military and civilian equipment. The AUG based on Nimitz or Mistral are just useless for us, and TAKRs are also useless for us. So for starters, we need to decide what we really need, how we need it and how we can achieve this ...

[Monarchist]

G1v2, this was possible with the Union. Although even if we can figure it out now, we can pull it, but we need two small things: 1 appropriate financing 2 not “childish” control over implementation. Without proper control, even a robot can fool around

[Monarchist]

In Zelenodolsk, men are smart and working, and the managerial staff is strong.
In Crimea, there were good personnel and equipment for the construction of ships, but in 20 years everything has degraded.

[Alex 2016]

Yeah, they will. In another 20 years!

[NEXUS]

Baltic Shipyard Yantar JSC has finally completed the construction of the Ivan Gren BDK Project 11711, which came to the place of state testing.

Didn’t they finally give birth ... about the Surf, I am silent and cry.

[Bronevick]

Poor ship, 15 times the hull was cut, set it to rest already.

[silver_roman]

This Gren will turn out gold. Soon the Navy will consist of unique lead ships.
Already 22350 must be increased, which means there will be a maximum of 4 pieces, then it will be 10 22350M years to saw. Increasing tonnage by 1.1 thousand tons.

[Stirbjorn]

This is the second ship of the project, the implementation of which dragged on for a long time.

And the first is who at all?
The movie is of course from the realm of science fiction - what an over-the-horizon landing and what kind of landing boats ?! There, the pontoon should land on the beach! Do not confuse with Mistral! I am silent about 8 helicopters of Morgunov in general, there is no fundamental difference between Gren and Morgunov, where did all this come up with ?! Of course we have journalists, of course ... but MIKHAN is still being driven here

[PSih2097]

Quote: Stirbjorn

And the first is who at all?

project 22350 "Admiral Gorshkov" - laid down in February 1, 2006 at the shipyard "Severnaya Verf" are still experiencing ...

[Stirbjorn]

then it would be more correct to write "the ship of the second project", and not the "second ship of the project", because it is Morgunov

[Shukshin]

BDK "Nikolay Vilkov" military service 1994-1996

[commbatant]

"Shy" write:

The first landing ship laid down December 23, 2004 at the Yantar shipyard in Kaliningrad, received the name Ivan Gren. In total, a series of 6 ships was planned for the Russian Navy, but in 2015 it was decided to reduce the series to two, in view of the decision to create larger new generation ships, the construction of which due to start in 2016

Analogues:
Вuque de Аpoyo Logistico (BAL) - “transport support ships”, actually tank landing ships created based on American tank landing ships "LST-542" during the Second World War. FROM 2011 years built and incorporated Mexican Navy 2 units. With a displacement of 3666 tons, speed 12 knots. have the following weapons: 5 - 40 mm Bofors L / 70.
en: Magar-class amphibious warfare vessel - Magar-type tank landing ships were created on the basis of a landing ship of the Sir Lancelot type of the British Navy. WITH 1987 years built and incorporated Indian Navy 2 units With a displacement of 5665 tons, speed 15 knots. have the following weapons: 2 x 122 mm MLRS, 4 - 40 mm Bofors. For landing the amphibious assault, it is equipped with 4 LCVP landing equipment (located onboard davits), a hangar for 1 helicopter (runway for 2 helicopters). The crew consists of 20 officers and 235 sailors.
en: Shardul-class tank landing ship - Shardul-type tank landing ships are a further development of Magar-style landing ships. Changes affected the improvement of crew habitability, seaworthiness, as well as reduced operating cost. During 2002 to 2009 of the year built and incorporated Indian Navy 3 units. With a displacement of 5650 tons, a speed of 15,8 knots. have the following weapons: 2 x 140 mm MLRS "WM-18", 4 - 30 mm CRN-91 AA, MANPADS. For landing the amphibious assault, it is equipped with 4 LCVP landing equipment (located onboard davits), a hangar for 1 helicopter (runway for 2 helicopters). Ships can also be used as hospitals or tankers. The crew consists of 11 officers and 145 sailors.
en: Type 072III - tank landing ships of the Type 072-III type (Yuting-II class) are the modern main type of BDK in Navy of China. During the period 2003 to 2005 built and commissioned 10 units. With a displacement of 3430 tons, a speed of 18 knots. have the following weapons: 1 - 37 mm type "76F" AAA, MANPADS. Equipped runway for 1 vert. (hangar is not provided).
en: Jason-class tank landing ship - Jason-type tank landing ships, are the main landing ships Navy of Greece. During the period 1986 to 2000 built and commissioned 5 units. With a displacement of 4470 tons, speed 16 knots. have the following weapons: 1 - 76 mm AU “Oto Melara”, 2 - 40 mm AU “Breda”, 4 - 20 mm AU “Rheinmetall”. Equipped with 4 landing and landing equipment LCVP and runway for 1 vert. (hangar is not provided).

I remember when Taburetkin signed a contract with the French for the construction of 4 Mistral, representatives of our military-industrial complex spoke on the zombie box almost once a quarter what they would do better, Ivan Gren is apparently an analogue of Mistral, which will be built as whole two (are they interested in one fleet or not?) ...

[Div Divich]

If you remove the helicopters, the ship will become better.

And the price will decrease much, and there will be more space for cargo.

And for normal landfall you can use floating conveyors.

So it’s possible to continue the series with up to 10 ships with minimal changes.

[commbatant]

Then it will turn into a trivial tank landing ship, and the senior comrades want to see in it a worthy analogue of the "Mistral"

[Div Divich]

Prior to the construction of such large landing ships, we, on foot, will be built for 20 years.

And there they are, already ready-made tank-landing, it remains to put into the series.

Better a tit in a hand than a crane in the sky.

[commbatant]

What would UDC or DKVD do? Do you need a strategy for their application, where in your Russian Federation will it conduct large-scale amphibious operations in the near future?
Many of our landing ships and large auxiliary vessels were built abroad (GDR, Poland, Finland), and here we also lost the Lenin Forge (where all aircraft carriers and TAKR, KR were built) .....
The Syrian Express has clearly shown that the Russian Federation is ripe for the creation of the Sea Shipping Command (by analogy with the United States), an example is the purchase of transport ships by the Russian Federation from Turkey for the transport of goods (tea from our BDK is a resource never lasting for them 1/4 century). ..

[Div Divich]

The Kuril Islands need to be protected, the Black Sea coast, the Kaliningrad region, sea bases should be protected from attacks.

[commbatant]

For the first time I hear that the coast and island territories protect the BDK ...

[Div Divich]

Does not protect, they have a different function.
Landing ships are cargo carriers that can unload onto an unequipped shore.

And the military, having already received the cargo, performs the protection function.

Now unloading to the unequipped shore is carried out through the front ramp, the equipment is fording. But this is already an outdated method, it is time to switch to unloading the smelting means. Either floating conveyors or cargo boats.

To the north, goods are also transported to military bases, for example, machinery, fuel, equipment, food, building materials. There are no marinas, so these ships are needed. There is no marina on the islands either. And on the coast of the mainland there are also few places where there are marinas, since this is an expensive pleasure.

[commbatant]

Such ships are needed ("landing on an un-equipped coast of military cargo and BT"), but as you yourself said -

we walk to the moon, 20 years

[Div Divich]

Yes, in my opinion, the UDC is not yet within our power, it is a whole military city afloat, with apartments, an airfield, a dock for boats, a hospital, cinemas, pools, gyms, with offices, with Internet and telephony. Well, there is also a cargo compartment there.

[commbatant]

the question is then why did the Soviet helicopter carriers drink or did they not have growth for modernization?

[Div Divich]

Did not study this question.

[Div Divich]

The Dutch have a supply ship carrying tanks, and we all get stuck in the UDC.
Called Zr.Ms. Karel Doorman.

They have a universal hangar on the upper deck, at least shove helicopters, at least equipment, at least loads.
The runway is also universal, they carry cargo containers. Cranes are for loading and unloading. Hoses hang to refuel ships.

I like this ship more than UDC, since it has a very large scope. Such a ship will always be in business, and not stand against the wall until the next exercises.

[Div Divich]

Here is the perfect landing ship, in my opinion:

[commbatant]

It will be small, we need not only an amphibious assault ship with a 4-boat docking chamber (DKVP), but also a spacious flight deck to accommodate 6 attack, anti-aircraft, transport and landing helicopters ... this is for amphibious-landing operations .... .
We need cheap helicopter carriers (in order not to waste resources, you can even return to the old Soviet projects), the task of which is to escort submarines and SSBNs when their bases (located on the Kola Peninsula and Kamchatka) enter the world ocean, now these functions are performed by the BOD of this few.

Yes, and it seems to me that the Russian Federation will have to return to the old UVVP aircraft project ....

THOSE. two projects must be implemented at the same time:
1. Cheap helicopter carriers for the Northern Fleet and Pacific Fleet they were needed yesterday;
2. UDC and DKVD, if there is a need for them, I allow cooperation in this project with someone, because it will be much more expensive. In addition, they will have to change the entire Naval Concept of the Russian Federation.

[Div Divich]

If you want a bigger size, then the JSS Karel Doorman, about which I wrote above, is like the previous one I specified, but the size is much larger.

Cargo boats are not in the docks, but in the side alcoves, descended by individual quick launch systems. The hangar and the take-off area for two Chinook helicopters, that is, you can easily fit our Mi 26 or several medium-sized helicopters in the hangar.

[commbatant]

We need those, we have never done these before, we can unite with the Finns or the Chinese

[Div Divich]

You do not take into account one small detail, he needs several warships in cover, and several more supply ships.

And the one I mentioned above will sail alone where needed and will fulfill its tasks no worse than this helicopter carrier. During the war, you can send with him one ship for cover. It will be a good tandem, one carries cargo and fuel, the other protects and refuel at the first. That is, autonomy grows at times.

[commbatant]

Any cover is needed ...

[Div Divich]

Supply ships have weapons for peacetime, a large-caliber gun in front and anti-aircraft guns in the rear.

If you wish, you can place a couple of torpedoes, take up little space.

[Div Divich]

Ivan Gren has chimneys in the center of the ship, thereby they cut the ship across, no cargo because of them do not drag along the ship.

On modern European ships, chimneys are routed to the sides, and in the center there is free passage.
It turns out more space.

[Div Divich]

I noticed that the United States has several types of landing ships.

UDC - the mobile headquarters, when the war begins, they bring it and leave it at a distance from the coast.
San Antonio - a truck that brings goods, then returns for new goods, and so many times carries different cargoes.

Headquarters can also be made on other ships, that is, generals and intelligence can be deployed, plus a hospital.
But ships delivering goods to an unequipped shore can not replace anything.

If Russia builds an analogue of Mistral instead of tank landing ships, it will be a mistake of several billion euros ... If a war arises, they will be tortured to carry goods, since they need to drag a fleet behind them for protection and refueling.

[commbatant]

A bit wrong, the amphibious forces of the EU and the US are different:
San Antonio (Landing Transport Dock) It has a different purpose than the European UDC - a solid flight deck and a helicopter hangar were sacrificed to cargo decks and the marines.
article about him on the VO website https://topwar.ru/37657-desantnye-transporty-doki
-tipa-san-antonio.html
Universal landing ships (UDC) type "Wosp" - A series of US Navy ships designed for the landing of units of the US Marine Corps. Ships of this series are the largest ships of this type in the world. UDC, are multifunctional ships, i.e. it may be headquarters, hospital ships, helicopter carriers with PLO helicopters or attack / multi-purpose ones; in some countries, air-to-air aircraft were used.

We ordered UDC from France, for which another question may be for the resale of the PRC (EU sanctions have been in force since 1989) or for joint operations with the PLA in the Pacific Ocean (at the KBF, KChF, it does not belong to him, these are enclosed water areas, for KSF, too, will not work, there ice class ships are needed) ....
The USA counted, probably where the “Mistrals” “emerged” and with a wild obscenity fell upon the French, most likely the British counted us again, the Americans would not have enough brains ....

[Div Divich]

I read that article, it is written that the Americans bring a lot of flights to the neighboring country, military and equipment, and then go on land offensive.

So UDC if only to use as a hospital ... Without it, you can do safely.
It does not affect the outcome of the war.

But without the cargo delivery ships it will not be possible to fight.

[commbatant]

And how will you land on an unprepared springboard, probably you can’t do without helicopters and KNVP?
I gave you an article to read about the landing transport dock, and not about the UDC.

[Div Divich]

To clear the coast with airplanes, then land, either at night, or as Americans jump across the neighboring country.
You can still stir up a distracting maneuver, and yourself without a noise in another place to land, when the enemy finds out - it will be too late.

I’ll re-read the article.

[commbatant]

All countries are building in parallel and UDC and landing transport dock ....
During the Cold War, when mass was needed, tank landing ships were built (according to our BDK) among the NATO countries, only the poor of Greece and Turkey were left ....
Only the USA had UDC, but many NATO countries (the European ones got out of the situation and started building anti-submarine aircraft carriers (which could be used as helicopter carriers), now almost no one has them all got the ships indicated above (the exception is the light aircraft carrier "Giuseppe Garibaldi ", Italian Navy) ....
The first escaped from the "vicious circle" of the French in the 80s by sending the cruiser helicopter carrier "Jean Dark" to the scrap ...
We are now in terms of the development of amphibious forces at the level of Greece and Turkey ....
For a long time, China was at the same level as we, but now it has escaped rapidly ...
I think the dry dock for the construction of aircraft carriers, UDC, etc. it is necessary to build in the Far East, in the North everything is “ground” for the construction of submarines and SSBNs ....

[Div Divich]

I also remembered the information.

How UDC appeared.
Wikipedia says that the United States during the attack on Vietnam felt a lack of landing capabilities, so they converted the old aircraft carriers into helicopter carriers with landing hangars.


Later, the handicraft assembly was transferred to a full-fledged development, and Uara Tarava appeared.

The USSR was developing similar ships, but something did not work out.
The Americans still laughed at the Russians, since the ship was imprisoned under American needs to attack small countries with a large number of soldiers, and not under Russian needs, and simple copying would lead to misuse, that is, they would have nowhere to use.

It seems Russia is stubbornly following the same path, and wants to make a copy of the UDC, and then they will understand that the functions of the Russian Navy need other than the American one, and the money spent on ships wasted.

Russia has a different climate, and enemies are different, and its needs are different, in general, ships need to be made for themselves, and not how to copy everything.
In the event of which, the NATO countries hope to use the American army for their defense, therefore they do not particularly care about their internal armies. So let the Americans copy one to one, these are their problems.

And we need to think about every action, so as not to lose battles later.

[commbatant]

Sofa Sofa

therefore, they converted the old aircraft carriers into helicopter carriers with landing hangars

confirms my

European got out of position and began to build anti-submarine aircraft carriers

It seems Russia is stubbornly following the same path, and wants to make a copy of the UDC, and then they will understand that the functions of the Russian Navy need other than the American one, and the money spent on ships wasted.

Not quite so, if the Russian Federation wants to repeat the United States, then in terms of UDC “Wasp” (the next class is UDC, after “Tarava”)
Why did we want to buy the Mistral, because such ships are made by other European countries?
All because of the “engines”, the British and French developed good power plants for UDC and landing transport docks (combining the work of diesel and gas turbine engines), I’m not a techie, I can’t explain while I read everything in ZVO, it was clear through a week already forgot everything ....
I advise you to read separately about the French and British landing ships separately, everything will become clear, and not just in “WIKI” to score the word UDC.
It’s clear that the British would never have sold us the technology, and then the war was on 08.08.08/2/2, where the French were “divorced” for their peacemaking for their authority in the EU and signed a contract for the construction of XNUMX + XNUMX UDC, which saved the French shipbuilding company from bankruptcy, I believe that such a UDC has nothing to do in the Russian Navy, but they need technologies for their construction, in the end you can even build for China to gain experience in their construction.
Even if the Mistrals had handed over to the Russian Federation, they could only be used as helicopter carriers with PLO helicopters as part of the Mediterranean squadron and ship squadron in the Indian Ocean together with the PLA Navy.
By the way, I think that in the Indian Ocean we better act together with the Chinese.
So that we could build the UDC “box” now (which, by the way, was done until recently by the Ukrainian Lenin Forge), we need a power plant and navigation aids, as well as fire controls ....

[Div Divich]

I will add my thought, then I will respond to comments.

So, as I understand it. As planned by the United States, UDC ships should be supplemented by aircraft carriers.
First, planes from aircraft carriers attack the country, after which it cleans up the remnants of the infantry with fire support for helicopters, although after cleansing by planes you can already unload any ships from the shore, but the Americans also want a floating headquarters at sea.

Thus, if you attack a small country without having its own land area nearby, UDC without aircraft carriers will suffer heavy losses.
And if you protect a small country, then a land plot will be allocated at least. And in this case, UDCs are no longer needed, but transporters for transporting weapons.

This means that Russia still needs to build tank landing ships with docks for large boats.

And in parallel to engage in the development of aircraft carriers. And leave UDC for later, when there are aircraft carriers, then it will make sense to strengthen the aircraft carrier group with them.

[commbatant]

You are reasoning correctly, aircraft carriers, UDC, landing docks of transport docks - this is a single whole and there is no sense in building them separately, in addition, all this requires a warrant, destroyers and frigates (air defense and anti-aircraft missiles), in addition, special support vessels are needed - high-speed tankers, special armament supply vessels, hospital ships, ocean tugs .....
But even earlier, a country that wants and is ready (financially and technologically) to build (purchase) all this must first develop a naval concept for the use of its fleet, and then create a naval doctrine based on it ....

[Div Divich]

But do not forget that UDC has created the USA for itself, and they usually fight with a weak enemy, no country will even launch a rocket in their direction.

Russia has different conditions, if the United States attacks it, then a couple of dozen missiles from any US warship will drown our promising very expensive UDC. You need to consider this.
I would rather create a lot of medium-sized ships, so that if you lose one or send it for repair, you can use the others. That is, to maximally complicate the task of the enemy. The enemy will not be able to destroy all ships if they are located in different parts of the country.

[commbatant]

The enemy will not be able to destroy all ships if they are located in different parts of the country.

For this, it is necessary to create conditions so that 1/2 or 1/3 of the total naval composition of the Russian Navy is constantly in the sea / oceans.

[Div Divich]

For this, money is needed, and Russia does not even have money to build one aircraft carrier.

So with UDC, they will build one thing, and then they will only use it in exercises because of the high cost of operation. Loads will continue to transport antediluvian ships.

It’s better to really assess your capabilities, since the country is poor, it’s necessary to build ships cheaper, medium-sized, 10 pieces, that is, several pieces for each fleet, so that during repairs not to feel a shortage of these ships.

[commbatant]

Taki all our BDK outside the USSR were built ...

[Div Divich]

Tapir like ours, Ivan Gren is his improved version. So we need to go further, improve Ivan Gren, and not throw this matter halfway.

Who prevents to replace the unloading method in it? It is necessary to replace the discharge through the nose ramp, to the discharge using boats.

[Div Divich]

It turned out we already had our own ships with landing boats, BDK Rhino.

[Div Divich]

I found out why Russia bought landing ships abroad.
To get ships faster.
I had to develop a project for myself, build it for 5 years, and finish the first ship in the series for 5 years.
And abroad they buy, which is already mass-produced, that is, many flaws are fixed. Building time 1-2 years.
But the time gained then gives us a negative effect.
The developers of their technologies were left without money; as a result, they were technologically behind the West.

---------

I noticed today in UDC Lavigne some elements from Ivan Gren.
That is, the developers think correctly, sequentially based on the old developments, they designed a new ship.

------------------

Large landing ships are needed when you need to transport an entire city, for example during the war.

Medium landing ships are needed when you need to transport a couple of cars and a couple of tons of cargo.

[Div Divich]

I read that BDK Mitrofan Moskalenko was stolen while standing and was not used. As a result, I had to write off it for scrap, since only one skeleton remained.

It turns out that because of the mess in the fleet, they were prematurely written off, instead of extending the term by thorough repair.

[commbatant]

Our many ships were built in the NDP and East Germany, so that incl. free their shipyards for the construction of destroyers, frigates, watchdogs ...

[Div Divich]

With a shortage of shipyards, it is logical to build new ones, but decided to save money and time.

[Div Divich]

In any technique, the main thing is that it performs its functions.

The landing ship, it would be better renamed the supply ship, so that there is no illusion that he alone can fight on the shore and win the war. Since any small country has aviation and artillery, these ships alone have no chance, you need to work together with other types of troops to win.

Its role is to carry goods across the sea and ocean, unload goods on an unequipped coast.

In this regard, Ivan Gren needs to be upgraded to a supply ship, by analogy with Karel Doorman, Rotterdam, San Antonio.

[Div Divich]

Until the supply ships have been built, it is possible to use ferries without problems to transport equipment, and to accompany a warship for protection. In one year it will not work to build them, but if you start, then in a few years everything will be.

[Div Divich]

The Yantar shipyard used to produce the BDK Rhino, which had a dock for boats, and hangars, and the size is much larger than Ivan Gren. Everything was, but because of the mess in the country they lost them, now we can’t even resume construction.