Military Review

Prospects for the Russian fleet. A look from France

60
The program of modernization of the Russian Navy at 2011-2020 years involved the construction of one hundred ships, but this goal will not be achieved, writes the French newsletter TTU.


The large anti-submarine ship of the 11551 project "Admiral Chabanenko" under repair at the 35 shipyard in Murmansk, 2016 year.

“The project for the purchase of amphibious helicopter ships-docks of the Mistral type, which were to replace the large amphibious assault ships of the type" Ivan Gren "(the main one started construction in 2004) showed that the Russian design bureau cannot offer an acceptable solution in terms of the construction of large-sized ships. This feeling is confirmed at the moment when the aircraft carrier Admiral Kuznetsov, whose age reaches 30 years, goes to the shipyard for modernization, and the design work on its replacement has not begun, ”the article cites. bmpd.

On the other hand, according to the author, “Russia's potential in the field of anti-submarine defense remains a priority, and although nuclear-powered cruisers like the Kirov are still being upgraded at the Sevmash shipyard, they will eventually be replaced by destroyer ships under the cipher Leader.” .

The publication clarifies that Sevmash is located on an area of ​​300 ha and "simultaneously builds fourth-generation 11 nuclear submarines (five SSBNs of the Borey-A type and six APRKs of the Yasen type)."

Although the Russian fleet faces a serious repair problem (aging infrastructure, personnel, cooperative ties, reduced funding ...), Russia reduces the number of new ships - “the gap between the plans for the 2020 year and the naval composition that is combat-ready is huge,” the author writes.

Despite the approved plan, “the Navy will include only 5 of 20 submarines of a new generation, 9 of 20 frigates (such as Admiral Gorshkov), 4 of 14 of IRC 22160 project, 16 of 41 corvettes and small anti-submarine ships, one of the six landing ships ", Says the material.

And only two minesweepers from the two high-speed patrol ships from 14 planned for construction and 14 - according to the plan, the publication states.

“Without saying a word, the General Staff of the Russian Navy revised its ambitions in favor of smaller ships, but significantly increased the production of cruise missiles by hundreds of copies. Moscow, while maintaining its capabilities in the field of naval nuclear deterrence and neutralization, has significantly increased the threat from the sea to its closest neighbors, ”the author concludes.
Photos used:
Seven_balls / fleetphoto.ru
60 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must sign in.
  1. Ivan Tarava
    Ivan Tarava 7 May 2018 13: 53
    +8
    You still answer for the Mistral.
    1. RASKAT
      RASKAT 7 May 2018 14: 03
      +12
      The prospects for our surface fleet are not very bright, of the more or less large ships we laid down the 20386 one in the 2016 year and the 22350 last in the 2013 year, the 11356 three hulls are still envious of the unknown. The rest are mostly trifle and auxiliary vessels. So in the next five years we will finish building the above, and the rest have not even been laid. It would not have formed a failure in the construction of new large ships. The main hardships so far are taken out by the old men of BOD, 1164, and patrol boats, and of course submarines, of course, but this is a separate issue and you cannot mark the presence in the water area with boats.
      1. Boa kaa
        Boa kaa 7 May 2018 18: 06
        +8
        Quote: RASKAT
        The prospects for our surface fleet are not very bright ...
        While we are doing what we can build on a modern base, without new slipways. Sevmash drives the RPKsNy and Yaseni - and rightly so. These are the components of the triad.
        And here is that
        The headquarters of the Russian Navy has revised its ambitions in favor of smaller ships, but at the same time significantly increasing the production of cruise missiles hundreds of copies. Moscow, retaining its capabilities in the field naval forces of nuclear deterrence and neutralization, significantly increased threat from the sea to its closest neighbors
        the Frenchman correctly noted. He was mistaken only in one thing - the kids with Caliber and MRA are ready to meet large NKs before approaching the line of mission: 2500 km is still a decent range, even if 3M14 fly from the Caspian / Baltic. The lack of MLC ships will have to be compensated by the MiG-31K with Daggers ... There simply is no other way. There won't be enough boats for everyone ...
        IMHO.
    2. maxim947
      maxim947 7 May 2018 14: 04
      +11
      In principle, things are roughly the same .... Except that the Varshavyanka are not mentioned, one and a half dozen RTOs and much more are smaller.
      But it’s better to let it be picked in your city, there will be more problems there.
    3. NEXUS
      NEXUS 7 May 2018 14: 09
      +7
      Quote: Ivan Tarava
      You still answer for the Mistral.

      They responded with a penalty with interest. Another question is where this money went, on which more than one frigate could be built.
      1. Stirbjorn
        Stirbjorn 7 May 2018 14: 58
        +5
        Quote: NEXUS
        They responded with a penalty with interest. Another question is where this money went, on which more than one frigate could be built.

        What other interest? If only on the euro, how Rogozin rejoiced
      2. Merold
        Merold 7 May 2018 16: 11
        0
        Quote: NEXUS
        Quote: Ivan Tarava
        You still answer for the Mistral.

        They responded with a penalty with interest. Another question is where this money went, on which more than one frigate could be built.

        And a lot of interest with a penalty ran? wink
      3. venik
        venik 7 May 2018 18: 22
        +2
        Quote: NEXUS
        They responded with a penalty with interest. Another question is where this money went, on which more than one frigate could be built.

        ========
        "General greetings" !!! What is the FOREST ???? What percent?
        Russia paid back the money WITHOUT any "penalties" and interest "!!!!! The benefit was only that exchange the ruble exchange rate has fallen, almost by half, while the purchasing power of the same ruble has dropped by only 25-30 percent!
        Need NEWS and ANALYTICS to read more attentively!
    4. Vend
      Vend 7 May 2018 14: 28
      +3
      Quote: Ivan Tarava
      You still answer for the Mistral.

      Yes, they already answered. Russia remained in profit. Let them think that the Russian fleet is not in danger of updating. Then there will be a surprise. laughing
    5. mvg
      mvg 7 May 2018 17: 05
      0
      Ichiot ... how else to say? Just Vanya
  2. TermNachTer
    TermNachTer 7 May 2018 13: 59
    +7
    I would take care of the issues of their fleet in the place of the French author. "Charles de Gaulle," for years does not get out of the repair. Compare "Mistral" and "Ivan Gren" is not correct. Since the first is built according to the standards of civil shipbuilding
    1. Normal ok
      Normal ok 7 May 2018 14: 16
      +8
      Quote: TermNachTER
      Compare "Mistral" and "Ivan Gren" is not correct. Since the first is built according to the standards of civil shipbuilding

      This is absolutely not important in this case. 1) Mistral is already there (5 in the ranks) and "Ivan Gren" is only being brought up (for the 14th year already!). 2) Mistral - a ship in the ocean zone. "Ivan Gren" - river-sea. Therefore, its seaworthiness strive for 0. 3) The Mistral takes many times more cargo. 4) Mistral - simply belongs to a new era in the development of military transport logistics.
      1. TermNachTer
        TermNachTer 7 May 2018 16: 11
        +3
        Maybe five. I didn’t think, but I didn’t hear something about them. I repeat, these are completely different things; comparing is absolutely incorrect. "Gren" - BDK - ship. "Mistral" ship armed with MANPADS and heavy machine guns, stamping such steamers is not a problem, there would be a need
        1. Dart2027
          Dart2027 7 May 2018 20: 26
          0
          Quote: TermNachTER
          "Gren" - BDK - ship. "Mistral" ship armed with MANPADS and heavy machine guns, stamping such steamboats is not a problem

          And what is Gren armed with? 30 mm artillery?
          1. TermNachTer
            TermNachTer 13 May 2018 10: 25
            0
            And you want to compare 30 - mm. with 12,7 mm.? And the strength of the hull built according to the requirements of the navy and civil? The height of the watertight bulkheads is their number, the thickness of the casing, the distance between the frames, stringers, etc. Enumerating the parameters that separate the ship from the civilian steamer can take pages of typewritten text. I repeat - I am very happy for the Russian fleet that this French junk swam past.
            1. Dart2027
              Dart2027 13 May 2018 12: 51
              0
              Quote: TermNachTER
              And you want to compare 30 - mm. with 12,7 mm

              And you do not want to compare the 33-mm with the armament of attack helicopters Ka-52, under which the Mistrals were built for us? At the same time, we do not forget that Gren is intended to act directly in the landing zone, and Mistral is 100 km from the coast.
              Quote: TermNachTER
              Enumerating the parameters that separate a ship from a civilian steamboat may take typewritten pages

              Have you personally seen all this on both ships, so what can you compare? Well, recent clashes between civilian and warships have shown that in our time the hull of a warship, to put it mildly, is not indestructible armor.
              1. TermNachTer
                TermNachTer 13 May 2018 19: 33
                0
                Faced an old watchman, whose hull strength over the years of operation is no longer the same. Alas, metal fatigue is not going anywhere. This refers to the design features of the hull - the ship and the ship. The ship was originally designed with the expectation of missiles, shells, a mine detonation, etc. The civil ship is not designed for this.
                1. TermNachTer
                  TermNachTer 13 May 2018 19: 39
                  0
                  Regarding the Mistral helicopters, it’s 30 mm. the guns on the Ka - 52 are sharpened for another job, and not to shoot down anti-ship missiles. He does not have such an opportunity. And secondly, you imagine, on the deck there is always a helicopter with the engine running and the pilot is sitting in the cockpit. What is the consumption of kerosene and motor resources? And on Grena, the pennant with radar and optical guidance is ready to open fire at any time.
                  1. Dart2027
                    Dart2027 13 May 2018 19: 59
                    0
                    Quote: TermNachTER
                    The ship is initially designed with the expectation of missiles, shells, mine detonation, etc.
                    About a hundred years ago, yes. Now the main thing is to reduce the proportion of displacement that falls on the hull. However, you can read more about this at Kaptsov.
                    Quote: TermNachTER
                    guns on the Ka - 52 are sharpened for another job, and not to shoot down anti-ship missiles
                    They are sharpened to shy at the enemy with their guns and missiles, including the anti-ship X-35. As for the protection, both Gren and Mistral are completely dependent on the escort, and their air defense is worth a tick, supposedly, that’s it, and by the way on the Mistral they also had to put 30 mm (https://vpk-news.ru/ articles / 9086), but unlike Gren they have it is not the main caliber.
                    1. TermNachTer
                      TermNachTer 13 May 2018 20: 01
                      0
                      And what about the “Mistral” was supposed to be the Civil Code, apparently I missed something?
                      1. Dart2027
                        Dart2027 13 May 2018 20: 02
                        0
                        Quote: TermNachTER
                        And what about the “Mistral” was supposed to be the Civil Code

                        Quote: Dart2027
                        They’re imprisoned to shy at the enemy with their guns and missiles, including anti-ship X-35
                        GK aircraft carrier - this is his air group.
                    2. TermNachTer
                      TermNachTer 13 May 2018 20: 02
                      0
                      And how will the Ka - 52 help the "Mistral" to bring down anti-ship missiles going to the ship?
                      1. Dart2027
                        Dart2027 13 May 2018 20: 04
                        0
                        Quote: TermNachTER
                        And how will the Ka - 52 help the "Mistral" to bring down anti-ship missiles going to the ship?

                        Quote: Dart2027
                        Regarding protection, then Gren and Mistral are completely dependent on the escort, and their air defense is worth a tick, supposedly, that's it, and by the way on the Mistral also had to put 30 mm(https://vpk-news.ru/articles/9086)
      2. Boa kaa
        Boa kaa 7 May 2018 17: 42
        +5
        Quote: Normal ok
        "Ivan Gren" - river-sea. Therefore, its seaworthiness strive for 0.

        BDK pr 1171.1 ship of the far sea zone. Its seaworthiness is not limited. So malice is inappropriate. Yes, there are problems due to the side-by-side / side-by-side arrangement of diesel engines. But this is to the designers, and not to the shipbuilders ... you need to ask questions and "interrogations with bias" to those who allowed this miracle before the construction stage.
      3. venik
        venik 7 May 2018 18: 15
        +1
        Quote: Normal ok
        Mistral is a ship of the ocean zone. "Ivan Gren" - river-sea. Therefore, its seaworthiness tends to 0.

        =========
        "You need to drink less" !!!, Or "snack" - more !!!!!
    2. mvg
      mvg 7 May 2018 17: 06
      +1
      You definitely understand in the ships, or so, went for a walk?
  3. Seaflame
    Seaflame 7 May 2018 14: 01
    +8
    Updating our fleet in all components simply causes melancholy and printing. Starting from mine sweeping and ending with surface ships of the 2nd rank. If Gorshkov is not put into operation this year, you can tear a vest on yourself. Better with submarines, but the pace is not impressive either.
  4. bogart047
    bogart047 7 May 2018 14: 01
    +3
    reasonable approach during a shortage of funds.
    1. Seaflame
      Seaflame 7 May 2018 15: 07
      +4
      Yes, that's not a fig not reasonable. I understand that nuclear-powered carriers and destroyers of the Leader type are not being built, but when the Fleet cannot be saturated even with frigates, it’s finally sad ...
      1. bogart047
        bogart047 7 May 2018 16: 31
        +2
        At present, 11 nuclear submarines are in construction at various stages of readiness. This is very good compared to Yeltsin. Cover the most critical gaps. Then they will take up the frigates.
  5. morpogr
    morpogr 7 May 2018 14: 11
    +1
    The construction program is not a dogma, and depending on the possibilities, it can change both in the direction of increasing or decreasing capital investments. And I really want to hope that for the next period of the Navy rearmament program there will be more than enough funds. And also new projects will appear, including breakthrough ones, as those recently puzzled by our president of our potential "partners". wink
  6. Imobile
    Imobile 7 May 2018 14: 22
    +2
    They constantly write that we cannot build large ships, it rests against a shipyard. Who knows, is it really so is it difficult to make 1 big dock for our country?
    1. Dude
      Dude 7 May 2018 14: 31
      -1
      Expensive, and there’s nothing to (s)
      1. Tiksi-3
        Tiksi-3 7 May 2018 15: 28
        +1
        Quote: Dude
        Expensive, and nothing

        belay fool Who invented or prompted himself?
    2. Tiksi-3
      Tiksi-3 7 May 2018 15: 27
      0
      Quote: Imobile
      Who knows, is it really so difficult to make 1 big dock for our country?

      already built in the Far East
    3. Seaflame
      Seaflame 7 May 2018 15: 35
      +2
      The shipyard is not the biggest problem (although it is also a weak point), Gorshkov was lowered for a long time, and he is not yet in service ... Polement-Redoubt, etc., this is not some kind of civilian icebreaker thread that can be satiated with foreign components.
    4. Boa kaa
      Boa kaa 7 May 2018 17: 49
      +1
      Quote: Imobile
      Is it really so hard to make 1 a big dock for our country?

      Quote: Tiksi-3
      already built in the Far East

      A floating dock for the construction of 100 thousand people is being built in the North.
      A shipyard is being built in large stone with a capacity of up to 350 thousand tons of displacement. But this is for the oil industry. If they are generous, they will lay the Storm.
      1. Petrol cutter
        Petrol cutter 7 May 2018 20: 23
        +1
        And the hero city of Kerch? How do you feel about the possibilities of this NW?
        1. Seaflame
          Seaflame 8 May 2018 14: 53
          0
          The plant needs to be restored under the Ruin, it fell into decay. We need new equipment, machine tools, cranes and everything can not be counted. And now the question. Do it all in Russia? I don’t think so. So you need to be purchased from foreign manufacturers. And will they deliver to the Crimea? Most likely not, or again, we get the situation with Siemens turbines.
    5. Vkd dvk
      Vkd dvk 8 May 2018 13: 45
      0
      Quote: Imobile
      They constantly write that we cannot build large ships, it rests against a shipyard. Who knows, is it really so is it difficult to make 1 big dock for our country?

      Do not say, for what? Build aircraft carriers, heavy cruisers? I’ll not catch up with anything. Here with small gauges to throw, cheaper and more reliable. One hundred volleys are not neutralized by any missile defense. To master the oceans, for what, a country with a purely continental structure, and if possible, make a goat's face to anyone from its territory?
  7. geniy
    geniy 7 May 2018 15: 25
    +3
    Quote: Imobile
    Is it really so hard to make 1 a big dock for our country?

    That's it! All in all, it’s business — to dig a large foundation pit the size of the draft of the largest ship with excavators — believe this is a penny for modern technology: two soldiers from a construction battalion replace an excavator! Let me remind you that in the century before last the Suez Canal was dug manually and with steam engines. And not so much by modern standards, a large amount of work. Suppose the length of the pit is 300 meters, for example, a width of 50 meters and a depth of 10 meters. Only 150 cubic meters of land.
    And then just concrete the bottom of this pit in order to put supports for the bottom of the ship on it, and put dock gates. The only steel structure is steel gates, and everything else is ordinary concrete. Well put some more taps.
    1. Servisinzhener
      Servisinzhener 7 May 2018 16: 20
      +3
      So, but not quite so. Aft of a concrete pit with a gate by the sea, there are many other things that should be attached to this pit. Railway branch for the delivery of materials. Power lines of the corresponding voltage and substation. Workshops with a fleet of machines and personnel who can work for them. Cranes of various lifting capacities. And you also need to know where to dig this very hole so that the adjacent water area has the appropriate depth and does not become silted by the current. Etc. etc.
    2. Boa kaa
      Boa kaa 7 May 2018 17: 55
      +4
      Quote: geniy
      In total, it’s business to dig a large pit the size of the draft of the largest ship with excavators

      Open the book on hydraulic engineering, and you yourself will be horrified by your denseness. I tell you as a person working in the hydraulic engineering department of one of the fleets ... yes
  8. nesvobodnye
    nesvobodnye 7 May 2018 15: 50
    0
    Can the French be trusted in the issue of modernizing our fleet?
  9. Zaurbek
    Zaurbek 7 May 2018 15: 53
    0
    And Ukrainians with their turbines and Germans with diesels helped in this, and France itself with 4 ships ...
  10. venik
    venik 7 May 2018 18: 12
    0
    I can not understand at all - WHAT is depicted in the PHOTO ?????
    In appearance - it’s something like a corvette class or an RTO, but a little longer ... Maybe someone will "ENLIGHTEN" ?????
    1. Seaflame
      Seaflame 8 May 2018 01: 15
      +1
      In appearance, the BOD is still recognized by the Soviet project. And there is also a signature under the photo: Large anti-submarine ship of project 11551 "Admiral Chabanenko"
  11. Petrol cutter
    Petrol cutter 7 May 2018 20: 18
    +1
    And he was almost ready to leave for 35SRZ. But here we have a movement in the Northwest / Pella North West. Therefore, stayed. At home, it is more convenient to work on the same 22800.
  12. Zomanus
    Zomanus 8 May 2018 00: 15
    +2
    Everything is complicated with the fleets. After the annexation of Crimea and the beginning
    work in Syria from all fleets was not taken by the worst ships.
    And if for the Federation Council this is not so critical, then it’s very sad to look at the composition of the Pacific Fleet.
    The parade on Fleet Day in Vladivostok is more like a line of old-timers on a walk.
  13. Catfish
    Catfish 8 May 2018 01: 04
    +1
    Quote: venik
    I can not understand at all - WHAT is depicted in the PHOTO ?????
    In appearance - it’s something like a corvette class or an RTO, but a little longer ... Maybe someone will "ENLIGHTEN" ?????


    Are you seriously? There is a signature under the photo.
  14. Imobile
    Imobile 8 May 2018 15: 39
    0
    Quote: wkd dvk
    Quote: Imobile
    They constantly write that we cannot build large ships, it rests against a shipyard. Who knows, is it really so is it difficult to make 1 big dock for our country?

    Do not say, for what? Build aircraft carriers, heavy cruisers? I’ll not catch up with anything. Here with small gauges to throw, cheaper and more reliable. One hundred volleys are not neutralized by any missile defense. To master the oceans, for what, a country with a purely continental structure, and if possible, make a goat's face to anyone from its territory?

    It is clear that we will not catch up, these are different tasks. It is one thing to shower, another to support a young nascent democracy in Mexico (any other country)
  15. geniy
    geniy 10 May 2018 09: 50
    +1
    You wrote directly a bunch of insoluble problems! And as soon as all of humanity has not perished, they are unable to solve such terrible tasks:
    Quote: Servisinzhener
    Aft of a concrete pit with a gate by the sea, there are many other things that should be attached to this pit. Railway branch for the delivery of materials.

    One would think that the railway line should be carried over a huge distance - almost across Siberia. So, after all, the new shipbuilding dock is supposed to be built in mind not far from some seaport, where there are already several railway lines, and it is enough to just make a small branch from one of them with a length of about ten kilometers. After all, one must understand here that it is not a seaport under construction with a ten-millionth turnover of goods brought in and taken out, but just a small branch for goods brought for construction — mainly sheet metal. And if you divide the displacement of an aircraft carrier of the order of 100 and divide this weight mainly of sheet metal by its construction period - say 000 years, and often much longer than 5 years, this means that only 10 thousand tons are required to be brought per month. Yes, any train at a time is able to bring 1 tons! That is, this railway line will work in full force only 2 hour per month - and the rest will be idle the rest! Well, I worked at a shipyard, and there was a small branch stretched out from the main railway - so in a few years I have never seen that goods would be brought along this branch. Of course, they probably brought it sometimes, but so imperceptibly for those around that this branch did not have any serious significance. And here you are trying to intimidate various ignoramuses with the damn hard difficulties of building a giant railway line!
    Power lines of the corresponding voltage and substation.

    Yes Yes! Just some kind of horror! Drive a huge transmission line across Siberia!
    Do you really imagine how much electricity is needed to operate a shipyard? The fact is that there is mainly welding work, and not so many machines. I think any steel or aluminum plant consumes electricity thousands of times more than a conventional shipyard.
    Workshops with a fleet of machines and personnel who can work for them. Cranes of various lifting capacities.

    Yes, and these are simply insurmountable difficulties. Here in the factory where I worked, there was one machine for the figured cutting of sheet steel, one sheet straightening machine (the German pre-war - brought from reparations from the defeated fascist Germany), one small press brake (also from fascist Germany), several welding machines. Well, there was also a furniture workshop for furniture production, and several different small turning and milling machines. Of course, there were cranes, but which were not always busy with work - after all, ship structures are made rather slowly and it is often not necessary to move them.
    And you also need to know where to dig this very hole so that the adjacent water area has the appropriate depth and does not become silted by the current.

    Oh damn, what a big problem to find out where in huge Russia you can dig a hole three hundred meters long! Yes, there is also such a great difficulty that you need a smart head that would recognize a place where it is not silted by the current! Well, just an incredibly difficult task! And the adjacent water area with a depth of 10-12 meters (the draft of the American nuclear-powered aircraft carrier 11 m) in Russia in general to find hard work!
  16. TermNachTer
    TermNachTer 13 May 2018 20: 32
    0
    Dart2027,
    An air group is an air group, and air defense systems are completely different. And so, the Ka-52 is absolutely useless in air defense issues. They had a very reasonable task, just for them - fire support of the landing.
    1. Dart2027
      Dart2027 13 May 2018 21: 32
      0
      Quote: TermNachTER
      An air group is an air group, and air defense systems are another

      Quote: Dart2027
      They are sharpened to shy at the enemy with their guns and missiles, including the anti-ship X-35. With regard to protection, then and Gren and Mistral are completely dependent on the escort, and their air defense is worth a tick, supposedly, that's it, and by the way, on the Mistral, they also had to put 30 mm (https://vpk-news.ru/articles/9086), but unlike Gren, they don’t have this main caliber.

      Did you try to read what I wrote?
      1. TermNachTer
        TermNachTer 13 May 2018 21: 55
        0
        Tell me what air defense systems are on the Mistral. Not what was supposed, but what is established. For 100 miles from the coast, you can land troops from any pelvis in which the size and strength of the deck allow helicopter landing. Once again I repeat these completely different things - BDK and find it difficult to classify the "mistral" as to what type of vessels. Comparing them is not correct.
        1. Dart2027
          Dart2027 13 May 2018 22: 21
          0
          Quote: TermNachTER
          Tell me what air defense systems are on the Mistral. Not what was supposed, but what is established
          And they became part of our Navy? And when did this event happen?
          Quote: TermNachTER
          from any pelvis in which the dimensions and strength of the deck allow helicopter landing

          It’s just necessary to get into it. In fact, this is precisely what explains the size of the Mistrals - half of the ship is hangars for helicopters and boats.
          Quote: TermNachTER
          BDK and I find it difficult to refer to what type of ships the "mistral". It is not correct to compare them

          Mistral is UDC, about which I do not know how many times it has been written. Both he and Gren are ships for the transfer and landing. Only if Gren is a clean transport, then UDC is also an additional opportunity (an air fire support group, a hospital with 70 seats, control systems to manage a group of ships or dissimilar forces).
          1. TermNachTer
            TermNachTer 13 May 2018 22: 30
            0
            UDC is what Americans are building. The ship was initially adjusted for war. And the Mistals, the British type of “hit” and something Dutch there, I don’t remember the name. This is a very simplified product, very strong savings. But not like UDC. They themselves somehow very mysteriously call them - the ship of projection of force. I can not vouch for the accuracy of the translation
            1. Dart2027
              Dart2027 14 May 2018 19: 38
              0
              Quote: TermNachTER
              very mysteriously called - power projection ship

              UDC is a class of ships; projection of force is an assignment.
              1. TermNachTer
                TermNachTer 15 May 2018 14: 06
                0
                We returned to where we started. UDC and BDK are ships. Mistral, Bay, etc. civilian vessels with the possibility of basing helicopters, paratroopers and landing. Vitality is the question. It’s a very expensive pleasure when a pit to the bottom of the “pelvis” and with it about 30 helicopters and one and a half thousand snouts.
                1. Dart2027
                  Dart2027 15 May 2018 19: 43
                  0
                  Quote: TermNachTER
                  UDC and BDK are ships. Mistral, Bay, etc. Civil Courts

                  A source?
                  Quote: TermNachTER
                  Survivability is the question

                  The last armored ships were the 68 bis cruiser.