New ships laid. Not without major surprises
As announced earlier, 23 of April was the location of two new frigates of the 22350 project, named “Admiral Amelko” and “Admiral Chichagov”, as well as two new ships, as promised, the 11711 project, named “Vladimir Andreev” and “Vasily Trushin” ".
And it was here that everyone was surprised: the Navy and the USC threw a surprise to the honorable public.
Everyone remembers the epic with the Project 11711 landing ship – a record-breaking long-term construction project, and a record not only in terms of time, it took 14 years to build, but also in terms of how simple the ship ultimately turned out to be “too tough” for our shipbuilding industry. What is worth only one last redesign of the ship, which “refused” to be demagnetized after the end of construction! And fleet, which changed the technical specifications three times for a ship already under construction, “distinguished” itself no less here.
As a result, the ship was still completed. Extremely unsuccessful - from the hull lines designed with errors, to the concept itself, the ship was and remains the object of well-deserved criticism. Nevertheless, as already indicated, the laying of such ships would be an absolute plus for the Navy, simply because no matter how bad they are, but such ships are better than none. Domestic BDK is seriously worn out, while the ships of the 775 project were built in Poland for a long time, and because of this there are difficulties with their repair, updating is necessary, so news about laying another pair of ships project 11711 was perceived positively by almost all observers.
However, at the ceremony itself, it turned out that the ships being laid had very little in common with the 11711 project that we knew. We look at the photo.
This is the lead ship of the 11711 project "Ivan Gren".
This is his mortgage board with a silhouette.
And now we look at the image of the pledged ships. This is a completely different project in fact! Instead of two superstructures - one, the flight deck is expanded to provide simultaneous flights of two helicopters.
And silhouette.
Moreover, the head of USC A.Rakhmanov said that the ships and the displacement will be different - 7-8 thousand tons.
Pledged ships have very little in common with the "original" 11711. It is surprising that for so different ships another project code was not used - they deserve it.
The project, however, raises questions. The figure clearly shows that the ship has a nasal gate for unloading equipment “to the stop”, to the shore. But for a ship with such a displacement, the idea of going right up to the shore seems extremely doubtful. For him, it would be more logical for the technology to descend afloat through aft lazport and send it to the coast under its own power. Frankly speaking, the losses in this way of landing are lower for both the landing and the ships. The only problem is the lack of a maritime armored vehicle at the Marine Corps, but since a ship is made from which it is possible to carry out a full over-landing landing, then it would be worthwhile to spend money on the car - especially since it can also be used with conventional BDK, and for the same over-the-horizon landing.
The gate is a problem node. The ships that are equipped with them, there is a danger of knocking out the gate wave when slamming, and such cases were in the fleets. As a measure of protection, the BDK uses the “strapping” of the gate in the transport position, which at the same time slows down and complicates their use, as well as walking the ship with tacks, at an angle to the wave, which reduces the speed at transitions in some cases. It is clear that new ships will inherit this problem. Was this justified? More likely no than yes.
Here you can recall the Americans who solved the issue with the gate on the tankers "Newports" by abandoning the gate in favor of the most complicated folding bridge - and this was not just the case.
The second "weak spot" is the very possibility of the ship approaching the coast. Physics can not be fooled, and 7000 tons of displacement for the ship, with dimensions comparable to the BDK project 11711, mean a big draft. But for the approach to the shore a small draft is extremely important. Even for a “classic” tank landing ship, a very small part of the world coast is available for disembarking. For new 7000 toners, it will be even smaller. And this greatly facilitates the enemy’s anti-amphibious defense, because there are few places where such a large ship can approach the coast.
Do new ships have a dock? We don't know that yet. Let's just say - for a ship of this class it would look very logical, in fact, the Navy would receive a pair of almost full-fledged (minus problem gates) DVKDs, which we have long and hard been missing. But while we do not even know whether the ship has the opportunity to release the equipment from the stern.
Well, let's wait.
Anyway, there is one colossal advantage over the standard “Cranes” of the “Vladimir Andreev” and “Vasily Trushin”: a large flight deck allows you to lift a couple of helicopters at the same time. This is a huge step forward compared to the “Ivan Gren” and “Peter Morgunov”, which, if there are two helicopters on board, have the opportunity to lift only one into the air, after which it is necessary to pull the second out of the narrow and narrow hangar and prepare it for take-off. This, it must be admitted, is a miserable scheme for the use of helicopters, and it’s very good that on new ships everything will be different.
As you can see, although there are questions about the new BDK, it’s still clear that the designers and the fleet are working on errors and are trying to fix something. It would, of course, be much more useful to use the experience of countries that have more experience in building amphibious ships than Russia, at least the same Singapore or Indonesia. But we traditionally do not learn from the mistakes of others, only on their own.
Well, even if so. It is better to learn from your mistakes than not to learn at all. So be that as it may, the news about the laying of new amphibious ships is doubly joyful, and because of the very fact of the laying, and because it seems that work has begun on the bugs. Sooner or later, but we will come to the optimal appearance of the amphibious ships and the amphibious forces in general.
All this can not but rejoice.
But the case is not limited to amphibious ships.
According to rumors leaked to the press, the two new Project 22350 frigates do not have 16 “cells” for offensive rocket weapon, and 24!
Here is the news without positive options. Now, the new frigates have potentially surpassed even the 1164 project cruisers, which have only 16 heavy supersonic anti-ship missiles, in terms of their offensive missile weapons (cruise missiles, anti-ship missiles, PLUR). Yes, they in theory fly further, in practice, at such a distance it is simply impossible to get reliable target designation, which nullifies this advantage. But quantity is quantity. And “Amelko” and “Chichagov”, if you believe the above information, will be able to carry the same 16 supersonic anti-ship missiles, only “Onyxes”, and they still have space for eight other missiles - for example, PLUR, or “Caliber” for hitting “ earth. "
With an additional launcher for eight missiles, the total number of missiles on board, along with anti-aircraft guns in new ships, reached the 56 — an unprecedented amount for a Frigate-class ship.
It is worth this time to be glad for the fleet without reservations.
Where "stuck" the third launcher? Apparently, next to the old two - at least, other possible places on the ship are not visible. We must also remember that the frigates of the 22350 project are very densely assembled, and for embedding another launcher from engineers it took a lot of effort.
It’s good that they did it (if 24 rockets are true).
In addition, on such a significant day for the fleet, the absence of the new Navy Commander-in-Chief Admiral Korolev at the ceremony of laying ground was astonishing. I must say that about the "precarious" position Korolev rumors have been going for a long time. Yes, and clear signs that the president is already seriously annoying what is happening with the Navy, the development of which he paid great attention, is complete. From this point of view, the absence of the commander in chief next to the president may be a sign of the clouds gathering over him. Let's say right away - for good reason. The number of insane decisions concerning naval construction exceeded the “critical mass” under Admiral Chirkov, but Korolev was able to do the seemingly impossible: make the situation even worse. If we assume that the president is dissatisfied with the commander in chief and that this is why the commander in chief was not at the ceremony of laying new ships, then perhaps the new commander is waiting for us. Do not miss again with the candidacy.
Unfortunately, only positive has not done. Sad thoughts brought the ceremony of withdrawing from the sheds PLA "Belgorod" - a radically rebuilt formerly modernized missile carrier project 949AM. If everything went as it should, then this ship would have been commissioned several years ago, as the first deeply modernized 3-generation missile carrier, armed with at least 72-me cruise missiles. With advanced electronics and reduced noise. Some experts argue that since the Belgorod would immediately be built as the carrier of the Calibrov, and would not be rebuilt from the standard 949А, the number of missiles on board could be reduced to hundreds.
Now we will never know this - the missile submarine was mutilated during the restructuring, and instead of dozens of cruise missiles along the sides, are equipped (are they?) Launchers for six Poseidon SPAs.
Which we know useless from a military point of view vulnerable and have no advantage over ballistic missiles (on the contrary, all the advantages of missiles).
An additional section was embedded in the boat to support the deployment of the nuclear deep-water station, the Shelf power module and the Harpsichord NPA, and it goes not to the fleet, but to the POGE MO, which uses the SPA project Poseidon as an occasion to increase budgets and gain additional authority in the Ministry of Defense. For the Navy, this ship is lost.
There is no dispute that what the GUGI does is important (except for the "Poseidons"), but it would be quite enough for the converted NPS XDBDR design submarines, which are now massively withdrawn from the combat fleet of the Pacific Fleet, but not yet utilized. A "spend" on the needs of the GUGI new bomber was not needed, it was a decision somewhere between a stupid crime and criminal stupidity. However, the Poseidon project in the future will cost us a lot, much more than a lost submarine.
One way or another, but in general, firstly, the good events of April 23 were much more than bad ones, and secondly, there is a trend to correct the situation in the surface shipbuilding.
It is still “born”, but this is good news.
Although sad, as it turned out, there is something.
And it was here that everyone was surprised: the Navy and the USC threw a surprise to the honorable public.
Other amphibious ships. What then laid the 23 of April of 2019 of the year?
Everyone remembers the epic with the Project 11711 landing ship – a record-breaking long-term construction project, and a record not only in terms of time, it took 14 years to build, but also in terms of how simple the ship ultimately turned out to be “too tough” for our shipbuilding industry. What is worth only one last redesign of the ship, which “refused” to be demagnetized after the end of construction! And fleet, which changed the technical specifications three times for a ship already under construction, “distinguished” itself no less here.
As a result, the ship was still completed. Extremely unsuccessful - from the hull lines designed with errors, to the concept itself, the ship was and remains the object of well-deserved criticism. Nevertheless, as already indicated, the laying of such ships would be an absolute plus for the Navy, simply because no matter how bad they are, but such ships are better than none. Domestic BDK is seriously worn out, while the ships of the 775 project were built in Poland for a long time, and because of this there are difficulties with their repair, updating is necessary, so news about laying another pair of ships project 11711 was perceived positively by almost all observers.
However, at the ceremony itself, it turned out that the ships being laid had very little in common with the 11711 project that we knew. We look at the photo.
This is the lead ship of the 11711 project "Ivan Gren".
This is his mortgage board with a silhouette.
And now we look at the image of the pledged ships. This is a completely different project in fact! Instead of two superstructures - one, the flight deck is expanded to provide simultaneous flights of two helicopters.
And silhouette.
Moreover, the head of USC A.Rakhmanov said that the ships and the displacement will be different - 7-8 thousand tons.
Pledged ships have very little in common with the "original" 11711. It is surprising that for so different ships another project code was not used - they deserve it.
The project, however, raises questions. The figure clearly shows that the ship has a nasal gate for unloading equipment “to the stop”, to the shore. But for a ship with such a displacement, the idea of going right up to the shore seems extremely doubtful. For him, it would be more logical for the technology to descend afloat through aft lazport and send it to the coast under its own power. Frankly speaking, the losses in this way of landing are lower for both the landing and the ships. The only problem is the lack of a maritime armored vehicle at the Marine Corps, but since a ship is made from which it is possible to carry out a full over-landing landing, then it would be worthwhile to spend money on the car - especially since it can also be used with conventional BDK, and for the same over-the-horizon landing.
The gate is a problem node. The ships that are equipped with them, there is a danger of knocking out the gate wave when slamming, and such cases were in the fleets. As a measure of protection, the BDK uses the “strapping” of the gate in the transport position, which at the same time slows down and complicates their use, as well as walking the ship with tacks, at an angle to the wave, which reduces the speed at transitions in some cases. It is clear that new ships will inherit this problem. Was this justified? More likely no than yes.
One of the types of slemings is bottom. Hitting the wave can destroy the nose. It happens and "counter" hit the waves in the stem (in the nose)
Here you can recall the Americans who solved the issue with the gate on the tankers "Newports" by abandoning the gate in favor of the most complicated folding bridge - and this was not just the case.
TDK class "Newport"
The second "weak spot" is the very possibility of the ship approaching the coast. Physics can not be fooled, and 7000 tons of displacement for the ship, with dimensions comparable to the BDK project 11711, mean a big draft. But for the approach to the shore a small draft is extremely important. Even for a “classic” tank landing ship, a very small part of the world coast is available for disembarking. For new 7000 toners, it will be even smaller. And this greatly facilitates the enemy’s anti-amphibious defense, because there are few places where such a large ship can approach the coast.
Do new ships have a dock? We don't know that yet. Let's just say - for a ship of this class it would look very logical, in fact, the Navy would receive a pair of almost full-fledged (minus problem gates) DVKDs, which we have long and hard been missing. But while we do not even know whether the ship has the opportunity to release the equipment from the stern.
Well, let's wait.
Anyway, there is one colossal advantage over the standard “Cranes” of the “Vladimir Andreev” and “Vasily Trushin”: a large flight deck allows you to lift a couple of helicopters at the same time. This is a huge step forward compared to the “Ivan Gren” and “Peter Morgunov”, which, if there are two helicopters on board, have the opportunity to lift only one into the air, after which it is necessary to pull the second out of the narrow and narrow hangar and prepare it for take-off. This, it must be admitted, is a miserable scheme for the use of helicopters, and it’s very good that on new ships everything will be different.
As you can see, although there are questions about the new BDK, it’s still clear that the designers and the fleet are working on errors and are trying to fix something. It would, of course, be much more useful to use the experience of countries that have more experience in building amphibious ships than Russia, at least the same Singapore or Indonesia. But we traditionally do not learn from the mistakes of others, only on their own.
Well, even if so. It is better to learn from your mistakes than not to learn at all. So be that as it may, the news about the laying of new amphibious ships is doubly joyful, and because of the very fact of the laying, and because it seems that work has begun on the bugs. Sooner or later, but we will come to the optimal appearance of the amphibious ships and the amphibious forces in general.
All this can not but rejoice.
But the case is not limited to amphibious ships.
Other frigates
According to rumors leaked to the press, the two new Project 22350 frigates do not have 16 “cells” for offensive rocket weapon, and 24!
Here is the news without positive options. Now, the new frigates have potentially surpassed even the 1164 project cruisers, which have only 16 heavy supersonic anti-ship missiles, in terms of their offensive missile weapons (cruise missiles, anti-ship missiles, PLUR). Yes, they in theory fly further, in practice, at such a distance it is simply impossible to get reliable target designation, which nullifies this advantage. But quantity is quantity. And “Amelko” and “Chichagov”, if you believe the above information, will be able to carry the same 16 supersonic anti-ship missiles, only “Onyxes”, and they still have space for eight other missiles - for example, PLUR, or “Caliber” for hitting “ earth. "
Inside the red contour - vertical missile launchers. There were always two of them on the 22350 project, 8 missiles each. Now, perhaps, there will be three - in the same zone
With an additional launcher for eight missiles, the total number of missiles on board, along with anti-aircraft guns in new ships, reached the 56 — an unprecedented amount for a Frigate-class ship.
It is worth this time to be glad for the fleet without reservations.
Where "stuck" the third launcher? Apparently, next to the old two - at least, other possible places on the ship are not visible. We must also remember that the frigates of the 22350 project are very densely assembled, and for embedding another launcher from engineers it took a lot of effort.
It’s good that they did it (if 24 rockets are true).
Political question
In addition, on such a significant day for the fleet, the absence of the new Navy Commander-in-Chief Admiral Korolev at the ceremony of laying ground was astonishing. I must say that about the "precarious" position Korolev rumors have been going for a long time. Yes, and clear signs that the president is already seriously annoying what is happening with the Navy, the development of which he paid great attention, is complete. From this point of view, the absence of the commander in chief next to the president may be a sign of the clouds gathering over him. Let's say right away - for good reason. The number of insane decisions concerning naval construction exceeded the “critical mass” under Admiral Chirkov, but Korolev was able to do the seemingly impossible: make the situation even worse. If we assume that the president is dissatisfied with the commander in chief and that this is why the commander in chief was not at the ceremony of laying new ships, then perhaps the new commander is waiting for us. Do not miss again with the candidacy.
A spoon of tar
Unfortunately, only positive has not done. Sad thoughts brought the ceremony of withdrawing from the sheds PLA "Belgorod" - a radically rebuilt formerly modernized missile carrier project 949AM. If everything went as it should, then this ship would have been commissioned several years ago, as the first deeply modernized 3-generation missile carrier, armed with at least 72-me cruise missiles. With advanced electronics and reduced noise. Some experts argue that since the Belgorod would immediately be built as the carrier of the Calibrov, and would not be rebuilt from the standard 949А, the number of missiles on board could be reduced to hundreds.
A sad event in fact.
Now we will never know this - the missile submarine was mutilated during the restructuring, and instead of dozens of cruise missiles along the sides, are equipped (are they?) Launchers for six Poseidon SPAs.
Which we know useless from a military point of view vulnerable and have no advantage over ballistic missiles (on the contrary, all the advantages of missiles).
An additional section was embedded in the boat to support the deployment of the nuclear deep-water station, the Shelf power module and the Harpsichord NPA, and it goes not to the fleet, but to the POGE MO, which uses the SPA project Poseidon as an occasion to increase budgets and gain additional authority in the Ministry of Defense. For the Navy, this ship is lost.
There is no dispute that what the GUGI does is important (except for the "Poseidons"), but it would be quite enough for the converted NPS XDBDR design submarines, which are now massively withdrawn from the combat fleet of the Pacific Fleet, but not yet utilized. A "spend" on the needs of the GUGI new bomber was not needed, it was a decision somewhere between a stupid crime and criminal stupidity. However, the Poseidon project in the future will cost us a lot, much more than a lost submarine.
One way or another, but in general, firstly, the good events of April 23 were much more than bad ones, and secondly, there is a trend to correct the situation in the surface shipbuilding.
It is still “born”, but this is good news.
Although sad, as it turned out, there is something.
Information