When Russia will have a strong fleet
The entry into service of the next "Virginia" and "Arly Burke" is met by the statement that there is no need for Russia to compete with the number of ships with the originally naval powers.
A continental country does not need a fleet and many ships have no purpose. The thesis is good, correct, but initially contains an error. "Continental Power" unexpectedly for all has four fleets on all sides of the world!
And here the fun begins.
Well, not a number, so skill. If the fleet of our "partners" is regularly reinforced with 1 rank ships, it would be fair to see the construction of at least one destroyer for the Russian Navy every few years. How justified is this expectation? In my opinion, more than! Otherwise, when the 60: 0 is on the board, there can be no talk of any real rivalry.
Reports about increasing the presence of the Navy in the oceans sharply diverge from reality. The number of ships does not match the statements.
The fleet is primarily ships, not talk. Assess the extent of rearmament of other countries over the last 5 years. And this is not the most significant participants!
The Italian fleet was replenished with 5 frigates (6700 tons) with long-range air defense / missile defense systems. An important technical aspect that determines the complexity of structures and their significance. Having completed the FREMM plan, the Italians immediately laid the next generation of frigates (destroyers), such as PPA. With such a pace and following the schedules to the middle of 2020, the number of modern Italian ships of the 1 rank will safely cross the line into 15 units.
In the distant solar India for the period 2015-2019. 2 rocket destroyers "Type 15А" were put into operation and 4, larger and more advanced "Type 15B" "Visakapatnam" (8000 t), were laid. By now all of them have been launched.
Britain, long lost the ambitions of a great maritime power, in the period 2015-2019. commissioned the Queen Elizabeth aircraft carrier and a pair of high-speed Tide-type integrated supply ships (39 000 tons). The active construction of destroyers during this period was not conducted - at the turn of the 2010-s. "Royal Navy" has already received a six "Derring". The next generation of 1 rank warships should be City-type frigates (8000 tons), the head of which was laid in 2017.
The domestic fleet is located somewhere at the level of the fleets of regional powers and the compact European naval forces. All that we have over the past decade in the lists of new arrivals of 1 ships of rank (or ranked as such, for lack of others) is the 5 frigates of the Admiral Series.
The Navy steadfastly holds positions only at the expense of submarine forces, but it is too early to talk about any “restoration” and “growing Russian threat”. During the previous "five-year plan" not a single nuclear submarine entered into service.
The UK fleet for the same period was replenished with two nuclear submarines of the "Estyut" type.
The Indian Navy in 2016, with great difficulty, received "Arikhant", his first-born nuclear submarine shipbuilding. Along with the “Arikhant”, the Russian Navy operates the Russian multipurpose NERPA K-152 PLA, leased for 10 years. Consideration is being given to the financing of reconditioning with the subsequent transfer of the Indian submarine to the next submarine (probably K-322 Kashalot, which has been on the Amur GCC for many years, awaiting a decision on its fate). The backlog in technology is compensated by a keen desire to have a modern fleet. The Indians use every opportunity, and, we must pay tribute to them, they achieve the desired results.
Italy has never had ships with nuclear power plants. But she is the only one among the parties mentioned who possesses technologies for the construction of non-nuclear submarines with an air-independent engine. Modern Todaro-type naval submarines, built at the Finkantieri shipyard, are fairly advanced combat vehicles that are not inferior to nuclear-powered ships on the limited scale of the Mediterranean Sea.
About how many submarines managed to put into operation the leading maritime powers, in this context, it is not necessary to mention. In order to avoid getting under the article about "insulting feelings."
There is a tendency in the world to reduce the time required for the construction of ships — ahead of schedule, which is facilitated by the growth of labor productivity, coupled with the desire of contractors to fulfill their obligations as soon as possible and to make a profit.
(News on the progress of construction of the universal landing craft L 400, Anadolu, Turkey.)
However, our USC has its own traditions, from which it is not going to recede anymore. Movement of any dates - just go!
Legend of this stories that is. "Admiral Kasatonov" was laid in 2009, launched in 2014 and since then "strengthens" the naval composition of the Navy from year to year. It does not have time to date and moves to the right. The “Thunderer” corvette has been built from 2012 onwards. As if it is already time - seven years for a guard ship near zone. Another corvette, the “Mercury”, was laid on 2016, and it was clearly added to the list by mistake. His scheduled entry into service - 2021.
Multipurpose PLA 4 generation K-561 "Kazan", the second in the series after the head "Severodvinsk." Eight years from bookmark to launch (2017). Another three years for the completion and testing. Transfer to fleet transferred from 2019 to 2020.
Terms of construction are not just long. They are irrational. For such results, you can bring to justice the entire USC top management. And there will be real deadlines equal to the deadlines for which the ships were built.
I believe there will be those who say: the tests are important. It is impossible to transfer to the fleet unprepared and untested ships.
But, gentlemen ... there is such a thing. If we build ships and submarines for a dozen years, and then conduct tests for years, military equipment will inevitably become obsolete before being commissioned. It can be said with confidence that SUCH construction / completion / testing periods are a vicious practice and there is no positive meaning in it.
However, there are examples and more abruptly. IRA "Karakurt", 800 tons of displacement, plan to build for three or four years, with a constant increase in time! With that, they do not have ANYTHING. Neither expensive and complex air defense / missile defense systems, which allow "to strike a bullet with another bullet," nor megawatt radars, nor complex and sensitive hydroacoustics. What to expect from 800 tons?
The amazing paradoxes accompanying the implementation of military shipbuilding projects (and the defense industry in general) have their explanation in the form of a criminal article. And this is not a "betrayal." This is a more banal article 160 "Assignment or waste".
It has long been clear that in the structure of the defense industry there are no orders and instructions, there are only orders. Managers at all levels execute orders from their superiors with the sole intention of increasing the share of their own profits in the implementation of each project. If the entire amount of the allocated funds goes to profit, then it does not matter - the project will simply be abandoned. And they will proceed to the consideration of the next “commercial offer”.
There is no other motivation for “effective managers”. That is how they see their task. A responsibility? Own do not throw.
Incredible construction time. Lack of production units. In the fleet, there are different types of ships and weapons against the background of irresponsible promises about the most incredible, fantastic weapons. Who will be responsible for the words about the creation of 200-node torpedoes with artificial intelligence, about the development of fifth-generation submarines (when in practice they barely mastered a pair of 4th-generation MAPLs), a 9-fly cruise missile and other near-scientific nonsense? ..
When the time comes, follow the usual excuses. Lack of shipyards, lack of technology, lack of personnel, and finally, lack of funds. It looks frivolous.
The same shipyard is not a unique natural phenomenon, similar to the peninsula of Crimea. Shipyards tend to be built in a relatively short period of time.
Russia is able to build a cosmodrome in the midst of Siberian wilderness and the Zenit Arena stadium with a moving field of 7000 tons. But for some reason it turns out to be powerless before the construction of a 300-meter slip or a covered slipway with a bridge crane. On the territory of already existing shipbuilding facilities with all communications. Fortunately, domestic enterprises of this kind have no problems with the territory - all of them were created according to wartime calculations, with the dispersed infrastructure on the area 10 times larger than that of foreign military shipyards.
Instead, 30 has been saying for years about the remaining shipyards in Nikolaev, “the only place where aircraft carriers could be built”.
Construction of the tanker "St. Petersburg" project XNUMHK class "Aframaks" at the shipyard complex "Star". Deadweight: 114 tons. Main dimensions: length - 114000 m, width - 250 m, draft - 44 m
Or about the lack of personnel. Of course, they are not. Why a lot of cadres with the indicated volumes of purchases of military equipment? That Su-57, that “Armata”, that superfrigate “Gorshkov”. A handful of specialists will successfully handle the scope of work.
All the indicated problems do not exist. There is only a reluctance to produce "unparalleled" technology in any noticeable amounts. Because it will reduce the rate of profit.
Any plans and expert calculations based on them - how many ships at the current update rate will be in the fleet for the 20 year, do not make sense. By the way, those calculations look very bad. Worse, only Roscosmos calculations on the base on the moon.
Experts believe that if the corvette or frigate in existing conditions are built on average 7-10 years, then the destroyer "Leader" will be built even longer. Too long to ensure the timely replacement of 1-grade ships of decommissioned. And the timing of the construction of an aircraft carrier may even be delayed until the end of the century.
Gentlemen, this is nothing. The current pace of construction of corvettes, frigates - imitation of activity. The superpower fleet is not built like that. The pace of construction is artificially slowed down / interrupted / stopped for known (already mentioned) systemic reasons.
It took enough time to realize that all the promises and plans of the last decades were not just broken. They were literally turned inside out!
The announcement of the appearance of 8 "Ash" before 2020, immediately sounded too unrealistic. But hardly anyone could have imagined then that, according to the results of the great and terrible state defense order, by the specified deadline, the current composition of the Navy would be just ONE multi-purpose boat of the 4 generation. All the same K-560 "Severodvinsk".
The laws of logic are inexorable - if you do not build ships, they never will. The fleet will eventually decrease to the size of a coastal fleet capable of performing border and environmental protection functions. And then completely disappear. The same thing happens if you simulate rearmament, transferring the Navy to one ship every few years. For a country with four fleets and global ambitions!
But it is if they continue to say beautiful words instead of deeds.
If the key figures in the state and the military industrial complex really decide that the country needs a military fleet, this fleet will be built at a completely different pace. And it will be necessarily built! We have all the necessary capabilities, facilities and technologies, and will only continue to develop in the future. And if you need foreign assistance and components, we will not be shy. Those who achieve their goals are not judged. They are respected.
On this optimistic note, allow me to bow out, giving readers the opportunity to express their opinions.
Continental power fleet is not needed
A continental country does not need a fleet and many ships have no purpose. The thesis is good, correct, but initially contains an error. "Continental Power" unexpectedly for all has four fleets on all sides of the world!
And here the fun begins.
Well, not a number, so skill. If the fleet of our "partners" is regularly reinforced with 1 rank ships, it would be fair to see the construction of at least one destroyer for the Russian Navy every few years. How justified is this expectation? In my opinion, more than! Otherwise, when the 60: 0 is on the board, there can be no talk of any real rivalry.
Reports about increasing the presence of the Navy in the oceans sharply diverge from reality. The number of ships does not match the statements.
The fleet is primarily ships, not talk. Assess the extent of rearmament of other countries over the last 5 years. And this is not the most significant participants!
The Italian fleet was replenished with 5 frigates (6700 tons) with long-range air defense / missile defense systems. An important technical aspect that determines the complexity of structures and their significance. Having completed the FREMM plan, the Italians immediately laid the next generation of frigates (destroyers), such as PPA. With such a pace and following the schedules to the middle of 2020, the number of modern Italian ships of the 1 rank will safely cross the line into 15 units.
In the distant solar India for the period 2015-2019. 2 rocket destroyers "Type 15А" were put into operation and 4, larger and more advanced "Type 15B" "Visakapatnam" (8000 t), were laid. By now all of them have been launched.
Britain, long lost the ambitions of a great maritime power, in the period 2015-2019. commissioned the Queen Elizabeth aircraft carrier and a pair of high-speed Tide-type integrated supply ships (39 000 tons). The active construction of destroyers during this period was not conducted - at the turn of the 2010-s. "Royal Navy" has already received a six "Derring". The next generation of 1 rank warships should be City-type frigates (8000 tons), the head of which was laid in 2017.
Honorable 10-place?
The domestic fleet is located somewhere at the level of the fleets of regional powers and the compact European naval forces. All that we have over the past decade in the lists of new arrivals of 1 ships of rank (or ranked as such, for lack of others) is the 5 frigates of the Admiral Series.
The Navy steadfastly holds positions only at the expense of submarine forces, but it is too early to talk about any “restoration” and “growing Russian threat”. During the previous "five-year plan" not a single nuclear submarine entered into service.
The UK fleet for the same period was replenished with two nuclear submarines of the "Estyut" type.
The Indian Navy in 2016, with great difficulty, received "Arikhant", his first-born nuclear submarine shipbuilding. Along with the “Arikhant”, the Russian Navy operates the Russian multipurpose NERPA K-152 PLA, leased for 10 years. Consideration is being given to the financing of reconditioning with the subsequent transfer of the Indian submarine to the next submarine (probably K-322 Kashalot, which has been on the Amur GCC for many years, awaiting a decision on its fate). The backlog in technology is compensated by a keen desire to have a modern fleet. The Indians use every opportunity, and, we must pay tribute to them, they achieve the desired results.
Italy has never had ships with nuclear power plants. But she is the only one among the parties mentioned who possesses technologies for the construction of non-nuclear submarines with an air-independent engine. Modern Todaro-type naval submarines, built at the Finkantieri shipyard, are fairly advanced combat vehicles that are not inferior to nuclear-powered ships on the limited scale of the Mediterranean Sea.
About how many submarines managed to put into operation the leading maritime powers, in this context, it is not necessary to mention. In order to avoid getting under the article about "insulting feelings."
We had time for the deadline, but then we were late ...
There is a tendency in the world to reduce the time required for the construction of ships — ahead of schedule, which is facilitated by the growth of labor productivity, coupled with the desire of contractors to fulfill their obligations as soon as possible and to make a profit.
"Currently, the shipyard is building the UDC with some advance schedule and does not exclude the transfer of its Turkish Navy already in 2020 year instead of the planned 2021."
(News on the progress of construction of the universal landing craft L 400, Anadolu, Turkey.)
However, our USC has its own traditions, from which it is not going to recede anymore. Movement of any dates - just go!
Poster of the start of 2019 of the year as a vivid example of news about fleet reinforcement
Legend of this stories that is. "Admiral Kasatonov" was laid in 2009, launched in 2014 and since then "strengthens" the naval composition of the Navy from year to year. It does not have time to date and moves to the right. The “Thunderer” corvette has been built from 2012 onwards. As if it is already time - seven years for a guard ship near zone. Another corvette, the “Mercury”, was laid on 2016, and it was clearly added to the list by mistake. His scheduled entry into service - 2021.
Multipurpose PLA 4 generation K-561 "Kazan", the second in the series after the head "Severodvinsk." Eight years from bookmark to launch (2017). Another three years for the completion and testing. Transfer to fleet transferred from 2019 to 2020.
Terms of construction are not just long. They are irrational. For such results, you can bring to justice the entire USC top management. And there will be real deadlines equal to the deadlines for which the ships were built.
Excuses are not accepted
I believe there will be those who say: the tests are important. It is impossible to transfer to the fleet unprepared and untested ships.
But, gentlemen ... there is such a thing. If we build ships and submarines for a dozen years, and then conduct tests for years, military equipment will inevitably become obsolete before being commissioned. It can be said with confidence that SUCH construction / completion / testing periods are a vicious practice and there is no positive meaning in it.
However, there are examples and more abruptly. IRA "Karakurt", 800 tons of displacement, plan to build for three or four years, with a constant increase in time! With that, they do not have ANYTHING. Neither expensive and complex air defense / missile defense systems, which allow "to strike a bullet with another bullet," nor megawatt radars, nor complex and sensitive hydroacoustics. What to expect from 800 tons?
The amazing paradoxes accompanying the implementation of military shipbuilding projects (and the defense industry in general) have their explanation in the form of a criminal article. And this is not a "betrayal." This is a more banal article 160 "Assignment or waste".
A simple explanation of complex matters.
It has long been clear that in the structure of the defense industry there are no orders and instructions, there are only orders. Managers at all levels execute orders from their superiors with the sole intention of increasing the share of their own profits in the implementation of each project. If the entire amount of the allocated funds goes to profit, then it does not matter - the project will simply be abandoned. And they will proceed to the consideration of the next “commercial offer”.
There is no other motivation for “effective managers”. That is how they see their task. A responsibility? Own do not throw.
Incredible construction time. Lack of production units. In the fleet, there are different types of ships and weapons against the background of irresponsible promises about the most incredible, fantastic weapons. Who will be responsible for the words about the creation of 200-node torpedoes with artificial intelligence, about the development of fifth-generation submarines (when in practice they barely mastered a pair of 4th-generation MAPLs), a 9-fly cruise missile and other near-scientific nonsense? ..
When the time comes, follow the usual excuses. Lack of shipyards, lack of technology, lack of personnel, and finally, lack of funds. It looks frivolous.
Shipyard is not a unique natural phenomenon.
The same shipyard is not a unique natural phenomenon, similar to the peninsula of Crimea. Shipyards tend to be built in a relatively short period of time.
Russia is able to build a cosmodrome in the midst of Siberian wilderness and the Zenit Arena stadium with a moving field of 7000 tons. But for some reason it turns out to be powerless before the construction of a 300-meter slip or a covered slipway with a bridge crane. On the territory of already existing shipbuilding facilities with all communications. Fortunately, domestic enterprises of this kind have no problems with the territory - all of them were created according to wartime calculations, with the dispersed infrastructure on the area 10 times larger than that of foreign military shipyards.
Instead, 30 has been saying for years about the remaining shipyards in Nikolaev, “the only place where aircraft carriers could be built”.
Construction of the tanker "St. Petersburg" project XNUMHK class "Aframaks" at the shipyard complex "Star". Deadweight: 114 tons. Main dimensions: length - 114000 m, width - 250 m, draft - 44 m
Or about the lack of personnel. Of course, they are not. Why a lot of cadres with the indicated volumes of purchases of military equipment? That Su-57, that “Armata”, that superfrigate “Gorshkov”. A handful of specialists will successfully handle the scope of work.
All the indicated problems do not exist. There is only a reluctance to produce "unparalleled" technology in any noticeable amounts. Because it will reduce the rate of profit.
Prospects are available, positive outlook
Any plans and expert calculations based on them - how many ships at the current update rate will be in the fleet for the 20 year, do not make sense. By the way, those calculations look very bad. Worse, only Roscosmos calculations on the base on the moon.
Experts believe that if the corvette or frigate in existing conditions are built on average 7-10 years, then the destroyer "Leader" will be built even longer. Too long to ensure the timely replacement of 1-grade ships of decommissioned. And the timing of the construction of an aircraft carrier may even be delayed until the end of the century.
Gentlemen, this is nothing. The current pace of construction of corvettes, frigates - imitation of activity. The superpower fleet is not built like that. The pace of construction is artificially slowed down / interrupted / stopped for known (already mentioned) systemic reasons.
It took enough time to realize that all the promises and plans of the last decades were not just broken. They were literally turned inside out!
The announcement of the appearance of 8 "Ash" before 2020, immediately sounded too unrealistic. But hardly anyone could have imagined then that, according to the results of the great and terrible state defense order, by the specified deadline, the current composition of the Navy would be just ONE multi-purpose boat of the 4 generation. All the same K-560 "Severodvinsk".
This is an imitation of activity.
The laws of logic are inexorable - if you do not build ships, they never will. The fleet will eventually decrease to the size of a coastal fleet capable of performing border and environmental protection functions. And then completely disappear. The same thing happens if you simulate rearmament, transferring the Navy to one ship every few years. For a country with four fleets and global ambitions!
But it is if they continue to say beautiful words instead of deeds.
If the key figures in the state and the military industrial complex really decide that the country needs a military fleet, this fleet will be built at a completely different pace. And it will be necessarily built! We have all the necessary capabilities, facilities and technologies, and will only continue to develop in the future. And if you need foreign assistance and components, we will not be shy. Those who achieve their goals are not judged. They are respected.
On this optimistic note, allow me to bow out, giving readers the opportunity to express their opinions.
Information