The cost of building the first two UDCs for the Russian fleet became known

The construction of two Russian universal landing ships (UDC) at the Zaliv plant in Kerch will cost about 100 billion rubles. This was reported by TASS with reference to a source in the military-industrial complex.

According to the source, the contract for the construction of two UDCs will be signed at the end of April this year, and the laying ceremony will be held in early May, it should be timed to coincide with the 75th anniversary of the Victory in World War II. For our part, we note that the bookmark date may be shifted due to the situation with coronavirus.

The contract for the construction of ships should be signed in the third decade of April. The cost of helicopter carriers will be slightly less than 100 billion rubles

- cites the words of the source news agency.

It was previously reported that two UDCs will be laid at the Gulf Shipyard in May 2020. But the data on the deadlines vary: some sources say that the lead ship will surrender the fleet in 2026, and the second - in 2027, others that the parent - until 2027, and the second - until 2030. Although there is no official confirmation of either of these data.

Later, information appeared that the Navy had finally decided on the parameters of the ships being laid. According to TASS, citing sources in the shipbuilding industry, ships will receive a displacement of 25 thousand tons. Initially, the displacement of ships should not exceed 15 thousand tons, and the number of helicopters on board - no more than ten. Also, the names of the pledged ships became known - Sevastopol and Vladivostok - these names were previously intended for helicopter carriers of the Mistral type, ordered from France. This decision was made by the General Staff of the Russian Navy.

It is planned that the UDC will carry 20 heavy helicopters and will be able to carry up to two battalions of marines with a total number of up to 900 people.

Comments

[Winnie76]

The Mistrals promised for several years. And here is 2026. God forbid without hyphenation.

[orionvitt]

Quote: Winnie76

The Mistrals promised for several years.

You probably forgot that the Mistrals were never received. And already ten years have passed. It doesn't matter what happened there. The fact is that they promised, but they did not. So the old adage is appropriate here. "If you want everything to be done, do it yourself."

[Winnie76]

Quote: orionvitt

You probably forgot that the Mistrals were never received. And already ten years have passed. It doesn't matter what happened there. The fact is that they promised, but they did not. ...

The construction of the Mistral took, if not mistaken, 2-3 years. Wherein:

1) Mistral redesigned for our tasks.
2) Apart from the UDC function, the Mistral could be used as a control ship and hospital.
3) It was stated that we received certain technologies plus we ourselves participated in the construction.
Now it turns out that our version of UDC will be under construction for 6-7 years. And this is at best. Well, cool.

[orionvitt]

Quote: Winnie76

Well, cool.

What is cool? They do it as they see fit. You probably because of your hobby for naked digital cameras, you forgot that there is such a thing as planning. Where many factors are taken into account. Such as finance, production facilities, development of design documentation, political factors, economic factors, and a bunch of different things. Once it was considered that by the target date it would be normal, then everything is in order. In your opinion, it’s easier to roll off three-plus lard for two ships that you never saw. No, of course they saw, even felt, but only from afar. In general, I think that rushing is good only when catching fleas. So everything is fine.

[ccsr]

Quote: orionvitt

. Where many factors are taken into account. Such as finance, production facilities, development of design documentation, political factors, economic factors, and a bunch of different things.

You absolutely described everything correctly, and the specialists who led serious projects will agree with your approaches to the timing. And various "critics" will never understand that, firstly, for helicopter carriers, it will be necessary to build ADDITIONAL helicopters, additionally train their crews, additionally train two battalions of the marines, and this alone will require a change in the armament program, and changes in the training program for pilots and naval officers. infantry. Secondly, it is necessary to build infrastructures for them, incl. housing stock, storage boxes, hangars, etc. There is also the third - how to get out with the allocated budget, there are the fourth, the fifth, etc.
So the chosen construction period was repeatedly calculated, taking into account the capabilities of the "Zaliv" itself, and therefore for those who themselves were the general customer, such periods can even be considered optimal when the enterprise itself needs re-equipment and it starts manufacturing a new complex product.

[venik]

Quote: Winnie76

Now it turns out that our version of UDC will be under construction for 6-7 years. And this is at best. Well, cool.

======
HOW MANY Mistrals were built? Do not know?

[Cowbra]

And Mistral is already a well-established production, and we are building from scratch. So the deadlines are real, but it’s still necessary to build, and precisely by ourselves. Said above why

[TermNachTer]

As the saying goes: "God help." It is good that Russian factories and shipbuilders are overloaded with work.

[Boa kaa]

Quote: TermNachTER

It is good that Russian factories and shipbuilders are busy with work.

That's right! (with)
And their price is at least 2,5-3 times less than what they paid for the "French" (4,2 billion)
If you take: - 1 dollar for 75 rubles., It turns out = 1,3 (3) billion dollars. But it is visible without weapons. So the point is to build it yourself! And competencies are developed, and people are busy, and money remains in the country!
IMHO.

[TermNachTer]

Even if it turns out a little more expensive, it is still better than depending on such "dumb" partners as the French. Again, the "mistrals" were built according to the standards of civil shipbuilding, I hope that the new UDC will be built according to Soviet reliability standards.

[Grigory_45]

Quote: TermNachTER

Again, Mistrals were built to civil shipbuilding standards.

"Mistrals" were offered to us "adjusted" according to our requirements, incl. by ice class. No need to reprint journalistic stories

[TermNachTer]

The thickening of the outer skin does not make the civil lushpike a ship. There remains a bunch of internal problems - the thickness and number of components of the ship's kit, the height and number of watertight bulkheads and a bunch of everything that distinguishes the ship from the ship

[Grigory_45]

Quote: TermNachTER

The thickening of the outer skin does not make the civil lushpike a ship. There remains a bunch of internal problems - the thickness and number of components of the ship's kit, the height and number of watertight bulkheads and a bunch of everything that distinguishes the ship from the ship

firstly, you don’t know that they changed for certain the design of the Mistral building
secondly, in the USSR they also created UDC projects on the basis of civil courts. For example, the landing helicopter carrier of project 10200 Khalzan was designed on the basis of a high-speed civilian container ship of project 1609.
And it doesn’t bother anyone. At the base - this does not mean that the corps was taken one to one.

[Alexey RA]

Quote: Gregory_45

secondly, in the USSR they also created UDC projects on the basis of civil courts. For example, the landing helicopter carrier of project 10200 Khalzan was designed on the basis of a high-speed civilian container ship of project 1609.

Here are just the first project of "Halzan", created on the basis of a civilian ro-ro rover corps, the Navy categorically rejected just because of the lack of survivability and security.

In its conclusion, Central Research Institute named after Acad. A.N. Krylova, like the 1st Navy Institute, approved a version of the project with 30 Ka-27 helicopters, noting the need for measures to reduce the physical fields of the ship, primarily acoustic, as well as to improve stability and unsinkability. In addition, in order to increase combat stability, it was recommended to provide reserves in the project for ensuring the basing of not only helicopters, but also promising vertical take-off and landing fighters (GDP) of the Yak-41.

And he demanded to design the UDC according to the standards of the Navy landing craft.

... due to the deployment of advanced electronic equipment, two Dagger air defense systems (12 vertical launchers, 8 missiles each), eight 30-mm AK-630 assault rifles with 4 Vympel type radar firing control systems, implementation elements of constructive protection, providing the possibility of receiving 300 paratroopers, etc., an initially simple ship turned into a rather complex and expensive (170 million rubles) warship with a total displacement of 31 tons (longest 000 m, widest 228,3, 40,3 m, draft 8,9 m), similar to project 1609 Roller об contours of the underwater part of the hull and a twin-shaft gas turbine power plant with a capacity of 50 liters. with., both units of which were located in one compartment.

But this option did not suit the fleet.

In its opinion on the technical project 10200 Central Research Institute named after Acad. A.N. Krylova, while not denying the expediency of creating an anti-submarine helicopter carrier, and noting that he was becoming one of the most valuable and important ships of the XII five-year plan, he focused on the inadmissibility of creating such a ship with deviations from the existing ones in accordance with the Navy’s TTZ Navy requirements regarding the survivability of the ship and its power plant (it was located in one compartment, as on any civilian ship), unsinkability and levels of physical fields. Since these shortcomings were due to the use of the hull and equipment of the project 1609 roller as a base and therefore were practically unavoidable, we concluded that the creation of such a ship in the Chernomorsudoproekt design bureau was unacceptable.

As a result, the final project of "Khalzan" was made on the basis of the corps of project 1143 - it was not possible to meet all the requirements of the Navy in a smaller displacement.

Quoted from: A. M. Vasiliev “Antisubmarine Helicopter Carrier of Project 10200“ Khalzan ”” collection “Gangut”, issue 47.

[TermNachTer]

"Halzan" remained at the design stage, no matter how it went into operation, we can only assume.

[Grigory_45]

By the way, on the basis of which civilian ship are UDC-type Mistral designed?

[Alexey RA]

Quote: Gregory_45

By the way, on the basis of which civilian ship are UDC-type Mistral designed?

Civil Shipbuilding Standards и civil ship base - these are still different things.
For example, British aircraft carriers of the "Colossus" type were built according to civil shipbuilding standards.

[Zabvo]

What are the French "dumb" partners, in my opinion, if you count as you, then not "dumb" than ourselves.

[Every]

Quote: ZABVO

What are the French "dumb" partners, in my opinion, if you count as you, then not "dumb" than ourselves.

THOSE. in your opinion, "throwing" with ships for which you have already paid - is it quite normal?
And we, so bad, brazenly slandering the unfortunate paddling pool.

[Zabvo]

Ie, in my opinion, "throwing" from the air defense system for which they have already paid is just as "dumb", greetings from Iran with the S-300 for example (oh, how inconvenient it was, hmm) ... Now my answer to two citizens, you and with the nickname "TermiNakhTer" I hope to read the same. They did not "deceive" us in a normal adequate understanding of the essence of the issue, sanctions were imposed on the Russian Federation in connection with which they (the French) had to make such a decision and it should be noted, and give them credit that they resisted this for a long time. Why on earth, France had to go against the interests of the essence of its Metropolis, or someone else believes in "Free and honest peace in the whole world." If the sanctions were not imposed on the Russian Federation, then our Mistrals would have been enlisted in the Navy long ago. About us, at the beginning, I gave an example, where if we recall the face in fluff no less, then it was not in our interests to quarrel with the West, and therefore the buyer was thrown in the same way, now it is not in the interests of France to quarrel from the United States on this they "threw" us. Hopefully intelligible.

[TermNachTer]

I even find it difficult to name "faster". Jews in the 60s "threw" on boats, in the 80s Argentos on boats and missiles, in the 90s Hussein through the air defense.

[Winnie76]

Quote: Boa constrictor KAA

And their price is at least 2,5-3 times less than what they paid for the "French" (4,2 billion)
If you take: - 1 dollar for 75 rubles., It turns out = 1,3 (3) billion dollars. But it is visible without weapons. So the point is to build it yourself!

There is certainly a sense. Only Mistral is multifunctional. It can be used as a control ship and hospital. Hence, probably the price. And built three times faster

[Boa kaa]

Quote: Winnie76

Only Mistral is multifunctional. It can be used as a control ship and hospital.

Colleague! I won't say about the hospital, I don’t know. But about the "control ship" - definitely there. Above the navigation bridge (the lower row of windows in the superstructure) is the FKP (marching) - the second row of windows in the superstructure. In the bowels of the ship there are probably CIC, GKP, and FKP-combat. So, communication facilities are reserved, workplaces (AWPs!) Are equipped. Please begin to lead the landing operation "Overlord Mini"! (At the "maxi" we do not yet pull on the landing capacity of our cash MDS)

[ccsr]

Quote: Winnie76

Can be used as a control ship

And this is why, given the fact that modern communication systems will allow you to control a group of ships from some flagship?

Quote: Winnie76

and the hospital.

This is generally a whim, if only because the floating hospital itself is a specialized ship. And to use a combat helicopter carrier as an auxiliary ship can only come to a deeply non-military person - this is the same as using tanks as tractors for an artillery regiment.

Quote: Winnie76

Only Mistral is multifunctional.

It is interesting to which naval commander it would occur to a warship to be used multifunctionally, and not in the way it was prescribed to him by instructions and incorporated into its design.

[Winnie76]

Quote: ccsr

And this is why, given the fact that modern communication systems will allow you to control a group of ships from some flagship?

For example, from what? Glory-type missile cruiser? So there is a displacement of 2.5 times less, plus various pieces of iron clogged. And at the UDC with the squares everything is in order, you can place the whole headquarters.

Quote: ccsr

This is generally a whim, if only because the floating hospital itself is a specialized ship. And to use a combat helicopter carrier as an auxiliary ship can only come to a deeply non-military person - this is the same as using tanks as tractors for an artillery regiment.

Why have two ships, two crews, two piers, a double supply of fuel, food, etc., if you can do one? Especially when the landing is possible, losses are possible - will we take the wounded to Moscow? And if this happens away from airfields, then how? On helicopters with ten refueling? What about the evacuation of citizens of the Russian Federation? And if there are a bunch of wounded?

Quote: ccsr

It is interesting to which naval commander it would occur to a warship to be used multifunctionally, and not in the way it was prescribed to him by instructions and incorporated into its design.

There will be multifunctional UDC - other instructions will be written. There is no insoluble problem

[ccsr]

Quote: Winnie76

For example, from what? Glory-type missile cruiser?

The Navy knows better, only it seems to me that no large-scale battles of the fleets are foreseen anymore, which means that it is possible to control the grouping of ships in peacetime even if they are thousands of miles from their location. As for the operational management on the spot, I think that with modern means of communication and obtaining intelligence in real time, it is quite possible for some admiral with a small group of officers from the operational management of the fleet.

Quote: Winnie76

And at the UDC with the squares everything is in order, you can place the whole headquarters.

Come on, fantasize - what the other headquarters if we had several ships from strength in the Mediterranean Sea, even when the fighting was ongoing.

Quote: Winnie76

Why have two ships, two crews, two piers, a double supply of fuel, food, etc., if you can do one?

How do you know the plans of our naval commanders for their use? They can be in different fleets at all - didn’t you think about it?

Quote: Winnie76

What about the evacuation of citizens of the Russian Federation?

This is where you saw the colonies of our citizens - are you going to evacuate them from London? Oh well...

Quote: Winnie76

There is no insoluble problem

The main thing is to take a sensible approach to solving problems, so as not to regret what happened later, as was the case with the collapse of the USSR.

[Winnie76]

Quote: ccsr

Come on, fantasize - what the other headquarters if we had several ships from strength in the Mediterranean Sea, even when the fighting was ongoing.

OK. No headquarters needed. They will command from Moscow on Skype. And in wartime, of course, Skype will work even better. After all, communication will not be crushed, satellites will not be lost, repeaters will not be destroyed.

Quote: ccsr

How do you know the plans of our naval commanders for their use? They can be in different fleets at all - didn’t you think about it?

That's right, because a hospital in one fleet is needed, and people in another do not get sick. And paratroopers shot in one fleet must be treated, and on the other they will be killed.

Quote: ccsr

This is where you saw the colonies of our citizens - are you going to evacuate them from London? Oh well...

Well, for example, coronoviruses from some Maldives. Or what embassy to withdraw from an unfriendly country

[ccsr]

Quote: Winnie76

OK. No headquarters needed. They will command from Moscow on Skype.

In fact, the technique for closing space radio lines existed in our seventies, so do not worry about it.

Quote: Winnie76

After all, communication will not be crushed, satellites will not be lost, repeaters will not be destroyed.

There is also a short-wave radio for controlling ship groupings, and it is quite developed.

Quote: Winnie76

And in wartime,

And in wartime, the ship group will not last long - they will be destroyed even at the initial stage of the war.

Quote: Winnie76

That's right, because a hospital in one fleet is needed, and people in another do not get sick. And paratroopers shot in one fleet must be treated, and on the other they will be killed.

Leave this myth-making, but rather trust the naval professionals - they themselves will figure out who and what to fight for, and who to treat and manage.

Quote: Winnie76

Well, for example, coronoviruses from some Maldives. Or what embassy to withdraw from an unfriendly country

"Ostap suffered ..." (c)
By the way, in most countries, our embassy is a dozen or two dozen people, and it is easier to take them out by plane, rather than ships.

[novel66]

and motors, where to get motors?

[RMT]

On June 17, 2011, Rosoboronexport and the French state-owned naval shipbuilding company DCNS signed a contract for the purchase by Russia of two Mistral-class helicopter carriers and related services, which mainly include logistics, education and technology transfer. According to the contract, the first ship for Russia was to be delivered in 2014, and the second in 2015. The amount of the signed contract amounted to 1,2 billion euros. RIA News

[Boa kaa]

Quote: RMT

The amount of the contract amounted to 1,2 billion euros

Valery, who built the aft extremities for them? Whoever put the filling in them, I mean "combat". And the full cost with weapons and other garbage?
Even the yachts of our "oligophrenics" are counted as 1m - 1 million dollars, not to mention the "stuffing"

[Zabvo]

Cheaper ours simply can not build, especially when there is no series.

[Nemchinov Vl]

Quote: TermNachTER

As the saying goes: "God help." It is good that Russian factories and shipbuilders are overloaded with work.

On the one hand, I agree. But !! On the other hand, the question torments - why this "Soviet gigantomania" ?! I mean I don't really understand why try to lay TWO immediately huge UDC (new (!), not worked out (!) not finished project) ?! Using the example of the same "Ivan Gren" (with "Peter Morgunov") ?! Fill in for now (this year) ONE such, and the second is the most worked out (for today) fr. 22350.1 (for the Black Sea Fleet) on the "Zaliv" !!! When it is at least 50% built (provided that the construction goes smoothly and according to plan), it will be possible to talk about laying the second one of the same ... !!! Now we would like to level the situation with the main BNK of the 1st rank, taking into account how quickly the BOD 1155 can get up, taking into account the wear of the resource of their power plant, which there is nothing to change !!! Today, when the construction speed of even the most seemingly exhausted frigates (22350.1), cannot yet be brought to the level of 4-5 years (!) Is it worth laying two UDCs at once ?!

[Grigory_45]

Quote: Vl Nemchinov

it is not entirely clear why try to lay TWO huge UDCs at once (new (!), not worked out (!) not finished project) ?! Using the example of the same "Ivan Gren" (with "Peter Morgunov") ?! Lay down for now (this year) ONE such, and the second is the most worked out (for today) fr. 22350.1 (for the Black Sea Fleet) on the "Zaliv" !!! When it is at least 50% built (provided that the construction goes smoothly and according to plan), it will be possible to talk about laying the second one of the same ... !!!

reasonable remark. We build and test the first ship, reveal most of the jambs. Well, the fact that the ships will be different - so we don’t have two identical ships, even one project.

[ccsr]

Quote: Vl Nemchinov

I mean, it’s not entirely clear to me why try to immediately lay TWO huge UDCs (new (!), Not worked out (!) Not finished projects) ?!

Well, at least with the fact that the second will cost less, and the construction cycle will be continuous, which means experience and personnel will be more rationally used.
As for the "unused" one, just a certain time shift will allow the plant to take into account the mistakes in the construction of the main one, so as not to repeat them on the next one in the series.
Yes, and the project "brought to mind" can hardly be found in the history of our large shipbuilding - the next in the series always carried some changes, and then the modernization made adjustments.

[Nemchinov Vl]

Quote: ccsr

Well, at least with the fact that the second will cost less, and the construction cycle will be continuous, which means experience and personnel will be more rationally used.

yes but WHY TWO ?? the difference in the tab between the head and the first serial frigates 22350 , already at 3,5 years old, and even that (!) did not really help to avoid "primary design flaws" (!!), but meanwhile, let me say that their VI 5400And not 25000 t. !!! First Fr. 22350 was built even so more than 12 years (!), Second (he is the first serial), already MORE THAN ten!

Quote: ccsr

As for the "unused", then just a certain time shift will allow the plant to take into account errors in the construction of the head so as not to repeat them on the next in the series.

Then lay on the "Zaliva", while one UDC and one 22350.1 (for the Black Sea Fleet) this year! It is necessary to reasonably use the area of ​​the plant, and its capabilities (and competence) in production. If after 4-5 years, the frigate is launched, there will be space for laying the second UDC. During this time, the "shortcomings of the first-born of this project" will be identified and taken into account, and the second will be built with this in mind !! Well, does anyone really believe that in the country where the construction of a frigate or large landing craft (with VI less than 6000 t (!)) MORE THAN ten years, then UDC of 25000 tons, will be built faster ??
Otherwise it looks like an attempt to block more production area, for a deep indefinite period (!) Do we need it ?!

Quote: Alexey RA

Quote: Vl Nemchinov
I mean, it’s not entirely clear to me why try to immediately lay TWO huge UDCs (new (!), Not worked out (!) Not finished projects) ?!

Apparently, to disassemble one of them on the slipway due to mass marriage. Fortunately, there is already experience, yes ...

so so ...

Quote: Igor Borisov_2

As I understand it, if the bookmark is in May, then the UDC project is completely ready?

by the way, if you believe the information from the Kaliningrad "Yantar" (for example, "Andreev" and "Trushin" (!) ) ... then here options are possible ...

[ccsr]

Quote: Vl Nemchinov

yes, but why two at once

The production capabilities of Zaliv make it possible to run two projects simultaneously, so we decided to build them one after the other. As for the operational purpose, this is not a question for the shipbuilders, but for our naval commanders - maybe a cock has been biting their ass for a long time after the failure with the Mistrals.

Quote: Vl Nemchinov

It is necessary to make rational use of the plant area, and its capabilities (and competencies) in production.

Can you even imagine the size of this plant? For many years I traveled past him to the city beach, and I can say that it was not for nothing that supertankers built under 180 thousand tons - there is enough space for everyone. Although of course the issue with personnel is very relevant, but the plant is already building new housing, so they will find those who want to work hard.

Quote: Vl Nemchinov

Do we need it ?!

I still hope that among the naval people there are still reasonable people, and apparently since they agreed to such a manufacturing cycle, they were good reason. So do not drive the wave - I have always been an opponent of the procurement of the Mistral, so maybe this construction of landing ships will take the itch of some strategists.

[Nemchinov Vl]

1)

Quote: ccsr

Zaliv's production capabilities allow simultaneously lead two projects

!!! Only pleases your statement. Above I wrote:

Quote: Vl Nemchinov

Then lay on the Bay until one UDC and one 22350.1 (for the Black Sea Fleet) this year!

If the frigates learn to assemble in a reasonable amount of time (4-5 years!), This doesn’t put a bookmark on the second UDC then ?!
2)

Quote: ccsr

Can you even imagine the size of this plant?

?!

Quote: ccsr

not for nothing that supertankers built under 180 thousand tons - there is enough space for everyone.

great (!) all that remains is to make rational use of these production facilities. For example, in the current year, UDC and one FR.22350.1; in the next one, 22350.1, and five years later, when the frigates were launched and the construction of the second UDC was completed (!), taking into account the shortcomings identified during the construction of the first building !!
3)

Quote: ccsr

I'm still I hope that among the navy we still have reasonable

completely in agreement, but -

Quote: ccsr

... and apparently once they agreed for such a manufacturing cycle ...

After all, they agreed to the almost simultaneous laying of more than a dozen "Karakurt" ...?! That nobody understood / or did not want to understand /that Zvezda's capacities won't provide them with 507 engines in such a short time ?! But I hope that you and I understand that the hulls of "Karakurt" with VI 800 tons, to sculpt faster than UDC hull with VI 25000 tons ?! And what about the planned GEM for helicopter carriers ?! Who will collect it? And from what actually ?! "Maximum fulfilled, for today", ГЭУ for 22350 - ДГТА М55Р :, it seems still cannot rhythmically be supplied for the Navy programs because of the assembly speed of the Zvezda-Reductor gearboxes ?! Another enterprise for the assembly of gearboxes (and marine gas turbine engines, except for Rybinsk) stubbornly NOT CREATED ?!
4)

Quote: ccsr

I still hope that among the naval people there are still reasonable people, and apparently since they agreed to such a manufacturing cycle, they were justified.

Already (and since yesterday / 2014 / !!!), for the rhythmic development of shipbuilding programs (!), it was necessary to create on its territory Center for offshore gas turbine engine building and assembly of gearboxes for them (!) similar / similar to the Soviet "Zarya-Mashproekt" !! But it is not and is not being created !! Ambitious shipbuilding programs are being built for a dozen years in advance (?!) They have everything: creation plans enlarged frigates 22350M with a VI of 7000 or 8000 tons practically destroyers (!); UDC with VI 25000 t., promising aircraft carriers, And BDK in VI about 8000 tons. ... Even atomic leaders of destroyers with VIs are about 18-20 ct. ... (but there will be more questions to their cost of construction and the cost of their subsequent operation for the Navy)?! And that would seem nice, BUT ?! On what ?! If I repeat even the rhythmic speed of assembly of the GEM for fr. in 5400 t. - PROBLEM ?! If you make a reliable and powerful promising diesel engine of 10000 hp. (16SD-500), not the first year does not work ?! In three, four, five years, the last BOD 1155 will die (since turbines similar to those used in their power plants are not produced), and their number, given the speed of construction and transfer to the fleet by frigates 22350 in a ratio of at least one to one, already objectively looks very unlikely? !!! Nobody, and nothing is alarming ?!

[ccsr]

Quote: Vl Nemchinov

And what about the planned GEM for helicopter carriers ?!

This is apparently why they are laying such a deadline for completing UDC to just have time to make a power plant - there also have their own plans and deadlines, and they were apparently linked to the end of the construction of landing ships.

Quote: Vl Nemchinov

it is necessary to create on its own territory the Center for Marine Gas Turbine Motor Building and the assembly of gearboxes for them (!) similar / similar to the Soviet "Zarya-Mashproekt"

Well, it’s not the sailors who determine it - so this question is not addressed to them. They can apply for the creation of such a center and no more, but the decisive word is with industry, and it may not listen to the military, because they can see the perspective differently.

Quote: Vl Nemchinov

Nobody, and nothing is alarming ?!

In this case, you do not quite correctly emphasize, because military sailors are only one of the gas suppliers, but there are a bunch of others who also need ships and their total needs can be much larger than the military, and the range of orders is wider, and the requirements not so tough. This problem was also in the days of the USSR, so it is unlikely that we will now be able to jump above our heads, which is why we can only hope that we still have smart people in the government.

[Alexey RA]

Quote: Vl Nemchinov

I mean, it’s not entirely clear to me why try to immediately lay TWO huge UDCs (new (!), Not worked out (!) Not finished projects) ?!

Apparently, to make out one of them on the slipway due to mass marriage. Fortunately, there is already experience, yes ...

[Grigory_45]

Quote: Winnie76

2030

more realistic - not earlier than 2030, knowing how long the ships have been building with us (especially since the UDC is a new topic for Russia)

[antivirus]

Will we storm Odessa and Hokkaido? Or Mongolia and Mozambique?
and spoons - ha ha ha more than small

[Igor Borisov_2]

As I understand it, if the bookmark is in May, then the UDC project is completely ready? Why is there no 3D model or drawing of the alleged appearance of UDC?

[Sky strike fighter]

The model can be seen here.
https://riafan.ru/1227782-istochniki-raskryli-parametry-pervykh-universalnykh-desantnykh-korablei-rf

According to another source, the displacement of the UDC will be greater than planned.

“The Navy issued a tactical and technical task for two universal landing ships, which they intend to lay in May 2020 at the Crimean Zaliv plant. Each will have a displacement of about 25 thousand tons and a length of about 220 meters, ”the source said.

[Starover_Z]

Quote: Sky Strike fighter

The model can be seen here.
https://riafan.ru/1227782-istochniki-raskryli-parametry-pervykh-universalnykh-desantnykh-korablei-rf

Ship models have been shown here more than once, but some have remained models. Maybe we should start stamping at least models for home assembly or all foreign models we will buy, support foreign manufacturers?

[Nemchinov Vl]

Quote: Sky Strike fighter

Navy issued tactical and technical task for two universal landing ships, which they intend to lay in May 2020 at the Crimean Zaliv plant.

the question is why immediately lay TWO huge ships, not worked out project ?! !!! Block the maximum production space (production capacity) of the "Zaliv" ?! If now the speed of construction and transfer to the fleet even "spent 22350", - 9-11 years old ?!

Quote: Gregory_45

Quote: Vl Nemchinov
it is not entirely clear why try to lay TWO huge UDCs at once (new (!), not worked out (!) not finished project) ?! Using the example of the same "Ivan Gren" (with "Peter Morgunov") ?! Lay down for now (this year) ONE such, and the second is the most worked out (for today) fr. 22350.1 (for the Black Sea Fleet) on the "Zaliv" !!! When it is at least 50% built (provided that the construction goes smoothly and according to plan), it will be possible to talk about laying the second one of the same ... !!!

reasonable remark. We build and test the first ship, reveal most of the jambs.

... Maybe first let the industry learn to build spent 4 (with VI 5) in 22350-5400 years, and only then it will be possible to talk aloud about ships (with VI 25000) and the timing of their construction ?! And not TWO AT ONCE !!!

[Starover_Z]

Quote: Igor Borisov_2

Why is there no 3D model or drawing of the alleged appearance of UDC?

Detailed drawings in color and with all sizes? Contact the first department, they will answer and give everything out.

[Tuzik]

here is the layout, but somehow it doesn't look 25ct

[Tuzik]

here is the layout, but somehow it doesn't look 25ct

[Boa kaa]

Quote: Tuzik

here is the layout, but somehow it doesn't look 25ct

Followed the link, looked at the layout. And here is what came out of this:
1. In the post we are talking about "20 or more HEAVY helicopters". But, excuse me! Ka-29, Ka-252 never belonged to heavy "Heavy" we have Mi-26 .. (medium-Mi-8), and the Ka line - light by our standards and classification. Therefore, gentlemen are clearly excited ...
2. The model shows weapons on the upper deck: an AK-176 gun mount and self-defense missile and artillery systems (Broadsword / Palma) ... Well, let's face it, it won't be enough! And this despite the fact that the ship will be in the roadstead in the area of ​​the landing point, because I did not see the ramp (the stem is classic - ship's, not "boxing" like that of the BDK)
3. UDC does not have a bow ramp, there is only a docking camera in the stern, which means that landing on the "KB" principle is possible only in the port, on the pier ... But what about heavy equipment?
(Raid unloading of tanks? - Original, sir! - Lieutenant Rzhevsky).
A natural question arises: Ivan Rogov (Rhino) - had both a docking camera and a ramp, Gren - had a ramp and a "gangway", And Sevastopol - only a docking camera? Well, how does "universality" get along with this, of course, in our, not imported version ...
4. Lapels are visible in the sides. In terms of size, they can accept fighters with personal weapons ... Surely they will push the technique "through the stern" ... Here is the question: - and medium tanks (MBT) will also go through them? ... will be? And what kind of pontoons / dkaVP they will be. If Chamois, then there are more than 2, perhaps, and will not fit. All that remains is to rely on the Octopus and 82A, which swim ... Maybe the PTSs will be supported ... For Ka ("poop") on the external sling no more than 1,0 tons will be able to drag, together with the aircraft of the assault group .. ...
But apparently the tactics of UDC application still have to be worked out, as we have so far such there were no ships.
Horns do not count.
AHA.

[Grigory_45]

Quote: Boa constrictor KAA

Ka-29, Ka-252 never belonged to the heavy "Heavy" we have Mi-26 .. (medium-Mi-8), and the Ka line - light by our standards and classification. Therefore, gentlemen are clearly excited ...

What to take from journalists or the press service? Never mind. All the same Ka-27/29 and Ka-52 will receive a residence permit

Quote: Boa constrictor KAA

The mock-up shows the weapons on the upper deck: the AK-176 gun mount and self-defense missile and artillery complexes (Broadsword / Palma) ... Well, frankly speaking, it will not be enough!

would you like to make a missile cruiser from UDC? The ship should have only weapons for self-defense, do not overload it with strike weapons (which, of course, obviously will not benefit from the ability to transport troops and cargo)

Quote: Boa constrictor KAA

UDC there is no bow ramp, there is only a dock camera in the stern, which means

means that the landing only with the help of amphibious assault and helicopters, as is now customary throughout the world.

[Boa kaa]

Quote: Gregory_45

would you like to make a missile cruiser from UDC?

Far from it! I'm still in my right mind: "sclerosis sometimes visits, insanity has not yet entered!"

Quote: Gregory_45

A ship should only have weapons for self-defense,

I agree to all 155%. BUT! 76 mm for such a displacement is not exactly enough. We need a "weaving", and if A-192 - so generally "pesTnya"! Then, well, there is already Carapace CM (Carapace-E). He will probably be better than the Dagger ... Moreover, he has already been mastered at 40 km range.

Quote: Gregory_45

no need to overload him with shock weapons

Why overload? But to place one of the Hurricane's vehicles on the upper deck is quite nothing for the fire support of the landing. Previously, this was practiced with the RZSO ... And the results seemed to be acceptable.
So, don’t tell me, my friend. This archie is important! Yes, sir. (V.I. Lenin)

Quote: Gregory_45

landing only with the help of amphibious means and helicopters, as is now customary throughout the world.

A colleague, but with a self-made drift along the surface of the sea on a floating landing technique? Have you ever met such a landing method? Tell me what? Not at all! To increase the rate of disembarkation, you’ll run through the water yourself, like on dry land, it’s not like going to the shore on the BeTeR.
Our "hydro-soldiers" do not like the sea very much (in the sense - "water"). I ask: - why? The answer struck right through: - "IT IS NOT POSSIBLE TO DROP!"
In our country, if a landing party has caught on to the shore, then the "heirs of Caesar Kunikov", like pythons who have caught a victim, will crush the PDO to death! For the Marines have nowhere to retreat - the water is behind!

[Grigory_45]

Quote: Boa constrictor KAA

Why overload? But to place one of the Hurricane's vehicles on the upper deck is quite nothing for the fire support of the landing.

as far as I understand the current concept of UDC application, fire support for the landing is assigned to escort ships and carrier-based combat helicopters. UDC itself should not be exposed to fire from PDO

[timokhin-aa]

This is not the model, this is a sawmill from the State Research and Development Center. Previously there was "Avalanche", then it was renamed "Surf" to mimic the concept of a successful DVD with the same name.

[antivirus]

Well, how does "universality" get along with this, of course, in our, not imported version ...

- Pilots and Marines are serving! at the same time!

[Boa kaa]

Quote: antivirus

- Pilots and Marines are serving! at the same time!

you Sailors forgot to add to your honest company

[ccsr]

Quote: Boa constrictor KAA

.Well, frankly, it will not be enough!

But this ship will never go alone to the area of ​​alleged fighting alone. I think that it was precisely because of the general operational tasks of the naval group that they decided to facilitate it with weapons, providing its protection to others.

Quote: Boa constrictor KAA

Here is the question: - and medium tanks (MBT) will also go through them?

Probably about medium tanks there can be no talk at all - if they planned, then armored personnel carriers, infantry fighting vehicles, BMDs and amphibious tanks, which they will probably develop over time.

Quote: Boa constrictor KAA

But apparently the tactics of UDC application still have to be worked out, as we haven’t had such ships yet.

That's for sure - there were none. But the military thought went to them for a long time, since they justified the need for the purchase of the Mistral (however, I think the sailors simply steamed them), i.e. the theory for them was summed up in advance, but now no one can say how it will be with practice.

[da Vinci]

"According to the source, the contact for the construction of the two UDCs will be concluded at the end of April this year, and the groundbreaking ceremony will take place in early May, it should be timed to coincide with the 75th anniversary of the Victory." Or maybe for the birthday of VVP? No-No - By the day of the taking of the Bastille !!! Or maybe one should be completed and actively used in so many years? What are you promoting, menaGers?

[sanek45744]

What are these useless comments for? Better not write anything than this nonsense.

[da Vinci]

Rave? Well then, by the 75th anniversary, open a bakery, or a newspaper booth, or a carousel on the playground. This show for the anniversary has always been a disaster in the USSR, when, for the sake of pomp and show, they made a complete g *** out of good ideas, when an object was handed over to the holiday, and then it was completed for several years. Remember today: "They have created an unparalleled rocket, a cosmodrome, an airplane, a tank, etc.", and for many years they have been "filed", and there is no end in sight ... If you think that jubilee window dressing is a blessing, then comments are really unnecessary.

[Antokha]

Listen, here we are talking about a bookmark, i.e. a solemn event of a symbolic sense, which cannot go wrong. And in the USSR, the delivery of objects and missile launches were timed to coincide with the dates. Is there really no difference?

[sanek45744]

What a cool blurry phrase to say. Bring at least one real object. And then without facts you look idle talk. And what is today, the day of publicity.

[da Vinci]

At least this story:
https://ru.wikipedia.org/wiki/%D0%9A%D0%B0%D1%82%D0%B0%D1%81%D1%82%D1%80%D0%BE%D1%84%D0%B0_%D0%BD%D0%B0_%D0%91%D0%B0%D0%B9%D0%BA%D0%BE%D0%BD%D1%83%D1%80%D0%B5_(1960)

[sanek45744]

Ahahah you yourself even read it to the end? Or just read the headlines. For me, Wikipedia is not an authoritative source, but it only says that the accident was due to gross safety violations. So you are just idle talk.

[da Vinci]

For example: Moscow Komsosolets or AIF?

[sanek45744]

What are these names?

[Doccor18]

100 billion rubles for 2 UDC - this is acceptable. Duration of 6 years, a little long, but given that these ships are the first for our industry, is also acceptable.
But here is the question of displacement.
Why 25 thousand tons? All world grandees make them from 35 to 45 kilotons. UDC should be able to transport
Marine Battalion Regiment for an unlimited distance and for a long time. It should also have on board, in my opinion, up to 24 landing, 8 attack and 2 rescue helicopters, and in the future 6-12 fighter jets.
25 kilotons will not fit all this.

[knn54]

-Standard displacement - the displacement of a fully equipped ship (vessel) with a crew, but without stocks of fuel, lubricants and drinking water in tanks.
- Full displacement - displacement equal to the standard displacement plus full reserves of fuel, lubricants, drinking water in tanks, cargo.
If 25 is standard, then full is not less than 35.
The question is, what kind of diesel will there be? Here, the power of the diesel engine will be at least 16 MW.

[zadorin1974]

Alexander is more modest, more modest)))))) We have been filing "Grena" for more than 11 years. And you here practically want "Roosevilt". Let's be realistic and "we'll see" - how it will be in terms of time and quality, but I'm pretty sure that both the amount, and the timing, and the project itself will be tailored throughout the construction period.

[sanek45744]

Well, at the expense of Gren, everyone knows what the essence of delaying the construction time is, so this example is not in comparison.

[zadorin1974]

And I don't know Sasha. I take balalaika from the mass media))))) Well, I'm such a collective farmer (I plant potatoes). Am I wrong about something? And about "Gren". First, the best BDK on needles (Gorbachev on the Hangman !!!!!) then we start giving birth to SOMETHING.

[Grigory_45]

Quote: Doccor18

Dates of 6 years, a little protracted

I'm afraid this is a very optimistic timeline. How many Ivan Gren were built, which can not be compared with the UDC? What about frigates? Moreover, as you rightly noted, the UDC for Russia is the first ships of this kind

Quote: Doccor18

100 billion rubles for 2 UDC - this is acceptable

no matter how the price grows "in the process". and, so I believe, this is the cost of ships without weapons and amphibious equipment (landing craft and air wing)

Quote: Doccor18

Why 25 thousand tons? All world grandees make them from 35 to 45 kilotons. UDC should be able to transport

because it’s cheaper. We can not yet chase such UDC as Juan Carlos or America. Something like Mistral would build

Quote: Doccor18

and in the future, 6-12 fighters of GDP

we have no VTOL, even in the long term. All conversations for the Yak-201 and others remained conversations.

[Boa kaa]

Quote: Doccor18

In my opinion, it should have on board up to 24 landing, 8 attack and 2 rescue helicopters, and in the future, 6-12 fighter jets of GDP.

On this occasion, I remembered the verses of the classic: - "You cannot harness a horse and a quivering doe in one cart. I forgot myself carelessly: now I pay tribute to madness" ... But you see not Pushkin ... And certainly not an "aircraft carrier". Therefore, you can not even imagine what it means to organize VTOL and landing helicopter flights from the same deck! Their basing and maintenance ...
Normal life and rest of the pilots! Their medical care ...
Decks need a separate carrier! And if you use UDC, then without landing, like a small AVM. In this case, the deck needs to be converted for VTOL flights with a heat-resistant coating. And this, together with the sealant, is not even very cheap ... So, let's wait a bit ...
(Wait a bit, and you will rest! - Goethe's night song.)

[Doccor18]

UDC like Wosp and America have on board both helicopters and tiltrotoplanes, and F35B fighter planes, and 1800 marines and crew, and everything fits and works.

[Boa kaa]

Quote: Doccor18

UDC type Wosp and America have on board and helicopters and tiltrotoplanes, and F35B fighter,

It was such, practiced flights from the UDC deck. But not in a joint landing operation, but as a light AVM. This is a slightly different use of UDC.

[ccsr]

Quote: Boa constrictor KAA

But not in a joint landing operation, but as a light AVM. This is a slightly different use of UDC.

So maybe our naval commanders are planning something similar and try to check the possibility of using these ships for vertical take-off and landing aircraft. We had something similar already in the Soviet era, I think it will be taken into account.

[Boa kaa]

The use of VTOL aircraft is less justified if take-off is in an airplane and the landing is vertical. If everything is vertical, then 50% of the fuel goes to take-off and landing, respectively, the radius. And you won’t get much payload during vertical take-off - combat effectiveness. Therefore, the F-35B in the British start from the springboard, in the Yankees - with a short mileage ...
And the second one. If the vertical line, then you need a heat-resistant coating of the deck (minimum - launching sites). This makes the UDC project more expensive. Whether our naval commanders would agree to this is a question.
Best regards,

[ccsr]

Quote: Boa constrictor KAA

Whether our naval commanders would agree to this is a question.

I agree that the issue is complex, you will not solve it in a hurry. But maybe our generals are thinking something like convertiplanes, although this is all at the level of assumptions, and you can guess as much as you like.

[Boa kaa]

As for VTOL, I know for sure that they work. But I didn’t hear about convertiplanes.
PS In the post above - a proviso: not "from the run", but "from the run". For - mileage - when landing.
Excuse me, panov, a little slip of the tongue. Yeah

[Alexander S.]

to 32mu will be built .. with a price of 180 billion. They do not know how to build ships with us.

[g_ae]

I apologize in advance for the stupidity, but this photo from rusty metal structures (or is it not rust?), What’s it for?

[Graz]

this primer is likely the same was painted at the beginning of the FNPP Academician Lomonosov

[alexmach]

what is she for?

To shipbuilding?
Not rusty but primed with red paint in my opinion

[g_ae]

Well I do not know. It may be primed, but on the Internet, photos of grounded ships on slipways are somehow more photogenic. Already a photo for the article could be picked up more beautifully. Anyway, it has nothing to do with the article. Again, I apologize as a person infinitely far from shipbuilding.

[Hagalaz]

I do not presume to assert, but I would say that this is all rust. Visible lightening along the welds. And the primer looks more red. Why is someone here scared of rust, I don’t know. Then primed and all business then.

[Antokha]

It scares NOT shipbuilders, but there are many of us here. We understand that we will paint it later, but I want to see something like assembling cars. And it seems as if everything has already rotted.

[Hagalaz]

In contrast to the automotive industry, there is probably no way to store such volumes of metal under the roof.

[Grigory_45]

Quote: Anton

but I want to see something like assembling cars. And it seems as if everything has already rotted.

ship hulls are welded. Even if it is assembled from sections - they are still welded. What is the point of painting if they cook?
At a car, neither the door nor the hood and trunk lid are welded)

[Grigory_45]

Quote: g_ae

but this photo is from rusty metal structures (or is it not rust?)

it's soil

[g_ae]

Here on the first two, even I see that soil. What am I leading to? If the photo for the article is designed to arouse pride in Russian shipbuilding, then here is clearly a blank shot. Something more thoroughly needed. Moreover, we are talking about ships that will only be built (maybe), and not already under construction.

[petrol cutter]

I allow myself to intervene in the discussion, like shipbuilding.
Metal (now for ship / ship steel) is being talked about - it comes to the shipyard already primed. It happens - gray, sometimes - red.
Further, where is how ... According to modern methods, the ship is shotgun before painting. And there already the color of the soil does not matter. It becomes- dull steel. In poor enterprises, they stupidly pass with a brush and paint, what turned out (I do not recommend doing so), the quality of the paintwork is nothing. I will say more, this leads to a huge cost overrun and free labor brigade painter. By repainting what you dyed on lovely ladies! ..

[g_ae]

Wildly sorry, but still in the photo under the heading is it a primer or rust? And is this normal or not? I just want to understand for myself (that's hooked). Thanks in advance.

[petrol cutter]

This is not rust. This is red soil.
Such a picture is everywhere. This is normal! As one friend of mine says.

[Chaldon48]

Move to the right if too much money flies to the left, the coronavirus has nothing to do with it.

[mvg]

More expensive Mistral, with similar parameters. Yes, and in the prices of 2020, and even 2 times longer ... Yeah, we can. Even the vang is uninteresting.

[30143]

And I have a question. When the Mistral was built, they declared that there was documentation and built the stern themselves. So again, work in the trash? And from scratch?
I don’t like names like Nakhimov. Not happy ...
It seems that they will never do, there are force majeure ...

[Piramidon]

Quote: 30143

there are force majeure ...

Eternal coronavirus?

[KrolikZanuda]

Where to lay will be the question. Dry dock Wutka and Sviyaga still occupy.

[Name Surname]

Of course, I am far from shipbuilding, but as the postponements for the second pair of modified "Grens", which were laid without a project, were obvious, it is not worth waiting for these by 2030.
What is the problem first to make a project, and then build? Or in our country everything will always be in one place, but by the memorable date, is it !?

[Kaetani]

Comrades, we will always have time to quarrel on the amounts, terms and shortcomings. Let's just be glad that we are building our UDC at our shipyard in our Crimea.
It sometimes seems to me that here we begin to remind the youth of today (((It’s good of course that we in the good sense of the word are used to the good. But just remember 10-11. If this news would be there, everyone would beat the drums.
God grant that the shipyards are updated during construction. Ships were finished even with a file. Even with a shift to the right. Even for a year or a half. But the main thing is to be the Russian fleet. Maybe that sounds a little pathetic. But I just enjoy everyday life.

[Hog]

I hope they will be built faster than Ivan Gren.

[Ratmir_Ryazan]

UDC is the first step in a new aircraft carrier.

25 tons of 000 helicopters for each serious power.

[ccsr]

Quote: Ratmir_Ryazan

UDC is the first step in a new aircraft carrier.

Not at all a fact. If you carefully look at the discussions among the top military leaders of the country, it seems that the construction of aircraft carriers has been postponed for an indefinite period, and now is not up to them.

[Ratmir_Ryazan]

it seems that the construction of aircraft carriers has been postponed indefinitely, and now is not up to them.

This is logical, why should the air be shaken about aircraft carriers, if the destroyers and UDC have not done yet, but there are also Storm and Lomantin projects for the future. Probably detailed design work is already underway.

[Connor MacLeod]

It would be better, instead of UDC, simply a helicopter carrier based on Ivan Gren (10000 tons, 15 helicopters, a company of special forces), and in addition to it. Simpler, cheaper, faster ...

[timokhin-aa]

Strange news. What, have they already decided on the GEM for them, or what? Will they stick the MA7? Is it suitable for a mega landing barge?
And what kind of lifts will there be for the helicopter? The Ka-29 is not being produced, there is no new helicopter, what the dimensions of the Lamprey will be, they do not even know in Kamov, when it will be too. In addition, there is an incompletely localized project, there is an import.
We also do not have a marine infantry fighting vehicle for over-horizon landing.
So how could UDC be designed with all this?
But 100 yards.
Plus the ZPKB project.
And it never designed such large ships.
Plus, the construction in the Gulf, and he even can’t build an RTO himself.
Plus, there seems to be a place reserved for container modules, and this is hello hundreds of tons of displacement out of the blue. The latter is true at the level of rumors and not the fact that it will be, but in the picture from ZPKB something similar to a ship is stuck.
But for all that, we already know the price tag - 1/4 of an aircraft carrier for at least 25 aircraft. A pair of UDC - 1/2 aircraft carrier.
Everything is somehow muddy with these UDC.
This project causes a heavy feeling, to be honest.

[petrol cutter]

Chegoy, he can't build an MRK? Moreover, Zelenodolsk supervises it as far as I know. And they spar there - what a light! If we built three on the "Sea" ... It’s even a shame for the "Bay".
And for dviglo- this is for you questions. You are one of the main professionals on the site in this topic (I do not exaggerate or joke). I personally listen to your opinion.
So tell the general public what motors are planned for installation and whether they are available.

[timokhin-aa]

So there is no verified information on the power plant yet, that’s the question.
As for the Gulf, I want to see at least the RTOs, which they will hand over completely themselves, then we will discuss the likelihood of their successful construction of the UDC.

[petrol cutter]

You understand that without engines no ship will hand over the shipyard.
Well, he / she can’t pass it. We give you the case. With the maximum configuration ... What is possible, worth., What is impossible, well, you can’t put it in any way ...
Moreover, it is not known what to put.

[timokhin-aa]

Well, if that were the only problem ...

Okay, we won’t argue, wait, I personally have a lot of fears in these UDC.

[petrol cutter]

In this place - more details please. What is bothering ?! . It is shipbuilding that is interested in comments. Besides jokes.

[timokhin-aa]

I just don’t believe that the Gulf has the power to quickly and easily launch such a project, in my opinion the plant has not yet come to life after the Ukrainian period in its history, and I doubt that the ZPB will be able to design such a ship without jambs, they have no experience.
Maybe I'm wrong, time will tell.

[petrol cutter]

I agree. I will say more, you are right. What a sin to hide!
Certainly "Zaliv" will not give a ready ship to the "mountain". No one will give it out without motors.1

[ccsr]

Quote: timokhin-aa

Strange news. What, have they already decided on the GEM for them, or what? Will they stick the MA7? Is it suitable for a mega landing barge?
And what kind of lifts will there be for the helicopter? The Ka-29 is not being produced, there is no new helicopter, what the dimensions of the Lamprey will be, they do not even know in Kamov, when it will be too. In addition, there is an incompletely localized project, there is an import.
We also do not have a marine infantry fighting vehicle for over-horizon landing.
So how could UDC be designed with all this?

And in Soviet times, complex weapons systems were often designed, when not all of its components were adopted yet and were mass-produced. And it was a normal pact so that a new ship (missile system, aircraft, air defense systems, etc.) by the time of adoption, consisted of the latest models of equipment and weapons, and it did not require modernization at least several years. That is why they set such a period for the construction of these UDCs so that in the event of a delay in the production of helicopters or power plants, for example, the final deadline for putting them into operation would not be significantly shifted. At least I explain to myself how the seemingly long time of their production is an objective reality, and there is no getting away from it. And in the West they also face this, and they have missed deadlines, so you shouldn't sprinkle ashes on your head. But there is one more aspect that will delay the commissioning of these ships, unless now they begin to train personnel for service on them, and especially not even sailors, but pilots, technicians and infantrymen. As life shows, even the most modern complex remains unreadable for a long time due to the fact that people are simply not taught to operate it correctly, and problems begin where they were not expected. I myself witnessed this when the newest "Taran" complex entered the troops, and the intelligence battalions did not have specialists capable of working on it, tk. this required special training, and they stood in parks and were afraid to approach them. In general, I did not want the mistakes of the past to be repeated, and by the time of acceptance the ships were at least provided with crews who had undergone appropriate training and knew how to use all the capabilities of these ships. I hope those who ordered these ships had an idea of ​​network planning and took everything into account in advance ...

[Yuriy Malyshko]

Well, I don’t understand why the Russian Navy needs these defenseless troughs? And where are they going to land the landing? And what will these ships do in the day to day fleet service? Veterans still with nostalgia and great respect remember the Project 1123 anti-submarine cruisers - this is the basis for a truly versatile ship!

[Badger]

You will turn to the General Staff as a great specialist, I will definitely listen and accept your recommendations for unconditional execution!

[timokhin-aa]

Veterans remember these ships with horror, especially those who served on them.

[川 建国]

Turning to the Far East, China’s first landing ship burned out this morning.

[petrol cutter]

Smoked imprudently?!. And I warned you! ..
If, in addition to jokes, judging by the photo, many sorrows happened at the ship repair service now however

[Badger]

Our answer to Chamberlain.

[Yuriy Malyshko]

Quote: Badger

You will turn to the General Staff as a great specialist, I will definitely listen and accept your recommendations for unconditional execution!

In the General Staff, apart from "jackets" (effective managers) and "very talented" women, you can hardly find anyone.