Then, however, comes the understanding that we are once again, and you can safely disperse.
As an example, here's a headline from TASS: "Varan" goes hunting. A new class of naval equipment is being created in Russia ".
Let's put it this way: the first half of the title simply and uncomplicatedly contradicts the second. And immediately the intrigue: this is how they create a new class of technology or this, excuse me, "Varan" is ALREADY out on the hunt and will soon show everyone?
Calm and only calm, nobody goes anywhere. And nobody creates anything. The main thing here is to raise the wave. As it was with the "Leader", "Storm" and other "Poseidons".
The presence of a certain project in the bowels of the Nevsky Design Bureau is just a few computer drawings of a very dubious nature. I don’t want to say anything, but it’s enough to look at the drawing where the bump stop was attached. And you don't have to be a literate person in the sea and aviation affairs to figure out that no one is going anywhere.
However, we will leave the conclusions at the end of the material, and first ask the questions "why?" and "who benefits?" Because everything depends on the answers to these questions.
Assault landing ships as a class have existed for a long time. It's just that over the past 50 years, they have turned from purely amphibious ships into independent combat units capable of solving a variety of tasks. This includes the transfer of troops, and patrolling areas, and aviation support for troops on the coast and other ships in the formations.
And yes, of course, the "flag demonstration." How could it be without it.
In general, an ordinary landing barge has evolved very decently into a large ship with great capabilities. Significantly larger than that of a conventional amphibious assault ship.
The class received recognition, today UDCs are in service with many countries. It is clear that the leaders here are the United States, which has as many as 13 ships of three types, "America", "Wasp" and "Tarawa".
In Japan 4, two "Izumo" and "Hyuga".
In South Korea - 2, Tokushima and Maro classes.
Australia has 2 Canberras.
In Turkey - 1, "Anadolu".
There are 3 Mistrals in France and 2 more in Egypt.
And so on.
Do we need such a class of ships in general and, if so, why?
At first glance, the Kurils are immediately drawn in the Far East. This scandalously controversial point is and will remain so forever, because the Japanese will not abandon their claims, and we (most likely, but we cannot be sure of anything in our country, unfortunately) will not give up the islands.
And here is drawn a ship for support and delivery of cargo and reinforcements with an air group capable of solving some kind of combat missions, such as supporting its troops on the shore.
Yes, America-type UDCs are capable of this, since 22 F-35Vs are powerful. This is a wing to be reckoned with anyway.
So, the Americans embodied the idea of a universal UDC in all its glory and showed it to the whole world. We also made an attempt to acquire such ships by purchasing them from France. Everyone knows how it ended. The Mistrals are in Egypt, but we have holes ... vague prospects.
However, apparently, the idea did not die out and someone really wants to build such ships in Russia.
We think how much they are needed at all. Considering that the UDC is precisely an assault landing ship, that is, a ship of an attacking plan, and, moreover, with almost no possibility of double interpretation. Even an aircraft carrier can be viewed in a defensive concept as an airfield pushed forward from the lines from which planes can take off to meet the enemy on the approaches to their borders.
And the UDC is not defense. This is a landing assault supported by airplanes or helicopters. Yes, UDC can defend something, the question is what and where. It is clear what the American UDC will defend. Democracy around the world. Likewise, it is difficult to imagine what the French ships will be doing in their territorial waters.
As for the Japanese and the Chinese, it is simply better to remain silent, there are continuous territorial disputes of a regional nature. And the UDC of project 075, hanging out near the Spratly Islands - this is understandable.
The presence of Russian UDCs near the Kuriles also seems to be justified. However, if you look closely at the potential adversary who will oppose them, it becomes clear that the Japanese destroyers-helicopter carriers and missile destroyers will simply demolish everything in their path. And in fact, today the Pacific Fleet cannot really oppose anything except submarines to the Japanese the fleet.
Well, yes, one day the "Admiral Nakhimov" will come out of repair, which ... Who alone is not a warrior in the field. The crowd stammered, in this the Japanese are strong and they have a lot of ships.
No options? Not at all. The Kuril problem “if something happens” is perfectly solved from the ground airfields of Kamchatka and South Sakhalin. And planes can take most of all and board, and fly a little. 300-400 km from Sakhalin to the southern islands and the same amount from Kamchatka to the northern part. Yes, and there are airfields on the Kuril Islands ...
Deliver reinforcements? Yes, this is the right thing to do. But for this, simply landing ships are more suitable, which they take more and carry on. Cover? Yes, from the same airfields and the same frigates / corvettes.
And yes, coastal complexes like the Bala are both cheaper and more effective. And as an additional means of stimulation, more than one "Buyan-M" or "Dagestan" with the same "Calibers" on board can be quiet in the shores cut by coves.
And - welcome, as they say. Whoever comes to us with what, he will get away with it.
And the Su-34s taking off from the airfield to Iturup will be much more effective than the Su-33s. The difference between a fighter and a fighter-bomber, I hope, is not worth explaining. And we will not talk about the fact that we will be able to take off from the deck of the UDC, because it is simply ridiculous.
And the main thing. UDC is a ship that will still require protection. If we take as an example that "Mistral", that "America", yes, they are able to fight off a couple of planes. But if you take them seriously - alas, everything will become sad. For example, if the Tu-95 seriously decides to offend the boat with all available ...
So if we seriously talk about the creation of Russian UDCs, then first of all it is necessary to consider the question of who will protect them. That is, the construction of a sufficient number of frigates and corvettes capable of providing air defense and anti-aircraft defense for the UDC.
And this task seems to be the top priority in the creation of the fleet of tomorrow.
However, we still have nothing more than a computer drawing of the UDC. For, I will quote TASS, "Domestic shipbuilders are working on the possibility of creating a universal maritime complex and a line of projects on a unified platform."
Do you understand? They are working on the OPPORTUNITY of creation. That is, the question is asked to the drawing: "We need this?" And if the answer is yes from the naval command, then the work will begin.
The specialists of the Nevsky PKB say very interesting things. UDC "Varan" is a unified platform, that is, several variants can be created on the basis of the ship. Actually, that is the topic, because of which they paid money for those same "Mistrals".
If you believe the representatives of the "Nevsky PKB" (why not believe it?), Then on the basis of the "Varan" you can create several types of ships. Light aircraft carrier, UDC, transport and hospital ship and support ship.
Perhaps - even in the version for the Arctic, with a reinforced hull.
Since the "Nevskoe PKB" has existed since 1931 and during this time such ships as aircraft-carrying cruisers of project 1123 ("Moscow" and "Kiev"), aircraft-carrying cruisers of project 1143 ("Admiral Kuznetsov" and "Vikramaditya "), BDK type 1171" Tapir "and 1174" Rhino "(" Ivan Rogov "), and" Vikramaditya "and" Vikrant "were also painted for the Indians within the walls of this bureau.
That is, they can.
A universal platform, a modular ship - all this has long been tormenting the brains of many fleets of the world. Such a good candy, whatever one may say. UMK - a universal maritime complex - is the idea of the day of tomorrow. But the UDC was once something strange and incomprehensible ...
As a matter of fact, the idea of the teaching materials in itself as presented by the St. Petersburg designers is good. And, perhaps, it should be carefully considered in terms of the need for the Russian fleet.
Alas, unfortunately, our media immediately rushed to discuss and compare. To what extent "Varan", which does not yet exist even on paper, is better than "America", which quite serves itself in the American navy and is being built in a series that we can only dream of.
Today it has become very fashionable to fight with numbers on paper. And therefore, comparisons of "Varana" with "America" and "Type 075" immediately began.
"There are no direct foreign analogues of Varan at the moment - the world's largest shipbuilding companies produce multipurpose UDCs designed to perform a number of tasks, but there are no universal complexes based on a single platform and made using unified components" (TASS) ...
The impression is that "Varan" is already floundering on the wave. The ship is not even in the project, the representatives of the "Nevsky PKB" themselves say openly that"Varan" as a whole is at the level of the preliminary design, and some of the main parts are at the stage of preliminary design. "General arrangement diagrams, schematic diagrams of the main power plant and the electric power system of the ship have been developed, a three-dimensional model of the hull has been created".
But - already, as usual, they recorded it in "unparalleled in the world." Apparently, she won't even swim without it.
But almost no one mentioned that the design was carried out by the Bureau employees as an internal initiative. And the development of the project of the CMD has not yet cost the state a penny.
It is worth considering here. And to draw appropriate conclusions on the topic of whether it is necessary to spend money and time on this project. And it is desirable to solve this as soon as possible, until the designers of the Nevsky PKB really spent a lot of time on a project that may not be needed by anyone.
There are some doubts, you know.
Those colleagues that have analogues in the world, for the most part, carry helicopters, but those that are aircraft carriers are "sharpened" for the F-35B. The plane, let's say, is peculiar, but what can we oppose? All the same "modern" MiG-29K?
It is not equal. Especially considering the fact that our opponents in this race have gone far, and for each of our aircraft carriers they have eleven. And it will be approximately the same with the UDC. This means that more modern sea-based aircraft are needed, which can actually withstand the quality of the number of the same F-35B from the enemy.
And all this talk about the equipment by means of "promising aircraft, including vertical takeoff and landing, to ensure a balance and efficiency of use, corresponding to modern and promising foreign aircraft-carrying systems" (press service of "Nevsky PKB") - this is really a conversation about what.
Yes, a promising ship, which is on paper, it can be equipped with promising aircraft, which are not even on paper.
But if we talk about the fact that such a ship will be needed tomorrow ...
This is where I want to say: "More business, less talk." And then the prospect will become a reality, embodied in metal, and not another project on which you can just earn a little extra money.
Making a decision on the need for a ship of this class for the fleet, then financing the development, taking into account the need to have everything necessary for such ships in the fleet, from aircraft to escort ships - and, in fact, work.
Everything can be built if you know why and for what. The main thing is understanding the need.