"Will become a powerful missile ship": the Commander of the Northern Fleet spoke about the TARKR "Admiral Nakhimov"

The nuclear-powered missile cruiser "Admiral Nakhimov", which has undergone modernization, will become the most powerful ship with missile weapons, but the emphasis is on Project 22350 frigates. fleet Admiral Alexander Moiseev in an interview with the newspaper "A red star".

According to the Commander of the Northern Fleet, after a major overhaul and modernization of the TARKR "Admiral Nakhimov" will become the most powerful ship armed with modern missiles. According to available data, the cruiser will have 80 UKSK cells, 92 (probably) mines of the S-300FM air defense missile system and 20 533-mm torpedoes or PLUR "Waterfall", i.e. the ammunition load of the TARKR will be 192 cruise and anti-ship missiles, missiles and PLUR.

But in the medium term, the basis of the ships in the far sea zone will be the frigates of Project 22350. The Northern Fleet expects the third ship of this project, Admiral Golovko, to join the fleet.

Currently, the Northern Fleet includes the lead and first serial frigates of Project 22350 "Admiral Gorshkov" and "Admiral Kasatonov", respectively.

TARKR "Admiral Nakhimov" has been under repair at Sevmash since 1999, but work on the ship began only in 2013. According to the plans of the military, the cruiser should return to the combat composition of the fleet in late 2022 - early 2023. Immediately after the completion of work on the "Admiral Nakhimov", the flagship of the Northern Fleet, the same type of heavy nuclear cruiser "Peter the Great", will stand up for modernization and overhaul. At least there are already plans to repair the only Orlan in service.

Comments

[mark1]

To be honest, 80 UKSK cells are not enough for such a giant, 92 S-300 missiles are the same small and I doubt that they will be in the cells, it looks like the good old drums have been preserved (since the number has practically not changed since the times). But if they were still abandoned, then the BC could be increased by 1,5 times + to consider the possibility of placing "Caliber" in these cells. And where are the lasers-shmazers (on a nuclear-powered ship, then God himself commanded), Gaussian railguns and other high-techs?
Well, maybe we will see something at the end of the modernization, we like to obscure something. And so it turns out the ship of yesterday (but expensive!)

[Doccor18]

Quote: mark1

And so it turns out the ship of yesterday (but expensive!)

As a raider, he is hopeless, because "one in the field is not a warrior" ...
As support for a nuclear aircraft carrier, it would be very useful, but ... it is not.
And in the conditions of a catastrophic shortage of ocean-class warships, any modernization can be justified, especially since at a venerable age, the ship was not really used much.

[mark1]

Quote: Doccor18

any modernization can be justified,

I do not like when something is done without a spark, inventions and fantasies .. but expensive and depressing.

[Doccor18]

Quote: mark1

I do not like when something is done without a spark, inventions and fantasies .. but expensive and depressing.

And what is being done with "sparkle and imagination" now? Only two things come to mind: 1. Mastering the budget. 2. Construction of mansions / palaces / residences ... This is where genuine interest and sparkling imagination are.
In all other respects - "everything is expensive and depressing" ...

[Andrei from Chelyabinsk]

Quote: mark1

To be honest, 80 UKSK cells are not enough for such a giant, 92 S-300 missiles are the same small and I doubt that they will be in the cells, it looks like the good old drums have been preserved (

This is not enough, it is quite enough. And the drums will of course be preserved.
You do not equate Nakhimov with Arlie Burkes and Ticonderogs - the UKSK accepts much heavier missiles than the Mk41, so the American and Russian cells are two big differences

[mark1]

Quote: Andrey from Chelyabinsk

This is not a little, it is quite enough.

Enough for what? The ship, as I understand it, is not a one-time (one salvo) unlike the same Atlanteans, it will operate almost autonomously (due to its uniqueness and small number of ship personnel), unlike the same Arlie Berks. Here, the comparison is not correct, Nakhimov in terms of functionality should approach the arsenal (moreover, autonomous) And the drums are also bad because the reaction time increases.

[Andrei from Chelyabinsk]

Quote: mark1

Enough for what? The ship, as I understand it, is not one-time (one salvo), it will act almost autonomously

Sorry, but, apparently, you are wrong in both statements. The ship - exactly one salvo, which he will release either from the position of tracking the AUS (i.e., it will accompany the AUS in peacetime) or if in wartime the commander manages to bring the cruiser to the launch line of the anti-ship missile system. In either case, it will be destroyed (the chances of leaving after a successful missile attack are at least, there are minuscule chances to reach the line).
It will act autonomously only on the base station, in other cases, most likely, it will be accompanied.

Quote: mark1

And drums are also bad because they increase the reaction time.

Nah :), Americans cannot fire a salvo from the UVP, they fire sequentially at minimal intervals. The same is possible for the S-300 - the rocket is ready for launch, followed by the next drum, etc., while the fired person is preparing for the next shot.

[mark1]

Quote: Andrey from Chelyabinsk

The ship is exactly one salvo,

No-a) The presence of structural protection does not imply disposability, and nuclear power plant is, in this case, the height of waste at all.
The reaction time for Americans is 1-2 seconds, we have 3-5, we will leave the weight and dimensions outside the brackets.

[Andrei from Chelyabinsk]

Quote: mark1

No-a) Structural protection does not imply disposability

These are not related things :) Structural protection, coupled with a very powerful air defense / missile defense (missile defense - in terms of confronting anti-ship missiles, of course) gives additional chances to live enough time for a full missile salvo from the position of combat tracking, inflicted under enemy attack, for example.

Quote: mark1

nuclear power plant is, in this case, the height of waste.

Not "the height of waste", but an urgent need to accompany the same nuclear AB of the US Navy

Quote: mark1

The reaction time for Americans is 1-2 seconds, we have 3-5

Sorry, I can't imagine what you are talking about now. In the event of an air hazard, a general-purpose radar will see it, then they will take it to escort the fire control radar, and by this time that the American UVP, that our "drums" will be ready for battle.

[mark1]

Quote: Andrey from Chelyabinsk

These are not related things :)

What are you !? -You also say that the battleship is quite disposable. Although if we assume that in a general battle he can be drowned from the first volley, then at least I understand your logic

Quote: Andrey from Chelyabinsk

Not "the height of waste", but an urgent need to accompany the same nuclear AB of the US Navy

Oh-ho-ho !!! Yes, they were perfectly accompanied at one time by ships with conventional propulsion systems. Eagles were originally created as PLO ships in the far zone (this is what the nuclear power plant was laid for), but during the design process, everything that could be crammed was crammed into them. But back to our time ... How many US Navy AUG are you going to accompany our heroic "Nakhimov" at the same time?

Quote: Andrey from Chelyabinsk

Sorry, I can't imagine what you are talking about now.

As Stanislavsky used to say - I don’t believe!
All this is just an attempt to pull what you want by the ears into reality. Sorry.

[Andrei from Chelyabinsk]

Quote: mark1

What are you !? -You also say that the battleship is quite disposable.

The battleship and the TARKR in terms of tactics of use have absolutely nothing in common with each other, so their comparison is completely incorrect.

Quote: mark1

Oh-ho-ho !!! Yes, they were perfectly accompanied at one time by ships with conventional propulsion systems.

In only one case - when they did not set themselves the task of separating from the tracking forces.

Quote: mark1

How many US Navy AUG are you going to accompany our heroic "Nakhimov" at the same time?

One AUG, or at most one AUS, i.e. 2 AUG.

Quote: mark1

As Stanislavsky used to say - I don’t believe!

What exactly do not you believe? :)))

Quote: mark1

All this is just an attempt to pull what you want by the ears into reality. Sorry.

I'm just telling you how it really is. You are free in your fantasies - we have a free country :)

[mark1]

Quote: Andrey from Chelyabinsk

The battleship and the TARKR have absolutely nothing in common with each other in terms of tactics.

The presence of armor protection, as a solution to the problem of ensuring maximum survivability to ensure, in turn, the conduct of combat with any enemy forces and the establishment of domination at sea - that's what they have in common.

Quote: Andrey from Chelyabinsk

In only one case - when they did not set themselves the task of separating from the tracking forces.

Duck, after all, these are not SSBNs, beyond the place where their presence is not desirable, there is no need to follow.

Quote: Andrey from Chelyabinsk

One AUG, or at most one AUS, i.e. 2 AUG.

Ie. so that the crew does not rest from idleness - I do not see any other meaning in view of the above.

Quote: Andrey from Chelyabinsk

I'm just telling you how it really is. You are free in your fantasies - we have a free country :)

Well, this is the answer in the style of -d (good man). Accepted - exchanged ... Well, I don't believe what, I think you know very well.

[Andrei from Chelyabinsk]

Quote: mark1

The presence of armor protection, as a solution to the problem of ensuring maximum survivability to ensure, in turn, the conduct of a battle with any enemy forces and the establishment of domination at sea - that's what they have in common

You see, ships of various classes had armor protection. For example, a number of gunboats, monitors and armored boats. It was also possessed by medieval knights, armored trains and tanks.
Thus, it is very easy to notice that the presence of this feature in ships (and not only ships) is in no way system-forming - ships that possess it (and not only ships) can have completely different tasks. Therefore, it is not worth drawing parallels between them.
With reference to your analogy, battleships were created to gain supremacy at sea in a general battle, in which their main rival was enemy LK, that is, ships of the same class. For the TARKR, fighting against its own class is deeply secondary.

Quote: mark1

Duck, after all, these are not SSBNs, beyond the place where their presence is not desirable, there is no need to follow.

As it is. You are either ready to destroy the AV at the beginning of hostilities, or not. If not, then the whole BS goes down the drain.
Quite simply, a simple and primitive example. Here AUG hangs out, say, in Norwegian, in the southwestern part of it. You "herd" her TARKR. A day before the start of the attack, AB gives its 30+ nodes and leaves in an unknown direction. What will you do? :) It is useless for the frigate to run after him - it will burn fuel at such a speed and will dangle in the ocean to no avail. And AB, breaking away from the "control", can return, and, acting from several hundred kilometers, in an hour "H" will help its escort to "disassemble" our ships on the BS.
TARKR, on the other hand, can follow AB without problems, and such tactics simply lose their meaning.

Quote: mark1

Ie. so that the crew does not rest from idleness - I do not see any other meaning in view of the above.

Are you familiar with BS tactics? The admirals of the USSR saw a lot in it. If you do not see, are you sure that the reason for this is your innocence? :)

Quote: mark1

Well, this is an answer in the style of -d (good man).

I cannot essentially object to sentences like

Quote: mark1

As Stanislavsky used to say - I don’t believe!

Religious issues are sacred to me

[mark1]

The history of the development of the booking of ships in this case is a verbiage:
Example with the Norwegian Sea complete nonsense that absolutely does not require the participation of an atomic cruiser. He will come back! And everyone knows this - the point of attack is here! And there are many means of tracking the AUG, the cruiser is not needed for this.

Quote: Andrey from Chelyabinsk

Are you familiar with BS tactics? The admirals of the USSR saw a great deal in it.

That's when we will "fatten" like admirals of the USSR, then this tactic will (possibly) make sense

Quote: Andrey from Chelyabinsk

Religious issues are sacred to me

Well, at least in something we agree on views

[Andrei from Chelyabinsk]

Quote: mark1

The history of the development of the booking of ships in this case is a verbiage

Arguments ended, rudeness began. How familiar ...

Quote: mark1

The example with the Norwegian Sea is complete nonsense, absolutely not requiring the participation of a nuclear-powered cruiser.

Well, tell us how everything will really be.

Quote: mark1

He will come back! And everyone knows this - the point of attack is here!

He will return ... to the moment when "at the point of attack" there is no one who can interfere with him.

Quote: mark1

And there are a lot of tracking tools for the AUG

The means of tracking the AUG are criminally small.

[Mountain shooter]

Powerful ship. It is a pity that there are few of them left. With unlimited cruising range.

[sivuch]

There is no unlimited range. If there are no restrictions on fuel, then there are reserves of food, drinking water (perhaps some of the technical - for cooling all kinds of devices and products). Watermakers are also used, but not for all needs, more for dryy decks.

[Sergey Obraztsov]

Not a specialist, but it seems like project 22350 is the least likely to be scolded on this resource. Of course, I would very much like to see at least in the plans warships of a larger displacement, and not utopian Wishlist about a bunch of aircraft carriers. And about Nakhimov ... I'm already tired of this talking shop, to be honest. As soon as he enters the fleet and receives the first assignment, then I will be happy.

[knn54]

ANY ship, like any technique, can be used wisely, or without ...

[Vladimir_2U]

The nuclear-powered missile cruiser Admiral Nakhimov, which has undergone modernization, will become the most powerful ship with missile weapons, but the emphasis is on Project 22350 frigates.

It is logical that there is no need to throw away a big club, albeit a shabby one, but it is stupid to rely only on it.

[Doccor18]

Will become a powerful rocket ship ": the Commander of the Northern Fleet spoke about the TARKR" Admiral Nakhimov

And he always was ..!

[Marachuh]

Raider, a couple of Kuznetsov ... And that there are no other tasks? For example, I see him as a flagship capable of diverting a lot of enemy forces. The company has the same 22350, a pair of Ash trees, a pair of Varshavyankas, PLO and air defense corvettes. You can stand near Syria, under the cover of aviation from Khmeimim. Or Venezuela and Cuba)))

[Artemion3]

22350 - the best variant of the DMZ mass ship

[Nemchinov Vl]

Quote: Artemion3

22350 - the best variant of the DMZ mass ship

I hope that only for now .... I would live to see something like that pr. 11560 (with modern BIUS and weapon systems) that went into serial and rapid construction ... (!)

[Artemion3]

Quote: Nemchinov Vl

Quote: Artemion3

22350 - the best variant of the DMZ mass ship

I hope that only for now .... I would live to see something like that pr. 11560 (with modern BIUS and weapon systems) that went into serial and rapid construction ... (!)

I don’t know, I don’t dream about it.

[Synoid]

Quote: mark1

To be honest, 80 UKSK cells are not enough for such a giant, 92 S-300 missiles are the same small and I doubt that they will be in the cells, it looks like the good old drums have been preserved (since the number has practically not changed since the times). But if they were still abandoned, then the BC could be increased by 1,5 times + to consider the possibility of placing "Caliber" in these cells. And where are the lasers-shmazers (on a nuclear-powered ship, then God himself commanded), Gaussian railguns and other high-techs?
Well, maybe we will see something at the end of the modernization, we like to obscure something. And so it turns out the ship of yesterday (but expensive!)

Best is the enemy of the good.
You propose to make a Zumvalt out of it and, like minke whales, then scratch a turnip over a chumodan without a handle.

[Ryaruav]

I think at the moment we need to focus (nk 2 ranks) on frigates 350 and modernized

[S. Viktorovich]

One or two ships of this type, especially the older ones, have no practical meaning. No matter how many expensive "bells and whistles" you put into it (they talk about hundreds), one hit is enough.