Embarrassed or not? Turkish UDC "Anadolu"

71
Embarrassed or not? Turkish UDC "Anadolu"

A year ago, maritime specialist Alexander Timokhin, whose articles appear here, published an article on the pages of another publication under the heading “Turkey disgraced with its first aircraft carrier". We had my articleAircraft carrier tears or drone carrier in Turkish". After a year, it became clear that we were not so much mistaken, but could not predict the development of both technologies and application tactics. drones. Therefore, it makes sense to reconsider some things.

In fact, it is difficult to judge, but something tells you to be disgraced is when a completely incapable ship descends into the water. Or which sinks during the descent. And how much the Turks have "disgraced", we will now try to figure it out, especially considering the fact that "Anadolu" became part of the Turkish military fleet, and in parallel with this, a second ship, Thrace, is being built.



It is worth noting here that the entire Turkish fleet is divided into two operational groups, Northern and Southern. The northern group is responsible for the Black Sea, the southern one for the Mediterranean. Therefore, the appearance of two such ships is understandable and justified, one for each operational connection.

UDC - universal landing ship - no matter how you look at it, there is a tool for aggressive force projection. Able to deliver from point A to point B a regiment of marines with equipment and ammunition and support it with a regiment of attack helicopters.


Why the Turks need such a percussion instrument is understandable. To protect the sphere of its interests in the world, and the fact that Turkey has plans that simply delight in their scale in the form of building a certain pan-Turkic world, then there will be something to protect. Starting from the same Africa, where Turkey rushed at the beginning of the XNUMXs.

It has long been clear that only the fleet (despite the development aviation) can properly ensure the transfer and supply of troops at a distance from their bases. And the best ship for landing is a landing ship.

What is UDC, known for a long time. All such ships in the world are built according to such canons: capacity from an infantry battalion with all equipment and weapons, hospitals for the surgical treatment of the wounded, a docking chamber in the stern, from which loaded landing craft and equipment with sufficient buoyancy can leave, the presence of a large deck, from which it is convenient to start helicopters or aircraft with vertical takeoff and landing. Plus, large holds of ships allow you to take on board a sufficient supply of food, fuel and ammunition for combat operations for the first time.

UDC is a very controversial ship, as soon as it starts talking about its aviation group. An ordinary landing ship, without such excesses, is much simpler in terms of the fact that there is no need to fight between the air and land components.

That aviation, that landing, require one thing: places. A place for equipment, a place for repairs (for aircraft), a place for weapons and fuel. Considering how much you need, there is a catastrophic lack of space, otherwise, if you give everyone as much as you need, you will get a vessel with a displacement of 40-50 thousand tons. Not fast and not very maneuverable, and even with a decent draft.

For comparison: the draft of our BDK project 11711 "Ivan Gren" is 3,8 meters with a displacement of 6600 tons.


The draft of the ship "Juan Carlos 1" is 7 meters with a displacement of 27 tons. Here's the airfare. Landing "Gren" can approach the shore and dump on it everything that is in the holds.


I don’t know how the Anadolu, which is a licensed copy of the Juan Carlos, will look in this regard, but it definitely won’t fit the shore. The troops will land on boats and self-propelled (if conditions permit), and this will already take much more time than landing directly on the shore. Yes, and it will be easier for the enemy to establish counteraction.

By the way, the draft of the monsters of the UDC project 23900 of the Ivan Rogov type, which are being built in Kerch, is even more - 8 meters. And it also evokes certain thoughts in terms of application.

Roughly the same with the air wing. The fact that the UDC can take from 6 to 12 aircraft does not make it an aircraft carrier. It can, of course, be called a light aircraft carrier, but this only indicates that the ship will be able to solve only lightweight tasks in the conditions of the almost complete absence of opposition in terms of air defense.

By the way, about air defense. Ships of the UDC type are not up to par with their air defense, and this is again due to the fact that there is not enough displacement. UDC is a warrant ship that requires serious cover.

The compromise of the assault landing ship is that the balance between the landing force, the air group and its own forces will never be maintained. This is simply unrealistic, and always one of the components will have an advantage over the others. For a normal UDC, this will be a landing force, for a light aircraft carrier, it will be an air wing.

Today, UDC is in the fleets of many countries whose military doctrine implies military operations outside their own space. Naturally, a country that is not going to land troops on the territory of other states does not need such ships.

Why Turkey needed ships capable of landing somewhere in Africa - the question contains the answer. Because Turkey has state interests far beyond its territory. Interests that Turkey is ready to protect with the help of weapons.

UDC "Anadolu", which "Juan Carlos 1" is a wonderful ship.


The best in terms of balance between capabilities, but still frankly weak in terms of aviation. As a light aircraft carrier, it is even worse than our Admiral Kuznetsov. But he can deliver troops where ordered, land them and cover them from the air.

In general, initially helicopters were supposed to cover. But as the shipbuilding business unfolded, the idea changed. Since the ship was ordered by Spanish partners, it became possible to place the F-35В on the UDC and turn the UDC into a light aircraft carrier. For a country with ambitions to enter the aircraft carrier club - well, what could be more pleasant for Erdogan?

So the Anadolu got a bow with a springboard, since the ship was originally built with a flat deck, for helicopters. In 2015, everything looked very beautiful. Almost like the F-35B on the deck of the first Turkish, albeit light, but aircraft carrier.

But in 2019, everything collapsed. The ship was already being completed, but Turkey was thrown out of the F-35B program for the willful purchase of the S-400 from Russia.

So at one point Turkey lost its light aircraft carrier. It seems that the springboard and the entire radio engineering complex became unnecessary at one moment? Many people thought so, and tons of gloating was poured out in the media.

However, was it worth it to rejoice? Let's take a calm look at the situation: Turkey has laid down two UDCs. There was an opportunity to improve the UDC to a light aircraft carrier. Then, after making changes to the design of the ship, the possibility disappeared. Everyone, shame on the jungle?


No, we are looking at point 1. Anadolu was built as a universal landing ship. A springboard that no planes will fly to? Yes, not very convenient. "Extra" drive and landing radars? There is nothing superfluous.

It is possible to talk about the shame of the Turkish Navy only if the Anadolu was cut into metal or sold. Like "Mistral", a third world country.

The return of the Anadolu to the role of a universal landing ship is a normal move. No one has taken away from Turkey helicopters, which were originally planned as an air strike force.

In addition, there is a marine version of the Bayraktar, which will quite normally launch from the deck of the Anadolu.

In some sources, the Anadolu situation was called an attempt to build a quasi-aircraft carrier. In general, a ship that can (and Anadolu can) carry a large number of UAVs is useful. Today, drones have proven themselves to be excellent reconnaissance, first of all, and strike, second, means.

When conducting a hypothetical landing operation on the territory of an unfriendly state, the use of UAVs for reconnaissance and primary testing of such important targets as unsuppressed air defense, the Bayraktar will be much more effective (including from a financial point of view) than the F-35B. And if we are talking about losses, then the advantages of the drone are simply huge.

The F-35B is a very modern and serious combat vehicle, however, the more serious the vehicle, the more man-hours of technical and engineering personnel are required for it inside not the most spacious and suitable UDC hangars. Many people who are knowledgeable in the subject directly say that it will be unrealistic to provide the necessary level of training in UDC conditions for the F-35B, which means that you should not expect high intensity flights.

In this situation, the use of several dozen UAVs in place of 12 aircraft does not look stupid. Today's practice of the war in Ukraine has shown how serious the enemy is - an attack drone or a kamikaze drone. Personnel, where machines worth several thousand dollars hit air defense systems worth several million is the best confirmation of this.

There is no doubt that Turkish military experts are following the events in Ukraine very closely, and therefore the order for Baykar Defense drone TB-3 "Bayraktar" with a folding wing does not look stupid.

In addition, in 2021, Baykar announced a project for a promising attack jet drone MIUS, which can also be based on the Anadolu UDC. The first flight of this device is scheduled for 2023, and there is confidence that this flight will take place.

But this is not about somehow adapting Anadolu to normal military service (as the Americans tried with the same Freedoms), but about strengthening the capabilities of the UDC. And if you place two or three dozen Bayraktars on Anadolu, then these opportunities will really increase.

The deck area of ​​5 square meters can accommodate a lot of things. Yes, the springboard will be an unnecessary thing, but it can also be useful for taking off the Bayraktars in the configuration of a shock UAV, with bombs. There is no point in converting back to a smooth-deck design, in addition, the American partners may forgive, so the Turks will be able to get the F-440B in the long term.

If you look at what happened in the end, then the performance characteristics of the Anadolu UDC are quite a decent clone of Juan Carlos.
The Anadolu displacement is slightly more than 27 tons, the hull length is 000 meters, and the width is 231 meters. UDC develops speed up to 32 knots, cruising range - 20,5 nautical miles.

The area of ​​the flight deck is 5 sq. meters, there is an aircraft hangar with an area of ​​440 sq. meters, which can accommodate 990 medium-class helicopters or eight heavy-lift helicopters. Four landing craft of the LCM type or two hovercraft of the LCAC type are based on board.


"Anadolu" is really capable of taking troops with equipment, moving a fairly considerable distance and landing. Cover... In general, four attack helicopters T-129 ATAK and eight Eurocopter AS 532 may not be enough, but the question is - against whom to be friends.

Since Anadolu’s own defense is better than that of Juan Carlos, two 20-mm Phalanx CIWS artillery systems, five Aselsan 25-mm artillery systems and a RAM anti-aircraft missile system, they can fight off problems at close range. As for the distant one, support ships are needed here.

But Turkey has frigates capable of escorting Anadolu to the other side of the earth, and this is a problem for the enemy. And attack drones will be able to significantly enhance the capabilities of the ship's aviation group, consisting of helicopters.

Last year, when Anadolu was put to the test, I confess that I was rather critical of the idea of ​​creating a quasi-aircraft carrier with aircraft armament from drones. But after a year, during which I closely watched what was happening in Ukraine, my opinion changed somewhat.

During this year, we have all witnessed how unmanned aerial vehicles on both sides of the front destroyed enemy manpower and equipment. And today we can definitely say that strike UAVs account for many more hit targets than aviation.

Of course, the launch of NURSs from a roll-up is very colorful. A bunch of missiles, and so not distinguished by accuracy, flies somewhere there, outside the sights. But it flies beautifully. Hitting areas and causing certain damage to these areas. However, NURS digging the ground cannot be compared with a cheap FPV drone that calmly destroys an anti-aircraft missile system. Or causes him such damage that requires urgent repair.

Today, the idea of ​​retrofitting the UDC with a flock of unmanned vehicles does not look like a desperate attempt to save face. I admit that UAV operators in Russia and Ukraine were forced to treat this type of weapon with respect.

So in 2023, it is worth recognizing that the Turks very gracefully got out of the seemingly problem with the non-delivery of the F-35B to them.

UDC was planned. They made a light aircraft carrier out of it. The aircraft carrier did not work out, they returned to the topic of UDC and reinforced the air group with drones. In any case, the Turkish fleet did not lose anything. We ordered two UDC - receive and sign. They did not receive light aircraft carriers - well, not everything is lost yet, Erdogan will wait for the change of president and make a second call. And Turkey will have non-aircraft carriers.

But landing ships - they already exist and will be ready to serve.

Another question is where and how they will be used, but I'm sure we'll see. And one moment. Russian UDC project 23900 is just under construction, and at best will be ready by 2027 ("Ivan Rogov"). And how ships are being built in our country, and even in a crisis, the expected timeframe can be shifted to the right in such a way ...

But during this time, one can easily collect information about the use of their UDC by the Turkish Navy and draw certain conclusions based on it. For example, about the fact that in the Black Sea, where it is planned to use the Rogov, we do not have escort ships for it. And the scope of application does not seem intelligible and understandable.

But there seems to be time. Meanwhile, the Turkish fleet is starting to operate its first UDC, accepted into the ranks of the Navy.
71 comment
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must sign in.
  1. +19
    13 March 2023 03: 56
    Of course, the launch of NURSs from a roll-up is very colorful. A bunch of missiles, and so not distinguished by accuracy, flies somewhere there, outside the sights. But it flies beautifully. Hitting areas and causing certain damage to these areas. However, NURS digging the ground cannot be compared with a cheap FPV drone that calmly destroys an anti-aircraft missile system.

    Only an airplane can carry these NURSs, and maybe KABs, for hundreds of kilometers, but a drone cannot. But this does not mean that drones are not needed ...
    And the presence of a ship, even a controversial one, is definitely not a shame, but a loss out of the blue is a shame.
    1. -6
      13 March 2023 05: 16
      shame yes ... the helicopter landed, successfully ...
      1. +24
        13 March 2023 06: 51
        I remember that three or four years ago there was a series of articles in the VO format "needed - not needed" there were aircraft-carrying cruisers pr.1143 "Krechet". Then I wrote a detailed commentary that if they were now part of the fleet, they could be turned either into light aircraft carriers like the Italian Cavour, or into full-fledged UDCs, at the same time making them a platform for network-centric operations and equipping them with drones. How then they made fun of me ... Well, what will those comedians say now?
        1. +1
          13 March 2023 08: 13
          Why Turkey is building UDC for one thing is the fight for gas fields in Cyprus and the need to capture a bunch of small islands that formally belong to Greece, where an infantry battalion is enough to capture them. The depth there does not allow ships of the Ivan Gren type to approach in tight action, they will have to operate from a distance, which is why they ordered these UDCs.
          1. +10
            13 March 2023 10: 14
            Why is Turkey building a UDC for one, this is a fight for gas fields in Cyprus

            Correct me if I'm wrong, but in my opinion, Turkish aviation calmly reaches Cyprus without UDC. At least, the absence of the latter did not prevent Turkey from landing a large-scale airborne assault in 1974 (including a helicopter), which covered the deployment of the main forces of the Turkish marines.

            In my opinion, the construction of a UDC for Turkey is just a test of the pen for the maritime industry and the economy as a whole, rather than the creation of a specific tool for a no less specific task. Plus, the construction of the UDC also has a great symbolic meaning, which unequivocally secures the role of a major regional player for Turkey, capable of defending its interests not only on land, but also at sea.
            1. +2
              13 March 2023 10: 34
              This UDC is needed primarily for the projection of forces into Africa. There are huge business interests that need to be protected.
            2. +2
              13 March 2023 16: 28
              Quote: Dante
              Correct me if I'm wrong, but in my opinion, Turkish aviation calmly reaches Cyprus without UDC. At least, the absence of the latter did not prevent Turkey from landing a large-scale airborne assault in 1974 (including a helicopter), which covered the deployment of the main forces of the Turkish marines.

              They had ships docking during the Second World War from the United States. The actions of the Turkish troops began with an amphibious landing (about 30 landing ships and boats covered by destroyers) at dawn on July 20, 5-7 km west of Kyrenia.
              1. +1
                14 March 2023 19: 54
                The actions of the Turkish troops began with the landing of an amphibious assault

                And what? Does that somehow change what I said? The amphibious assault was just preceded by the parachute and helicopter landing of the landing units and their taking control of the road between Nicosia and Kyrenia, the port of which and the beaches located around the city became the main gate for Turkish intervention.

                The green "squares" are the designation of the Turkish landing.
                In general, these events are described in great detail here:
        2. PPD
          +1
          13 March 2023 10: 00
          To turn them into aircraft carriers, you need to have something that will fly from them.
          Preferably yours.
          The United States closed deliveries to Turkey - hello to the aircraft carrier.
          Who will squander a carrier-based aircraft for 1-2 aircraft carriers, and even light ones?
          1. +2
            13 March 2023 10: 50
            Yes, they won't say anything. Those cruisers rotted and would have rotted for anyone during this time. And there would be nothing to rebuild.
        3. +2
          14 March 2023 02: 56
          Quote: Dante
          I remember that three or four years ago there was a series of articles in the VO format "needed - not needed" there were aircraft-carrying cruisers pr.1143 "Krechet".

          During the late union, there were plans during the middle repair to modernize the Krechety into full-fledged aircraft carriers with a springboard and arrester. In this case, at the beginning of the 00s, 10 full-fledged aircraft carriers would have been in service, 4 of which were nuclear.
          And in the 90s, the United States very purposefully stimulated the disposal of our ships of the main classes. From submarines and aircraft carriers (primarily) to destroyers and BODs. So really - they would have rotted in septic tanks without repair and funding. Well, at least they did "Vikramaditya" for the Indians as they wanted before for themselves.
    2. +3
      13 March 2023 07: 55
      Only an airplane can carry these NURSs, and maybe KABs, for hundreds of kilometers, but a drone cannot.

      Why would? For example, an old MQ-1 Predator
      The first flight took place in 1994. In February 2001, at Nellis Air Force Base, for the first time, test launches of AGM-114 Hellfire anti-tank missiles (ATGMs) from the Predator UAV were performed. The Predator can be armed with two ATGMs (one under each wing console).
      Take the Russian S-70 "Hunter"
      Combat load: 2,8 tons, according to other sources - up to 8 tons
      Range of flight: 6000 km

      The United States and China have flying analogues of the "Hunter", and the Turks are developing one.
      1. +4
        13 March 2023 08: 26
        UAVs TB are planned to be deployed on Anadolu3 and KIzIlelma. They will ensure the delivery of high-precision missiles and bombs for hundreds of kilometers.


      2. -5
        13 March 2023 13: 32
        Quote: smart fellow
        Why would? For example, an old MQ-1 Predator

        From the fact that in the article the aircraft is opposed:
        Quote: Vladimir_2U
        cheap FPV drone

        What kind of CAB or at least NURS can carry an FPV drone?
        Okay, an article - a comment would first be mastered with its conceptual apparatus ...
    3. -4
      13 March 2023 23: 25
      Turkey is surrounded by islands where the native Muslims were forced out by the Greeks after the Ottomans lost the First World War. The only population that Turkey was able to save were Cypriot Muslims. Greek Cyprus is getting stronger every day with the support of the West, Greece is even trying to deprive Turkey of access to the Mediterranean. Therefore, the Turks need a navy ready for war.
  2. +3
    13 March 2023 04: 10
    The Turks can afford large BDKs, as they have access to the Mediterranean Sea and the World Ocean.
    Our Black Sea Fleet is locked up in its bases on the Black Sea ... and is not able to go out into other areas of the World Ocean.
    So I don't even know... what The Black Sea Fleet can now only perform tasks of local importance, and those BDKs that it has are enough to solve local operations.
    Otherwise, it would be nice to see the operational plans of the Turkish General Staff at the naval theaters of the BD ... and what role is assigned to the new BDKs in them.
    1. +5
      13 March 2023 04: 12
      Quote: Lech from Android.
      The Turks can afford large BDKs, as they have access to the Mediterranean Sea and the World Ocean.

      Russia has only the Black Sea Fleet?! Yes, and basing in Tartus and Aden also somehow allow them to operate in the South ...
    2. +8
      13 March 2023 04: 55
      Quote: Lech from Android.
      The Turks can afford large BDKs, as they have access to the Mediterranean Sea and the World Ocean.

      Why do Turks need access to the oceans? And the Mediterranean Sea can be wonderfully controlled by aviation - it is the same puddle as the Black Sea ... Very cheap and very angry!

      Here's what made me laugh:
      in parallel with this, a second ship, Thrace, is being built

      The name of the ship is a good click on the nose of Greece... wink
      1. +1
        18 March 2023 20: 45
        And Bulgaria. Bulgarians are Slavs by language, Turks by name, and more and more Thracians by origin and territory.
    3. +4
      13 March 2023 08: 07
      Quote: Lech from Android.
      The Turks can afford large BDKs, as they have access to the Mediterranean Sea and the World Ocean.
      Our Black Sea Fleet is locked up in its bases on the Black Sea ... and is not able to go out into other areas of the World Ocean.
      So I don't even know... what The Black Sea Fleet can now only perform tasks of local importance, and those BDKs that it has are enough to solve local operations.
      Otherwise, it would be nice to see the operational plans of the Turkish General Staff at the naval theaters of the BD ... and what role is assigned to the new BDKs in them.

      What is better than the Mediterranean Sea from the Black Sea?
      Here and there, the theater of operations is closed, there are only two exits from it, anti-ship missiles are shot through from aircraft through and through, like the Black Sea, more of course the Baltic and Black Seas.
    4. +1
      13 March 2023 09: 53
      By order of the supreme, all MP brigades will again be three battalions, landing forces and assets for the Black Sea Fleet, and in other fleets per battalion with reinforcement. We do not have landing craft for large-scale operations, and indeed the BDK, UDC, KFOR is the third wave, and we don’t have the forces and means for the first two.
  3. +8
    13 March 2023 04: 45
    The shame of the jungle is Kuznetsov, or rather everything that is happening to him.
    1. +1
      18 March 2023 20: 48
      A warship cannot be a disgrace. The attitude towards him is shameful, however, with such an attitude towards the country, what can we grieve about the ship.
  4. +6
    13 March 2023 05: 14
    And what is the point of FAST landing directly on the coast and with small forces, without destroying the coastal defenses. These are guaranteed losses. And if there is no longer any defense, then you can land slowly and with large troops.
  5. +10
    13 March 2023 05: 14
    A shame, even a disgrace, a mediocre loss of a leader. So let's not compare a Chinese aircraft carrier with a finger
  6. +11
    13 March 2023 06: 40
    . Embarrassed or not? Turkish UDC "Anadolu"

    What do they say about the frankly old T-62? It's better that it exists than it doesn't. In any case, the same can be said about the Turkish UDC.
    1. +8
      13 March 2023 07: 12
      Quote: Stas157
      . Embarrassed or not? Turkish UDC "Anadolu"

      What do they say about the frankly old T-62? It's better that it exists than it doesn't. In any case, the same can be said about the Turkish UDC.

      Remembering the English poet:
      We have a killer answer to their every question:
      We have a maxim machine gun, they don't have a maxim.
  7. +21
    13 March 2023 07: 10
    But what do we care whether the Turkish fleet is dishonored or not? Our naval command over there covers itself with glory: both the Black Sea and the Pacific. There are no other problems, except how to discuss the Turks?
    1. +5
      13 March 2023 08: 44
      Quote: Galleon
      There are no other problems, except how to discuss the Turks?

      There is UDC - there is something to discuss, no UDC - ...
      1. +6
        13 March 2023 10: 50
        No UDC, no problem, otherwise serve these UDC ....... wassat
      2. +3
        13 March 2023 16: 35
        Quote: Doccor18
        Quote: Galleon
        There are no other problems, except how to discuss the Turks?

        There is UDC - there is something to discuss, no UDC - ...

        Well, yes, for sure: there are their own UDCs - there is something to discuss. There are no UDCs - but there are Turks laughing
        1. +2
          13 March 2023 23: 59
          UDC is good because it is large, it can be drowned in the bay or at the entrance to the bay, it will block more, according to the glorious tradition of our fleet.
  8. +1
    13 March 2023 07: 19
    And what will prevent it from being transferred from the South to the North? Then two. Against who? Not funny.
  9. +5
    13 March 2023 07: 49
    In fact, I have already written several times that the presence of drones in various environments on ships is promising. It is high time to work out the issue and equip all our ships with the maximum possible number of drones.
    Let them be even disposable (although there were tests of catching in the net), but at times they can raise the information component of ships - especially small classes.
    And big, in principle, you can even issue Poseidons as scouts.
  10. +6
    13 March 2023 08: 05
    For comparison: the draft of our BDK project 11711 "Ivan Gren" is 3,8 meters with a displacement of 6600 tons.

    Ivan Gren is certainly a force, only the draft is perhaps the only parameter in which our BDK is better than the Turkish one! There is no speed (weak engines provide a declared speed of 16 knots and a range of 3500 only in the absence of cargo), the landing and technical capacity is such that where two Rhinos (1174) Gren can handle, at least five will be required. The saddest thing is that it turned out even worse than its predecessor 1171, which, of course, could not boast of special comfort, digitalization and new stealth technologies, but took 20 tanks and troops (at a greater range with greater speed), and Gren or 13 tanks, or troops. Even the Defense Ministry itself recognized that the concept of using Gren was outdated and cut him with 100mm guns and a naval version of the hail, putting additional air defense in their place.
    1. +4
      13 March 2023 09: 03
      Quote: SergioPetrov
      Even the Defense Ministry itself admitted that the concept of using Gren was outdated

      Yes, not the concept is outdated, but the implementation let us down. Russia, with its vast maritime borders, with Chukotka and Kamchatka, with the Kuriles and the Northern Sea Routes, needs two or three dozen simple and inexpensive large landing ships, because Soviet ones do not last forever ...
      UDC is an excellent multi-purpose platform, only expensive, even the non-poor Pentagon moans about the price tags of the Americas and designs something smaller and cheaper.
      1. -2
        13 March 2023 09: 33
        I apologize for the offtopic, but in the current situation, Russia should not have time for the fleet at all, we are only wasting the rest of the resources ...
        1. +7
          13 March 2023 12: 12
          Quote: Vladimir80
          I apologize for the offtopic, but in the current situation, Russia should not have time for the fleet at all, we are only wasting the rest of the resources ...

          The problem is that the fleet is 40% of the strategic SBCs. And it will not be possible to replace them in the near future. So the Navy as a means of nuclear deterrence for Russia is up to the mark.
          Another thing is that the construction of the fleet went on as you like, just not to support the SSBNs.
      2. +3
        13 March 2023 19: 39
        Outdated, back in the 80s. If the USSR had free shipyards and money, then we would have our own mistral (Ivan Tarava), since 1171, 1174, and even more so 11711 is a hat in real conditions. All the supposed advantages of this concept are based on the inability of the fleet to capture the port = accordingly, it is necessary to strengthen the fleet, and not rivet husks that are incapable of normal walking on high water and unable to protect themselves, nor the formation, nor the landing.
    2. +1
      13 March 2023 10: 47
      It should have been called a landing transport and it would have been normal. But our sailors, for lack of a fleet, love big names - BDK, strategic submarine cruiser ...., in general, I can’t even pronounce this. Although in the army he knew and remembered all the Uzbeks, Tajiks, Azerbaijanis, etc., etc.
    3. +3
      13 March 2023 18: 29
      Are they Rhinos? The last "Nikolaev" is already in the cut. There were only three of them, two in the Pacific Fleet, one in the Northern Fleet.
  11. The comment was deleted.
  12. PPD
    +6
    13 March 2023 09: 47
    Now there is a war, often referred to as war.
    And many landings landed?
    So what is the draft there - 3,8, 7 or 8 meters, it doesn’t matter at all. The coast will be mined, and something interesting will be thrown into the water.
    And that's it. Landing from a distance is even worse - it’s difficult to get to the coast, but to gain a foothold and not be destroyed ...
    Or is the enemy not expected?
    Bayraktar there or f 35 does not matter at all. And that and that is quite knocked down.
    Yes, and quantity. Yes, and it is necessary to supply the landing force.
    1. +3
      13 March 2023 18: 31
      Before any landing, engineering reconnaissance of the coast is carried out by divers of the IDR brigades of the MP.
      1. +1
        13 March 2023 19: 03
        What do you think happened to Moscow? (not sarcasm) hi
        1. -1
          13 March 2023 19: 46
          She drowned. The copyright knows who.
          1. +3
            13 March 2023 20: 58
            I know who! And I really don't like these words! Submariners hi hi
            1. +1
              14 March 2023 14: 49
              If we talk about the essence of the issue, then they seem equally likely to me: the version of a man-made accident that they could not cope with due to the failure of the mechanisms and the version with anti-ship missiles. For the second version, there is an interesting observation that someone deliberately disperses a deliberately false version that these were harpoons, although no one sane has ever considered harpoons as possible (not at all the performance characteristics to make it generally realistic).
            2. -1
              24 March 2023 00: 48
              Putin answered the question of a foreign correspondent in this way: "What happened to the Kursk submarine?" in the style of a conversation between the fourth estate and the first. Give the American public an account of who is to blame for the loss of American sailors. But then Russian submariners died and it is not the business of representatives of the American public to ask the Russian president for the death of Russian submariners, as the authorities from their subordinates. Let them ask their president. I think if the question were formulated differently: is it known about the causes of the death of the submarine "Kursk"? then the answer would be different. And so what is the question is the answer.
  13. -1
    13 March 2023 10: 11
    The third world is not Egypt, he has UDC, he is from the second world. Russia has no. She is from the third world.
  14. 0
    13 March 2023 10: 19
    A lot of words and transfusions from "empty to empty".
    I'm lost 2/3 of the way. Reboot
  15. +5
    13 March 2023 10: 41
    “For comparison: the draft of our BDK project 11711 Ivan Gren is 3,8 meters with a displacement of 6600 tons.
    The draft of the ship "Juan Carlos 1" is 7 meters with a displacement of 27 tons. Here's the airfare. Landing "Gren" can approach the shore and dump everything that is in the holds on it.

    Well, yes. Certainly. It will fit, straight, and throw it out. Only a couple of tanks on the shore will make a sieve from this "Gren". And one will do. But the shells must be thrown. And 3.8 m is not such a small draft. And there are countless places where such a miracle can come up.
    In general, the concept of our BDK is flawed. It's just a transport for the marines. No port, no landing. And these vidos from exercises with landfall are just fantasies or nonsense. Against blacks in Africa, you can go to the port. And landing on the beach ...... This is not even funny. This is military idiocy.
    1. 0
      13 March 2023 20: 02
      Just do not discuss what you do not understand! In the Pacific Fleet and in the North, a BDK with a ramp can approach very many places, the so-called. to the unequipped shore, and to the pier both sideways and point-blank! From experience, while you are disembarking from DKVP and DKA (1174), 77 and 1171 are already on the second flight. Syria showed their necessity, and in the Kuriles and the Northern Sea Route they will not be worth the price for another 20-30 years! A draft of 3,8 m is the average temperature in the hospital. Depending on the slope of the shore, a bow draft can be made up to 0,5 meters by ballasting. Why they are not built in dozens is not clear. And why they (I.Gren) were built for more than 10 years is also unclear. For comparison, the BDK N. Vilkov, laid down in 1971, transferred to the fleet in 1974, built the same AMBER. They write here that by removing the Grad and artillery, they strengthened the air defense! What, 630th? So they are on 775.3. One conclusion - there is no concept for the development of the Navy, thought out for at least 25-30 years. Rather, it exists, but it changes every period with the change of the Commander-in-Chief and the Minister.
      1. +1
        16 March 2023 14: 12
        Syria showed the need for transports, not Grenov. Grena and everything else out of desperation. You yourself are not stupid in the maritime business, so you don’t understand why the semi-river trough was not built in a large batch. Gren is not needed. His landing on the shore is a thing that only works against the Papuans with spears.
  16. +1
    13 March 2023 10: 45
    Quote: Dante
    Correct me if I'm wrong, but in my opinion, Turkish aviation calmly reaches Cyprus without UDC.
    Moreover, the airfields of the Republic of Northern Cyprus recognized only by Turkey are at the disposal of the Turkish Air Force.
  17. 0
    13 March 2023 11: 32
    It is extremely inconvenient to conduct military operations in the Black Sea puddle, it is shot from the shore over the entire area, there is a problem to be solved - target designation. And the sailors will be disgraced when the ship lies on board during the descent or it cannot stand on an even keel.
  18. +1
    13 March 2023 12: 04
    UDC is not an independent combat unit / what a mri in the text.
  19. +2
    13 March 2023 12: 07
    Landing "Gren" can approach the shore and dump on it everything that is in the holds.
    I don’t know how the Anadolu, which is a licensed copy of the Juan Carlos, will look in this regard, but it definitely won’t fit the shore. The troops will land on boats and self-propelled (if conditions permit), and this will already take much more time than landing directly on the shore. Yes, and it will be easier for the enemy to establish counteraction.

    But the Gren will be able to approach the coast only after the complete suppression of coastal defenses. For when near the coast at low speeds and on the foot, even mortars are dangerous for the BDK.
    So the rate of landing of the first echelon of troops at the Gren will be the same as at the UDC.
    UDC is a very controversial ship, as soon as it starts talking about its aviation group. An ordinary landing ship, without such excesses, is much simpler in terms of the fact that there is no need to fight between the air and land components.

    Yes, there is nothing controversial there. You just have to remember that the UDC appeared in the United States, in which the marines are suspicious of the fleet. Marines not without reason (since Guadalcanal wink ) suspect the fleet of being unable to provide continuous air support for the landing in the first phase of the landing operation - until the capture and / or equipment of the coastal airfield. Even if there are Marine squadrons on board the AB, the naval squadrons can withdraw the AB at any moment to solve their purely naval tasks. Therefore, the Marines need their own decks, on which the fleet cannot lay a paw. In WWII, the Marines won back escort aircraft for themselves. They were written off - landing helicopter carriers appeared. Well, the UDC became the crowning achievement of "their own decks with their own aircraft", which are of little use for solving specific naval tasks, so that they can safely support the landing force.
  20. +2
    13 March 2023 12: 55
    Everyone who is trying to comprehend the use of UDC primarily in terms of landing, taking into account current experience, is puzzling over a simple question, but how to survive the ship as it approaches the enemy coast. After all, they will start hitting it with torpedoes / rockets of diesel-electric submarines, air-to-surface missiles of fighters and P-P missiles of the coastal forces of the defenders. What is the scope of the ASW / AD / ABM tasks that the landing party will have to solve? The escort must stop all this, but he himself will be under fire. You may not immediately sink the UDC, but even damage by a pair of missiles will disrupt the implementation of the BZ. As hypersound develops, the fate of the UDC will become frankly bitter. The NVO has clearly shown that even not the most advanced Ukrainian army can sink large ships. Rogov will simply be cramped in the World Cup, it makes sense to think about overtaking him to the Northern Fleet and converting him into an anti-submarine flagship with PLO helicopters in the interests of ensuring the deployment and increasing the combat stability of our SSBNs. Being in the areas of probable location of NATO multi-purpose boats, PLO helicopters could solve the tasks of detecting, tracking, and, if necessary, target designation and direct destruction of such boats. Now our SSBNs in terms of combat stability and in the Northern Fleet in the Pacific Ocean / Sea of ​​\uXNUMXb\uXNUMXbOkhotsk are weakened by a low level of ASW, we have few ships and aircraft. Well, if we are building such giants as Rogov, maybe they can solve more pressing problems than UDC?
    1. +1
      13 March 2023 17: 29
      The meaningful use of UDC can only be in the United States. There are no carrier-based formations with a bunch of escorts. There are foreign bases. With aviation and a bunch of supplies. And in general, they have a lot of UDC. And they can land some sane number of marines ashore so that the enemies do not immediately dig them there. M.b. to a lesser extent this applies to Japan.
      Well, the Turks have depicted something. But they have islands and an old friend Greece. Fleet in bin.
      The rest is for prestige. Including us. We need military transports. In this sense, UDC is good as a base. And scared. On which crows sit. It is impossible to use our BDK for its intended purpose. Is it just to kill some Georgia? Although, if these Georgians knew how to resist, then our landing party would not be in trouble. But how to have a base is quite good. There and rooms and give a ride what, and to treat. But where are the Mistrals or the like?
    2. +2
      13 March 2023 19: 11
      Here Klimov and Timokhin have been talking about this for more than a year, and they even fight with the Moscow Region, ZERO sense! They said that they were interested, and go ahead, with or without a song, it doesn’t matter. They had a palladium saw. recourse
  21. 0
    13 March 2023 13: 53
    In my opinion, it is not entirely correct to project the experience of the SVO to the tasks of the UDC: in a high-intensity conflict against an enemy that does not even have the most technologically advanced weapons systems, the effectiveness of this ship will be extremely limited. We have already seen what kind of threat anti-ship missiles can pose to ships, even in small numbers. And you shouldn’t think that these are our military gouges, and the Turks will do everything according to their mind and science, they can also get under fire, especially since you have to come very close to the coast for landing. And what task can a regiment solve without heavy weapons? Take a weakly defended island; port - if only by a sudden attack, say, without declaring war; to ensure the supply by sea of ​​the cut-off group of troops. As soon as a pair of anti-ship missile launchers, an infantry company in the port, is on the coast, the usefulness of the UDC will be minimal. Here it is quite pleasant to land on the islands in the Aegean Sea, it is unlikely that the Greeks will arrange strong fortifications on the islands. On the other hand, any undestroyed anti-ship missiles on a small island can send UDC to the bottom.

    And for large-scale amphibious operations, it is certainly more efficient to use specialized ships, so that if an aircraft carrier, then an amphibious one, without any frills, each will more effectively fulfill its role.

    And against the natives there will be f35, or bayraktars, already less important.
    1. +1
      14 March 2023 09: 14
      On the other hand, any undestroyed anti-ship missiles on a small island can send UDC to the bottom.

      It's not that simple. With UDC, an over-the-horizon landing is expected. And the RCC may simply not know about the existence of the UDC. Even if they know, the missiles will first have to pass over the head of the escort warships, before that having launched under the guns of helicopters, UAVs, and even landing support aircraft, which is also not an easy task.
  22. TIR
    +1
    13 March 2023 17: 35
    I think the Turkish version is now the best in the world in terms of capabilities. After the landing, the entire bridgehead on the coast will be covered by artillery. Air defense will destroy any aircraft, and intelligence will be needed to identify targets. The same Bayraktar will do much better given its optics. And the escort will work for the targets. Also, landing troops when the ship needs to approach the shore is 100% destruction of the BDK while still at sea. We need to stop thinking that such ships will be allowed to land troops ashore. If we still think in the Moscow Region, then we need ships that land troops on boats and swim. Our BDK is in fact a mass sea grave for everyone. With their displacement, any hit by a 155mm guided missile will send the ship to the bottom within a minute. In fact, if you need to land troops, then the entire coast needs to be burned and plowed. Then, already on fast boats, land troops. Without stopping the shelling, take him deeper. And all this you need to have powerful air defense on ships and constant reconnaissance from UAVs
  23. -1
    13 March 2023 18: 26
    He might and would have been good if he had a normal air group. And so, for now - the little animal is unknown))) UAVs have not yet replaced manned aircraft and will not replace them in the near future.
    1. TIR
      0
      13 March 2023 23: 46
      And for the BDK, aviation is not needed. It's just a desire to cram everything that is into one ship. The BDK should generally carry only equipment and people. And since the upper deck is not occupied, the UAV can also be placed. They have much less weight. Aviation must be carried by an aircraft carrier. If you build equipment, then you should probably take the bar higher, and not think that we will fight the Papuans with spears. This means that in order for the BDK to be able to land troops on any coast, you must first destroy the entire enemy fleet, then either suppress aircraft or limit its work in the landing zone. This is either powerful long-range air defense or naval aviation (aircraft carriers are needed). Only then it is necessary to destroy all the fortifications with personnel and weapons at the landing site. Then we need constant observation and target designation of all enemy artillery pieces that can reach the landing zone. Already when all the risks are reduced to zero, it is already possible to launch the landing. That is, the first need is not in the BDK, but in good destroyers, submarines. Right now, do you think we are able to land troops in the Odessa region? I think he will drown in blood. And our BDK will not even reach the shore, but they will be sunk
      1. 0
        16 March 2023 14: 14
        Gren is not a BDK, it is worse in terms of performance characteristics than 1171, and before the BDK it’s like the moon
  24. +1
    13 March 2023 18: 27
    The story is sad. Naval theorists resisted buying the Mistrals for a long time, but good lubrication forced the GUK to agree. Fortunately, the French rolled up the ships and there were no losses. But when we got the Zaliv plant, the Kazan eagles from Ak Bars, who had already eaten the Zelenodolsk plant and design bureau, got involved. They magically lubricated the GUK and received an order for 2 UDC, cat. never designed or made. Each of them needs an escort warrant. We do not have it, just as there is no purpose for which such vessels are needed. Meanwhile, supplies to Syria are being dragged on old hackneyed BDKs and purchased old Turkish ships. So it goes.
  25. +3
    13 March 2023 19: 20
    Pretty normal ship. By loading it with landing troops and helicopters, the Turks will receive a good expeditionary ship to demonstrate their forces, for example, in Africa, where they have military bases in Somalia and Morocco and a lot of interests in other countries of the region. Or they can go ahead of the rest and make the first drone carrier what, and there are many options for how to weave it into the concept of drone wars being born before our eyes. In general, the Turks are great that they did not stall with him and completed it. And where to adapt it, they certainly will come up with.
  26. +3
    13 March 2023 19: 58
    We admit that Turkish admirals still have planning for the future, so to speak, a look beyond the horizon ... For some reason, I recalled a former neighbor, a conscript sailor who came on vacation because "we went to sea and managed to drag aboard crashed American drone. And it was in the 70s (!) of the last century
  27. +3
    13 March 2023 22: 32
    "The landing "Gren" can approach the shore and dump everything that is in the holds on it."
    Using the example of the SVO, the question arises: "And who will let him get closer to the coast in a modern clash?" By themselves, ships of this type are weakly armed, to put it mildly, and not only will they not be able to provide any significant support to the landing force, but they will also stand up for themselves. As a result - a reinforced battalion of marines at the bottom. At one time I went for a walk on the "Filchenkove" (type "tapir") to Africa for a walk
  28. 0
    April 12 2023 23: 02
    Landing "Gren" can approach the shore and dump on it everything that is in the holds.

    And the enemy on the shore wakes up to sit and wait until the ship approaches the dense one, and the landing force unloads on the shore .... Approximately how our three-time Red Banner, undefeated fleet destroys the enemy’s conditional aircraft carrier, which is also standing and waiting ... Naive and yes only...