New missile-armed ships for the Russian Navy

12 519 47
New missile-armed ships for the Russian Navy
The Perm submarine being launched from its slipway, March 2025. Photo by USC.


Strike capabilities of the navy fleet Russia is defined, first of all, by the presence of a wide range of products missile weapons of various classes and types. In addition, a large number of surface and submarine ships with missile armament are in service. The development of this component of the Navy continues, and new interesting results are expected in the near future. In the coming months, the potential of the missile-carrying fleet will improve both quantitatively and qualitatively.



Submarine carriers


In the context of the development of missile weapons and the corresponding capabilities of the fleet, the construction of Project 885M Yasen multipurpose nuclear submarines is of great importance. Four such submarines are currently at various stages of construction and testing, and another will be laid down in 2026.

The Perm submarine, the sixth Yasen-class vessel, is currently undergoing trials. This vessel is scheduled to be delivered to the customer by the end of the year. It was previously reported that the Perm will be the first vessel of its type to be routinely equipped with the Zircon hypersonic missile system.

Project 885(M) submarines are known to be equipped with eight launchers, each of which can accommodate several missile containers of different types. Specifically, a launcher can accommodate four 3M22 Tsirkon missile containers. The Yasen-class submarines' standard ammunition complement also includes Kalibr missiles and Oniks anti-ship missiles.

According to various reports, the Zircon missile reaches speeds of up to 10-11 km/h or Mach 8-9 in flight. Its range is expected to exceed 1 km. During the main portion of its flight, the missile uses inertial and/or satellite navigation, and target guidance is presumably accomplished using an active radar seeker. Surface or ground targets are destroyed using kinetic energy and a 300-400 kg warhead.

The 3M22 missiles are expected to significantly improve the Perm's combat potential. They will enable it to attack and destroy various surface and air targets, including those with good Defense and missile defense. The deployment of Tsirkons on other Yasen systems is expected in the future. This process will take several years, but will have clear positive consequences.

Return to service


In August 2025, following a major overhaul and modernization, the Project 1144 heavy nuclear-powered missile cruiser Admiral Nakhimov began sea trials. Barring any significant complications, all such trials will be completed in the coming months. The ship will return to the Pacific Fleet by the end of the year.


The Burya small missile ship under construction. Photo by the Russian Ministry of Defense.

The key feature of the modernization was the elimination of the standard set of launchers for the P-700 Granit anti-ship missiles. In their place, a modern 3S14 universal naval launch system with 80 launchers for various missile types was installed.

It was previously reported that the upgraded Admiral Nakhimov will be capable of using all types of weapons compatible with the UKSK 3S14. Its ammunition complement will include Kalibr cruise missiles, Oniks anti-ship missiles, and Tsirkon hypersonic missiles. The number of such missiles on board and the proportions of the ammunition complement will be determined in accordance with the assigned combat missions.

It's easy to see that such an upgrade will positively impact the cruiser's potential. First and foremost, it will lead to a significant increase in the size of its ammunition loadout. Furthermore, the ship will be able to carry several types of strike weapons, allowing it to perform a wider range of missions. The novelty factor should also be considered: all missiles for the 3S14 are significantly newer than those of the Granit, which in itself offers certain advantages.

It has been previously reported that the sister cruiser Pyotr Velikiy will follow the Admiral Nakhimov for repairs and modernization. It will likely also receive a new weapons system based on modern missiles and auxiliary equipment. As a result, the Russian Navy will have two heavy cruisers with broad combat capabilities.

Implementation of plans


It's worth noting that the growth in the missile-carrying fleet's performance isn't solely due to the implementation of bold and high-profile projects. Several series of ships of other types are also under construction. While these ships are smaller in displacement and ammunition capacity than heavy cruisers, they are no less valuable to the Navy.


Launch of the corvette Provorny, July 2024. Photo by USC

For example, several companies are engaged in the serial production of Project 22800 Karakurt small missile ships. Since 2018, eight such ships have been delivered to the customer. In 2026, two new small missile ships, Kozelsk and Burya, which are already undergoing testing, will be delivered to the Baltic Fleet. The Pacific Fleet, meanwhile, will receive the ships Rzhev and Udomlya.

With a full displacement of 870 tons, the Karakurts have a developed missile-artillery weapons. The main weapons are eight missiles of different types, transported in UKSK 3S14 cells.

A larger missile-armed ship is also expected to be delivered this year. This will be the corvette Provorny, built according to Project 20385. It was launched in June 2024 and is currently preparing for mooring trials. The ship will then head to sea for the next stage of testing. Barring any complications, Provorny will join the Pacific Fleet this year.

Project 20385 is based on the previously developed Project 20380 and differs in its primary armament. Corvettes of this class utilize the 3S14 UKSK missile system with eight launch cells. Consequently, the Provorny will be able to carry several types of strike missiles and attack targets on land and at sea.

This year, the Caspian Flotilla is also expected to receive a pair of guided missile combat units. Two Project 12418 missile boats, Stupinets and Strelok, have been under construction for it since the middle of the last decade. They were launched, completed, and sent out for testing in 2024 and 2025. It was previously reported that both pennants would enter service before the end of 2025. However, news There have been no reports of their delivery yet. Apparently, the signing of the acceptance certificate has been postponed until 2026.


The Stupinets missile boat. Photo: Telegram / BMPD

Project 12418 represents a major modernization of an older missile boat design. All major systems and weapons were replaced. For example, the Stupinets and Strelok boats will each receive two quadruple launchers for Kh-35 Uran missiles. The launchers are mounted behind the superstructure and fire sideways, over the side.

General trends


The domestic shipbuilding industry continues to fulfill orders from the Ministry of Defense and regularly delivers new ships, submarines, and boats of various classes to the Navy. Almost all of these ships carry modern missiles for self-defense or attack.

The delivery of the next missile-armed ships is scheduled for this year. The Navy will receive one multipurpose nuclear-powered submarine, several ships of various classes, and a pair of boats. These pennants will be accepted into three major naval formations and will improve their quantitative and qualitative capabilities.

The missile armament of the new combat units deserves attention. Most of these ships will be equipped with a standardized firing system. This will allow them to use a common range of missiles for various purposes. This approach offers clear advantages in terms of procurement, operation, and combat use.

Thus, shipbuilders and the Navy have a significant amount of work to accomplish this year. The results will significantly impact the combat effectiveness of surface and submarine forces. Clearly, such a result will fully justify the effort and resources invested.
47 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must sign in.
  1. +7
    28 January 2026 02: 41
    It's both a joy and a sadness. There aren't enough surface ships to replace those being decommissioned.
    1. +8
      28 January 2026 02: 54
      Yes, a lot is written off too.
      1. +1
        28 January 2026 12: 57
        That's true... in 1991, there were 285 submarines, including diesel ones. Now there are 200 fewer. And that's the best-case scenario.
        1. +8
          28 January 2026 17: 22
          Quote: Alex013
          That's true... in 1991, there were 285 submarines, including diesel ones. Now there are 200 fewer.

          In fact, most of the USSR's submarines should have been decommissioned back in the 70s and 80s. Our Navy, with the stinginess of Plyushkin, continued to maintain and repair first-generation submarines, right up to Project 627A, 658, and Project 613. Even the "folding" submarines of Project 651, Project 659, and Project 675 surface The launch of cruise missiles and anti-ship missiles—and they survived until the late 80s. However, surface ships weren't far behind: they were actually using ships of redesigned pre-war designs—the same 68-bis and 30-bis. Artillery cruisers with non-automatic anti-aircraft guns and manually-guided small-caliber AA guns straight from 1939. belay
          The combat value of all these dinosaurs was close to zero, but they constantly required money for operation and repair, and also diverted traditionally meager naval basing and repair capacities.

          I think, if the Navy's ship inventory had been reviewed in the mid-70s, with the first-generation ships decommissioned, there would have been sufficient bases and shipyards for the remaining ships. And the KON would have been able to increase, compensating for the decline in the fleets' numbers.
          1. +2
            28 January 2026 19: 31
            If we write off all the useless junk now, there won't be much left at all. request
            And the more ships there are, the more captains and admirals there are. soldier
          2. exo
            +3
            28 January 2026 20: 40
            After all, the 68-bis and ships based on these projects had their niche: supporting amphibious landings and commanding naval groups. Clearly, the air defense of these ships was supposed to be provided by more modern designs. As for the Project 627 SSNs and the others mentioned above, I completely agree.
            1. +4
              29 January 2026 11: 10
              Quote: exo
              Still, the 68-bis and ships based on these projects had their own niche: supporting landings and commanding naval groups.

              In the 80s, there were 7 Project 68-bis cruise missiles in service (not counting the 2 command cruise missiles). Isn't that too many?
              Not to mention the Navy's strange policy regarding repairs and modernization. For example, the Zhdanov, Lazarev, and Pozharsky managed to undergo major repairs immediately before decommissioning. The Kutuzov was even put into storage immediately after completing modernization.
              Although the champion in this special naval Olympics was still the Sverdlov: smile
              In the period from 24.12.1960 to 14.7.1961 and from 12.2.1966 to 29.4.1966. underwent major repairs in Leningrad, after which it was decommissioned, mothballed and laid up, but on 11.2.1972 it was de-mothballed and put back into service on 7.2.1977. was sent for a second overhaul, on 14.2.1978 it was again mothballed and placed in long-term storage in Liepaja
              1. 0
                29 January 2026 18: 56
                Quote: Alexey RA
                I'm not even talking about the Navy's strange policy regarding repairs and modernization.

                This also happened under the Tsar. My colleague Stvoliar once posted data on the scheduled boiler replacements before the Russian Yamal-Nenets Autonomous Area Warfare (RYAV). A good half of the Black Sea Fleet's 30-caliber guns were replaced (and then safely decommissioned), but the Navarin and Sisoes continued on the campaign with their old ones. request
              2. AMG
                0
                30 January 2026 14: 28
                Don't judge too harshly, because such ships are supposed to serve for up to 30 years. And what would the navy have used to navigate the seas and oceans after WWII? Look at the service record of the cruiser Zhdanov, for example. A comrade told you that artillery ships were supposed to support amphibious landings with their caliber; 76mm is ill-suited for that. And back then, there were probably plans to fight for the straits to allow the navy to reach open waters.
                1. 0
                  30 January 2026 19: 36
                  Quote from AMG
                  Don't judge too harshly, because such ships should serve for up to 30 years.

                  In peacetime, perhaps. The problem is that the air defenses of the Project 30-bis and Project 68-bis were inferior even to those of the Allied ships of the second half of WWII.
                  Quote from AMG
                  What would the fleet use to sail the seas and oceans after WWII?

                  Walked or fought?
                  The navy could sail on anything. But the Soviet Navy couldn't fight on ships that were obsolete even by the standards of the end of World War II—it could only die with honor on them.
                  Kuznetsov proposed taking things slow and starting to rebuild the fleet using newly designed ships from post-war projects. But the People's Commissariat of the Shipbuilding Industry declared that it would build only the designs it could afford now, because the workers needed wages. And the fleet's demands conflicted with the needs of the proletariat. In short, it was industrial dictatorship at its finest.
                  Quote from AMG
                  Comrade told you that the artillery ships were supposed to support the landing of the naval assault with their caliber,

                  For this purpose, since 1969, ships for fire support of landing forces were designed - the future destroyers of Project 956.
                  The destroyers entered service. But the Navy stubbornly continued to operate and repair the Project 68-bis cruise missiles.
                  1. AMG
                    0
                    30 January 2026 20: 43
                    The air defense is indeed weak, as SAMs only appeared in the early 60s. The "old-timers" began to serve alongside the new ones. The Baltic Fleet and Black Sea Fleet could count on coastal aviation cover. They should have monitored the aircraft carriers in the Mediterranean, showing their strength in 1967 and 1973. I may be repeating myself, but I heard that Project 30-bis were assigned to the Black Sea Fleet's landing flotilla. And Project 956, that's from the early 80s. Sincerely, yours.
              3. exo
                0
                31 January 2026 18: 23
                This was already some kind of national pastime during the Soviet era: major repairs, then write-off. And money wasn't squandered like that. So, the point is unclear.
          3. +1
            29 January 2026 08: 09
            They recalled that the T-34 and IS tanks were decommissioned in 1991. At that time, the size of the Soviet tank armada decreased from 70 to 30.
          4. +1
            29 January 2026 11: 47
            I agree with you 100%. I have nothing more to add.
          5. +2
            29 January 2026 12: 45
            Alexey RA (Alexey), sir, you're 202% right! Time, effort, and money were spent on modernization according to Project 675 MKV, and the hulls were already no good! And it's best not to mention the K-133 and K-181 Project 627A, which were practically training ships...
    2. -7
      29 January 2026 01: 55
      Quote: Pavel57
      It's both a joy and a sadness. There aren't enough surface ships to replace those being decommissioned.

      There's little point in surface ships. They've been moored at the Novorossiysk pier for a long time. And missiles can be launched from other sources, too. Escort tankers? The oil will be golden. A waste of money.
  2. +3
    28 January 2026 03: 02
    Small-size navies are more suited to peacetime—protecting coastal areas and escorting ships within them. So where have all those domestic missile systems gone that our designers managed to squeeze into a standard shipping container? Such a container would have turned any civilian vessel into a military one...
    1. +1
      28 January 2026 04: 49
      They haven't gone anywhere. They're still with the Morinsis-Agat Concern.
    2. +3
      28 January 2026 19: 08
      Quote: Edvid
      Such a container turned any civilian vessel into a military one...

      He turned any civilian ship into a civilian ship with an expensive container on board.
  3. +2
    28 January 2026 03: 15
    They were threatening to hand over the Burya back in 2024, I think. In retrospect, at least they've stopped fibbing now. They were supposedly planning to accept almost fifty ships into the fleet in 2024 (https://www.gazeta.ru/army/news/2024/06/09/23208265.shtml for those who don't believe it), but then you look at these ships and something doesn't add up. Some were counted last year and this year, and maybe they'll count more next year. And then there are the support vessels, the tugboat, and it's still not enough; they probably also counted the boat and the inflatable ring. recourse
    By the way, how is Kostin doing?
    1. +2
      28 January 2026 03: 56
      Quote from alexoff
      At least they stopped lying, otherwise they wanted to accept almost fifty ships into the fleet in 2024

      Well, it seems like they also cut sturgeon in civil aviation.
  4. +16
    28 January 2026 05: 58
    The picture is depressing, the delivery dates are shocking... an 870 t ship has been under construction for 10 years... and where is the 20380 Strogii and the modernized 1154,1 Chabanenko?
    1. +3
      28 January 2026 08: 18
      Comparing it with what the Chinese are doing brings tears to my eyes... Except maybe for the submarines, it's more or less the same.
  5. +13
    28 January 2026 06: 22
    They wanted to show off the article, but it didn't turn out very well.
  6. +11
    28 January 2026 06: 51
    The author of the article only addresses the strike armament of the deployed ships. All these corvettes and small missile ships in the near-sea zone have virtually no air defense or anti-submarine warfare capabilities.
    They clearly cannot protect the tankers of the shadow fleet (as well as merchant ships in general) in the ocean zone.
    Nakhimov, 3 frigates 22350, Shapashnikov 1155M (without air defense) - that's the entire fleet!
    And this is the result of the General Staff of the Navy's mosquito fleet construction strategy.
    1. +1
      28 January 2026 19: 40
      And this is the result of the General Staff of the Navy's mosquito fleet construction strategy.
      There aren't that many mosquitoes there, either. Are there even three dozen of these mosquitoes for the entire fleet? Seven Karakurt-class destroyers, twelve Buyan-class destroyers, five 22160 patrol ships—well, that's certainly better than the Polish or Romanian fleets, but it still doesn't quite qualify as a mosquito fleet. If there were ten times as many, then we could say they were using their resources inefficiently. But the resources were probably enough for a couple of destroyers over 25 years...
    2. +1
      29 January 2026 22: 40
      Quote: FRoman1984
      Nakhimov, 3 frigates 22350, Shapashnikov 1155M (without air defense) - that's the entire fleet!

      Last year, they vowed to deliver another frigate, Project 22350, this year along with the Nakhimov. Now it's clear they won't. These geniuses have some incredible synergy with the navy – they stole the budgets for hundreds of ships under construction, they squandered key component production, they lied and wrote reports, and blared drums about unheard-of successes... And the surface fleet still doesn't exist. And the modernization of Project 1155 was canceled, although it could have helped the Pacific Fleet... and our admirals are a sight to behold.
      Now it's clear that war/non-war and other funding priorities matter. But could the frigates have been completed? The Karakurt-class frigates are a desperate attempt to grab Schrödinger's cat by the genitals. And it's all so absurd... irrational... like under Nicholas II.
  7. +8
    28 January 2026 07: 57
    For example, several companies are engaged in the serial production of Project 22800 Karakurt small missile ships. Since 2018, eight such ships have been delivered to the customer. Two new small missile ships will be delivered to the Baltic Fleet in 2026.

    I can't imagine who would be stunned by the mass production of small missile ships, or what tasks they could perform (and for what purpose) at all... But it reminded me of a joke:
    "Let's give the country coal! Even if it's small, there's plenty of it..."
    1. 0
      28 January 2026 20: 10
      We are now learning everything from the Chinese; they started building their fleet with torpedo and missile boats, and now they are mass-producing frigates, destroyers and aircraft carriers! bully Well, now we are adopting best practices, so to speak, starting from the basics. laughing
    2. +1
      29 January 2026 01: 40
      Quote: ROSS 42
      "Let's give the country coal! Even if it's small, there's plenty of it..."

      Sorry, I'm not a marine specialist, so I have a question.
      How can all this construction cope with the threats that have made the Black Sea Fleet underwater?
  8. +1
    28 January 2026 08: 25
    It has been previously reported that the sister cruiser Pyotr Velikiy will follow the Admiral Nakhimov for repairs and modernization. It will likely also receive a new weapons system based on modern missiles and auxiliary equipment. As a result, the Russian Navy will have two heavy cruisers with broad combat capabilities.
    Nakhimov has been modernized since 2014, so the "result" won't come anytime soon.
  9. +4
    28 January 2026 08: 32
    Quote: ROSS 42
    Let's give the country coal! Even if it's small, there's plenty of it..."

    Original: Spitsbergen is a land of coal - small, but up to (a lot)!!! laughing USC does not export shipbuilding. Except for nuclear submarines and submarines.
    1. +7
      28 January 2026 19: 11
      Quote: tralflot1832
      USC does not export shipbuilding. Except for nuclear submarines and submarines.

      And those aren't really... It's just the best there is.
    2. +2
      29 January 2026 05: 07
      Quote: tralflot1832
      Original: Spitsbergen is a land of small coal

      My original is based on the jokes of Kuzbass miners.
      wink
  10. +4
    28 January 2026 10: 00
    "Barring any serious difficulties, all such activities will be completed in the coming months. The ship will return to the Pacific Fleet's combat complement by the end of the year." A thunderous, prolonged round of applause, turning into a standing ovation, is due to the esteemed author for the first sentence! However, in the second sentence, the word "will return," based on the first sentence, should be replaced with "should return according to plans."
    The wise policies of the Russian Ministry of Finance, the pricing policy of the Russian Defense Ministry, and the wisest of all the actions of the USC managers, trained in tractors, led to the quiet retirement of SEVMASH's Soviet-era specialists. SEVMASH's director, Mr. Budnichenko, fought for a long time to secure orders for its machine operators, who had enormous workshops with state-of-the-art equipment and specialists who could use these machines to create amazing things from a variety of materials. BUT! For some reason, USC specialists from the central office near the Blue Bridge in St. Petersburg traveled to Finland and placed orders for the navy, including for nuclear icebreakers. The Russian Prosecutor's Office and the FSB were looking in the right direction, though. The word "import substitution" was bandied about from various high-level platforms, but for some reason, SEVMASH only received orders for bearings for its shaft lines from the Chukotka AL...
    Time passed, and Vkus Vil, Pyaterochka, and Magnit began paying couriers in Severodvinsk a decent wage. What if they were forced to go "behind the fence" and not use the internet there, crawling along the ramps of the Nakhimov or Perm nuclear power plants with operating reactors, receiving their dose of radiation, carrying cans of stinking paint and brushes? After all, some of the equipment arrived upgraded, installed only yesterday by the assemblers and welder, and today a painter in overalls, hard hat, and respirator has to spruce up the reactor compartment enclosure—not exactly creative. It's a completely different story, riding a bicycle in the fresh air with a beautiful, bright backpack over your shoulder, phone always in hand! Last week, city television once again announced: everyone to SEVMASH! The head of the quality control department explained it politely and avoided all the nitty-gritty details. The gist of it, frankly speaking, was: "There are no machine operators, no painters at all. They won't even hire you as an apprentice painter. There's a ton of work for painters, but no one wants to work there. We don't know how to deliver orders on time." In the USSR, female painters in shipbuilding retired at 45, men at 50. Then came the World Cup...
    Thanks again to the author for the wise first sentence that I quoted!
    1. +5
      28 January 2026 15: 47
      Oh, great downvoters! Refute the SEVMASH press service's statement: https://sevmash.ru/rus/news/3580-2024-10-18-05-24-51.html.
      And compare: Federal Law of December 28, 2013 N 400-FZ (as amended on November 28, 2025) "On Insurance Pensions" and the Law "On Pension Provision for Citizens in the USSR (as amended on April 17, 1991)". Did you watch the TVS report from January 22, 2026, calling for people to become painters at SEVMASH?
      1. +4
        28 January 2026 19: 17
        Quote: Tests
        Oh, great minus-takers!

        Don't pay attention:))))))
  11. +2
    28 January 2026 13: 02
    The author is inaccurate; the Perm submarine's missile armament includes the Kalibr missile. Why is the 1144.2M heavy cruiser Admiral Nakhimov assigned to the Pacific Fleet? It is assigned to the Northern Fleet. Two frigates of the 22350 class, not mentioned by the author and currently undergoing construction afloat, will be assigned to the Pacific Fleet. The frigate Admiral Amelko is being built with an increased number of missiles. The Project 21631 Buyan small missile ships are not mentioned. This series of 12 ships was delivered to the Navy, and each ship carries eight missiles (Onyx and Kalibr).
    We are slowly solving the problem with the ocean fleet, and taking into account the SVO, the completion of ships afloat has shifted to the right.
  12. +8
    28 January 2026 15: 07
    Thanks to Kirill, of course, for the article about the navy. However, I have a question about the text:
    The 3M22 missiles are expected to significantly improve the Perm's combat potential. They will enable it to attack and destroy various surface vessels. and air targets, including those with good air defense and missile defense systems.
    As far as I know, Zircon works against surface and coastal targets. But for it to also work against airborne ones (!) – that's a new thing for me! bully
    1. +2
      28 January 2026 19: 19
      Quote: Boa constrictor KAA
      air targets, incl. having good air and missile defense

      Apparently, they meant "Star Destroyer":)))
  13. +3
    28 January 2026 16: 17
    It has been previously reported that the sister cruiser Pyotr Velikiy will follow the Admiral Nakhimov for repairs and modernization. It will likely also receive a new weapons system based on modern missiles and auxiliary equipment. As a result, the Russian Navy will have two heavy cruisers with broad combat capabilities.

    Yeah, they'll modernize it by 2050!
    1. exo
      +2
      28 January 2026 20: 45
      Or NO. If you look at "Kuznetsov." Which is closer to the truth.
  14. 0
    29 January 2026 11: 38
    Where is the missile launcher on a missile boat? The usual tubes are not visible on the sides, and it is impossible to fit a vertical launcher there.
    1. 0
      29 January 2026 13: 26
      Who gave a minus - it’s difficult to explain what I did wrong?
    2. +1
      29 January 2026 18: 43
      Dear Roman Efremov (Roman), here's a link with photos of the Stupinets boat from different angles: https://bmpd.livejournal.com/4846430.html
      1. 0
        29 January 2026 21: 46
        Thank you. So they're mounted across the hull. But those are probably X-35s, they're smaller.
  15. 0
    30 January 2026 08: 14
    The "Peter the Great" will definitely be decommissioned. The modernization budget is so high that the fleet will be left without pants.