How Russia is rebuilding its ocean-going fleet

January 9 2021 29

According to the British edition of The Guardian, the Pentagon has instructed its navies to act "more aggressively" against the Russian and Chinese navies. It is easy to guess that we are talking about "ensuring freedom of navigation" on our Northern Sea Route and in the Gulf of Peter the Great, as well as in the South China Sea. The pace of construction of the PRC's naval forces is striking, but how can Russia respond to the challenge from the world's strongest naval power?

Let's face it, our fleet is very seriously inferior in size and armament to the American one, moreover, it is scattered across several seas, where it guards the state borders of Russia. The real threat to the United States is posed by the underwater component, which is the most important component of the "nuclear triad" of the Russian Defense Ministry. With the surface fleet, everything is worse, the warships of the far sea zone, our cat cried. But in recent years, the situation has begun to change for the better. At the end of the outgoing 2020, Defense Minister Sergei Shoigu reported:

The navy received two modern submarines, seven surface ships, 10 combat boats, 10 ships and support boats.

Among the novelties, it is worth noting the Knyaz Vladimir nuclear submarine of the updated project 955A Borey, capable of carrying 16 Bulava ICBMs, which is an effective means of nuclear deterrence. The frigate of project 22350 "Admiral of the Fleet Kasatonov" was also accepted into the fleet. A total of 10 such frigates are planned in the series, which were supposed to become the basis of the Russian naval fleet in the far zone, but the construction faced a lot of difficulties and delays. A big blow to the domestic military-industrial complex was the refusal of Ukraine to supply aircraft and ship power plants to Russia, which greatly shifted the deadlines for the delivery of new ships to the right. KB Almaz and NPO Saturn had to master import substitution of key components. It is expected that by 2025 the Ministry of Defense of the Russian Federation will receive six frigates of the "admiral" series, and the fifth and sixth ships will be reinforced. Also in the future, it is possible to build "Super Gorshkovy" according to the modernized project 22350M with an increased displacement.

While the fleet is gradually being updated with new series, mention should be made of the modernization program for existing ones. The renewed TARK Admiral Nakhimov of the Orlan project, in which they intend to stuff 240 attack missiles and 240 guided anti-aircraft missiles, by the end of 2022, can become a formidable force. The Russian cruiser will be the strongest in the world, capable of delivering strikes with Kalibr, Onyx and Zircon missiles, as well as providing reliable cover for other ships of the fleet. If the defense industry gets their hands on Admiral Lazarev, making it the flagship of the Pacific Fleet, Russia's capabilities in this key region will seriously increase.

A series of old Soviet BODs of Project 1155 is also undergoing deep modernization. Initially sharpened for anti-submarine warfare as part of formations, they will receive updated radar and electronic warfare systems, an air defense system, as well as a universal launcher for Caliber, Onyx and Zircon missiles. ... The first ship of this series, "Admiral Shaposhnikov," last year underwent a "renovation", increasing its combat capabilities, the remaining six frigates are next.

It is quite obvious that Moscow does not intend to be content with only the coastal fleet. Last year, our Navy received a large landing ship of project 11711 "Pyotr Morgunov", which is capable of carrying a reinforced marine battalion with technique... The fact that the Ministry of Defense is preparing to act abroad may be evidenced by the laying in Kerch of two large universal amphibious assault ships of the 23900 project. Theoretically, these UDCs in the future may even turn into light aircraft carriers, which we will discuss in detail told earlier.

Taken together, this means that Russia is gradually returning to the status of powers with a surface ocean-going fleet.

Information

Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must sign in.

Afinogen

+3

9 January 2021 14: 50

Moscow does not intend to be content with only the coastal fleet. Last year, our Navy received a large landing ship of project 11711

A landing ship is a sheep that has gathered in a dense forest where there are a large number of wolves (enemy cruisers) If only they planned to build new cruisers. We have enough intelligence and strength only to patch up old Soviet cruisers. On the one hand, it is good that they do not disappear, but there are too few of them.
1. Brother
  
  +4
  
  9 January 2021 16: 30
  
  Sorry = TRUE! An attempt to pass off what you want as valid!
  
  Oh! These fairy tales! (Officials in power and ardent "patsreots" oh, these storytellers!
  
  Who builds the FLEET! so this is China!
2. Rum rum
  
  -2
  
  9 January 2021 18: 54
  
  Who else builds cruisers in the world?
  And besides, as far as I remember, our new ships are one class higher in armament (example: MRK = corvette, corvette = frigate, frigate = destroyer).
  Or I'm confusing something.
  Are the admiral's series of frigates equal in armament to destroyers?
  1. Afinogen
    
    +2
    
    9 January 2021 19: 55
    
    I mean that, first of all, it is necessary to build strike ships and not landing ships. Why Americans are building a whole fleet of landing ships, from small to large, they have a doctrine only to attack. And where should we land the troops ??? If only I could defend my own.
    1. ASK.21.07
      
      +2
      
      9 January 2021 23: 26
      
      Landing ships are also needed, as well as shock ships for the DMZ. But, absolutely right, you need to start from the near sea zone, where we have a complete failure with mine protection (there are simply no modern means of searching for and destroying mines), almost complete - with an anti-submarine.
      
      The second point is more specific. PLO planes are at the level of the 60s and 70s, there are almost no helicopters, a huge series of small missile ships, which are IN GENERAL powerless against even the most rare submarines and planes (even though the “Pantsir” was put on the last "Karakurt" , confusion and hesitation in the construction of corvettes, thought of as the main ships for BMZ. Even 20380 were built, in fact, according to several projects, and there are 20385 more, as well as 20386 - the nightmare of any sane sailor, very expensive and extremely ineffective, but with a bunch of "innovations that have no analogues in the world" (just because these innovations no one in the world in such quantity and quality has been rattling for 300 years). This swing means a waste of funds, which are already not great bins, and a critical weakening of anti-submarine protection in BMZ, from where our strategic submarines go to the base. That is, they become vulnerable to submarines of potential adversaries, i.e., the USA, Great Britain, Japan, Norway (they have very good submarines). Let's count how many enemies we have, and how many anti-submarine ships can be put up against each of them today, and it is not difficult to conclude that if we do not take our minds, then very soon we will not have to talk about any guaranteed nuclear retaliation
      
      In terms of the submarine, there is also nothing to boast about. "Varshavyanka" is the maximum level of the first half of the 90s, and the fact that the Americans called it a "black hole" means not that they are afraid of it, but that in the USA they love to give beautiful names to their own and other people's weapons. That is when the Lada will go into series, and when each fleet is provided with them in the required quantity, then it will be possible to talk about something.
      
      As for the UDC, they need to be built. Since they can be used not only for landing, but also, for example, as a base for anti-submarine helicopters. And not only. Plus - this is the experience in the construction of large-tonnage ships. Very soon we will face the prospect of building our own aircraft carrier, and the UDC is a stage on the way to this necessary weapon for us. Necessary, but not first and foremost.
    2. Rum rum
      
      +1
      
      10 January 2021 00: 36
      
      And where should we land the troops ??? If only I could defend my own.
      
      Well, how is it? The adversary should know that we can come to visit.
      All sorts of ships are needed
      They are all important.
      
      Dear Afigeon, do you think there are some stupid people sitting in MO?
      1. Afinogen
        
        +1
        
        10 January 2021 10: 37
        
        Quote: Rum Rum
        Well, how is it? The adversary should know that we can come to visit.
        All sorts of ships are needed
        They are all important.
        
        I agree all sorts are needed, but all in due time. And if the adversary decides to attack with all his cruisers and destroyers of which he and his allies have a lot. BDK will fall first as a defenseless victim, and even that handful of ships of pensioners left over from Soviet times will not last long. We need now to urgently revive our fleet and put the emphasis mainly on attack ships.
        
        Rum rum
        
        +2
        
        10 January 2021 15: 29
        
        You did not understand.
        When we arrive, all AUG, etc. must crash against our defenses. And no one will send the BDK without cover.
        It is necessary "urgently", but not in a hurry and thoughtfully.
        Weighing needs with opportunities.
  2. ASK.21.07
    
    +2
    
    9 January 2021 23: 03
    
    Not really. 22350 are exactly frigates. Powerful, advanced frigates, at the best in the world. But the destroyers will be 22350M, judging by their displacement (7000 tons is standard, while the current "Gorshkovs" have a full 5400). They should have something like 100 missile cells, 48 of which are anti-ship missiles and "Calibers". This is the level of destroyers.
    22350 has 16 (starting from the 5th ship of the series - 24) cells for anti-ship missiles and 32 for anti-aircraft missiles of different power and range.
    1. Rum rum
      
      +1
      
      10 January 2021 00: 38
      
      Don't kick the pianist.
      1. ASK.21.07
        
        0
        
        10 January 2021 00: 41
        
        Ummm ... I don't get it.
        
        Rum rum
        
        +1
        
        10 January 2021 15: 22
        
        He plays as best he can.
        
        ASK.21.07
        
        0
        
        11 January 2021 01: 30
        
        Duc no one kicks. The discussion is underway.
        
        Rum rum
        
        +1
        
        11 January 2021 15: 19
        
        It was a joke (humor and self-irony).
Sergey Latyshev

+4

9 January 2021 15: 37

At this rate, it will recover until the arrival of aliens ... just everything described in the future tense ...
On VoenSite they write that even the Japanese underflot is stronger and larger.
The submarines still somehow balance, but they are a weapon of the dead hand ...
1. Cyril
  
  0
  
  9 January 2021 17: 40
  
  The Japanese "underflot" is one of the largest and strongest in the world. It is second only to the Russian one in terms of strategic and not very strategic nuclear submarines. In all other respects, he is one of the leading in the world.
  1. Sergey Latyshev
    
    0
    
    9 January 2021 17: 56
    
    All true.
    Everything is relative.
    I came across that the most numerous is in North Korea. I checked - yes, the most ...
  2. ASK.21.07
    
    0
    
    9 January 2021 23: 32
    
    Quite right. And anti-submarine aviation and this "underflot" is no better than the American one. And in terms of mine protection, they have a complete openwork, as with minesags.
    1. Rum rum
      
      +1
      
      10 January 2021 15: 44
      
      Is this fleet far from our coastal complexes and coastal aviation?
      As you don’t understand: a fleet operating exclusively at sea (on trade routes) does not work against Russia.
      
      Against amers, China, Geyropa, Iponia, Australia (against the rest of the world), yes it works, but not against Russia (remember the Great Patriotic War).
      
      We are a continental power. Almost all of our interests are on land.
      
      And don't talk about AUG. Against normal coastal defense (aviation, BKR, fleet, air defense), the AUG does not dance.
      
      And show me the water area from which the AUG can act against Russia.
      1. ASK.21.07
        
        +1
        
        11 January 2021 02: 14
        
        Quote: Rum Rum
        Is this fleet far from our coastal complexes and coastal aviation?
        As you don’t understand: a fleet operating exclusively at sea (on trade routes) does not work against Russia.
        
        First, look at how much of this coastal aviation and DBK we have and compare with what a potential enemy, the same Japan, has, since we are already talking about it. Everything is far from positive there. DBK and air defense alone will not be able to fight back, especially since the same DBK needs target designation, and here we have a complete lag behind the "partners". Will the satellites guide the missiles at the target?
        
        Against amers, China, Geyropa, Japan, Australia (against the rest of the world), yes, it works, but not against Russia (remember the Great Patriotic War).
        
        If you remember the Great Patriotic War, then it would be nice to remember that there they set themselves the goal of conquering us. Neither America nor Japan needs this. Time. Secondly, our powerful BF with cruisers and battleships was then paralyzed for 2 years by a dozen German and Finnish minesigns, most of which were converted from civilian ships.
        The Japanese are very quickly able to force all exits from Vladivostok with mines (depths allow). And we have a complete failure with mine defense. So to repeat the experience of the Germans, if it comes to a collision of heads (for now, purely hypothetical, but "never say never"), Tokyo is worthless.
        
        Quote: Rum Rum
        We are a continental power. Almost all of our interests are on land.
        
        The only exception is that more than half of exports (almost all oil and grain, many other goods) go by sea, and Norilsk, Chukotka, Kamchatka, etc. are supplied by sea.
        It will certainly not work to conquer and crush Russia as a state by smashing us at sea. But to deal a sensitive blow to the image is another matter. Say, if you arrange a naval blockade for us, wrapping all the ships that go to us and from us. But in this case, not only Navalny's supporters can go to the rallies. Let us recall the results of the Russian-Japanese years 1904-1905.
        
        Of course, here we must take into account that Japan itself will not get on the rampage if the United States does not support. And if they do, what then? So we need to urgently close our gaps in the defense, otherwise we can get a second Tsushima with all that it implies.
        
        Rum rum
        
        +2
        
        11 January 2021 15: 15
        
        Firstly:
        The coastline is the longest in the world, but the potential enemy's fleet is very problematic to attack from the Arctic Ocean. To drive the fleet into the Baltic, Black, Okhotsk seas means giving it to the coastal defense for profit.
        Tu-22M was created just to counter the fleet, the Yaps have nothing close, not to mention heavy anti-ship missiles. So we were told about the latest means of marine reconnaissance. Old "Legend" new "Liana", what do we know about this? And GPS was by no means the first satellite navigation system, and what we knew about it.
        
        Secondly:
        Exactly, the Fleet almost did not participate in the war (at least epic battles), and how did this affect the outcome of the war?
        More than half of our exports are delivered by pipes and can be delivered by rail.
        Almost all of our markets are located in Eurasia or North Africa. In case of war with amers, it is stupid to supply them with oil - you must agree.
        The supply of the northern territories is carried out in the inland seas (cabotage), that is, under the cover of coastal defense and when the northern latitudinal passage is completed, the problem will disappear altogether. And yes, islands and shores don't sink, unlike ships. The range of AUG aviation is several times less than the range of coastal aviation, and our anti-ship missiles are the most anti-ship missiles in the world. About air defense, I generally keep quiet.
        
        And I am not saying that the fleet is not needed, but I see no reason to shout "sentry, everything is lost." It is necessary to calmly develop the fleet without unnecessary haste.
2. Cyril
  
  0
  
  9 January 2021 17: 42
  
  https://topwar.ru/178778-sekretnyj-japonskij-flot.html
steelmaker

+3

9 January 2021 18: 28

that Russia is gradually returning to the status of powers with a surface ocean-going fleet.

Putin and the government have 15 plans. I wouldn't take a word. When they enter service, then we will rejoice.
1. ASK.21.07
  
  +2
  
  9 January 2021 23: 35
  
  All the more so because the implementation of these plans is complicated. By 2020, we were supposed to have 10 frigates 22350, and eight each, if I am not mistaken, submarines 955 and 885. At the exit - 2 frigates, 4 "Boreas" and 1 "Ash". After all, "Kazan" and the next one will be handed over only in 2021. Unless something happens again.
BoBot Robot - Free Thinking Machine

0

10 January 2021 12: 38

Why do we need steamers? To feed the fat-faced goldsmiths ?! We will bring down from the coast, and direct from satellites!
1. ASK.21.07
  
  +2
  
  11 January 2021 04: 04
  
  Rockets are not guided from satellites. You can only find a target that still needs to be identified, then take it for tracking not by satellites (in the Liana system, which provides the detection of sea targets, 4 satellites flying over one point once a day), given that the US AUG is superbly trained to avoid tracking (in the 80s, two such groups approached Kamchatka, one of which could not be found, and the second, although they found it, but quickly missed it, and after all, then the capabilities of our Navy were not an example). The target is maneuvering, and even hiding among civilian ships (and, for example, near Vladivostok, the traffic is such that just hold on, a needle in a haystack, and it will be easier to find) or corner reflectors. And even the most modern satellites are not so difficult to deceive, it is important to work it out. The US Navy has been doing this regularly since the Cold War.
  
  Target designation is constant contact of reconnaissance means with a target, up to and including its capture by the missile's homing head. In the days of Kuznetsov, the Tu-95RTs and high-speed patrolmen were engaged in this, constantly keeping the Americans at gunpoint, but now who?
  
  I recommend reading in more detail https://topwar.ru/176082-morskaja-vojna-dlja-nachinajuschih-vyvodim-avianosec-na-udar.html. Simple and comprehensive.
  1. BoBot Robot - Free Thinking Machine
    
    +1
    
    11 January 2021 12: 20
    
    You, trshch, are just Admiral Nelson! Still, in my opinion, the satellite detection and guidance system is real!
oderih

0

11 January 2021 13: 18

I listened to you with my son. They laughed for a long time.
1. oderih
  
  0
  
  11 January 2021 13: 21
  
  For now, the Arctic and the Sea of Okhotsk are inland waters. I wouldn't fit. Well, the submarines of Kamchatka and from ports can derbalize.