UDC or cruiser. What helicopter carrier does the Russian Navy need?


They say the best is the enemy of the good. There is a fair amount of truth in this statement. The super-innovative and super-expensive Zamvolt destroyers turned out to be unnecessary for the US Navy. Created with extensive use of stealthof technologies and composite materials Russian corvettes, as recently turned out, burn like a torch. The weapon of victory should be relatively simple, therefore very reliable and, preferably, cost reasonable money. Is it possible to apply a similar approach to the revival of the Russian Navy?


A while ago we were surprised Found outthat, contrary to the imposed propaganda myth, Russia has everything it needs to build a rank 1 destroyer class ship. To do this, it is enough to take the already existing Soviet project BOD 1155.1, modernize it in accordance with the challenges of the time, install modern engines, and we could get a reliable strong "workhorse" that can be used to solve a wide range of tasks. The Russian Navy does not need any "wunderwaffe", like the super-expensive and super-sophisticated nuclear destroyer "Leader", which the shipbuilding industry is guaranteed to grind out for 15 years, or even more. Instead of one super destroyer, which still will not radically change the balance of power at sea, it is more expedient to build three simply good destroyers, from which there will be more real sense.

And there is no need to be complex about turning to Soviet developments. For some reason, the Americans do not hesitate to build, continuously improving, their destroyers "Arleigh Burke", starting in 1988. For some reason, no one calls them "old", on the contrary, this destroyer is recognized as the best in the world in its class. And the super-duper "Zamvolta" turned out to be completely unnecessary for the US Navy. Let's ask ourselves a question, can our country take something else, in addition to the BOD of project 1155.1, from Soviet developments and build from scratch, improving it?

Helicopter carrier?


Currently, two Project 23900 universal amphibious assault ships are under construction in Kerch. In addition to the ability to transport a battalion of marines and armored vehicles, the most important advantage of the UDC is its air wing, which can consist of helicopters of different types, up to 16 pieces in total. They will allow the Russian Navy to solve a number of urgent tasks.

At firstBy placing on the deck from 4 to 6 AWACS helicopters, the helicopter carrier will be able to issue data for target designation to the strike and anti-aircraft missiles of the ship group, in which it is traveling. The range of the Ka-31 type helicopter is seriously inferior to the carrier-based AWACS aircraft, but without it our fleet is generally half-blind and half-deaf, cannot effectively direct the Zircons and Calibers to the target, which, unfortunately, not everyone understands.

Secondlyas we recently have established, today the Russian Navy is not able to provide reliable cover for the combat deployment areas of its SSBNs. There is an acute shortage of anti-submarine ships and anti-submarine aircraft that would fight against enemy multipurpose submarines that hunt our SSBNs. The helicopter carrier is partly capable of solving this problem. Anti-submarine Ka-27M, deployed at a floating airfield, will be of great help in hunting enemy submarines. In the future, they can be replaced with more modern Lamprey helicopters.

Thirdly, in a different composition of the wing, anti-submarine helicopters can be replaced with attack ones, which can be equipped with anti-ship missiles and, possibly, even air-to-air missiles. This will make it possible to deliver air strikes to small ships and even to enemy air targets.

Thus, the helicopter carrier is an extremely useful warship. Unfortunately, there are a couple of problems.

There are only two of them, "Mitrofan Moskalenko" will become the flagship of the Black Sea Fleet, "Ivan Rogov" will join the KTOF. The need to fight submarines and ships of a strong enemy has not been canceled, for example, in the Northern Fleet. In reality, the Russian Navy will receive two UDC closer to the end of the decade. And the second problem is that due to the limited air group, you will have to choose which helicopters to deploy. From 4 to 6 Ka-31s are needed without discussion, the remaining space on the deck will need to be given either for anti-submarine warfare or for drums, otherwise, if you smear the resource with a thin layer, then it may not be enough to effectively complete a combat mission.

In other words, it is highly desirable that the Black Sea, Pacific and Northern fleets have at least two aircraft carriers each. For now, let's take clean aircraft carriers as a parenthesis in view of their high cost, complexity and duration of construction. But is it possible to somehow resolve the issue of a multipurpose floating airfield for helicopters of various classes?

Helicopter cruiser?


Some time ago we already concerned the question of the possibility of reviving the forgotten Project 1123 helicopter carrier cruiser. The Condor is rightfully considered the first Soviet aircraft-carrying ship. It was created specifically for hunting enemy nuclear submarines in the far sea zone, therefore it was seriously armed. Each such cruiser carried 14 anti-submarine helicopters, anti-submarine missiles and bombs, had a fairly serious air defense system and artillery for its time. The Condors were tough ships and could even withstand a nuclear explosion nearby.

Unfortunately, this project also had very significant drawbacks. Due to the structural features of the hull, its seaworthiness left much to be desired, inside it was cramped, and due to chronic problems with the steam turbine power plant, it had a real speed much lower than the "passport" 29 knots. So is it worth contacting the Condors if instead of the third in the 1123 series, the USSR Navy decided to build the TAVRK 1143 Krechet project?

It is possible that it is still worth it, but not according to project 1123, but according to 1123M (1123.3). Soviet engineers tried to eliminate the maximum number of design flaws in the third ship, which was supposed to be named "Kiev", but was never completed.

The third "Condor" was supposed to grow 12 meters in length and 1 meter in width. Its standard displacement would have grown to 15 tons versus 000 of its predecessors, the number of take-off sites - up to 12290. The Kiev air group was supposed to be already 6 helicopters, even the use of vertical take-off and landing Yak-22 aircraft was supposed. They intended to equip the new cruiser with anti-ship missiles, as well as strengthen its anti-aircraft defense.

Thus, "Kiev" could become a truly multipurpose warship of the far sea zone. Why was it abandoned without completing the building? Because the command decided to give the slipway for the first Soviet TAVRK, which surpassed the Condor in performance characteristics. Does this automatically mean that the 1123M project is not interesting to us either?

Not at all. Unlike the USSR, in modern Russia there is nowhere to build ships of the TAVRK or ATAVRK class. Rather, there is where, but it will be necessary to take "Sevmash" or "Zvezda", but it seems that it is impossible. But a helicopter-carrying anti-submarine cruiser with a standard displacement of 15 tons is a much smaller task than building an aircraft carrier with a displacement of 000 to 70 tons. This could well have been carried out at the Zaliv plant in Kerch, immediately after the completion of work on the UDC of project 000, the total displacement of which, we recall, is much larger, reaching 100 tons.

Instead of steam turbines, the revived "Kiev" could be equipped with 4 gas turbine engines М90ФР with a capacity of 27 hp. With. each according to the COGAG scheme, which will give the Condor 500 hp. against 110 from its predecessor. The developers even promise to increase the M000FR capacity from 90 MW to 000 MW. This would give the cruiser a good run. In addition to 90 anti-submarine and other helicopters, it could be equipped with serious strike and anti-aircraft weapons.
A ship of this class can be used for a wide range of tasks: in conjunction with the UDC as the "core" of the ship's strike group, to support amphibious assault forces with missile strikes and attack helicopters, and also as the "core" of a search and strike anti-submarine group.

A helicopter-carrying cruiser with a standard displacement of 15 tons is something that the domestic shipbuilding industry can handle. The Zaliv plant, after launching the UDC as a platform, suggests itself.
13 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must sign in.
  1. Astronaut Offline Astronaut
    Astronaut (San Sanych) 20 December 2021 16: 40
    +1
    The author of course distorts about "Agile" quote from gazeta.ru:

    The hull of the ship survived thanks to the fire insulation laid between the superstructure and the deck.

    Only the superstructure burned down, which did not yet have this isolation.
    And what does 1155.1 do not suit you? You contradict yourself.

    For some reason, the Americans have not hesitated to build, continuously improving, their destroyers "Arleigh Burke", starting in 1988.

    The idea of ​​a helicopter-carrying cruiser is very interesting and, it seems to me, has the right to exist. Only not TAVRK, but TAVKR Heavy Avian-carrying Cruiser)) and precisely in the form of 1123M.
  2. Marzhecki Offline Marzhecki
    Marzhecki (Sergei) 20 December 2021 16: 42
    0
    Quote: Astronaut
    And what does 1155.1 do not suit you? You contradict yourself. For some reason, the Americans have not hesitated to build, continuously improving, their destroyers "Arleigh Burke", starting in 1988.

    It works for me. What is the contradiction? Have you read these articles at all?

    The author of course distorts about "Nimble" quote from their gazrta.ru the hull of the ship survived thanks to the fire insulation laid between the superstructure and the deck. No hardware has been installed on the superstructure yet

    What exactly is the twitching?
  3. Marzhecki Offline Marzhecki
    Marzhecki (Sergei) 20 December 2021 19: 20
    0
    Quote: Astronaut
    The idea of ​​a helicopter-carrying cruiser is very interesting and, it seems to me, has the right to exist. Only not TAVRK, but TAVKR Heavy Avian-carrying Cruiser)) and precisely in the form of 1123M.

    And thanks for that.
  4. S WITH Offline S WITH
    S WITH (N S) 20 December 2021 23: 40
    0

    for the search and destruction of submarines, an underwater nuclear unmanned aerial vehicle Cephalopod is being developed, so helicopter carriers are unnecessary, it is necessary to build small aircraft carriers of the Varan type, on which the turntables can also be based on the UAV
    1. Marzhecki Offline Marzhecki
      Marzhecki (Sergei) 21 December 2021 07: 33
      0
      Quote: S S
      for the search and destruction of submarines, an underwater nuclear unmanned aerial vehicle Cephalopod is being developed, so helicopter carriers are unnecessary, it is necessary to build small aircraft carriers of the Varan type, on which the turntables can also be based on the UAV

      Let them build it first and let it into the series. Don't forget that there are hunters for hunters.
      A helicopter carrier is an extremely useful and versatile ship; some of the tasks that it can perform are described in the article. No submarine can do this. Versatility.
  5. Fuck the B-nose! We need steamers to guard the coasts, so that Kamchatka is not recaptured from us!
    1. iv.victor150147 Offline iv.victor150147
      iv.victor150147 (Victor Ivanov) 11 January 2022 11: 27
      0
      Calm down, with such an economy and industry, we will not have either one or the other.
  6. Marzhecki Offline Marzhecki
    Marzhecki (Sergei) 21 December 2021 11: 49
    0
    Quote: S S
    so helicopter carriers are unnecessary, it is necessary to build small aircraft carriers of the Varan type, on them and the turntables can be based and uavs

    Varane has the right to exist as a light aircraft carrier. But let's compare it to the Condor.
    1) a displacement of 45 thousand tons versus 15 thousand tons. What is easier, cheaper and faster to build?
    2) wing: 50 aircraft, including 24 MiG-29K carrier-based fighters, six helicopters and 20 unmanned aerial vehicles (UAVs) - this is Varan, UDC project 23900 has 16 helicopters.
    22 helicopters (anti-submarine, AWACS, landing or attack helicopters) - this is the Project 1123M Condor. That is, as a pure helicopter carrier, a cruiser with 22 devices outperforms a light aircraft carrier, which must also carry fighters.
    3) multifunctionality: Varan is a pure light aircraft carrier without shock weapons, UDC is similar. Condor is a helicopter-carrying cruiser that has powerful anti-submarine weapons, an air defense system and can be equipped with anti-ship missiles, as well as universal launch cells for Caliber and Zircon. It is an independent and effective combat unit.
    That is, with several times smaller displacement, as a helicopter carrier, the Condor wins over both Varan and the UDC of project 23900 in terms of multitasking. If those need to be covered with a warrant of ships, then the cruiser itself is capable of covering other ships.
    P.S. I'm not against the UDC or Varan, these are very necessary ships, but the Condor occupies a unique segment, closing many tasks at the same time. In an amicable way, the Russian Navy needs 3-4 such helicopter-carrying anti-submarine cruisers. IMHO.
    1. The comment was deleted.
      1. The comment was deleted.
  7. Yuri V.A Offline Yuri V.A
    Yuri V.A (Yuri) 24 December 2021 12: 24
    -1
    Again, the author has conjectures, projections and utopias. A modern destroyer of 15000 tons is too much, and a cruiser of the old project of 20000 tons is just that.
    1. Marzhecki Offline Marzhecki
      Marzhecki (Sergei) 25 December 2021 06: 40
      0
      Again, the author has conjectures, projections and utopias.

      Oh, I'm sorry, oh, I'm sorry. Better your whining, of course. hi

      A modern destroyer of 15000 tons is too much, and a cruiser of the old project of 20000 tons is just that.

      Is this about the Leader, or what? And you didn’t yourself admit that there wouldn’t be much use from him?
      After the modernization, the cruiser project will no longer be old, and there are not 20 unnecessarily, but smaller ones.
      And there will be more sense from him than from the Leader or from the UDC as a helicopter carrier.
  8. iv.victor150147 Offline iv.victor150147
    iv.victor150147 (Victor Ivanov) 24 December 2021 13: 59
    0
    I read the headline: "What helicopter carrier does the Russian Navy need?" Almost all the comments about what is more effective in combat use. Nobody asks the question, what can we build? and can we at all? Unless, of course, you do not have in mind the purchase, for example, in one of the NATO countries.
    1. Marzhecki Offline Marzhecki
      Marzhecki (Sergei) 25 December 2021 06: 41
      0
      Quote: iv.viktor150147
      I read the headline: "What helicopter carrier does the Russian Navy need?" Almost all the comments about what is more effective in combat use. Nobody asks the question, what can we build? and can we at all? Unless, of course, you do not have in mind the purchase, for example, in one of the NATO countries.

      Actually, that is why they paid attention to this project, which is quite capable of building. I even indicated where, with what engines, etc.
      1. gunnerminer Offline gunnerminer
        gunnerminer (gunner miner) 26 December 2021 00: 38
        -2
        The helicopter carrier requires a naval escort group, and a multipurpose nuclear submarine ... For a guaranteed salvo on the deployment route and in the patrol zone, the SSBN crew need to provide KPUG and PLO aviation. for the crews of the SSBN.KUG will also be required to ensure the dispersal of SSBNs during the threatened period. Such a squad of forces still needs to be created.