Lost opportunities. Why is the "Soviet Mistral" better than the UDC of project 23900


The transition the combined detachment of large landing ships of the Baltic and Northern fleets in the Mediterranean Sea made a lot of noise in Europe. NATO countries staged a real circus with the transfer of troops to the coast and the escort of six Russian large landing ships, as if they could really capture them. What are the real capabilities of the Russian Navy for landing on the sea coast, and what could they be?


To capture some conditional "African" country from the sea, it is desirable to create a strong expeditionary strike group (EUG), capable of striking sea and ground targets of the enemy's antiamphibious defense, as well as landing the actual landing force - marines and armored vehicles. At the same time, the EUG itself must be reliably covered from attacks by aircraft, anti-ship missiles and submarines. Let's "by eye" compare the capabilities of the Russian Navy and the US Marine Corps, with the support of the US Navy, to conduct amphibious assaults.

What's with the Americans


They are great with this. The payroll of the US Navy includes 8 landing helicopter dock ships (Landing Helicopter Dock, LHD), 11 landing transport docks (Landing Platform Dock, LPD), 5 landing helicopter dock ships (Landing Ship Dock, LSD) and 3 landing - assault helicopter carrier (Landing Helicopter Assault, LHA) of the USS America type. The Americans intend to increase the number of the latter from 3 to 11. This means that at a time the United States can transfer over 31 marines and 670 armored vehicles to a foreign coast.

This is a very serious force that allows Washington to speak "through the lips" with almost anyone. It is clear that only the United States can afford to maintain the most powerful navy in the world and the most numerous Marine Corps due to a combination of many factors, including their geographical remoteness from the main theater of operations, aggressive external policies Washington, as well as the exceptional financial capabilities of the "hegemon".

Russia cannot afford all this, claims to the role of a world power require meeting certain criteria, in particular, the ability to project its military force somewhere on the other side of the world. What do we have with hypothetical amphibious assault forces?

Missed landing opportunities


To be honest, we are not very good at this. If you look at the combined detachment of the BDK, which so defiantly alarmed the NATO bloc, then 5 out of 6 are old Soviet ships that have almost exhausted their resources. Only one of them, "Ivan Gren" project 11771, is a remake, which was built for a very long time, expensively and with a lot of comments.

Today, our main hope is the "Russian Mistrals", project 23900 universal landing ships laid down and under construction in Kerch. About which ships the Russian Navy, BDK or UDC need, we detail reasoned earlier.

Interestingly, we could have had our own Mistrals a long time ago, and the BDK, the “workhorses” of the fleet, could have been larger. Many opportunities at one time were mediocrely missed due to intrigues, sloppiness and outright sabotage.

"Rhinos"


When the domestic press wondered if six Russian large landing ships were going to the Caribbean Sea, they usually forgot to mention that they were not structurally adapted for such an ocean crossing, which would have ended it in a dangerous adventure. However, the USSR Navy had three Project 1174 ships, which were quite capable of such a task.

The total displacement of the Rhinos, as these BDKs were called, was 14 tons, which made them ships of the far sea and ocean zone. The cruising range at a speed of 060 knots with a normal fuel supply was 18 miles, and with a maximum fuel supply - 4000 miles. BDKs could transport up to 7500 PT-50 tanks, or 76 armored personnel carriers and infantry fighting vehicles, or up to 80 vehicles, as well as up to 120 marines. Soviet ships carried weapons for self-defense and support of the landing troops: 500-mm gun mount AK-76, four six-barreled 726-mm automatic guns AK-30, launcher (PU) of the Osa-M air defense system, four quadruple launchers for MANPADS and one installation MLRS A-630 Grad-M.

In total, 3 ships of project 1174 were built: Ivan Rogov, Mitrofan Moskalenko and Alexander Nikolaev. Yes, the promising Russian UDC project 23900 is named after two Soviet BDKs. By the way, when France threw us with the Mistrals, it was the Rhinos that were considered as some kind of their ersatz.

Alas, Ivan Rogov was disposed of in 2004, and Mitrofan Moskalenko was scrapped in 2019. There was some hope for the preservation and modernization of "Alexander Nikolaev", but he was also sentenced. Note that ships of this class and displacement are just what you need to deliver military cargo to the Caribbean or somewhere else.

By the way, the "Rhinos" were built on the Kaliningrad "Yantar", which, obviously, is capable of laying and building a ship with a displacement of over 14 tons, the size of a decent cruiser.

"Ivan Tarava"


Project 11780 universal landing ships in the amount of 2 pieces were never built, which is a pity. They could well become "Soviet Mistrals", giving the Russian Navy the first UDC helicopter carriers without flirting with France.

This project was developed by the Nevsky Design Bureau in the late 80s, inspired by the American Tarava UDC. The Soviet "Ivan Tarava" turned out to be smaller in size, with a standard displacement of only 25 tons versus 000 for the original. However, its performance characteristics are impressive even in comparison with its successor, the modern project 33.


So, the promising Russian UDC has a standard displacement of 30 tons, a total displacement of 000, a cruising range of 40 miles against the declared 000 of the Ivan Tarava. A modern ship has a better landing capacity: up to 6000 marines and up to 8000 combat units equipment against 1000 marines and 40 tanks from the Soviet. However, in terms of the composition of the air wing, the unrealized project looks more attractive - 12 Ka-29 airborne transport helicopters in the landing version or 25 Ka-27 anti-submarine helicopters in the anti-submarine version against 16 helicopters and 4 UAVs on the UDC project 23900.

In general, the Soviet universal amphibious assault ship-helicopter carrier is very impressive in terms of its performance characteristics even today. Undoubtedly, a pair of such UDCs, "Kremenchug" and "Kherson", would significantly increase the capabilities of the USSR Navy and the Russian Navy in operations in the far sea and ocean zone. Alas, this promising project was ruined by departmental intrigues when the "battle for the slipway" unfolded. Shipyards capable of building ships of such a large displacement were needed for TAVKR, so competitors used frankly sabotage moves against Ivan Tarava.

Directly on the nose of the helicopter carrier, they proposed to place an artillery mount and set the task for the developers to “justify” such an unusual decision for an aircraft carrier. Then they began to add additional tasks, complicating and frankly clouding the project, which in the end did not take place.

We can only regret it.
31 comment
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must sign in.
  1. passing by Offline passing by
    passing by (passing by) 2 February 2022 13: 17
    -2
    whatever you call a yacht, so it will float ...
    1. Marzhecki Offline Marzhecki
      Marzhecki (Sergei) 2 February 2022 13: 55
      +1
      Wasp - wasp in translation. Nothing seems to float normally.
      By the way, the sailors say that the ship "walks". Something else floats. soldier
      1. passing by Offline passing by
        passing by (passing by) 2 February 2022 14: 03
        0
        Kherson and Kremenchug are "floating" and will soon join those ships ... they will go into oblivion. They also wanted everything at once. And a phrase from the cartoon. complaint against the director...
  2. Marzhecki Offline Marzhecki
    Marzhecki (Sergei) 2 February 2022 14: 08
    0
    Quote: passing by
    They also wanted everything at once.

    How is this to be understood?

    And a phrase from the cartoon. complaint against the director...

    I have no complaints about him. Just a yacht not UDC yes
    1. passing by Offline passing by
      passing by (passing by) 2 February 2022 14: 14
      -2
      How is this to be understood?

      Let's start remembering about underpants, visa-free travel and other requirements on mudan?

      Just a yacht not UDC

      Has this UDC even reached the layout level? And it is not known what else would have been added to those tasks ... by the way, Abramovich's yacht has a helicopter, boats and British special forces as sailors ... but there is no gun on the bow)))
      1. Marzhecki Offline Marzhecki
        Marzhecki (Sergei) 2 February 2022 14: 37
        0
        Let's start remembering about underpants, visa-free travel and other requirements on mudan?

        you do not confuse Russia with Ukraine?

        Has this UDC even reached the layout level? And it is not known what else would have been added to those tasks ...

        Got it. And today, UDCs are already being built in hardware.
        1. passing by Offline passing by
          passing by (passing by) 2 February 2022 14: 49
          -2
          Shall we talk further?

          you do not confuse Russia with Ukraine?

          this is when Kherson became part of Russia? and the project of the UDC of the same name was Soviet.

          And today UDC are already being built in hardware

          This is where the project 11780 began to be implemented in hardware?
          1. Marzhecki Offline Marzhecki
            Marzhecki (Sergei) 2 February 2022 15: 55
            -1
            Listen, figure it out first in your head, and then discuss with me.
            1. passing by Offline passing by
              passing by (passing by) 2 February 2022 16: 34
              -2
              the phrase was 11780 and its name. And in Russian! I did not start the discussion by dragging in topics not related to my first comment. such as the fact of building 23900 to a remark about the layout of 11780 ... I even said a word about 23900, I asked about it ??? And now it turns out I have to figure it out with my head?
              1. Marzhecki Offline Marzhecki
                Marzhecki (Sergei) 2 February 2022 16: 36
                -1
                Re-read the article and what I wrote, CAREFULLY, perhaps your questions will disappear by themselves. EVERYTHING IS WRITTEN HERE.
                1. passing by Offline passing by
                  passing by (passing by) 2 February 2022 16: 47
                  -2
                  Kherson and Kremenchug projects 11780 were closed by the commander-in-chief under the USSR in favor of aircraft carriers! Did I read correctly? Right. Kherson and Kremenchug in the ruins are also covered with a copper basin. Right? right. And I didn’t ask about the rest and there’s nothing to ascribe too much to me!
                  Instead of the UDC, the aircraft-carrying cruiser "Admiral Kuznetsov" was built. what bad officials ... they would scare now not with an aircraft carrier, but with two helicopter carriers. and it’s not a fact that they would not be sent to China as scrap metal or would rot in ruins.
  3. nov_tech.vrn Offline nov_tech.vrn
    nov_tech.vrn (Michael) 2 February 2022 14: 17
    -4
    UDC is a big fat target, but shorter meat
  4. Marzhecki Offline Marzhecki
    Marzhecki (Sergei) 2 February 2022 14: 37
    0
    Quote: nov_tech.vrn
    UDC is a big fat target, but shorter meat

    Without anti-aircraft carrier "freaks" nowhere ... what
    1. nov_tech.vrn Offline nov_tech.vrn
      nov_tech.vrn (Michael) 2 February 2022 22: 28
      -2
      I’m not against aircraft carriers and not even against UDC, it’s just that it’s a rather vulnerable target, the defeat of which can lead to the disruption of the entire operation, we don’t consider “flag display” and “force projection”, respectively, very serious forces of both air defense and countermeasures should be accompanied submarines. At one time, if the agents had more Exocets and their carriers, the Falkland Islands would now be called the Malvinas. .
      1. Marzhecki Offline Marzhecki
        Marzhecki (Sergei) 3 February 2022 08: 03
        0
        If the Britons had then had normal aircraft carriers instead of inferior anti-submarine gizmos, the Argentines would have had no chance at all. hi
  5. wolf46 Offline wolf46
    wolf46 2 February 2022 15: 08
    +1
    I forgot that BDK 1174 was built on Yantar) There is a possibility that, having built a pair of 11711M, they will undertake to modernize the project again. If it's not already happening..
    And there is a stone's throw to "Rhino") At the base "Ivan Gren" they put an end to it. What kind of BDK (11711M or analogue 1174) does the fleet need?
  6. Marzhecki Offline Marzhecki
    Marzhecki (Sergei) 2 February 2022 15: 56
    +1
    Quote: wolf46
    On the base "Ivan Gren" put an end to it. What kind of BDK (11711M or analogue 1174) does the fleet need?

    Having familiarized myself with the performance characteristics of the Rhinoceros, I tend to him, in a modernized version. What do you think?
    1. wolf46 Offline wolf46
      wolf46 2 February 2022 18: 17
      +2
      First, avoid heterogeneity in the airborne forces. Probably, the appearance, performance characteristics of "Ivan Andreev" are the result of trial operation of "Ivan Gren" and new R&D, and not taken from the ceiling. So I count on the continuation of laying 11711M at least one more (or better two) pair of ships in order to saturate the Pacific Fleet quickly and with the same type of BDK. The 22350 frigate project is good in terms of its evolution: basic (4 hulls in total) - improved (4 hulls so far) - modernized (planned to be laid down). Thus, today the 11711 series includes: basic (2 ships in total) - modernized (so far 2 ships) - ..
      1. Marzhecki Offline Marzhecki
        Marzhecki (Sergei) 2 February 2022 20: 23
        +1
        Rhinoceros is decently larger than 11711M.
        And so, yes, unification has a lot of advantages. yes
  7. svetlanavradiy Offline svetlanavradiy
    svetlanavradiy (Svetlana Vradiy) 2 February 2022 17: 03
    -2
    Maybe I'm not very versed in military matters, but it seems to me that aircraft carriers are already the last century. These are targets for enemy bombardment. Land-based hypersonic missiles and submarines equipped with hypersonic missiles are now important.
    1. passing by Offline passing by
      passing by (passing by) 2 February 2022 17: 35
      +2
      the enemy is different. is it not too bold to use hypersound where naval aviation can handle it?
    2. Marzhecki Offline Marzhecki
      Marzhecki (Sergei) 2 February 2022 20: 21
      -1
      You're wrong. Aircraft carriers are extremely useful ships, surrounded by a mass of myths.
      1. Monster_Fat Offline Monster_Fat
        Monster_Fat (What's the difference) 2 February 2022 21: 36
        -2
        I love Russian "news" about what is not.
        1. Marzhecki Offline Marzhecki
          Marzhecki (Sergei) 3 February 2022 08: 04
          -1
          This is not news, but an analytical review of what could have been.
  8. IMHO Offline IMHO
    IMHO (nikitoss) 3 February 2022 06: 35
    +1
    First they broke / cut everything, and then we sit and cry, oh, there were ships ...
    And there was also a vertical plane ... but where is it already: competencies have been lost, deadlines have been shifted to the right. We are building icebreakers and gas carriers, which means that the BDK and UDC (if necessary) would be built in the required quantities. So it's not needed yet.
    1. Marzhecki Offline Marzhecki
      Marzhecki (Sergei) 3 February 2022 08: 06
      0
      All right, say it.
  9. Sergey Latyshev Offline Sergey Latyshev
    Sergey Latyshev (Serge) 3 February 2022 10: 04
    0
    To regret, not to regret, but the project is old, now they are building not like that anymore
    1. Marzhecki Offline Marzhecki
      Marzhecki (Sergei) 3 February 2022 12: 58
      -1
      How so? How exactly are they building now? And what has fundamentally changed?
      1. Sergey Latyshev Offline Sergey Latyshev
        Sergey Latyshev (Serge) 3 February 2022 15: 55
        +1
        Judging by modern sketches, they are trying to bring it closer to an aircraft carrier: add space on the nose and make the top wider, higher. -
  10. Don36 Offline Don36
    Don36 (Don36) 4 February 2022 16: 37
    0
    In the Russian Federation today they are building not only UDC, but also BDK 11711M. Let's see what they build. You should get reduced copies of UDC Rotterdam
  11. SHAH Offline SHAH
    SHAH 12 February 2022 21: 36
    -1
    The author writes interestingly, missed, intrigues, sloppiness, but to write the truth is weakly elementary theft at the state level + those who are strong in power, Russia is not needed.