Hidden threat: why combat icebreakers of Project 23550 need to be seriously re-equipped

October 24 2023 15

In this publication we continue what we started earlier. Thread about threats to Russia from NATO in the Arctic region. It is believed that the Arctic is our “backyard”, where only we can feel at home, but is this really so?

One of the reasons to touch upon Arctic issues was the recent news that the lead patrol ship of the ice zone of Project 23550 “Ivan Papanin” was sent to Kronstadt for demagnetization of the hull. There will be at least four ships of a similar type, and it seems that this time our admirals have prepared in advance for a modern war in the Far North.

"Arctic"/"Ermak"

Let us note that Russia has a long tradition of building icebreakers, including dual and purely military/patrol purposes. Also, ice-class militarized ships are being built in Norway, Denmark and Canada. Therefore, Project 23550 did not appear out of nowhere.

The contract for the construction of two ships of Project 23550 (code “Arctic”) was concluded between the Russian Ministry of Defense and the Admiralty Shipyards in 2016, and the Russian Navy was supposed to receive the first of them back in 2020, but the deadlines have shifted to the right. The lead ship is called “Ivan Papanin”, the next one is called “Nikolai Zubov”. Why are they so remarkable?

First of all, the size of both patrol ships attracts attention: with a length of 114,5 meters and a width of 19,5 meters, they have a total displacement of 8500 tons. That is, these are quite destroyers in terms of displacement, which should be remembered by those who claim that Russia is not able to build warships of this class. PJSC Vyborg Shipyard definitely can. The maximum speed of the Papanin and Zubov reaches 18 knots, the cruising range at 10 knots is 10 miles, the autonomy of navigation is 000 days, the crew is 70 people, another 60 can be taken on board. Moreover, both ships comply with the ice class Arc70, which allows them to push through ice up to 7 meters thick.

It is officially stated that Project 23550 can be operated in both arctic and tropical conditions. It is positioned as a “warship for peaceful missions.” “Ivan Papanin” and “Nikolay Zubov” will be able to be used as icebreakers, tugs, supply vessels, patrol and warships in the most difficult conditions of the Far North. In general, their importance cannot be overestimated.

The FSB Border Service liked the project so much that for its needs, “Arctic” was modified into the “Ermak” cipher. There are almost no differences between them; they relate only to the set of weapons, which we will discuss in more detail later. The first border icebreaker, called Purga, was laid down in 2020 and is expected to be in service by 2025. The second, bearing the proud name “Dzerzhinsky,” will only be laid in 2023.

"Doves of Peace - 2"?

If we take into account the aggressive rhetoric of the NATO bloc regarding the Arctic region and what is happening today in the Black and Baltic Seas, it seems that the Russian Ministry of Defense and the FSB Border Service were staring at the water when they became concerned with the construction of specialized ice-class ships. However, the sad experience learned from the SVO allows us to doubt this somewhat.

What are “Ivan Papanin” and “Nikolai Zubov” armed with and how are they protected?

Their standard armament consists of one 76,2 mm AK-176MA artillery mount, as well as 8 Igla or Verba MANPADS. Optionally, ships of the Russian Navy can be retrofitted with 2-4 6P59 "Kord" machine gun mounts of 12,7 mm caliber and a pair of "Caliber-K" type container mounts, which should accommodate up to four 3M-14 or 3M-54 "Caliber" cruise missiles "or the same number of anti-ship missiles of the X-35 Uran type.

In principle, the border ships of the FSB of the Russian Federation do not have any cruise or anti-ship missiles. These are the same 76,2 mm AK-176MA artillery mount, four 12,7 mm 6P59 Kord machine gun mounts, 8 Igla or Verba MANPADS, as well as a pair of 30 mm AK artillery mounts -630M. These are all their weapons. Doesn't remind you of anything?

Those familiar with the problems of the Russian Navy probably remembered the Project 22160 patrol ships, which, due to their weak armament, received the nickname “doves of peace” from ill-wishers. The actual absence of a sea-based air defense system served them very badly after the start of the air defense system, when they had to install modules from the ground-based Tor air defense system directly at the stern and attach them with chains. Project 22160 can be said to have no anti-submarine protection, which became a mortal threat for them after the Ukrainian Armed Forces received underwater kamikaze drones. Here, by the way, is the morning news from the Governor of Sevastopol Mikhail Razvozhaev in his Telegram channel:

Loud sounds - this is the Black Sea Fleet on the outer roadstead repelling a possible attack by underwater sabotage forces and enemy assets.

And these are the problems that the NATO bloc created for us in “proxy” mode with the hands of Ukrainian Nazis in the Black Sea. What can we soon get in the Far North?

There we will have four multi-purpose ice-class ships with the displacement of a destroyer, but without a normal air defense system or anti-submarine warfare systems. Why, sorry, do they need “Caliber” or anti-ship missiles there if the main threat will come from aviation and submarines?

Before it is too late, Project 23550 should be equipped with sea-based air defense systems: at least Pantsir-M, better yet, Tor or even Redut. It is necessary to make timely changes to the design of ships that have not yet been built so that they do not subsequently turn into defenseless targets in the ice. They also need to be equipped with means of combating enemy submarines and underwater drones: GAS, Packet-NK and the Ka-27PL anti-submarine helicopter. The feasibility of placing containerized Kalibr and anti-ship missiles on icebreakers raises some doubts.

It is likely that the Arctic series will have to be continued, modified to take into account new real threats and increased the number of anti-submarine helicopters to two units.

Information

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

Vladimir Tuzakov

-3

24 October 2023 11: 27

You need to respond to threats accordingly and adequately to the threats. So far, no threats are foreseen in the Arctic, with the appearance of the first air defense, because icebreakers, support ships and strike weapons are not the main thing. Here are the coastal strike forces to develop according to the threats. Conclusion: Plan to repel military threats, depending on changing circumstances, without fail and constantly. To repel military threats, prepare in advance for more likely actual circumstances.
faiver

+1

24 October 2023 12: 38

It is optimal to develop container-type air defense systems so as not to make major changes to the design of ships already under construction
JD1979

-6

24 October 2023 12: 46
Not generally normal criticism, but so that there is no such thing from which you can really laugh))) And all because the author, at least in his imagination, has no idea how what he proposes will actually work)))

A typical picture of an icebreaker and its operation. And now a question for experts))): What will happen if you shoot from the Package-NK?
1. Beidodir
  
  +6
  
  24 October 2023 13: 14
  
  A typical picture of an icebreaker and its operation. And now a question for experts))): What will happen if you shoot from the Package-NK?
  
  Do you even know that there is also a change of seasons on the NSR? That your picture is winter, but there is also summer?
  
  Are you aware that ice cover in the Arctic is continuously shrinking?
  
  Not generally normal criticism, but so that there is nothing that can make you laugh out loud)))
  
  But you laugh, laugh It seems like you've already been reprimanded about your boorish manner. You did not understand anything?
  1. JD1979
    
    -2
    
    24 October 2023 15: 07
    
    Quote: Beydodyr
    Do you even know that there is also a change of seasons on the NSR? That your picture is winter, but there is also summer?
    
    And how much of that summer is there?
    
    Quote: Beydodyr
    Here's a video from 2014
    
    Did you watch your video yourself? ))
    
    Quote: Beydodyr
    Are you aware that ice cover in the Arctic is continuously shrinking?
    
    So what?))
    
    Quote: Beydodyr
    But you're laughing, you're laughing. You seem to have already been reprimanded about your boorish manner. You did not understand anything?
    
    And I don’t understand))) Just like those who write nonsense over and over again don’t understand)) Like you, for example. It’s summer, the ice is decreasing) but tell me please. Will such protection be operational and effective if there is ice around the icebreaker for at least 6 months a year? Once again, MINIMUM. And second. And in the place of the enemy submarine, will you use the weaknesses of surface ships and attack from under the ice field?))) Or, like a stupid knight, will you wait for a short summer, clean water, and then float up and warn by radio?))) No, right? Of course, I understand that it is more pleasant to believe in fairy tales than to accept reality as it is, but such faith often backfires, although... maybe you are a masochist if they beat you and you still believe) This is what I really don’t understand)
    The same can be said about helicopters with sonar and buoys - a seasonal worker, and it also depends not only on the presence of ice, but also on the flying weather.
    The only means of anti-submarine defense that can operate at any time of the year and in any weather in northern conditions is another submarine, and possibly a network of stationary bottom sensors, but we have not had one and will not have one.
    Well, to catch up:
    
    It is necessary to make timely changes to the design of ships that have not yet been built so that they do not subsequently turn into defenseless targets in the ice: GAS
    
    Can you tell me where and in what way the GUS can be placed on an icebreaker? And most importantly, HOW WILL IT WORK when ice is hammering on your hull?)) Because without the GAS Package-NK it’s just useless ballast.
    1. Beidodir
      
      +1
      
      24 October 2023 15: 33
      
      And how much of that summer is there?
      
      And what? Shouldn't there be a service in the summer?
      
      Did you watch your video yourself? ))
      
      Unlike you, I watched. Look to the end.
      
      And I don’t understand))) Just like those who write nonsense over and over again don’t understand)) Like you, for example. It’s summer, the ice is decreasing) but tell me please. Will such protection be operational and effective if there is ice around the icebreaker for at least 6 months a year? Once again, MINIMUM.
      
      What are you going to do for the remaining six months? What will you do in 20 years, when there is even less ice?
      
      And second. And in the place of the enemy submarine, will you use the weaknesses of surface ships and attack from under the ice field?))) Or, like a stupid knight, will you wait for a short summer, clean water, and then float up and warn by radio?))) No, right?
      
      You are clearly thinking in terms of a computer game.
      
      The same can be said about helicopters with sonar and buoys - a seasonal worker, and it also depends not only on the presence of ice, but also on the flying weather.
      
      Yeah. We would like the Navy to be abolished altogether. The weather is different there
      
      Can you tell me where and in what way the GUS can be placed on an icebreaker?
      
      23550 is not an icebreaker, it is an ice-class warship, if you still haven’t figured it out. And sonars can be towed
      
      And most importantly, HOW WILL IT WORK when ice is hammering on your hull?)) Because without the GAS Package-NK it’s just useless ballast.
      
      I understand you, the fleet should fight only in the summer and in good weather. On that and finish.
      1. JD1979
        
        -2
        
        24 October 2023 16: 06
        
        Quote: Beydodyr
        And what? Shouldn't there be a service in the summer?
        
        I understand what I wrote?
        
        Quote: Beydodyr
        Unlike you, I watched. Look to the end.
        
        Some even look at the book, that’s exactly what they look at)))
        
        Quote: Beydodyr
        What are you going to do for the remaining six months? What will you do in 20 years, when there is even less ice?
        
        Ahah, are you sure that you WILL be GIVEN these 20 years, maybe you’re one of ours)))
        
        Quote: Beydodyr
        Yeah. We would like the Navy to be abolished altogether. The weather is different there
        
        I see a book)))
        
        Quote: Beydodyr
        23550 is not an icebreaker. this is an ice-class warship, if you still haven't figured it out.
        
        And in it...
        
        Quote: Beydodyr
        I understand you, the fleet should fight only in the summer and in good weather. Let's end there
        
        It's really time to finish.
        Even when I wrote to you in DIRECT text that these types of weapons can only work in certain conditions (as you wrote there: summer, clean water, did you attach a video?) and not in others. Those. THIS DOESN'T WORK IN WINTER. But we need something to work ALL YEAR ROUND. And I asked you HOW THIS SHOULD WORK IN YOUR UNDERSTANDING. But you could only:
        
        Quote: Beydodyr
        I understand you, the fleet should fight only in the summer and in good weather.
        
        Seriously? I’m talking about year-round, round-the-clock and all-weather work, and you keep telling me about summer and then conclude that it’s me who insists on this?
        PS. Before you assent to someone in the desire to seem smart, you need to have at least a little understanding of who and how and what you are assenting to. Because it may turn out that there are neither sonar systems nor torpedoes on icebreakers, not because the military is stupid and the author and you are so smart and perceptive, but because everything is the other way around and they understand that the systems will not work as they should in real conditions and will not install them no need. And if someone knew the main requirement of the military: to work in any conditions, they would not write nonsense.
        P.P.S. Sorry for trampling on your pink fantasies so rudely)))
        
        Beidodir
        
        0
        
        24 October 2023 16: 21
        
        Ahah, are you sure that you WILL be GIVEN these 20 years, maybe you’re one of ours)))
        
        I came up with it myself, I was offended by myself
        
        P.P.S. Sorry for trampling on your pink fantasies so rudely)))
        
        God will forgive.
        
        PS. Before you assent to someone in the desire to seem smart, you need to have at least a little understanding of who and how and what you are assenting to. Because it may turn out that there are neither sonar systems nor torpedoes on icebreakers, not because the military is stupid and the author and you are so smart and perceptive, but because everything is the other way around and they understand that the systems will not work as they should in real conditions and will not install them no need. And if someone knew the main requirement of the military: to work in any conditions, they would not write nonsense.
        
        And I asked you HOW THIS SHOULD WORK IN YOUR UNDERSTANDING. But you could only:
        
        In response to this, I have already expressed to you my wish to go serve on the Papanin without GAS, Paket and helicopter Sorry, without an all-weather absolute weapon, you will be an honorary shooter, shooting back from Cordoba.
        
        JD1979
        
        -2
        
        25 October 2023 19: 12
        
        Quote: Beydodyr
        In response to this, I have already expressed my wish to you to go serve on the Papanin without GAS, Paket and helicopter. Forgive me, without an all-weather absolute weapon, you will be an honorary shooter, shooting back from Cordov.
        
        It’s clear, all the arguments are from the category “on your own” But you yourself can go to the library, even with a package or without, somewhere))) take a book on geography, climatology, read and think) All you had enough for was Kord))) You know on VO one of the REAL experts and who writes articles on marine topics and only on marine topics gave people like you the nickname - “pink ponies”
        
        The comment was deleted.
    2. Beidodir
      
      +1
      
      24 October 2023 15: 55
      
      Of course, I understand that it is more pleasant to believe in fairy tales than to accept reality as it is, but such faith often backfires, although... maybe you are a masochist if they beat you and you still believe) This is what I really don’t understand)
      The same can be said about helicopters with sonar and buoys - a seasonal worker, and it also depends not only on the presence of ice, but also on the flying weather.
      
      Because without GAS Paket-NK is simply useless ballast.
      
      I wish you to serve on the Papanin without the Package, helicopters and GAS.
2. Boa kaa
  
  +3
  
  25 October 2023 19: 03
  
  Quote: JD1979
  What happens if you shoot from the Package-NK?
  
  There will be an ice hole! Our boats surfaced into it to fire a salvo of SLBMs.
  But the author is absolutely right: the main threat to NK in the Arctic (by the way, not always in solid 10-point ice!) is the Yankee SSN and ISV. Therefore, he is right in raising the question of protecting icebreakers from this scourge.
  We don’t know whether or not the icebreaker has underwater missile launchers, which are below the overhead line and can fire anti-aircraft torpedoes. The question about the ship’s G/A armament is also unclear. And the fact that 8,5 kT displacement without a helicopter is generally NONSENSE! By the way, icebreakers do not always navigate through compacted ice fields. There are also springs of clean water.
  AHA.
  1. JD1979
    
    0
    
    25 October 2023 20: 16
    
    Quote: Boa constrictor KAA
    Therefore, he is right in raising the question of protecting icebreakers from this scourge.
    
    He’s right, he’s right, there is a problem, but the author is a little... you can’t use such words. He likes to find a problem and fantasize, offering solutions that, even for a non-specialist, if you just think about how to implement it or whether it will work at all, they make it funny (the person above is very indignant when I talk about this directly, but cannot say anything specifically, in why am I wrong , just wrong is all)
    Yes, ships need anti-aircraft defense and anti-tank equipment, but is it really possible to place a sonar on an icebreaker-type ship with a VERY specific hull? I'm by no means an expert, but I love to read. But from my vantage point, I see that you can’t place a sonar in the hull, namely in the nose, away from the propellers. The housing around the sonar must be sound-permeable, and this goes against the main requirement - to walk in ice. Either a strong hull and break the ice, or a gas pump, but then only clean water. An under-keel arrangement is also excluded - the contours of the hull are specially made such that the broken ice partially passes along the bottom. The only option left is a towed sonar launched from the stern. But again, how will it work in the ice, how will it hear. It seems to me that the noise of the icebreaker will simply drown out everything in front and to the sides, and these are actually the most dangerous directions. And convoy ships can go behind. Without ice, ordinary military ships with their own sonar systems operate calmly. But in the ice... How will the sonar react to the roar of breaking ice? It seems to me that she won’t hear anything except him, and no filtering algorithms will save her. Well, that’s all, if there is no GAS - Package-NK is meaningless. And there are also questions about the Package itself. What kind of torpedoes does the author want to see there and what problems can they solve if, purely theoretically, a sonar can be installed on an icebreaker (well, not quite of course) and it will work. And there seem to be 2 types of them - one for submarines up to about 10 miles and the second - anti-torpedo up to 1 km. And here’s the question: it’s not John Fool with a captain’s cap who will sit on an enemy submarine and he will be well aware of the performance characteristics of the weapons on board the Project 23550 ship. And considering that the performance characteristics of its torpedoes allow firing at a range of 40-50 km, will he be substituted? Obviously not. So the first option is kind of useless. Anti-torpedoes remain. Well, in the summer (Beydodyr, he really insisted that there is summer in the Arctic too, but who can argue?) in clean water it will work. But again we return to the cold period and ice. Whereas? If the noise from the ice pricking and hitting the hull will clog everything around. How to hear an approaching torpedo, how will an anti-torpedo lock onto a target if there is such a cacophony around and how will it get into the water through the ice? Comrade Beydodyr couldn’t do it))) In the end he wrote that I want the fleet to work only in the summer))) We probably communicated in different Russian languages...
    The only working option is a Helicopter, for which there is a hangar (but are there helicopters themselves?), and which can detect a boat in advance and sink it with its own torpedoes. But again, this is in the summer or in conditions of a non-continuous ice field. What if it’s solid and or dense? Even if the sonar or buoy can be squeezed into the hole, it is not a fact that it will be possible to drop a torpedo into the hole and it is not a fact that it will be in the place where the enemy submarine will be. They can and will calmly choose a position under the ice, because if there is natural protection from helicopter submarines, then why not? Well, that’s why I have only one conclusion: the only PLO that will operate in any season, in any flying weather or not, with its own sonar and a set of torpedoes - another submarine.
    The author, in fact, out of some kind of fright, latched on to the icebreakers and decided that they urgently needed PLO functions. Although one solves their problems. Why then not tankers, dry cargo ships, and others?
    a The problem must be solved, but solved in other ways, normal, and not ersatz. Means for this have long been invented, but the author either does not know, or in order to write an essay he tactfully kept silent about them.
    In the summer (Beydodyr, I will remember you every time ) The most effective and time-tested defense is anti-aircraft defense aviation, both in terms of territory coverage and reaction time. In winter - submarines on routes and covering bases. But we have a very acute problem with aviation and, to a lesser extent, with submarines, and it is they who need to be solved first of all, and not think about how to pull the sonar on an icebreaker or vice versa, as Marzhetsky suggests. What I completely agree with him on is the need to strengthen air defense, since I can bet on anything, 99% of the time it will be the anti-ship missile that will fly in, since it is faster, easier to implement and, most importantly, cheaper. In general, it would be interesting to ask Klimov a question on this topic.
    1. The comment was deleted.
    2. The comment was deleted.
twice-born

+2

24 October 2023 14: 05

That's right, author. The armament of our new ships has always amazed us in recent years. One weak gun, not even two! A couple more heavy machine guns, not even 30 mm (!), and missiles against aircraft carriers! Why are you making them, just to put something there for formality?!
The lack of air defense is a whole different story, worthy of execution for sabotage and betrayal of customers and designers!
Everyone hopes that sailors with not cross-eyed eyes and crooked hands will run out onto the deck with light heavy machine guns and MANPADS and defeat everyone?!
In passing

+2

24 October 2023 19: 27

What could be threatening there in the Arctic? An ice-class aircraft carrier with its retinue, also ice-class? Is there such a thing somewhere? But there are submarines and long-range aviation. This is what warships are designed for. Underwater drones and aerial surveillance drones, accompanied by a submarine. Well, or vice versa. And air defense on a ship is mandatory, otherwise it’s just a trough for slaughter, a team of suicide bombers with riflemen, and officers with daggers. Beauty!
The comment was deleted.
sannyhome

0

6 December 2023 12: 31

Combat icebreakers... Let's be honest - camouflaged battleships...)