Russian Naval Shipbuilding Industry: News

Dima wrote:

marcellogo wrote:Are not the russian shipbuilders able to built ships in separate parts and link them together?

Yes they do. Yantar shipyard build the second set of Indian 11356 Frigates with small modules like we see below. This one of the bow being shifted from its workshop to be placed on the hull. Search for 11356 construction at Yantar and you will get much more images of hull sections in varying degree of completion.


Modules like these make up the hull. Modular construction varies on complexity, but still these are all modular construction.

Thanks a lot.

Vladimir79 wrote:

Tsavo Lion wrote:The UDKs will be built before any CVNs, as they r higher priority & actually more useful to the VMF; if need be, some naval aviators will be kept at NITKAs to train others, if they refuse those orders, they'll be prosecuted & lose their retirement pay. The VMF isn't a yacht club!

Our biggest weakness right now is marine gas turbines.  Our biggest strength is nuclear propulsion, a new carrier and destroyer class based on nuclear is the one thing we can do right now if we invest the money.

Putin boasted that Russia is now import-independent from Ukrainian made turbines. If need be, they'll keep making them until they get them right. A big UDK/CV hybrid can also be nuclear powered, esp. if it'll have some ice breaking capability.

Russia needs to invest in shipyards that allow them to work with bigger ships... even if they never make a 100K ton US like carrier, they will be working with large tankers for crude oil and gas transport around the world for the next few decades, so they need shipyards that can build and work on and maintain large ships of all shapes and sizes.

That means dry docks and floating docks of all types... the dry docks they were working on the Kuznetsov were not built in Russia but it would certainly not hurt them to design and build some now because big ships are needed... whether they are for the military or civilian use around the world.

New Cruisers of 20K ton size and bigger are going to be built and likely large aircraft carriers and aircraft carrying ships like helicopter carriers will be useful so they need places to build and places to dock and operate from as well... and they need dry docks to operate from too.

They have spent money in the far east to make big ships like tankers but also nuclear powered large military vessels.

I don't think enormous US like carriers are what they need... they have shown multi hull ships of 45K tons that have wide decks and hulls that can carry bigger air compliments than the Kuznetsov currently carries meaning more fighters and AWACS platforms in a ship rather lighter than the current Kuznetsov... which is a good thing because that means it wont cost the Russian taxpayer too much to build and to operate, yet will offer a global reach that will mean export and trade with the rest of the world which is what Russia needs to grow economically and politically to improve its future potential.

If you can't handle the Kuznetsov now then how can you expect to operate the 20K plus ships that will form the core of your fleet in 10-15 years in the future that these carriers will be developed to support?

Ironically it is the bigger ships with nuke power systems that Russia has the best potential, they just don't have the place to dock them... but investment in the northern and pacific fleets should allow that in the near future and expansion of other ports will be needed anyway because the future of the Russian Navy will be bigger ships, but also their future will be bigger civilian trading ships too... bigger crude tankers and bigger gas tanker ships as well as bigger container ships and bigger goods transports... from Russia to the world and from asia to europe and back via the north sea route they are developing.

Huh, it's as if my posts end up being ignored.

I'll say it again, Zvezda shipyard.

I'll repeat

Zvezda shipyard.

Tsavo Lion wrote:
Putin boasted that Russia is now import-independent from Ukrainian made turbines. If need be, they'll keep making them until they get them right. A big UDK/CV hybrid can also be nuclear powered, esp. if it'll have some ice breaking capability.

This article sums up the state of it relatively well...

https://southfront.org/underreported-problems-of-russian-navy/

That article states they have moved onto domestic and there is a push for it. Mind you, it is for all smaller ships.

As for larger ships like an aircraft carrier, why not use nuclear? Since nuclear engines from Russia work well.

miketheterrible wrote:Huh, it's as if my posts end up being ignored.

I'll say it again, Zvezda shipyard.

I'll repeat

Zvezda shipyard.

So are you going to put ships into the slipways, therefore, preventing the construction of other ships and delay work.

Large floating docks EXIST, for this reason, you cannot just stick a large ship on the ship of a harbor and work on it if the work is deep.

That Shipyard has limited dry dock space ALL SHIPYARDS DO and they cannot afford to jam it with ships and cost time delays which cost money and more to other orders. You act like it has 20 something slots it doesn't.

Welcome to shipbuilding, The loss of PTD-50 was large for Russia.

SeigSoloyvov wrote:

miketheterrible wrote:Huh, it's as if my posts end up being ignored.

I'll say it again, Zvezda shipyard.

I'll repeat

Zvezda shipyard.

So are you going to put ships into the slipways, therefore, preventing the construction of other ships and delay work.

Large floating docks EXIST, for this reason, you cannot just stick a large ship on the ship of a harbor and work on it if the work is deep.

That Shipyard has limited dry dock space ALL SHIPYARDS DO and they cannot afford to jam it with ships and cost time delays which cost money and more to other orders. You act like it has 20 something slots it doesn't.

Welcome to shipbuilding, The loss of PTD-50 was large for Russia.

People somehow imagine that if you have enough of flat land next to the shore it can be used as shipyard xD

Isos wrote:

miketheterrible wrote:That article states they have moved onto domestic and there is a push for it.  Mind you, it is for all smaller ships.

As for larger ships like an aircraft carrier, why not use nuclear? Since nuclear engines from Russia work well.

Nuclear ships carry back up diesel or gas engines if I'm not wrong.

Just if they have auxilary diesel or turbine engines to produce electricity for some critical systems or for their airwing if they have it. Otherwise no.

SeigSoloyvov wrote:

miketheterrible wrote:Huh, it's as if my posts end up being ignored.

I'll say it again, Zvezda shipyard.

I'll repeat

Zvezda shipyard.

So are you going to put ships into the slipways, therefore, preventing the construction of other ships and delay work.

Large floating docks EXIST, for this reason, you cannot just stick a large ship on the ship of a harbor and work on it if the work is deep.

That Shipyard has limited dry dock space ALL SHIPYARDS DO and they cannot afford to jam it with ships and cost time delays which cost money and more to other orders. You act like it has 20 something slots it doesn't.

Welcome to shipbuilding, The loss of PTD-50 was large for Russia.

Has enough with building more. What's your point? Gotta make do with what you got

Militarov wrote:

SeigSoloyvov wrote:

miketheterrible wrote:Huh, it's as if my posts end up being ignored.

I'll say it again, Zvezda shipyard.

I'll repeat

Zvezda shipyard.

So are you going to put ships into the slipways, therefore, preventing the construction of other ships and delay work.

Large floating docks EXIST, for this reason, you cannot just stick a large ship on the ship of a harbor and work on it if the work is deep.

That Shipyard has limited dry dock space ALL SHIPYARDS DO and they cannot afford to jam it with ships and cost time delays which cost money and more to other orders. You act like it has 20 something slots it doesn't.

Welcome to shipbuilding, The loss of PTD-50 was large for Russia.

People somehow imagine that if you have enough of flat land next to the shore it can be used as shipyard xD

Are you too stupid to realize zvezda drydock handles over 100,000 tons?

https://www.ship-technology.com/projects/zvezda-shipbuilding-complex-bolshoi-kamen/

miketheterrible wrote:

Militarov wrote:

SeigSoloyvov wrote:

miketheterrible wrote:Huh, it's as if my posts end up being ignored.

I'll say it again, Zvezda shipyard.

I'll repeat

Zvezda shipyard.

So are you going to put ships into the slipways, therefore, preventing the construction of other ships and delay work.

Large floating docks EXIST, for this reason, you cannot just stick a large ship on the ship of a harbor and work on it if the work is deep.

That Shipyard has limited dry dock space ALL SHIPYARDS DO and they cannot afford to jam it with ships and cost time delays which cost money and more to other orders. You act like it has 20 something slots it doesn't.

Welcome to shipbuilding, The loss of PTD-50 was large for Russia.

People somehow imagine that if you have enough of flat land next to the shore it can be used as shipyard xD

Are you too stupid to realize zvezda drydock handles over 100,000 tons?

also I am not.sure that US refit their Carriers in floating dry docks. I believe they use the "classic" drydock in the shipyards.

It would be good, anyway to build a new navy shipyard near murmansk with a large enough drydock AND to get a new floating drydock (the PD-50 was build in 18months in two swedish shipyards and then welded.together (the main shipyard went bankrupt in 1989, btw)). Moving such a big drydock could be quite problematic, and PD50 was damaged on its first voyage to murmansk, so asking.the chineses or the koreans to build it and.then.transfer it could also be risky. Maybe Sevmash in severodinsk or the Rostec shipyard in murmansk could build such a floating drydock?

miketheterrible wrote:

As for larger ships like an aircraft carrier, why not use nuclear? Since nuclear engines from Russia work well.

This is what I have been saying all along. Nuclear is the way to go for capital ships. When we need to wave the flag it is not the Admiral K going, it is Peter the Great.

Vladimir79 wrote:

miketheterrible wrote:

As for larger ships like an aircraft carrier, why not use nuclear? Since nuclear engines from Russia work well.

This is what I have been saying all along.  Nuclear is the way to go for capital ships.  When we need to wave the flag it is not the Admiral K going, it is Peter the Great.

What would be the estimated cost difference? Because if it really isn't much and you get a ship with unlimited range, then why the heck not?

miketheterrible wrote:

What would be the estimated cost difference?  Because if it really isn't much and you get a ship with unlimited range, then why the heck not?

It is a higher upfront cost but saves money on fueling over time. Especially if you plan to be active and use it rather than sitting at the dock most of its life.

miketheterrible wrote:...........
What would be the estimated cost difference?  Because if it really isn't much and you get a ship with unlimited range, then why the heck not?

I would guess much smaller since they will probably use RITM-200 reactors with 20% enriched uranium, it qualifies as civilian product according to IAEA

KN-3 reactors on Kirovs use 90% enriched uranium

And don't get me started on safety difference

Rodion_Romanovic wrote:
also I am not.sure that US refit their Carriers in floating dry docks. I believe they use the "classic" drydock in the shipyards.

It would be good, anyway to build a new navy shipyard near murmansk with a large enough drydock AND to get a new floating drydock (the PD-50 was build in 18months in two swedish shipyards and then welded.together (the main shipyard went bankrupt in 1989, btw)). Moving such a big drydock could be quite problematic, and PD50 was damaged on its first voyage to murmansk, so asking.the chineses or the koreans to build it and.then.transfer it could also be risky. Maybe Sevmash in severodinsk or the Rostec shipyard in murmansk could build such a floating drydock?

Depends, but since Americans mostly use their big shipyard dry docks for the use of USN they do maintenace of capital ships there.

To my knowledge they do not have AFDBs in service anymore, at least not USN as itself, some shipyards probably do. They operate only AFDMs for their submarines and LHAs.

They probably can build it in few years, i am not sure they would dare into such an adventure atm. There is reason why USSR bought drydocks abroad in a first place.

Isos wrote:

Just if they have auxilary diesel or turbine engines to produce electricity for some critical systems or for their airwing if they have it. Otherwise no. I only remembered that Kirovs has both, nuks and turbines.

That is different. Kirovs have CONAS propulsion, Combined Nuclear and Steam propulsion. And are basically only ships ever with such propulsion.

Militarov wrote:

Rodion_Romanovic wrote:
also I am not.sure that US refit their Carriers in floating dry docks. I believe they use the "classic" drydock in the shipyards.

It would be good, anyway to build a new navy shipyard near murmansk with a large enough drydock AND to get a new floating drydock (the PD-50 was build in 18months in two swedish shipyards and then welded.together (the main shipyard went bankrupt in 1989, btw)). Moving such a big drydock could be quite problematic, and PD50 was damaged on its first voyage to murmansk, so asking.the chineses or the koreans to build it and.then.transfer it could also be risky. Maybe Sevmash in severodinsk or the Rostec shipyard in murmansk could build such a floating drydock?

Depends, but since Americans mostly use their big shipyard dry docks for the use of USN they do maintenace of capital ships there.

To my knowledge they do not have AFDBs in service anymore, at least not USN as itself, some shipyards probably do. They operate only AFDMs for their submarines and LHAs.

They probably can build it in few years, i am not sure they would dare into such an adventure atm. There is reason why USSR bought drydocks abroad in a first place.

I believe they bought it abroad because all their shipyards were busy building ships, and they did not want to keep one or two of them busy with a floating dock for a couple of years. That shipyard in Sweden was quite big and almost without orders, so it's possible that they got a good deal.

The take off and landing part would be separeted so the lenght doesn't need to exceed more than 200m.

The problem is that to get it shorter you have to make it much wider, which when it comes to operating in international shipping lanes and of course most ports, including canals and dry docks it is easier to handle a long ship than a wide ship because long ships are actually much more common than very wide ones which are limited to oil rigs or radar rigs for ABM systems...

As for larger ships like an aircraft carrier, why not use nuclear? Since nuclear engines from Russia work well.

They have already invested a lot of money developing new nuclear power plants for big ships... they have not actually operated that many nuclear powered surface ships, but their future will be full of them.

So are you going to put ships into the slipways, therefore, preventing the construction of other ships and delay work.

Yes.

Those other ships are civilian ships and they can wait. They need to expand their capacity to work on large ships anyway if they are going to build big ships for the Russian navy and large civilian ships then they will need a lot of large docks... land based and floating to be able to handle them in the future... gotta start some time.

Welcome to shipbuilding, The loss of PTD-50 was large for Russia.

If it was such a loss, then they can build another four of them... two in Russia and give the contracts for the other two to South Korea and China... PTD-50 wasn't made in Russia and there is no reason why its replacements need to be, but it would be useful work for a Russian shipyard to build nonetheless.

I seem to remember the PTD-50 was made in Sweden in the 1980s or something, so it is time to build a new one anyway.

Nuclear ships carry back up diesel or gas engines if I'm not wrong.

They do, but your main propulsion is the important thing... if your backups fail your primary engine should meet all your power needs until the smaller backup propulsion systems are sorted... it is the opposite of that that is the problem.

People somehow imagine that if you have enough of flat land next to the shore it can be used as shipyard xD

Of course not, but then it is not just going to happen on its own either... if they want Carriers then they need big ships, if they want to be a global economic power that can continue to say no to the US and EU and do what you like then you need some large ships in your navy... it doens't matter how many Zircons your corvettes can carry, it is about endurance and range and operating on the other side of the planet with minimum support.

And it doesn't need to be as expensive as the US makes it appear.

I only remembered that Kirovs has both, nuks and turbines.

At the time they didn't have nuk power plants for surface ships with enough power so they added gas turbines to boost speed above the 18knts the nuke PP could manage.

These days they have rather more powerful and rather more efficient NPPs that wont need to be refuelled over a 30-40 year operational life period which makes them much cheaper to operate.

Their new breeder reactor designs means you can put spent nuclear rods around the nuclear pile of a running breeder reactor to turn it back in to reactor fuel that can be used again... in other words the spend fuel rods can be reused/recycled...

It would be good, anyway to build a new navy shipyard near murmansk with a large enough drydock AND to get a new floating drydock (the PD-50 was build in 18months in two swedish shipyards and then welded.together (the main shipyard went bankrupt in 1989, btw)). Moving such a big drydock could be quite problematic, and PD50 was damaged on its first voyage to murmansk, so asking.the chineses or the koreans to build it and.then.transfer it could also be risky. Maybe Sevmash in severodinsk or the Rostec shipyard in murmansk could build such a floating drydock?

Murmansk could have two made and SK and China could make one each for the Pacific fleet...

And are basically only ships ever with such propulsion.

It was quicker and easier than developing a new reactor with enough power.

I seem to remember the reactor is a modified sub reactor and not originally designed for very large ships...

That shipyard in Sweden was quite big and almost without orders, so it's possible that they got a good deal.

I would suggest they would get a good deal from quite a few shipyards in Europe... but I really wouldn't trust them these days after the Mistral fiasco even if Russia did end up ahead they didn't get the ships they wanted.

Kirov class has steam turbines.

miketheterrible wrote:

Militarov wrote:

SeigSoloyvov wrote:

miketheterrible wrote:Huh, it's as if my posts end up being ignored.

I'll say it again, Zvezda shipyard.

I'll repeat

Zvezda shipyard.

So are you going to put ships into the slipways, therefore, preventing the construction of other ships and delay work.

Large floating docks EXIST, for this reason, you cannot just stick a large ship on the ship of a harbor and work on it if the work is deep.

That Shipyard has limited dry dock space ALL SHIPYARDS DO and they cannot afford to jam it with ships and cost time delays which cost money and more to other orders. You act like it has 20 something slots it doesn't.

Welcome to shipbuilding, The loss of PTD-50 was large for Russia.

People somehow imagine that if you have enough of flat land next to the shore it can be used as shipyard xD

Are you too stupid to realize zvezda drydock handles over 100,000 tons?

https://www.ship-technology.com/projects/zvezda-shipbuilding-complex-bolshoi-kamen/

Are you too stupid to realize there is a thing called "limits" apparently so. Zvezda isn't operational yet and it already has orders such has large LNG Tankers that are considered vital to russian Economy, they are not going to take up the slipways for those LNG tankers for the Kuz get over it.

Zvezda only has a few docks that could handle a ship like the Kuz you think every slipway can fit that carrier? LOL please, The more you talk the more you show me you don't know jack about what your peaching