[Official] 'Peter The Great' News Thread:

How can the largest cruiser of the Russian Navy be strengthened?, May 21, 2021.

The world's largest surface combat ship, the nuclear-powered cruiser Peter the Great, will undergo modernization. Perhaps as large-scale as its counterpart in Project 1144, the Admiral Nakhimov cruiser. How exactly is Nakhimov being updated now and why is it hardly worth doing something similar on Peter the Great?

Member of the Board of the Military-Industrial Commission and member of the Marine Board under the Government of the Russian Federation Vladimir Pospelov announced plans to modernize the heavy nuclear-powered missile cruiser of the project 1144 "Peter the Great". This ship, we recall, is the largest and most powerful in the world among surface non-aircraft carrier ships - the beauty and pride of the Soviet (and Russian) Navy.

According to Pospelov, the final appearance of the modernization will be determined after the entire complex of works on another similar cruiser of Project 1144, which is currently undergoing modernization, Admiral Nakhimov, is completed.

Military considerations

To understand the role and significance of Project 1144 cruisers in the Russian Navy, it is worth remembering how they appeared. In 1964, the US Navy launched Operation Sea Orbit. During this operation, the nuclear-powered attack aircraft carrier Enterprise, the nuclear-powered missile cruiser Long Beach and the nuclear-powered destroyer Bainbridge made a round-the-world voyage in 65 days, conducting real exercises with allies, calling at ports of friendly countries and without a single refueling or receiving cargo at board, without the involvement of ships of the floating rear.

This expedition showed the role of nuclear ships in naval warfare. With an unlimited cruising range and a sufficient amount of energy to desalinate water, they were very little dependent on supplies and could carry out combat missions in any conditions. High speed during the transition also played into their hands, it provided the Americans with a lead in the deployment of their forces in comparison with their opponents - they were corny faster where they needed to be. All this could not but impress the Soviet command.

At the end of the 1960s, the country began to create its own ships of this class - a heavy nuclear aircraft carrier (due to the presence of a number of anti-ship missiles, it was classified as an "aircraft-carrying cruiser") of Project 1160 "Eagle" - a large ship with a displacement of about 80,000 tons, with catapults and an air group of naval versions of the MiG-23 and Su-24, as well as the never-created P-42 deck anti-submarine aircraft and helicopters.

But the "Eagle" needed protection from submarines, and to give it combat stability, the development of a nuclear-powered large anti-submarine ship (BOD) began. In parallel, since 1965, the Project 1165 nuclear missile cruiser was developed as a striking unit of an atomic compound, which gives it the ability to strike when carrier-based aircraft cannot work.

In the early 1970s, however, the concept changed somewhat. It became clear that fighters from an aircraft carrier would not be able to solve all air defense tasks, and a large number of anti-aircraft missiles had to be placed on some of the ships. In 1971, instead of a nuclear-powered BOD and a cruiser, one ship remained in operation, which was supposed to have excellent anti-submarine capabilities, both shock and anti-aircraft capabilities. So the project 1144 began to appear, which later became a cruiser.

What is important to all of this? The fact that this ship was planned as part of an aircraft carrier formation (aircraft carrier group), and not as an independent unit. It was from that time that the seemingly missile cruiser had the most powerful, even by modern standards, anti-submarine weapons and a hydroacoustic complex - these are the roots of the atomic BOD.

But the "Eagle" was not given to be born. For a number of reasons, the aircraft carrier has remained on paper and in models.

But not a cruiser! Since 1977, the construction of these ships began, now having a huge size and displacement due to the need to have strike, anti-aircraft, and anti-submarine weapons on board. Now, however, its capabilities in the war outside the fighter cover from the shore (200-250 km from the airfield, no more) have become much more modest. Remaining a valuable combat unit, this ship could no longer be an instrument of decisive defeat of the American surface forces, although it could inflict considerable losses and was a difficult target.

Thus, in the face of Project 1144, we are dealing with a concept that is half implemented - a ship that gives combat stability to an aircraft carrier group and expands its strike capabilities, but without an aircraft carrier. And it is from this that it is worth starting from when assessing the prospects for its modernization.

The price of "Nakhimov"

The nuclear-powered missile cruiser "Admiral Nakhimov" has been undergoing modernization since 1999, that is, for more than twenty years. Work on the direct reconstruction of the ship began only in 2013. Today, in 2021, the ship is still out of service. In addition to the unimportant organization and the desire of the customer to revise the tactical and technical assignment for the construction or modernization of the ship already in the course of the ongoing work, such terms are also associated with the fact that the ship was actually rebuilt from scratch.

From the old "Nakhimov" there is only a power plant and a building, and even that has been altered. The cable tracks were completely replaced on the ship, which has a huge cost. In fact, the volume and cost of repairs was close to the construction of a new ship. On the Nakhimov, in addition to this, all the weapons were completely updated. Moreover, even for production samples (such as launchers for cruise missiles), new modifications had to be made.

The cost of modernizing the cruiser is not announced in open sources, but it is clear to specialists that we are talking about more than a hundred billion rubles. And maybe even several hundred billion. This money could be used to build another series of Boreyevs, or two brigades of corvettes, or to completely recreate the naval aviation, or to rebuild Sochi again, simply without sports facilities. That is, this is really a lot of money.

Is such a cost justified for just one ship, even if it is so large and important? The question is open. "Nakhimov" will be able to repel a very strong air strike with its new anti-aircraft missile system, but, apparently, only one. Then the missiles will simply run out. In addition, in the first strike, the enemy can simply "overload" the ship's air defense system with its own means of destruction - there would be enough carriers.

This ship was supposed to go along with the aircraft carrier, and with it we already have it clear that.

And if you do not climb on it into battle with a strong enemy? Use the ship for cruise missile strikes on the coast from a safe distance, raids, demonstrating a threat to the enemy on communications in the ocean, and strikes against warships only from the maximum range and if there is target data obtained from other sources (from which and how - separate question)? Then the ship turns out to be a serious problem for any enemy.

But the trouble is - hundreds of billions could not have been spent on it. It would only be possible to update the electronic weapons, equipment, carry out repairs, and replace only offensive weapons - instead of the Granites launchers, insert vertical launchers for the Caliber, Onyx and Zircon launchers into the hull. This is the limit. And then hundreds of billions would turn into tens, and the rest of the money could be spent on other things very necessary for the fleet.

Option for "Peter the Great"

It is clear that it is too late to change anything with Nakhimov. But there are chances not to repeat this very expensive operation with "Peter the Great". It is extremely difficult for the Russian Navy to remain effective without full-fledged anti-submarine and anti-mine forces, full-fledged ships of the floating rear with the required capacity and cruising range, and all this requires money. In conditions when the announced reduction of the military budget, in the modernization of "Peter the Great" it is necessary to invest exactly as much money as is needed to increase its strike capabilities - and not a penny more. If something can be added to it, in addition to the missile weapon system, then the “Packet-NK” complex for protection from enemy torpedoes.

The increase in the strike capabilities of the ship due to modern cruise missiles will fully justify the investment in such modernization, and the repair will justify itself by extending the service life of the ship. But a complete overhaul with the replacement of all anti-aircraft weapons, alas, does not justify itself. The ship is getting stronger, of course, but without an aircraft carrier it will still not be able to fight for a long time, and the return on investment in it is minimal.

Of course, perhaps we will nevertheless take seriously the Kuznetsov and the ship's fighter regiments. Then we will have an aircraft carrier, but ... First, we will already have the Nakhimov by the time we have already invested, so they will go to military service together. And secondly, if you invest in "Petr", as well as in "Nakhimov", then most likely there will not be enough for an aircraft carrier, as well as for its aviation.

Text: Alexander Timokhin

https://m.vz.ru/society/2021/5/21/1100138.html

The guy who wrote this doesn´t know much about the stuff.

Hole wrote:The guy who wrote this doesn´t know much about the stuff.

Agreed

Total failure

Does he not understand they have the Admiral Kuznetsov and it has an air wing of new fighter aircraft already paid for and in operation?

Ideally they should have scrapped all their old ships and replaced them all with brand new state of the art corvettes and frigates and destroyers and cruisers and new CVNs, but no country could afford that because it is not just the ships but also the infrastructure to support new ships which will cost more than the ships.

There is also the need... what would they do with an enormous fleet right now?

Big ships are useful, they have the capacity to be fully multirole and carry enough missiles to allow them to not just defend themselves but also other ships it operates with.

Can it be overwhelmed... yes of course... in modern history has any ship had its defences overwhelmed by enormous numbers of anti ship weapons all fired at one time... no.

Will countries try that in the future... almost certainly but you have to remember these are not ships that would just sit back and shoot down wave after wave of enemy till it ran out or missiles... it would coordinate its operations and its movements to allow itself to reach the source of those missiles and aircraft so it can shoot back and damage the enemy and perhaps even stop the attack from continuing.

Even if the Kortik isn´t replaced with Redut the ship will have more then 400 air defence missiles and the Pantsir-M an naval Tor missiles are more then capable to shot down any western ASM. In any instance the "attacking" ships will face up to 80 Zircon missiles coming towards them.

Another remark, the high costs of the refurbishment was do to the fact that nearly every pipe and cable had to be replaced because the ship was neglected for nearly 15 years, lying around in a harbor without being properly mothballed.

Exactly, and the point is that the hostile west, and lack of international support when they are in the right like the Georgian invasion of South Ossetia and murdering Russian peacekeepers... Russia has no choice but to both look elsewhere for trade and development, but also to ensure its own access to the worlds oceans and she can only do that with her navy.

She can't afford the USN sized Navy... but then the US can't afford it either and it is killing them.

The Black Sea is an internal lake half surrounded by HATO countries... with a HATO country in control of access/exit.

There would not be much value in sending cruisers into such a bottle neck.

Sitting off the coast of Syria it would be the equivalent of about 6 batteries of S-300s, as well as large numbers of TOR and Pantsir and its radar and EW systems would be useful too.

Navy fanboy wrote:

i thought they would just been a carrier group for Atlantic ocean voyages. Learning something new

The main French naval base where CdG and Mistrals are is Toulon, and as I have checked last time, it was a middle of the French Med coast

... and the Italians keep their carriers at Taranto, and that is the very bottom of an Italian shoe, middle of Med again.