If it is necessary they can build the ships in the Black Sea at one of the existing shipyards.
When the ships were ordered the war had not started yet so none of this would have been foreseen.
Arkanghelsk likes this post
There is no doubt Russia needs a blue water navy. But they don't need destroyers.
They also need to sort out the engine issue and last I heard that Zvezda owned the rights to most engines and was being difficult in allowing other facilities to manufacture said engines.
The ship finishes sea trials and is in Baltic, why has this ship not transferred to BSF through canal?
Can it fit??
No. Project 20380 ships cannot pass the Volga-Don canal. There are limitations of 3.5m depth in some places.
If it is necessary they can build the ships in the Black Sea at one of the existing shipyards.
Garry how could this ship get to the Black Sea by circumnavigation, if the bosphorus is closed to Russian Naval vessels?
Podlodka77 likes this post
The canal runs 227 km (141 mi), partially along several canalized rivers and Lake Vygozero. As of 2008, it carries only light traffic of between ten and forty boats per day. Its economic advantages are limited by its minimal depth of 3.5 m (11.5 ft),[citation needed] inadequate for most seagoing vessels.
This depth typically corresponds to river craft with deadweight cargo up to 600 tonnes, while useful seagoing vessels of 2,000–3,000 dwt typically have drafts of 4.5–6 m (15–20 ft).[5][6] The canal was originally proposed to be 5.4 m (17.7 ft) deep; however, the cost and time constraints of Stalin's first five-year plan forced the much shallower draught.
GarryB and owais.usmani like this post
Podlodka77 wrote:Sewernaya Werf should be closed or demolished, or whatever - that shipyard is junk.. ..
Therefore, anyone who writes that it is not only to the shipyard, but also to other subcontractors, is greatly mistaken.
I forgot to add that they also have a project 20386 corvette that has been under construction since October 2016 and we will probably all be dead by the time it reaches active service.
GarryB, Big_Gazza and owais.usmani like this post
GarryB and owais.usmani like this post
franco, Big_Gazza, Rodion_Romanovic and zardof like this post
GarryB and Big_Gazza like this post
Rodion_Romanovic likes this post
GarryB wrote:
Plus, as I keep asking... why build dozens of Gorshkovs when the improved Gorshkov has not hit the water yet and we don't know how it will go... it might be amazing... in which case internet trolls like yourself will be asking why did they waste time and money and slipway space making more of the original Gorshkovs when the new one is better in every way... they don't have an unlimited budget.
Podlodka77 wrote:If Russia was a country that had a clear PLAN, then Russia would not find itself in a situation without gas turbines after 2014. And what now, who is the Russians to blame for that but themselves ?
GarryB, owais.usmani and Broski like this post
owais.usmani and Broski like this post
Russia will have the PD-35 aero engine soon enough.Rodion_Romanovic wrote:Back on the engines. Many of the largest naval gas turbine built in the west (e.g for large frigates or destroyers) are aeroderivatives from the widebody engines (like the naval Trent that derives from the Boeing 777 engine. Russia did not have any aeroengine with the desired characteristics. (Possibly the NK-32, but I doubt in the 90s they had money to spare for this.
Like I said before it is not like they were doing nothing all this time. They kept working on the PS-90 and AL-31 aero engines to improve their reliability and performance. Latest versions of the AL-31 have single crystal turbine blades. They have like four times the total lifetime and time between major overhauls of older engines and more performance to boot. They also designed the next generation PD-14 and AL-41 engines. PD-14 has turbine blades with cooling channels for example. More recently Russia also started adding special ceramic coatings to turbine blades.Podlodka77 wrote:All I am writing is that after the collapse of the USSR, Russia should have worked on designing its own gas turbines.
I cannot figure out why they decided to spend money on the landing ships at Yantar either. Maybe they were unhappy with the Ivan Gren design and wanted to figure out a new design which is more suitable? At the same time they did not even have gas turbines to put in frigates back then. They had several frigate hulls waiting for engines at Severnaya Verf as it was. The only viable alternative would have been to build corvettes I think.Podlodka77 wrote:The Russians should give up landing ships and instead build corvettes and frigates at Yantar. The best Russian shipyard for building surface warships is Baltic, but that shipyard is busy with the construction of nuclear icebreakers. Sevmash is not a problem, only money is needed. For God's sake, Sevmash has 30,000 workers.
The only thing I care about is speeding up the construction of Multipurpose Nuclear Submarines (SSGNs) while everything else is priority #2.
GarryB and Broski like this post
Turkey can close down the Bosporus to military ships in case of conflict. Which is what they did.
Implications for the Current Conflict and Beyond
It remains unclear whether Turkey invoked Article 19 or Article 21 of the Montreux Convention when it closed the Straits to all military vessels last year. The Montreux Convention has provisions limiting Turkish Straits access for vessels of war belonging to belligerent powers (Ukraine and Russia) when Turkey is not at war (Article 19). Article 19 states that “in time of war, Turkey not being belligerent, warships shall enjoy complete freedom of transit and navigation through the Straits” consistent with earlier conditions. When Turkey “considers herself to be threatened with imminent danger of war” (Article 21), Turkey has discretion to regulate the passage of all warships from belligerent and non-belligerent powers (Article 21). The upshot: Turkey appears to be applying Article 21’s more capacious restrictions without invoking Article 21 publicly.
Indeed, Turkey’s current closure goes well beyond Article 19. In February 2022, the Turkish Foreign Minister stated that “the situation in Ukraine has transformed into a war” and Turkey “will implement all articles of Montreux transparently.” Further, Turkish Foreign Minister Mevlüt Çavuşoğlu warned that no states should transit their warships through the Straits. Turkey’s invocation of Montreux’s wartime provisions has played a de-escalatory role, prohibiting Russian warships from the Baltics or elsewhere from entering the Black Sea.
But has Turkey been fully transparent in its Montreux interpretation? Article 19 only prevents Ukrainian and Russian vessels from outside the Black Sea from entering the Black Sea (unless they are returning to their home base). This interpretive disconnect was highlighted by the U.S. Naval War College’s Professor Pete Pedrozo earlier this year. Since Turkey’s closure of the straits, no NATO vessels have transited the Black Sea, but Russian civilian merchant vessels carrying logistics and supplies to the Russian military have purportedly been allowed to transit the Straits. Analyst Yörük Işık of the Middle East Institute reported that Russia, during its military campaign in Syria, actually bought Turkish civilian vessels, reflagged them, and used them to resupply its war effort there.
I believe that they are ships in slightly different class (I mean 22350 and 22350M).
Of course, this unless Russia then decides to do a sort of gorshkov light as well, on.a smaller hull of the size of a 11356 class (krivak 5- grigorovic), but it would increase even more the amount of different ship class in production, so I am not sure it would be sensible.
Imbeciles...
So let's summarize; Russia is still completely incapable of building a fleet of surface warships. Due to the lack of money, the speed of building nuclear submarines also dropped DRASTICALLY.
Complete incompetence was also shown in the modernization of surface warships and submarines.
And what are you dreaming about on the forum about project 22350M frigates ?
Most forum members will sooner die of natural causes than live to see a 22350M frigate in action.
Its not a joke its reality...!
* The SSGN submarine fleet will continue to shrink..I am of the opinion that the number of submarines will decrease by a third from the current number of 24 submarines and that in the future Russia will have as many SSGN submarines as France and the UK combined - no more.
If what you say about 20380 production in Amur is true, would it be possible for Russia to organise their production in a refurbished shipyard in Novorossia?
E.g. in Mariupol, or eventually even in Nikolaev once the western part of Novorossia is liberated?
All I am writing is that after the collapse of the USSR, Russia should have worked on designing its own gas turbines.
They had and still have one of the most powerful intelligence services, and they were able to find out what challenges the Russian military-industrial complex would face in the future. One example is those fucking gas turbines.
Well, my friend, of all the bad decisions, the decision to build the project 11711 landing ships in Yantar is the worst.
LMFS and Hole like this post