ALDEGA Posted December 5, 2004 Posted December 5, 2004 An overview of (some) Soviet Navy vessels, most of which were decommissioned/scrapped by today. Since this is a flightsim forum, only carrier capable vessels ;) Moskva class helicopter cruisers The first big Soviet cruisers of postwar design, intended as ASW ships to counter US SSBNs in the Mediterranean. An interesting combination of cruiser and aviation features, but unsuccessful. They were intended to operate with AAW and ASuW escorts in task forces. A third ship of this general type, named Kiyev was cancelled in 1968-69; she was either an anti-ship missile version of this design or enlarged aviation version. Moskva picture 1 picture 2 (on fire) picture 3 Built by Nikolayev. Laid down 15 Dec 1962, launched 14 Jan 1964, completed 25 Dec 1967. This ship suffered extreme machinery problems and her plant was rebuilt twice. Used for VTOL trials in 1973. Suffered severe fire 2 February 1975. Stationary at Sevastopol after 1983, except for one short cruise late in 1991. Remained nominally in service, but inoperable, as an accommodations hulk until stricken 7 November 1996. Towed to India for scrapping 6/1997. Leningrad picture 1 picture 2 picture 3 picture 4 Built by Nikolayev. 15 Jan 1965, launched 31 July 1968, completed 2 June 1969. Served as mine countermeasures helicopter ship at Suez, 1974. Stricken due to poor condition 24 June 1991 but hulk remained at Sevastopol through 1995. Scrapped in Greece starting 9/1995. Kiev class VTOL cruisers Large VTOL cruisers developed from the Moskva concept. These ships started as an enlarged Moskva design, but evolved into a totally new ship. They had multiple missions - offensive and defensive ASW, fleet operations, support of amphibious operations. Although theoretically impressive, they were less than fully successful, and their VTOL "fighter" ( Yak-38 ) was nearly useless. A 4th ship of the class was completed to an extensively modified design (Baku). Kiev: picture 1 picture 2 Built by Nikolayev. Laid down 21 July 70, launched 26 Dec 1972, completed 28 Dec 1975. Assigned to the Northern Fleet. Overhauled at Nikolayev 1985. Stricken due to poor condition 30 June 1993 but retained as parts source for Gorshkov. Sold and scrapped in India 2000. Minsk: picture 1 picture 2 picture 3 Built by Nikolayev. Laid down 28 Dec 1972, launched 30 Sept 1975, completed 27 Sept 1978. Assigned to the Pacific Fleet. Overhauled 1981-82 at Vladivostock. Inoperable after 1989, laid up in reserve 2/1992, stricken 30 June 1993. Sold 14 Nov 1994, sale cancelled, agreement to scrap in South Korea signed 1 Aug 1995, towed to Kyang-yang, South Korea for scrapping in 1995, but was not scrapped. Towed to Shenzhen, China 8/1998 for use as a casino/entertainment complex. Novorossiysk: picture 1 picture 2 Built by Nikolayev. Laid down 30 Sept 1975, launched 26 Dec 1978, completed 14 Aug 1982. Assigned to the Pacific Fleet. Laid up in reserve 9/92, stricken 30 June 1993. Sold 14 Nov 1994, sale cancelled, agreement to scrap in South Korea signed 1 Aug 1995. Arrived at Pohang, South Korea for scrapping 18 Jan 1996; scrapped 1997. Baku An improved and updated version of the Kiev; served as an operational testbed for equipment intended for Kuznetsov. Lasted only 5 years in service. Generally similar to Kiev, but with different weapons and electronics fit, and aviation features optimized for the cancelled Yak-141. picture 1 Built by Nikolayev. Laid down 12/78, launched 1 April 1982, completed 11 Dec 1987. Assigned to the Northern Fleet. Renamed Gorshkov 4 Oct 1990. Inoperable after major machinery casualty 1992, major fire in 1993. Boiler explosion and fire 2 February 1994, under repair until mid-1995; went to sea briefly 5/1995. Nominally in service, but probably not fully operational and probably not fully crewed. Unlikely to ever go to sea again. Kuznetsov class multirole aircraft carriers The first true Soviet carriers, intended for overseas deployments, intervention, etc. in the manner of US carriers. An adventurous design, but not fully successful. The second ship was left incomplete following the breakup of the USSR. Generally based on the Kiev hull but with significant enlargement and improvements. Full flight deck, angled landing deck, but a ski-jump is fitted instead of catapults, due to failures in the catapult development program. Extremely heavy missile armament, including heavy SSMs in VLS set into the flight deck. Intended to operate navalized versions of regular Soviet fighter and attack aircraft, plus naval helicopters. Aviation features are reported to be poorly designed. The ship uses the Kiev machinery and has suffered machinery problems. Admiral Kuznetsov (ex-Tbilisi, ex-Leonid Brezhnev, ex-Riga) picture 1 picture 2 picture 3 picture 4 Built by Nikolayev. Laid down 6 Nov 1983. Renamed Leonid Brezhnev 18 Nov 1984, launched 5 Dec 1985. Renamed Tbilisi 10/1988, started trials 10/1989, then renamed Kuznetsov. In service for delivery voyage 21 Jan 1991. Full operational capability 1995. Deployed to the Mediterreanean late 1995 into early 1996, then remained in port for overhaul through 1998. Is now in service, but probably not fully operational. Varyag (ex-Riga) picture 1 Built by Nikolayev. Laid down 6 Dec 1985, launched 4 Dec 1988, renamed Varyag late 1990. Construction stopped by 1992 when the ship was structurally complete but electronics had not been fitted. Ownership was transferred to the Ukraine and the ship was laid up unmaintained, then stripped. Sold to Chinese interests 1998 for conversion to an entertainment complex, but did not leave the Black Sea until 1 November 2001. Ulyanovsk nuclear powered multirole aircraft carrier A follow-on to the Kuznetsov design, intended to be a fully capable CVN, equivalent to the US CVNs. The program was doomed by the fall of the USSR. A second ship was probably planned. Design: Details uncertain. Would have been equipped with steam catapults and nuclear propulsion, probably a doubled Kirov plant. Source: http://www.hazegray.org/navhist/carriers/russia.htm Eventhough most of the vessels mentioned above do not exist any longer (or are used for non-military purposes) they are still interesting vessels. The Kiev Class VTOL carrier looks particularly interesting ... :D There may be some mistakes in the text. I'll leave it up to the experts to correct them. :wink:
britgliderpilot Posted December 5, 2004 Posted December 5, 2004 Re: Naval units of the Soviet Union What's that cloud of dust in the distance? Is it a rapidly approaching JJ_Alfa? I think so . . . . .:wink: http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v121/britgliderpilot/BS2Britgliderpilot-1.jpg
Alfa Posted December 5, 2004 Posted December 5, 2004 LOL....yeah just press that little red button saying "Russian navy" and you know what happens :lol: Good initiative Aldega, but a poor source of information(to say the least ) you found :) . For the record, the Kreychet("Kiev-class") , Kuznetsov and the planned larger Ul´Yanovsk designs were all built for exactly the same purpose and task - just with increasing size and capability. It was never the intention(as the source claims) to "mimic" US aircraft carrier designs or nature of operation. Their purpose was to operate in support of the submarine fleet and nothing else :) . The Kuznetsov was equipped with a "ski-ramp" because it was originally meant to be an enlarged version of the "Kiev-class", and like the Gorshkov, to operate the YAK-41 VSTOL aircraft, but with two full squadrons of these versus a single one on the Gorshkov - and not "due to failures in the catapult development program". :wink: It was only after Sukhoi and MiG jointly managed to persuade the naval command that their primary fighter designs(Su-27 and MiG-29) could be made carrier capable without the need for catapults, that these fighters entered the picture for the Admiral Kuznetsov(or "Tblisi" as it was called back then) - the switch from the originally planned Yak-41s to Su-27K/MiG-29K resulted in the vessel getting arrestor gear and a re-designed(more distinct) ski-jump. The Soviet naval doctrine was designed around the submarine fleet as the main naval asset - both as platforms for the nuclear deterrence, and as the main weapon for countering NATO(mainly US) naval forces. The Soviet naval command never intended to operate actual aircraft carriers as they were deemed far to expensive to build and operate and vividly opposed the idea of equipping the aviation cruisers as such - i.e. with catapults. The idea behind the aviation cruisers was to support the submarine fleet with large anti-submarine surface vessels equipped with a small airforce of ASW helicopters. However, a major concern was how to make such vessels efficient enough in this role and how to keep them alive in the advent of war - therefore the nature of them steadily evolved into larger, more versatile and capable platforms. With the Kiev-class they were not only capable of suppressing enemy submarines, but also enemy anti-submarine surface vessels and, through their airwing of fixed wing fighters, of controlling the airspace in their immediate vicinity, intercept enemy airborne anti-submarine assets and protect themselves against air-attacks. With the larger Kuznetsov design, came increased endurance, more advanced radar- and airdefence systems, more advanced SSM capability and a more capable airwing. The Ul´Yanovsk would have increased the endurance even further, facilitated a larger airwing and more capable early warning assets via two steam catapults for launching the Yak-44 - but the vessel would have retained the ski-jump for fighter launches and generally operated in the same role as the Admiral Kuznetsov. :) - JJ. JJ
ALDEGA Posted December 5, 2004 Author Posted December 5, 2004 Good initiative Aldega, but a poor source of information(to say the least ) you found :) . Was it that clear? :lol: Anyway, it's sad to know that most of those carriers are gone today. Imagine if there had not been an economic collapse... That's why we have Lomac :) btw, Alfa, if you have the necessary permission on this message board, feel free to make changes and corrections in my original post ;) Perhaps we can expand the discussion to all vessels and not only the aircraft-capable vessels. Which reminds me, you did import some vessel(s) from Flanker2. Have you been able to get ED to officially include it in Lockon 1.1 (or next release)?
D-Scythe Posted December 5, 2004 Posted December 5, 2004 ladee ladee da...ED please fix the Tico and Moscow right now...ladee ladee da :lol: [shameless plug] Naval fix list: i) Vastly increase the capabilities of the SM-2MR missile and Aegis system on the Ticonderoga ii) Fix Osa missile system on the Moscow ii) Increase SLCM range on both Kutnetzov, Moscow and Ticonderoga iv) Vastly increase aggresiveness of cruise missile attacks so ships will hit any target on the map [/shameless plug] 8)
Alfa Posted December 5, 2004 Posted December 5, 2004 Hi Aldega, Anyway, it's sad to know that most of those carriers are gone today. Imagine if there had not been an economic collapse... That's why we have Lomac :) Yeah...Well the Kuz is still alive and kicking....occasionally :) btw, Alfa, if you have the necessary permission on this message board, feel free to make changes and corrections in my original post ;) Ack - I could, but it is not my place to do so Aldega :) - it is your post, and there is nothing wrong with it......apart from me dissagreeing with the source you quoted of course :lol: Perhaps we can expand the discussion to all vessels and not only the aircraft-capable vessels. Feel free - I for one would enjoy such a discussion :) Which reminds me, you did import some vessel(s) from Flanker2. Have you been able to get ED to officially include it in Lockon 1.1 (or next release)? Hehe...no Aldega :) . The upcoming Lock-on 1.1 is very much a CAS oriented title, and although it contains a wide range of improvements to varies aspects of the sim, the naval aspect is not one of them - i.e. it is the same as in Lock-on 1.02. I think we will have to wait for a dedicated naval title before we see any improvements to this aspect. :) JJ
SUBS17 Posted December 5, 2004 Posted December 5, 2004 Thats an interesting history for the Russian Navy, its a pity that most of those ships were scrapped. The good thing about LockOn is the time setting is when both Nato and Russia were about even at the time with their Naval forces. [sIGPIC] [/sIGPIC]
Trident Posted December 5, 2004 Posted December 5, 2004 ladee ladee da...ED please fix the Tico and Moscow right now...ladee ladee da :lol: [shameless plug] Naval fix list: i) Vastly increase the capabilities of the SM-2MR missile and Aegis system on the Ticonderoga ii) Fix Osa missile system on the Moscow ii) Increase SLCM range on both Kutnetzov, Moscow and Ticonderoga iv) Vastly increase aggresiveness of cruise missile attacks so ships will hit any target on the map [/shameless plug] 8) While were at it: v) improve the damage-model (listing / breaking apart / taking out individual systems like radars, weapons-launchers, propulsion... ) vi) give the OHP its Harpoons viii) improve the AI I don't think it's that important though, LOMAC is moving further in the CAS-direction with v1.1. Like JJ I'm not really expecting ED to fix the naval aspect until they start a completely new sim.
Recommended Posts