After the President of Ukraine Viktor Yanukovych announced that Moscow and Kiev had agreed that Russia would help complete the construction of the cruiser Ukraine, a discussion ensued about which country's fleet would replenish this ship and whether the Russian Navy needed it.
“It is very difficult to understand who needs the ship now,” Aleksandr Khramchikhin, head of the analytical department of the Institute of Political and Military Analysis, told the Novy Region news agency. - Of course, for our fleet, which has dwindled to a disgrace, now such a cruiser is already becoming useless. We need to start, so to speak, from below, not from above, not from cruisers, but at least from frigates. Moreover, these cruisers have a very narrow anti-aircraft orientation. They were built exclusively to combat American aircraft carrier formations. It does not seem to me that this task is in any way urgent for us now. Therefore, it is difficult for me to understand why we need this ship and what to do with it if it is built."
And here is the opinion of the former commander of the Black Sea Fleet, Admiral Vladimir Komoedov: “The ship will not become obsolete for another 15-20 years in terms of its capabilities. But, of course, it should be used in the ocean, in open theaters, not on the Black Sea, not in the Baltic - there is not enough space for it. The ships (of the "Slava" type, to which the cruiser "Ukraina" belongs, - editor's note) are very good, quite decently designed … The question of redemption (of the "Ukraine" by Russia - editor's note) has been long standing and should finally be resolved … If such a decision is made, it is more correct. This is better and two orders of magnitude higher than the Mistral can.
Who is right? In our opinion, this is a rare case when the arguments of both participants in the discussion are equally weighty and deserve attention. Indeed, in five years, the Russian Navy will have no ships to guard the water area, that is, small anti-submarine and missile ships, which are designed to protect naval bases, ports and the coast. Why, then, does he need another oceanic strike anti-aircraft cruiser? Moreover, the capabilities of modern American nuclear-powered aircraft carriers to detect and destroy the enemy are undoubtedly higher than that of the most advanced missile cruisers. In addition, Russian-American relations are improving, albeit with creaks and failures. There are fewer “points of friction” between the two countries that can lead to conflicts.
But there are other countries that are building up their military power, especially in the Pacific Ocean. And to contain them, the project 1164 Atlant cruisers are best suited. Therefore, it is worth recalling these ships.
The cruisers of the project 1164 were created by the specialists of the Northern PKB. Their total displacement is 11,500 tons, an economical gas turbine unit (COGAG type) with a heat recovery circuit with a total capacity of 110,000 hp. allows to develop a 32-knot full speed. The ships are designed to "give combat stability to the forces of the fleet in remote areas of the seas and oceans and destroy enemy surface ships, including aircraft carriers." Often, sailors simply call them "aircraft carrier killers." They are armed with 16 supersonic missiles 4K-80 of the P-500 "Basalt" reconnaissance and strike anti-ship complex (the first two corps of the series - "Moscow" and "Marshal Ustinov") with a firing range of up to 550 km or the same number of 3M-70 anti-ship missiles of the P complex -1000 "Vulkan" (on the cruiser "Varyag"), capable of hitting targets at a distance of up to 700 km. The cruiser "Admiral Lobov", which after the division of the Black Sea Fleet was called "Ukraine", was to receive missiles "Vulcan" as well.
Note that no fleet in the world has long-range supersonic anti-ship missiles like Basalt and Vulcan. Only this year, the United States began developing long-range supersonic anti-ship missiles to combat the potential threat posed by Chinese missile ships. But when they will enter service with the US Navy is not yet clear.
Anti-ship missiles "Basalt" (Sandbox, that is, "Sandbox" - according to NATO classification), with salvo firing, can turn into dust almost any surface target. After the start, they accelerate to a speed of 2-2.5 M. Their flight in the direction is corrected by the Argon control system. Then the first missile in a salvo takes on the role of the leader, rising to a height of 5000 m, and in a passive mode, intercepting the radar signals of enemy ships, it directs the entire "wolf pack" to the target. Information to the slave, flying at an altitude of 40-50 m above sea level, is transmitted in the millimeter range, which is impossible to track. If the enemy captures the lead missile with his radar, then the active jamming system is activated on it. If the enemy manages to shoot down a gunner missile by means of air defense and missile defense, then the next one in the order takes its place, and the attack continues. The leading missile distributes targets among the members of the "pack", which allows to achieve high efficiency of destruction of group targets. In other words, “basalts” are high-precision “smart” weapons that operate on the “fire and forget” principle. They are equipped with missiles or special ammunition, that is, a 350 kt nuclear warhead, or a high-explosive cumulative warhead weighing 500-1000 kg. The enemy ship, having received such a "gift", goes into an almost dispersed state. The missile itself is protected not only by active interference, but also by light armor of the most important components and it is not so easy to shoot it down.
The P-1000 Vulcan missile is an improved version of Basalt. With the same overall dimensions, due to the use of a more powerful launch and acceleration stage with controlled nozzles, the use of light and stronger titanium alloys, as well as some weakening of armor protection, the firing range was increased to 700 km.
To match the strike - the defensive weapons of the Atlanteans. 64 missiles of the "Fort" air defense missile system provide the ship's zonal air defense missile defense system. Two launchers of the Osa-M air defense system are designed for self-defense. The artillery is represented by a twin 130-mm AK-130 mount and six 30-mm AK-630M guns. Anti-submarine and anti-torpedo armament consists of two under-deck five-tube torpedo tubes capable of firing anti-submarine missile-torpedoes of the Vodopad-NK complex, and two RBU-6000. There is a hangar and a helicopter landing area. The ships have developed electronic equipment and electronic warfare equipment. The cruisers have excellent seaworthiness and maneuverability. Suffice it to say that the diameter of the circulation is 3.5 times the length of the hull, that is, 655 meters. Of course, the Atlanteans are excellent ships. They have created good conditions for the crew. No wonder they fell in love with Russian sailors and were able to survive the era of the Russian "turmoil" of the 90s, when other ships of the latest projects were scrapped.
The cruiser "Ukraine", which was laid down in 1983 as "Komsomolets", and then received the name "Admiral Lobov", is the fourth ship in the series. Its "sisterships" - "Moscow" (formerly "Slava"), "Marshal Ustinov" and "Varyag" (former "Chervona Ukraine") - serve in the Black Sea, Northern and Pacific fleets, respectively. "Admiral Lobov" was launched at the Nikolaev shipyard named after 61 Communards on August 11, 1990. In 1993, the cruiser was handed over to Ukraine at 75% readiness. Since then, virtually every new government in Kiev has undertaken to complete the "future flagship" of the Ukrainian fleet. However, the work was carried out in a sluggish mode, or even stopped for a long time. Finally, by the order of the Cabinet of Ministers of Ukraine No. 385-r of September 5, 2002, permission was given to sell it.
But without Russian weapons and a significant number of components, again Russian-made, it turned out to be impossible to complete and sell the cruiser. That is why Kiev started negotiations with Moscow. They, depending on the rapidly changing political situation in Ukraine, were either conducted or stopped. In early 2007, the then general director of Ukrspetsexport, Serhiy Bondarchuk, announced that Kiev and Moscow were continuing a dialogue on the completion and joint sale of the Ukraine missile cruiser to a third country. "This is a very difficult question," he stressed, "but we are negotiating with Rosobornexport in order to complete the construction of the cruiser for the customer and sell it."
There were actually two potential customers: India and China. But for the Indian Navy, the ship was not suitable for a number of reasons. Firstly, it was about a single ship, not a series, which did not suit Delhi. Secondly, the Indian Navy made a choice in favor of aircraft carriers as the main strike forces of the surface fleet. Obviously, the Indians were not satisfied with the price of the ship.
China, perhaps, with a dumping price, could be persuaded to a deal. However, Beijing was more interested in long-range supersonic anti-ship missiles than the cruiser itself. Considering the fact that the Chinese are experiencing an irresistible urge to unlicensed copying of foreign models of military equipment, such a sale would result in great losses. And not only economic, but also political. The deal would undoubtedly provoke outrage in Delhi and Washington, and would sharply worsen Russia's relations with India and the United States. And for Russia itself, the appearance in the PLA Navy "Atlanta", and then some of its clones, would, to put it mildly, undesirable.
As Admiral Vladimir Komoedov confirms, negotiations were underway on the sale of the ship to the Russian Navy. The former commander of the Black Sea Fleet was undoubtedly in the know. He gave an interesting detail on how the Russian side put the question: “You cannot say that this cruiser belongs only to Ukraine. There, the share of Ukraine, as far as I remember, is 17, maximum 20%. Therefore, there is a question about the redemption of not completely the ship, but the share - everything else belongs to Russia. Agree, this is a very important detail.
According to Ukrainian shipbuilders, the cruiser costs about $ 500 million at 95% availability, and its completion will cost $ 50-75 million that it stood for more than 20 years without movement and proper conservation of mechanisms and assemblies. On the other hand, the figures for the completion costs seem to be understated.
According to Mikhail Nenashev, chairman of the subcommittee on military-technical cooperation of the State Duma Committee on Defense, Mikhail Nenashev, the readiness of the cruiser "Ukraine" today is 70%, and an unnamed source of the Ministry of Defense of the Russian Federation determines the degree of readiness of the ship at 50%. Therefore, they say, the completion and modernization of the cruiser will require about 50 billion rubles. The amount is rather big. The RIA Novosti agency calculated that this money could be used to purchase four Project 636 submarines or three or four newest Project 20380 corvettes.
But the amount of 50 billion rubles is undoubtedly greatly overestimated, even with all the "rollbacks" and "kickbacks". After all, as Dmitry Medvedev was told during the recent visit by the Russian president to the heavy nuclear missile cruiser Peter the Great, the cost of building a new nuclear-powered ship of this class will be about 30 billion rubles (although in this case the price was clearly underestimated). In our case, we are talking about the completion and modernization of a cruiser with a smaller displacement, with a conventional and already installed power plant on the ship. It seems that some of the Russian representatives lobbying for the purchase of French Mistral-class helicopter carriers are deliberately frightening the public and the authorities with the inflated cost of modernizing Ukraine. Against the background of astronomical figures for the Atlant, a very considerable price for the unnecessary Russian Navy landing ships of foreign construction does not seem so great. But one cannot but agree with the words of Admiral Vladimir Komoedov that the purchase of the cruiser "Ukraine" is two orders of magnitude higher in value for the Russian Navy than the French helicopter carrier "Mistral". In any case, this is a real combat unit, not an imaginary one.
The delegation of the Russian Navy under the leadership of the acting head of the technical department of the Russian Navy Rear Admiral Viktor Bursuk studied the state of affairs on the cruiser located at the Shipyard named after V. I. 61 communards. According to preliminary conclusions, the ship is in good condition and its completion is possible in the same way as the modernization of electronic equipment. But, undoubtedly, a more thorough revision of mechanisms, pipelines, communications and equipment is required. And then it will become clear what one more Atlant will cost Russia.
There is a lot of talk about the fact that the decision on the possible purchase of "Ukraine" will be of a political nature in connection with Moscow's course towards strengthening the integration of Russia with Ukraine. But it seems that economic interest will not be left aside. It is envisaged to include a number of Ukrainian shipbuilding enterprises in the United Shipbuilding Corporation. And the payment for "Ukraine" can become an acceptable bonus for their merger with USC. Moreover, as already noted, ships of this type have undoubted advantages. This was also confirmed by the recently held Vostok-2010 exercises, in which the Black Sea Moskva took part, which made a semicircle in order to find itself in the zone of maneuvers. The ship has successfully completed the tasks assigned to it. At the same time, the Varyag made a 40-day cruise in the Pacific Ocean, calling at the American port of San Francisco, where it ensured the visit of President Dmitry Medvedev to the United States. Taking into account the military-political situation in the Pacific Ocean, it is advisable to consider concentrating all cruisers of this type in this theater. Their grouping will make it possible to create a favorable operational regime for Russia in the Far Eastern waters.
The hull of the "Ukraine", welded from durable 8-mm steel, does not cause concern. Serve and serve him. But other equipment of cruisers will require updating. Back in Soviet times, the Northern PKB developed a version of the modernization of the Atlanteans according to project 11641. According to it, the cruisers October Revolution, Admiral of the Fleet of the Soviet Union Gorshkov, Admiral of the Fleet of the Soviet Union Kuznetsov and Varyag were to be built. the first four buildings must be refurbished. The main weapon remained the same (16 "volcanoes", 64 "forts", a twin 130-mm artillery mount AK-130), but the means of defense of the near line and part of the electronic equipment were replaced. Instead of the Osa-M air defense system and three AK-630M batteries, it was planned to install the Kortik air defense system. The BIUS "Lesorub" was replaced by a more advanced system "Tron", which made it possible to create a single air defense-missile defense circuit. A second helicopter appeared, strengthening the ship's anti-submarine capabilities. Of course, the introduction of newer weapons and weapons systems is now required.
There is an option to convert the cruiser into an expeditionary landing ship. It cuts off all anti-ship missile launchers, removes the vertical missile launchers of the Fort air defense missile system, increases the area of the helicopter deck and hangar volume, installs powerful davits for launching landing boats or interceptor boats, and equips rooms for accommodating marines and special forces. Of the armament, a twin 130-mm installation for fire support of the landing force and means of defense of the near line are left. For service off the pirate coast of Somalia, such a ship can be very useful.
But, of course, you need to calculate how much it will cost. And is it worth, as they say, the game? After all, you can give a bonus to the Ukrainian shipbuilding industry by placing orders for the construction of new ships and vessels for the needs of the Russian Black Sea Fleet. In any case, this topic was touched upon at a meeting of the security committee of the Ukrainian-Russian interstate commission in the Crimean village of Partenit. And it is likely that this option will suit both parties.
P. S. On July 6, deputies of the Verkhovna Rada of Ukraine voted to abolish the name "Ukraine", previously assigned to the unfinished missile cruiser. 247 deputies voted for the adoption of the relevant draft resolution, with 226 being the minimum required. The explanatory note provided by the Ukrainian government says that the decision will create conditions for "ensuring the development of options for further use" of the cruiser, in particular - for its sale to Russia.
