055 DDG Large Destroyer Thread

Status
Not open for further replies.

rhino123

Pencil Pusher
VIP Professional
Considering Russia still using cold war style Slava class cruisers in blacksea and Pacific as their prime platforms, I can see they definitely salivate for 055.

Again... How was u certain that they will salivate for 055, especially when 055 was not even active yet, therefore no one know for sure the details or performance of the ship and if this ship suit the Russian Navy, so i actually think the Russian are not that easily tempted.
 

by78

General
Russia side proposes to China to do a trade. It's 100K tons ski jump , nuke powered carrier design to trade for a 055 made ship. China immediately turned it down. No way, a blue print exchange for a made ship.Russia has its eyes on 055!

In my POV, 2 055 can traded for a yeltsin sub.

If your post was meant to be a joke, then please give us an indication that you were looking for giggles. If you were serious, then please share a link so we may all judge its veracity and merits. If you were merely expressing a personal view or sentiment, then clearly say so and give us your reasoning. What I'm trying to say is that your post, as originally phrased, should never have been posted.
 

wuguanhui

New Member
Russia side proposes to China to do a trade. It's 100K tons ski jump , nuke powered carrier design to trade for a 055 made ship. China immediately turned it down. No way, a blue print exchange for a made ship.Russia has its eyes on 055!

In my POV, 2 055 can traded for a yeltsin sub.

Can you give a source?
 

Jeff Head

General
Registered Member
Russia side proposes to China to do a trade. It's 100K tons ski jump , nuke powered carrier design to trade for a 055 made ship. China immediately turned it down. No way, a blue print exchange for a made ship.Russia has its eyes on 055!

In my POV, 2 055 can traded for a yeltsin sub.
Pure sepculation to me.

Any source for such a claim?

Unless I see such a source, I will right this off to what I said...puire speculation.

Please, source such posts on SD, or make it clear that this is something that is your opinion...at least tell us where you heard such a thing.

We try and keep SD as professional and "real" as possible.
 
now noticed the tweet
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!





29/9/2017, Liaonan shipyard, 2×056 under construction.

DSsSgkqVAAEMS8m.jpg
 

FireyCross

New Member
Registered Member
That seems rather improbable, there is hardly any pressing need or indeed the will for Russia to be inducting any large kinda of surface combatant into it's navy. Indeed its latest navy report specifically highlights that it is focusing on frigates for the near future. More importantly, if there is any deal of such a kind to be made, Russia is definitely going to have it made in its own shipyards, for all the same reasons as China or any other nation that wants to preserve and maintain its shipbuilding capacity.
This kinda talk seems more of a fanboy claim than any serious discussion.
On the point of the Yasen, no way on earth would Russia be peddling the crown jewel of its navy technology for anything of at least equal, if not more, value. The kind of military shift that can be brought about by a modern and capable SSGN can hardly be overstated. Even extremely close allies like the UK and the US are rather loath to share their respective secrets regarding sub tech as well.

Mostly I agree. However Russia definitely has the need, and probably the will, but certainly not the financial, organisational or physical resources to build large surface vessels for her navy. The terminally poorly maintained Kuznetsov desperately needs replacement, or at the very least a complete overhaul and some sister ships (Russia's geography pretty much dictates that she needs to operate two completely independent fleets - so realistically she needs at least 2 carriers at an absolute minimum, and ideally 4) Her Udaloy class destroyers are capable but in need of modernisation, and a medium term for replacement which isn't even on the horizon, and is unlikely to happen. Russia inherited the Soviet navy, but not the means to properly maintain and update it. The almost tragi-comic delays and problems faced with the Gorshkov class frigates illustrates just how bad the situation is right now. There were supposed to be 15 of them in the end. The lead ship was started in 2005-2006 and isn't even in service yet, 12-13 years later. And these are ships in the 5000 ton class.... Russia knows what she needs but she just doesn't have the ability to put steel in the water. Even the subs, which is definitely a traditional Soviet and Russian strength, have had similar issues. There's still only one Yasen in the water, and the Boreis are still taking the better part of a decade from start to finish.

Whilst she would like any future large ships to be built in her yards, there is an awareness that they just can't be relied on - hence her looking to Europe for the Vladivostok, and getting burned. I certainly wouldn't rule out Russia reaching out for a joint venture on large ship construction to manage the costs and help speed construction. I wouldn't be too surprised if Russia and India co-operate on a carrier project, albeit more modest than the fantasy navy proposal for 100k ton vessels. I'd imagine something more along the lines of either a modified Kuznetsov (i.e. a 001A / CV-17 type affair) which could be built in yards in either country, or a revisting of the Ulyanovsk design, which would likely have to be built in India. The latter, if financed and organized correctly, wouldn't be fantastical. Full designs exist, and the nuclear propulsion system is the same as the currently in service Kirov class battlecruisers. It's unlikely India will give up the chance to more fully develop indigenous know-how, but it would be possible - if Russia got serious and sorted out her internal contradictions.
 
D

Deleted member 13312

Guest
Mostly I agree. However Russia definitely has the need, and probably the will, but certainly not the financial, organisational or physical resources to build large surface vessels for her navy. The terminally poorly maintained Kuznetsov desperately needs replacement, or at the very least a complete overhaul and some sister ships (Russia's geography pretty much dictates that she needs to operate two completely independent fleets - so realistically she needs at least 2 carriers at an absolute minimum, and ideally 4) Her Udaloy class destroyers are capable but in need of modernisation, and a medium term for replacement which isn't even on the horizon, and is unlikely to happen. Russia inherited the Soviet navy, but not the means to properly maintain and update it. The almost tragi-comic delays and problems faced with the Gorshkov class frigates illustrates just how bad the situation is right now. There were supposed to be 15 of them in the end. The lead ship was started in 2005-2006 and isn't even in service yet, 12-13 years later. And these are ships in the 5000 ton class.... Russia knows what she needs but she just doesn't have the ability to put steel in the water. Even the subs, which is definitely a traditional Soviet and Russian strength, have had similar issues. There's still only one Yasen in the water, and the Boreis are still taking the better part of a decade from start to finish.

Whilst she would like any future large ships to be built in her yards, there is an awareness that they just can't be relied on - hence her looking to Europe for the Vladivostok, and getting burned. I certainly wouldn't rule out Russia reaching out for a joint venture on large ship construction to manage the costs and help speed construction. I wouldn't be too surprised if Russia and India co-operate on a carrier project, albeit more modest than the fantasy navy proposal for 100k ton vessels. I'd imagine something more along the lines of either a modified Kuznetsov (i.e. a 001A / CV-17 type affair) which could be built in yards in either country, or a revisting of the Ulyanovsk design, which would likely have to be built in India. The latter, if financed and organized correctly, wouldn't be fantastical. Full designs exist, and the nuclear propulsion system is the same as the currently in service Kirov class battlecruisers. It's unlikely India will give up the chance to more fully develop indigenous know-how, but it would be possible - if Russia got serious and sorted out her internal contradictions.
If any navy has a carte blanche on what they can order, one can be assured that they will have a wishlist a mile long. But that does not mean that what they want concurs with reality on the ground.
While geography dictates that Russia logically should have 2 separate fleets. Geography also questions the type of ships that are to operate in those fleets. Most of Russia's sea access are either ice bounded for a significant part of the year or are located in closed access points like the Black Sea or St-Petersburg, only Vladivostok offers any relatively open access and even then it still needs to pass through choke points.
More importantly, Russia's geopolitical status does not raise the need for a full size intervention force, much less one consisting of a super carrier strike group with fullsized capital ships. Russia has no overseas obligations and most of its immediate concerns are located on mainland Europe. Much of the more grandiose projects like the Kirov and Ulyanovsk were more of a Cold War mentality of keeping up with the Joneses than one born of practical thought.
Now while I will agree that Russia would most likely join in on a co-op project for ship building, I will disagree on the type of ship that Russia would want from that agreement in the near future. As it stands now, Russia has more need of medium sized frigate ships than capital ships like a carrier or cruiser.
 

kurutoga

Junior Member
Registered Member
One can make an argument Russia may not need a large navy. It is better to focus funding on air force, nuclear weapons, and submarines. A good sized navy is "nice to have" to a lot of nations. China's case is a bit special, not only because of the potential of supporting trade routes. But also because of South China Sea, Taiwan, and the East Asian region. Even that, we can't expect the Chinese navy buildup will continue forever, once it reaches a reasonable size the pace will slow down.

Military is just another investment, you need to get enough returns (not always tangible) or it won't sustain.

My second point is people are overly optimistic about today's Chinese navy hardware (ships, subs, weapons). China's biggest advantage is scale, given the size of its industrial base. IMO China needs two decades of solid development to become leader in some areas.
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top