Russia, Ukraine to sell Slava Class Cruiser

Undead Yogurt

New Member
I did a little thinking. The Ukrina was actually mentionned to sell to China as early as September of 2005 after peace mission 2005. At that time, it was mentionned that one other possible buyer is USN. Don't laugh, the rationale is that USN would buy it, so that it would not end up in China's hand.

How can we not laugh? Going by that logic, the Russians can just start building any random large warship and have a guaranteed buyer. :D In any case, can someone link to an actual source that says the PLAN is "interested"? (Please... India... take this one...)
 

Gollevainen

Colonel
VIP Professional
Registered Member
Let the old girl rest in the pages of naval annuals...

The orginal ship was a bit of oddity when it came out, posessing mix of generations in it systems and suffering from compromises made to it systems.
The ship is so big becouse it has so big armament, which is only due the fact that the Soviet Seccond generation long range SSM fit took so much space. The whole project is nothing more than reinvented project 934 (What the Kresta class was orginally supposed to be) made as a cheaper back up for Kirovs with out the flag ship function.
The ship suffers from desing faults as it SAM suite can really fire only to the rear section and there are allegded Top-weigth issues.

Also the weapon fit of the Slavas as well as their overal concept is too deeply intergrated to the Old Soviet Fleet and provides little to the navies operating with different doctrine and philoshophy. Same task can be provided with lot more smaller ships using newer generation of SSMs and the suggestions to build it in the license would mean that China would have to build obsolete Bazalts (wich were 60's thecnology) and that simply doesent make any sense. Conversion it to an other role migth be another thing, but after all, it has been laid down in 1984, so after it would theorethically be ready to sail in Chinese flag, it would be almoust near of its retirement age.
 

BLUEJACKET

Banned Idiot
The hull life is calculated according to the time it spends both at sea & inport, not just inport- so even after all these years in drydock/pierside this ship can be fitted out to whatever primary mission suits the customer best and have a long sailing history.
I first posted quotes & links about PLAN's interest in Ukraina in #78.
 

Pointblank

Senior Member
The hull life is calculated according to the time it spends both at sea & inport, not just inport- so even after all these years in drydock/pierside this ship can be fitted out to whatever primary mission suits the customer best and have a long sailing history.
I first posted quotes & links about PLAN's interest in Ukraina in #78.

Ships can also last a very long time if they are well cared for. I think there are still a few ships sailing around for various third-world navies saw service in World War II if I am not mistaken.
 

Gollevainen

Colonel
VIP Professional
Registered Member
Ships can also last a very long time if they are well cared for. I think there are still a few ships sailing around for various third-world navies saw service in World War II if I am not mistaken.

Yeas but i see no logic there to support an emerging naval manufacturer like China to invest obsolete machines.

If there would be really a need for ship of this kind in PLAN, they should build it domestically. Otherwise, no way! PLAN isent anymore desperate need of (relatively speaking) modern ships, and one ship wouldnt make any difference in any case, exept burdening the logistical factor with yet another set of odd weaponry, machinery and eletronics to be maintained.
 

Pointblank

Senior Member
Yeas but i see no logic there to support an emerging naval manufacturer like China to invest obsolete machines.

If there would be really a need for ship of this kind in PLAN, they should build it domestically. Otherwise, no way! PLAN isent anymore desperate need of (relatively speaking) modern ships, and one ship wouldnt make any difference in any case, exept burdening the logistical factor with yet another set of odd weaponry, machinery and eletronics to be maintained.

The Slava will be fairly familiar in terms of some of the equipment fitted onboard. The SA-N-6 SAM is familiar to the Chinese, as so is the Top Dome fire control radar. The Kite Screech gun control radar is the same as fitted to the Sovremenny's, as is the AK-630 CIWS and the associated Brass Tilt fire control radar, and the PK10 decoy launcher. The Top Plate radar found on the Ukraina is used in some Chinese warships as well. The Slava also operates the Ka-27 'Helix' chopper, a chopper that is used by PLAN warships as well.

The Russians, as mentioned earlier, might also be willing to part with the Varyag (hull number 011) as well. The Varyag is of a slightly different subclass of the Slava's, which also includes the Ukrayina as well, due to slight differences in the electronics fit between the Varyag subclass and the Moskva subclass. Due to the differences, she is the odd man out of the class in Russian service, and that may account for why she is in low manning readiness. As such, the Russians get to part with the oddball of the class in Russian service (and get some cash in the process), and the Chinese get a pair of warships that are identical.
 

BLUEJACKET

Banned Idiot
Yes, and also by having & operating Slava class they may reverse engineer the hull design and build something similar. The missile launchers/radars, etc. can be changed to accomodate ASMs the PLAN will intend to use. If the price is right it will make good sense to get it- why waste time building 1-2 Slava-like ships if they can be had in a fraction of the time & cost?
This is Slava-
slava-missile-cruiser-pr1164-01.jpg


slava-missile-cruiser-pr1164-02.jpg


ustinov-missile-cruiser-1164-02.jpg


and Varyag-

varyag-missile-cruiser-1164-01.jpg


varyag-missile-cruiser-1164-03.jpg
 
Last edited:

Gollevainen

Colonel
VIP Professional
Registered Member
The Slava will be fairly familiar in terms of some of the equipment fitted onboard. The SA-N-6 SAM is familiar to the Chinese, as so is the Top Dome fire control radar. The Kite Screech gun control radar is the same as fitted to the Sovremenny's, as is the AK-630 CIWS and the associated Brass Tilt fire control radar, and the PK10 decoy launcher. The Top Plate radar found on the Ukraina is used in some Chinese warships as well. The Slava also operates the Ka-27 'Helix' chopper, a chopper that is used by PLAN warships as well.

There is alot more inside the ship than showed to outside...;) I mainly ment that as china is now in the process of building and designing it's own indegenious major surface combatants, its altogether not wise to buy a huge ship which is based on entirely different philosofy.

Yes, and also by having & operating Slava class they may reverse engineer the hull design and build something similar.

Well like I said, the hull design of Slava is noway near succesfull or by any logic exept the one applied to soviet naval doctrines. The hull is so big as the SSMs onboard are so big. PLAN has no need for ship of that size or purpose and to try to use that hull design as a basics of something indegenious, its mere madness. You can have a similar role ship with the same (or even improved) capabilities with far smaller, more effective and cheaper hull. Slavas are just too...well soviet to be taken to any succesfull use in navies that doesen't follow the soviet naval doctrines (read any other navy in the world)

Ships can also last a very long time if they are well cared for. I think there are still a few ships sailing around for various third-world navies saw service in World War II if I am not mistaken

As harsh as it sounds, lying decades in former soviet unions dockyard, and being build in former soviet union unequals good service life and well maintenance;)
 

bd popeye

The Last Jedi
VIP Professional
As harsh as it sounds, lying decades in former soviet unions dockyard, and being build in former soviet union unequals good service life and well maintenance;)

I agree with Golly. I've seen pictures of Russian ships laid up in total disrepair.

This article is three years old, however it gives a good account of the condition of the Russian Navy in 2004. For the Russians sake I hope things have improved by now.

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!


12 - RW 4-2-04 - RW Home
Moscow Times
March 30, 2004
A Fleet of Disposable Ships
By Pavel Felgenhauer

Last week the commander of the Russian Navy, Admiral Vladimir Kuroyedov, made waves worldwide when he told journalists that the nuclear-powered flagship of the Northern Fleet, the Pyotr Veliky, was in such bad shape that it could explode "at any moment." Kuroyedov added that the ship's two nuclear reactors were at risk.

Kuroyedov announced that after personally inspecting the Pyotr Veliky he had ordered the ship docked for three weeks for repairs. The ship's crew took a 30 percent pay cut and the ship was removed from the list of Russia's "battle-ready" warships, the admiral said.

In Russia, the news aroused only limited interest. Too many nuclear submarines, important public buildings, schools and the like have sunk, burned or exploded in recent years, often with catastrophic loss of life.

In Russian, such disasters are referred to as "technogenic catastrophes," a politically correct phrase that most often masks the real cause: negligence, mismanagement, greed or corruption. Such catastrophes are so frequent these days that even when the head of the Navy says that a 19,000-ton warship could blow up at any moment, the public is not overly concerned. If the ship were to explode, we would probably be horrified. But the mere possibility of disaster is not enough to create panic.

If the German or Swedish brass, for example, were to inspect most any Russian warship or submarine, they would almost surely find that it didn't pass muster. The current Russian Navy was built up in a great rush in the 1970s and 1980s to take on NATO and the United States in an all-out nuclear war. The notion was that all of our surface ships would be knocked out within 15 minutes to one hour of the start of hostilities.

Our warships were therefore built to be used once. Their decks were covered with enormous tubes housing nuclear-tipped cruise missiles, but no adequate reloading facilities were built in since reloading wasn't regarded as a feasible option. A mighty fleet was built for a single task: to fire a single volley and sink to the bottom as heroes.

The Third World War never happened, however, and now we are stuck with a huge inventory of low-quality warships that are supposed to serve the needs of a peacetime Navy. Onshore naval infrastructure is inadequate and maintenance is often nonexistent. Ships' crews are poorly trained -- not just the conscripts, but the officers as well.

Rather than receiving professional training, most sailors merely struggle to survive in hostile conditions. After more than a decade of utter neglect, many of the officers who remain on active duty are simply those who can't get a better job anywhere else or who are marking time until they finally get a free apartment from the government.

The Pyotr Veliky, by all accounts, is a cut above the average. Navy insiders reckon that Kuroyedov singled out the Northern Fleet flagship to settle a score with retired Admiral Igor Kasatonov, whose nephew Vladimir Kasatonov just happens to be the ship's commander.

Beyond Russia few realized that Kuroyedov was exaggerating the hazard posed by the Pyotr Veliky. In the West, when the head of the Navy announces that his largest warship could explode, this usually signals immediate danger. Britain and Scandinavia were particularly upset, probably bracing themselves for a sky full of nuclear fallout.

When Kuroyedov realized what a commotion he had created, he began to back off his original statement. The Navy announced that the admiral's remarks were off the record, that the ship's reactors were in good shape and that the only mess on the Pyotr Veliky was in the sailors' living quarters. Kuroyedov told journalists of the explosion threat in a restroom at the Defense Ministry that doubles as a smoking lounge during high-level meetings. He apparently did not realize the impact his words would have.

Kuroyedov has been caught telling tales to the press in the past. After the Kursk sank in 2000, the admiral told reporters that the Navy had proof that a U.S. submarine had sunk the vessel. In the end it was established that Russian negligence, not a U.S. submarine, had sunk the Kursk.

In 2001 a number of admirals were fired because of the Kursk disaster, but not Kuroyedov. President Vladimir Putin seems to have a soft spot for the admiral and chooses not to call him to account for his public misstatements.

This is one of the biggest problems in Putin's Russia. As long as an official is loyal to the president, he can lie and steal without fear of retribution.

Pavel Felgenhauer is an independent defense analyst.
 

Totoro

Major
VIP Professional
Doctrinally, such a ship (or ships) would be a waste to PLAN. I do hope, for their own good, they do not purchase them.

Even a brand new ship of that size, custom made for subsystems and crew size of 21st century technology, would be a waste right now. Huge missile cruisers are just not cost effective - they're way too pricey and they put way too many eggs in one basket. It is better to have 2-3 smaller destroyers than one such gargantuan ship.

Baby steps are important. PLAN has come along a long way, but it still has more to do to achieve true blue water status. Mimicking old USSR's navy's doctrine would be a weight around its neck and a grave mistake. In my opinion, russians had to use it, cause they didn't have other options, technologically. But modern day sea warfare accentuates dispersion of units which are then combined into a potent force with networking. With further computeratization i expect even the US supper carriers to give way to larger number of smaller carriers in the next 50-100 years.
 
Top