Soviet unbuilt Naval projects

Also it is time for me to post some of my Soviet Battleship drawings:

Project 21 aka The Sovietskiy Nelsonski:
https://www.deviantart.com/tzoli/art/Project-21-The-Sovietskiy-Nelsonski-903031234
dexn3cy-854cac9e-de39-49c9-9980-91e2b36c8a50.png

Due to the emergence of the II. London Naval Treaty, the British-Soviet bilateral naval agreement and rising Soviet Political power in 1936, the Soviet leadership in February asked for battleships designs to meet the Washington Naval Treaty norms eg a maximum displacement of 35.000tons standard and a maximum main gun calibre of 406mm. From these requirements the KB-4 (Konstruktorskoye Byuro - Design Bureau, 4th Section) and the TsKBS-1 (Tsentral'noye Konstruktorskoye Byuro Spetssudostroyeniya - Central Design and Special Shipbuilding Bureau, 1st Section) created what was became the Project 21 battleship a proposal for the Baltic fleet. The designs were ready by June with KB-4 created a Nelson like design where all the main turrets were located forward, the secondary armament on the sides and the heavy AA armament on the aft with turreted light AA guns around the sides and above the Hanger on the aft. The bridge was also very Nelson-ish looking TsKBS proposed 2 variants one with a conventional arrangement the other a Nelson like all forward one.
Both bureaus abandoned the 130mm Dual-Purpose artillery arrangement for 4x3 152 or 6x2 155mm secondary and 6-7x2 100mm AA armament. While KB-4 went for thicker vertical 380mm belt and Pugliese style underwater defence, TsKBS went for angled 350mm belt and American style flat bulkheads for underwater defence. Both teams opted for 3-shaft arrangement and a minimal speed of 56km/h (30knots).
Discussions of the proposals lead to the abandonment of the Nelson style all forward arrangement due to tactical and survival issues despite the advantages it shows in saving displacement and reducing vibrations of the gunnery control towers and thus the conventional arrangement design was chosen for further development.
This drawing shows the KB-4 proposal and while it was stated it's displacement was for 35.000tons standard, calculations with such dedicated software shows that with the set parameters of armour, armour length, armament and speed, the standard displacement is closer to 52.000tons (160.000shp and 30knots) or 54.000tons (225.000shp and 32,75knots) which shows the lack of knowledge of the Soviet designers to create a fast 406mm armed battleship on 35.000tons displacement.

The design had the following characteristics:
Dimensions: 249 (wl) x 31,6 x 8,90m
Displacement as stated: 35.000tons (standard)
Displacement as realistic: 52-54.000tons (standard)
Armour: 380mm Belt, 140mm Deck
Engines: 159.000shp, 3-shafts for 56km/h (30knots) or 225.000shp, 3-shafts for 61km/h (32,75knots)
Range: 11.000km at 26km/h (6.000nm at 14knots)
Armaments:
3x3 406mm/50 B-37 Pattern 1937 Cannons,
4x3 152mm Guns (Likely /50 calibre),
6x2 100mm/51 B-24 Pattern 1936 AA Guns,
9x4 37mm/67 46-K AA Guns
4-6x Seaplanes: Beriev Be-2 / KOR-1

The KB-4 Type A Battleship Design:
https://www.deviantart.com/tzoli/art/KB-4-Type-A-Battleship-Design-904759741
deyo531-06d0c595-c772-4a27-a0a3-bda08edc2f85.png

Here I show you the KB-4 proposal. It shares common elements of the previous Project 21 Nelson style battleship like the British like tower bridge and separate conning tower, Pugliese style underwater protection system, large number director and range finder towers for redundancy and separate anti surface and heavy AA guns instead of Dual-Purpose ones. Unique features are the well placed light AA guns with excellent firing arcs though broadside angles against torpedo crafts are not too good being the light AA guns located at the ends and not next to the superstructure, centreline aft positioned 2 pair of 100mm heavy-AA guns with excellent firing arcs and mainmast too closely positioned to the 2nd funnel which makes the main crane usage difficult.
As requested by the naval officers, the main armament layout is conventional being two turrets forward, one aft, secondary guns are in twin turrets slightly increasing their fire rate and survivability as they are being more sparsely spaced. Standard heavy AA armament of the time and good light AA armament in armoured mounts provide the Aerial defence of the design. While having quite similar ship size, armament and armour compared to Project 21 the standard displacement is much more realistic in the range of 45.000tons rather just 35.000.

The design had the following characteristics:
Dimensions: 255 (oa) x 33,5 x 9,50m
Displacement as stated: 45.900tons (standard)
Armour: 380mm Belt at 5°inclanitaion, 180mm Deck over magazines and 135mm over machinery
Engines: 200.100shp, 3-shafts, 56km/h (30knots)
Range: 13.000km at 26km/h (7.000nm at 14knots)
Armaments:
3x3 406mm/50 B-37 Pattern 1937 Cannons,
6x2 152mm Guns (Likely /50 calibre),
6x2 100mm/51 B-24 Pattern 1936 AA Guns,
10x4 37mm/67 46-K AA Guns
2-4x Seaplanes: Beriev Be-2 / KOR-1


The TsKBS-1 Type A Design:
https://www.deviantart.com/tzoli/art/TsKBS-1-Type-A-Design-1157836418
dj5cgaq-ac5a2dea-8d45-47f2-8c42-ea5077d38f0c.png

Here I show you the TsKBS-1 proposal. Here the design bureau choices were quite different then of the other proposals. The armament is the the required option both in number of guns, turrets and layout, though the Heavy AA guns were concentrated mostly aft while the light armament is evenly spread on the hull in armoured turrets with a single pair located high next to the bridge. Secondary guns layout remained conventional reminiscent of the later Sovetsky Soyuz class battleships. The general look of the superstructure is sort of mix between the Italians (Funnel) and American (Tower). Unique aspects are the catapults placed between the funnels at the middle of the ship at both siddes and the high seaplane hanger partly incorporated into the bridge structure and winged by the secondary range finders.

The design had the following characteristics:
Dimensions: 245 (wl) x 251(oa) x 33,6 x 8,70m
Displacement as stated: 44.900tons (standard), 50.000tons (full load)
Armour: 350mm Belt at 5°inclanitaion, 180mm Deck
Engines: 180.000shp, 3-shafts, 56km/h (30knots)
Range: 13.000km at 26km/h (7.000nm at 14knots)
Armaments:
3x3 406mm/50 B-37 Pattern 1937 Cannons,
6x2 152mm/57 B-38 Pattern 1938 Guns,
6x2 100mm/51 B-24 Pattern 1936 AA Guns,
10x4 37mm/67 46-K AA Guns
2-4x Seaplanes: Beriev Be-2 / KOR-1
 
Tzoli said:
Also it is time for me to post some of my Soviet Battleship drawings:

Project 21 aka The Sovietskiy Nelsonski:
https://www.deviantart.com/tzoli/art/Project-21-The-Sovietskiy-Nelsonski-903031234
dexn3cy-854cac9e-de39-49c9-9980-91e2b36c8a50.png

Due to the emergence of the II. London Naval Treaty, the British-Soviet bilateral naval agreement and rising Soviet Political power in 1936, the Soviet leadership in February asked for battleships designs to meet the Washington Naval Treaty norms eg a maximum displacement of 35.000tons standard and a maximum main gun calibre of 406mm. From these requirements the KB-4 (Konstruktorskoye Byuro - Design Bureau, 4th Section) and the TsKBS-1 (Tsentral'noye Konstruktorskoye Byuro Spetssudostroyeniya - Central Design and Special Shipbuilding Bureau, 1st Section) created what was became the Project 21 battleship a proposal for the Baltic fleet. The designs were ready by June with KB-4 created a Nelson like design where all the main turrets were located forward, the secondary armament on the sides and the heavy AA armament on the aft with turreted light AA guns around the sides and above the Hanger on the aft. The bridge was also very Nelson-ish looking TsKBS proposed 2 variants one with a conventional arrangement the other a Nelson like all forward one.
Both bureaus abandoned the 130mm Dual-Purpose artillery arrangement for 4x3 152 or 6x2 155mm secondary and 6-7x2 100mm AA armament. While KB-4 went for thicker vertical 380mm belt and Pugliese style underwater defence, TsKBS went for angled 350mm belt and American style flat bulkheads for underwater defence. Both teams opted for 3-shaft arrangement and a minimal speed of 56km/h (30knots).
Discussions of the proposals lead to the abandonment of the Nelson style all forward arrangement due to tactical and survival issues despite the advantages it shows in saving displacement and reducing vibrations of the gunnery control towers and thus the conventional arrangement design was chosen for further development.
This drawing shows the KB-4 proposal and while it was stated it's displacement was for 35.000tons standard, calculations with such dedicated software shows that with the set parameters of armour, armour length, armament and speed, the standard displacement is closer to 52.000tons (160.000shp and 30knots) or 54.000tons (225.000shp and 32,75knots) which shows the lack of knowledge of the Soviet designers to create a fast 406mm armed battleship on 35.000tons displacement.

The design had the following characteristics:
Dimensions: 249 (wl) x 31,6 x 8,90m
Displacement as stated: 35.000tons (standard)
Displacement as realistic: 52-54.000tons (standard)
Armour: 380mm Belt, 140mm Deck
Engines: 159.000shp, 3-shafts for 56km/h (30knots) or 225.000shp, 3-shafts for 61km/h (32,75knots)
Range: 11.000km at 26km/h (6.000nm at 14knots)
Armaments:
3x3 406mm/50 B-37 Pattern 1937 Cannons,
4x3 152mm Guns (Likely /50 calibre),
6x2 100mm/51 B-24 Pattern 1936 AA Guns,
9x4 37mm/67 46-K AA Guns
4-6x Seaplanes: Beriev Be-2 / KOR-1

The KB-4 Type A Battleship Design:
https://www.deviantart.com/tzoli/art/KB-4-Type-A-Battleship-Design-904759741
deyo531-06d0c595-c772-4a27-a0a3-bda08edc2f85.png

Here I show you the KB-4 proposal. It shares common elements of the previous Project 21 Nelson style battleship like the British like tower bridge and separate conning tower, Pugliese style underwater protection system, large number director and range finder towers for redundancy and separate anti surface and heavy AA guns instead of Dual-Purpose ones. Unique features are the well placed light AA guns with excellent firing arcs though broadside angles against torpedo crafts are not too good being the light AA guns located at the ends and not next to the superstructure, centreline aft positioned 2 pair of 100mm heavy-AA guns with excellent firing arcs and mainmast too closely positioned to the 2nd funnel which makes the main crane usage difficult.
As requested by the naval officers, the main armament layout is conventional being two turrets forward, one aft, secondary guns are in twin turrets slightly increasing their fire rate and survivability as they are being more sparsely spaced. Standard heavy AA armament of the time and good light AA armament in armoured mounts provide the Aerial defence of the design. While having quite similar ship size, armament and armour compared to Project 21 the standard displacement is much more realistic in the range of 45.000tons rather just 35.000.

The design had the following characteristics:
Dimensions: 255 (oa) x 33,5 x 9,50m
Displacement as stated: 45.900tons (standard)
Armour: 380mm Belt at 5°inclanitaion, 180mm Deck over magazines and 135mm over machinery
Engines: 200.100shp, 3-shafts, 56km/h (30knots)
Range: 13.000km at 26km/h (7.000nm at 14knots)
Armaments:
3x3 406mm/50 B-37 Pattern 1937 Cannons,
6x2 152mm Guns (Likely /50 calibre),
6x2 100mm/51 B-24 Pattern 1936 AA Guns,
10x4 37mm/67 46-K AA Guns
2-4x Seaplanes: Beriev Be-2 / KOR-1


The TsKBS-1 Type A Design:
https://www.deviantart.com/tzoli/art/TsKBS-1-Type-A-Design-1157836418
dj5cgaq-ac5a2dea-8d45-47f2-8c42-ea5077d38f0c.png

Here I show you the TsKBS-1 proposal. Here the design bureau choices were quite different then of the other proposals. The armament is the the required option both in number of guns, turrets and layout, though the Heavy AA guns were concentrated mostly aft while the light armament is evenly spread on the hull in armoured turrets with a single pair located high next to the bridge. Secondary guns layout remained conventional reminiscent of the later Sovetsky Soyuz class battleships. The general look of the superstructure is sort of mix between the Italians (Funnel) and American (Tower). Unique aspects are the catapults placed between the funnels at the middle of the ship at both siddes and the high seaplane hanger partly incorporated into the bridge structure and winged by the secondary range finders.

The design had the following characteristics:
Dimensions: 245 (wl) x 251(oa) x 33,6 x 8,70m
Displacement as stated: 44.900tons (standard), 50.000tons (full load)
Armour: 350mm Belt at 5°inclanitaion, 180mm Deck
Engines: 180.000shp, 3-shafts, 56km/h (30knots)
Range: 13.000km at 26km/h (7.000nm at 14knots)
Armaments:
3x3 406mm/50 B-37 Pattern 1937 Cannons,
6x2 152mm/57 B-38 Pattern 1938 Guns,
6x2 100mm/51 B-24 Pattern 1936 AA Guns,
10x4 37mm/67 46-K AA Guns
2-4x Seaplanes: Beriev Be-2 / KOR-1
Click to expand...
Nicely done!
 
Does anyone know anything about a supposed replenishment ship that was intended to be built to provide Bazalt missiles reloads at sea for the Kiev (1143) class carriers? Not the Berezina (1183), likely larger. I only heard mention that there was such a project, but no other details.
 
stashandr said:
This picture is very similar to the West's earlier view of the Kirov 1144 cruiser. Most likely, the author of this picture copied it from there
Click to expand...
If I recall correctly, this drawing was Alexey Nikolay'ch Sokolov's attempt to draw Project 1077 using only a list of the weapons installed, and the size of the ship, because at the time, no pictures were available. Sokolov himself said that his drawings were a challenge to whoever had better pictures - prove him wrong and show us what the ship actually would have looked like.

For Project 1077, this has actually happened, and a model in some museum has surfaced, which shows what the designers planned:

1754048894950.png

Note that this picture has also been claimed to be either Project 923 or Project 1077, I don't know which is correct.
 
It does seem to match some of the details of the Pr.1077 as shown in the Neskoe SKB book above, the funnel layout seems to match. So I'm leaning more towards 1077 than 923.
 
A Tentative Fleet Plan said:
Gas turbine uptakes look very Udaloy-esque, so I'm thinking Pr.923.
Click to expand...
Hood said:
It does seem to match some of the details of the Pr.1077 as shown in the Neskoe SKB book above, the funnel layout seems to match. So I'm leaning more towards 1077 than 923.
Click to expand...

Sokolov's latest writeup on them claim that they both started from the same point (Udaloy hull and machinery) and diverged from there.
 
Winchester said:
View attachment 779936

Note that this picture has also been claimed to be either Project 923 or Project 1077, I don't know which is correct.
Click to expand...

The weapons fit and general layout is an almost perfect match for the Project 1077 as shown in the Neskoe SKB book, I would be very confident in saying the model is Project 1077; the large forward superstructure with lots of portholes also aligns with a ship intended to carry a flagship staff and sufficient personnel to sustain round the clock helicopter operations. The Project 1077 would have made an interesting flagship for a Soviet Surface Action Group consisting of itself, a Project 1164 and some destroyers. The 1164 providing long range air-defence and anti-surface capability and the 1077 providing surveillance, short-medium range air defence, and ASW in addition to its flagship role.

I have attached Russian drawing of Project 923. There are some similarities, and there should be given both were meant to host 5-6 helicopters (Ka-252PMO in the case of Project 923), but the 1077 has a more comprehensive weapons fit and that big forward superstructure. The Project 923, as a dedicated mine-clearing mothership, is particularly interesting and I can only assume that it was intended to support Soviet amphibious forces for some of their longer range (e.g. Pacific and Nothern fleet) wartime roles. The inclusion of 3K95 as the longest range air defence system matches decisions made for the Project 11780.
 

Attachments

  • Project_923_Granat.jpg
    Project_923_Granat.jpg
    66.7 KB · Views: 260
Last edited:
JFC Fuller said:
The weapons fit and general layout is an almost perfect match for the Project 1077 as shown in the Neskoe SKB book, I would be very confident in saying the model is Project 1077; the large forward superstructure with lots of portholes also aligns with a ship intended to carry a flagship staff and sufficient personnel to sustain round the clock helicopter operations. The Project 1077 would have made an interesting flagship for a Soviet Surface Action Group consisting of itself, a Project 1164 and some destroyers. The 1164 providing long range air-defence and anti-surface capability and the 1077 providing surveillance, short-medium range air defence, and ASW in addition to its flagship role.

I have attached Russian drawing of Project 923. There are some similarities, and there should be given both were meant to host 5-6 helicopters, but the 1077 has a more comprehensive weapons fit and that big forward superstructure. The Project 923, as a dedicated mine-clearing mothership, is particularly interesting and I can only assume that it was intended to support Soviet amphibious forces for some of their longer range (e.g. Pacific and Nothern fleet) wartime roles. The inclusion of 3K95 as the longest range air defence system matches decisions made for the Project 11780.
Click to expand...
Do you have a Russian title for the book that picture comes from?
 

Similar threads

Back
Top Bottom